Talk Elections

Election Archive => 2010 Elections => Topic started by: Rob on February 06, 2009, 06:28:54 PM



Title: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Rob on February 06, 2009, 06:28:54 PM
imo, the situation in America and the world at large will still be atrocious when the 2010 midterms roll through. With that in mind, I think the Democratic Party would be very unwise to abandon the "change" theme next year. Sure, the Democrats have the White House and Congress; but the Republicans can easily prevent reform from being enacted. The GOP is virtually certain to campaign on some kind of "change/reform" platform in 2010, but we should steal their issue from them.

The Democratic slogan in 2010 should be "Had Enough?" A simply effective classic, and the target would be Republican obstructionism. Obama's personality would be kept out of the campaign at this level; he would, however, make solemn (and very public) pleas for bipartisanship, implying there are "good" Republicans who want to rise above party lines for the good of their country. Around this time, Democratic pundits should begin to drop the term "Obama Republican" at any given opportunity- the more public attention (even "legitimacy") given to these voters, more of them will be "created."

Finally, and most importantly, the Democrats need to pick one single, tangible issue with heavy public support to advance... and contrive to lose the fight. The vote, of course, will be mostly party-line. After that, they can flood the airwaves- especially in states and districts that voted for Obama- with "Had Enough?"

Think it could work? ;)


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Lunar on February 06, 2009, 06:32:29 PM
Considering that some of the most competitive seats (MO, OH, NH, FL, maybe KS, prospectively IA) will be open seats where I'm sure the Republican candidate will pledge bipartisanship... Another big seat, PA, will be with Specter who is not an obstructivist.  Another big one will be KY where Obama is not that popular.

What does that leave us?  I guess North Carolina.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on February 06, 2009, 06:57:21 PM
No it won't work. Obstructionism doesn't really work as a national theme its only worked in local races like SD 2004. Obama now has the Presidency and huge majorities in Congress so any such campaign would be taken as whinning, or an attempt to disquise your own ineffectiveness. What the hell are you guys going to bring up the Olympia Snowe won't vote for? Once the sideshow in MN is completed all you need is one vote and Snowe will likely be persuaded.

If the midterm is nationalised which I doubt it will and "Had Enough" is the compaign theme then it would most likely be the theme for the GOP. People don't understand what a filibuster is and how many votes you need. Your best bet would be to leave well enough alone and try to localise this election. Nationalising it would hurt your chances in Kentucky and maybe North Carolina and Missouri if Turnout is at 2006 levels. You got some very good candidates like Carnahan, Hodes, Mongiardo, Ryan etc. Let them run there own campaigns as they see fit.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Sam Spade on February 06, 2009, 07:35:22 PM
The success of that argument depends on how the economy is, most likely.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Psychic Octopus on February 06, 2009, 08:29:29 PM
It is hard to say. I think the GOP will gain seats in the senate and house in 2010, but it may be an effective slogan.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Lunar on February 06, 2009, 08:33:26 PM
It is hard to say. I think the GOP will gain seats in the senate and house in 2010, but it may be an effective slogan.

But as of now there's only vulnerable GOP seat, out of, what, seven, with an incumbent Republican who can be accused of being an obstructionist in the Senate. 

I suppose that House GOP members are the favorites to win in many of those states, in retrospect...


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on February 06, 2009, 08:52:51 PM
It is hard to say. I think the GOP will gain seats in the senate and house in 2010, but it may be an effective slogan.

I'm not quite sure how you expect the Republicans to gain seats in the Senate. They're most likely going to gain in the House because Democrats racked up such massive margins, but virtually everything I've seen so far illustrates that all the toss-ups are Republican incumbents.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Psychic Octopus on February 06, 2009, 09:05:05 PM
It is hard to say. I think the GOP will gain seats in the senate and house in 2010, but it may be an effective slogan.

I'm not quite sure how you expect the Republicans to gain seats in the Senate. They're most likely going to gain in the House because Democrats racked up such massive margins, but virtually everything I've seen so far illustrates that all the toss-ups are Republican incumbents.

I agree; they are more likely to gain in the house. But if all depends on Obama's approval.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: ilikeverin on February 06, 2009, 10:17:21 PM
I agree the economy won't be recovered by then; as such, we are likely in for a less-than-stellar election.  (thankfully, the economy will probably recover by 2012, and with the typical "are you better off than you were four years ago?" argument, Obama should be re-elected fairly comfortably)


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Keystone Phil on February 06, 2009, 10:46:06 PM
Uh..."Had Enough?" is what the GOP will use and people would be more likely to understand why they'd be using it.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on February 06, 2009, 10:58:21 PM
Uh..."Had Enough?" is what the GOP will use and people would be more likely to understand why they'd be using it.

It depends on how things go, but I'm generally in agreement with you. I'm not sure how the Dems can say "had enough" when they're the ones in power.

Of course, Republicans can't use "Had enough?" if things are improving. But we'll see.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Rob on February 07, 2009, 12:35:19 AM
Uh..."Had Enough?" is what the GOP will use

That's kind of the point. The idea is to spin the GOP's best potential argument and turn it against them. You might say the "audacity" of such a move is what appeals to me. ;)


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: pbrower2a on February 07, 2009, 12:27:12 PM
Even a stabilization of the economy at a lower level than that associated with the corrupt Dubya-era, credit-fed boom could seem an improvement... or at least the right direction. There are likely to be fewer jobs in 2010 as lots of kids get pushed out of the job market as retail stores close due to reduced consumer spending and public policy encourages the hiring of 'family breadwinners' even in menial jobs but for living wages. The good side of that is that the menial jobs will probably be better paid than when kids who used the jobs to support cars, clothes, and electronic goodies are in school or are doing homework instead.

We absolutely cannot return to the Dubya-era economy of illusory prosperity -- a false prosperity based upon people consuming assets or going into debt just to keep up appearances as real pay shrinks for most people. That is no more possible than expecting heat waves to reverse the cooling of December in January.

The American economy stank when FDR was President from 1934 to 1940... but such was tolerable because people saw a pattern of improvement and saw no chance for a return to the economy of the 1920's. FDR won landslide victories in 1936 and 1940. After Dubya, Obama has much leeway with results.

Some Republicans seem to act as if the wise course is to obstruct the efforts of Barack Obama and the Democratic majority so that the Democrats can fail and the Republicans can offer their own alternative -- essentially their own agenda of Profits First, People Never. It is a huge gamble, one that can fail badly politically and weaken their political position in elections of 2010 and 2012 at the least, or one that can succeed politically but make things worse -- and leave some Hard Right Republican with an economic situation even direr than that that we now have -- and an opportunity to establish a plutocrat's paradise/worker's hell. (That system: no unions, no corporate taxes but instead highly-regressive sales taxes and capitations, no minimum wage, no welfare, 70-hour workweeks, plenty of child labor, the vote limited to the rich, working people generally being wrecks in their middle 30s... )

That is a gamble -- a huge gamble, one that depends upon the catastrophic failure of the Other Side as well as the society as a whole. That is a revolutionary stance that only extremists can support, Right or Left. If we are lucky, then the consequences are the failure of the Hard Right as it is further discredited. Conservatism will have to re-emerge slowly as cautious conservatives develop within the Democratic party and eventually split from it. We might have a split around 2020 between Christian Democrats and Social Democrats, the Republican Party having gone the way of the Federalists and Whigs. If we are not so lucky, then we might get Karl Rove's system on steroids.

It's a bad gamble for everyone, one to be avoided. My suggestion to the Republicans: whittle away a little on the edges and do what is necessary for survival in a time of Obama's success and a recovering economy. Political success isn't worth the ruin of society.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on February 07, 2009, 12:40:49 PM
Even a stabilization of the economy at a lower level than that associated with the corrupt Dubya-era, credit-fed boom could seem an improvement... or at least the right direction. There are likely to be fewer jobs in 2010 as lots of kids get pushed out of the job market as retail stores close due to reduced consumer spending and public policy encourages the hiring of 'family breadwinners' even in menial jobs but for living wages. The good side of that is that the menial jobs will probably be better paid than when kids who used the jobs to support cars, clothes, and electronic goodies are in school or are doing homework instead.

We absolutely cannot return to the Dubya-era economy of illusory prosperity -- a false prosperity based upon people consuming assets or going into debt just to keep up appearances as real pay shrinks for most people. That is no more possible than expecting heat waves to reverse the cooling of December in January.

The American economy stank when FDR was President from 1934 to 1940... but such was tolerable because people saw a pattern of improvement and saw no chance for a return to the economy of the 1920's. FDR won landslide victories in 1936 and 1940. After Dubya, Obama has much leeway with results.


FDR only got reelected in 1940 becasue of the start of WW2 in Europe. Republicans won the issue of the economy in 1940 but lost on NAtional Security concerns.


Some Republicans seem to act as if the wise course is to obstruct the efforts of Barack Obama and the Democratic majority so that the Democrats can fail and the Republicans can offer their own alternative -- essentially their own agenda of Profits First, People Never. It is a huge gamble, one that can fail badly politically and weaken their political position in elections of 2010 and 2012 at the least, or one that can succeed politically but make things worse -- and leave some Hard Right Republican with an economic situation even direr than that that we now have -- and an opportunity to establish a plutocrat's paradise/worker's hell. (That system: no unions, no corporate taxes but instead highly-regressive sales taxes and capitations, no minimum wage, no welfare, 70-hour workweeks, plenty of child labor, the vote limited to the rich, working people generally being wrecks in their middle 30s... )

That is a gamble -- a huge gamble, one that depends upon the catastrophic failure of the Other Side as well as the society as a whole. That is a revolutionary stance that only extremists can support, Right or Left. If we are lucky, then the consequences are the failure of the Hard Right as it is further discredited. Conservatism will have to re-emerge slowly as cautious conservatives develop within the Democratic party and eventually split from it. We might have a split around 2020 between Christian Democrats and Social Democrats, the Republican Party having gone the way of the Federalists and Whigs. If we are not so lucky, then we might get Karl Rove's system on steroids.

It's a bad gamble for everyone, one to be avoided. My suggestion to the Republicans: whittle away a little on the edges and do what is necessary for survival in a time of Obama's success and a recovering economy. Political success isn't worth the ruin of society.


Republicans do not want to return to the Bush economy.  They are opposing the stimulus package cause it is too big and has become to much of a giant thank you note to Special Interest Groups who help purchase this last election for Obama. They also believe that people are now starting to save more of there money instead of just spending and borrowing and Obama and the Dems wants them to be irresponsible again. The savings rate needs to be 10% or higher not 3.6%. Obama and the Dems seem they are goign to act as a substitute for the irresponsible spending of consumers and having the Fed Gov't do it instead. Well as Sam Spade and others have been saying what happens when people quit buying Gov't bonds. The Gov't funds there spending by selling bonds and if they can't sell them anymore like CA can't what happens? It won't be a 1930's Depression, it will be a 1920's German Hyper Inflation.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Queen Mum Inks.LWC on February 07, 2009, 06:24:22 PM
No.  It worked in 2006 and 2008.  It won't work again.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Psychic Octopus on February 07, 2009, 07:58:02 PM

I'd actually agree with that. The thought of the Dems gaining more seats in the house is impossible.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on February 07, 2009, 09:44:48 PM
LOL

Why on earth would a party with 250 house seats and 59 senate seats run on the platform of "Had Enough!"?

Had enough of what? Themselves? If they run on a whiny "oh it's the Republicans fault that this isn't working" will, hopefully, ruin them although I'm sure NBC/CBS/NYTimes will push the Democrats narrative as hard as they can. The CHANGE theme will be dated come 2010 when the Democrats have been in power for 2-4 years if nothing has improved. It would be hilarious if they try.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Kaine for Senate '18 on February 07, 2009, 10:25:13 PM
Not a chance.  No Party that has 59 seats in the Senate, and 250+ in the House, along with the Presidency, can complain about this.  If they try, it will backfire in a major way.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on February 07, 2009, 10:31:35 PM
The Democrats should try to pass a good bill. And force the Republicans to fillibuster, making them read from a freaking phone book.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Mr.Phips on February 08, 2009, 12:44:02 AM
I agree the economy won't be recovered by then; as such, we are likely in for a less-than-stellar election.  (thankfully, the economy will probably recover by 2012, and with the typical "are you better off than you were four years ago?" argument, Obama should be re-elected fairly comfortably)

Many are now saying that the economy will not be back to normal until 2015.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Queen Mum Inks.LWC on February 08, 2009, 12:47:18 AM
I agree the economy won't be recovered by then; as such, we are likely in for a less-than-stellar election.  (thankfully, the economy will probably recover by 2012, and with the typical "are you better off than you were four years ago?" argument, Obama should be re-elected fairly comfortably)

Many are now saying that the economy will not be back to normal until 2015.

Who does that help though?  Or I gues who does it hurt more?


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Person Man on February 08, 2009, 12:59:30 AM
2015? Selling pot never sounded better...


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Psychic Octopus on February 08, 2009, 01:02:09 AM
2015!?!?!?!?!

I'm going back in time and fixing the ballots for Al Smith in 1932, so we can stop this New Dealism. (I'm kidding of course, FDR was a great president, I just disagree with some New Deal Policies)


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Mr.Phips on February 08, 2009, 01:11:51 AM
I agree the economy won't be recovered by then; as such, we are likely in for a less-than-stellar election.  (thankfully, the economy will probably recover by 2012, and with the typical "are you better off than you were four years ago?" argument, Obama should be re-elected fairly comfortably)

Many are now saying that the economy will not be back to normal until 2015.

Who does that help though?  Or I gues who does it hurt more?

It would probably hurt both parties.  Democrats in 2012 and Republicans in 2014. 


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Queen Mum Inks.LWC on February 08, 2009, 02:44:51 AM
I agree the economy won't be recovered by then; as such, we are likely in for a less-than-stellar election.  (thankfully, the economy will probably recover by 2012, and with the typical "are you better off than you were four years ago?" argument, Obama should be re-elected fairly comfortably)

Many are now saying that the economy will not be back to normal until 2015.

Who does that help though?  Or I gues who does it hurt more?

It would probably hurt both parties.  Democrats in 2012 and Republicans in 2014. 

So you're predicting Repubs take back the Senate (and maybe the House in 2012) and get blamed again in 2014?  Fair enough prediction, I guess.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: crazy jimmie on February 08, 2009, 04:09:46 AM
Not everything will be like 2006 and 2008 forever.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Queen Mum Inks.LWC on February 08, 2009, 04:24:59 AM
Not everything will be like 2006 and 2008 forever.

Don't you mean 2004?  :P


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Psychic Octopus on February 08, 2009, 03:07:02 PM
Not everything will be like 2006 and 2008 forever.

How did I know you were going to say that? :)


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: pbrower2a on February 08, 2009, 09:47:58 PM
I agree the economy won't be recovered by then; as such, we are likely in for a less-than-stellar election.  (thankfully, the economy will probably recover by 2012, and with the typical "are you better off than you were four years ago?" argument, Obama should be re-elected fairly comfortably)

Many are now saying that the economy will not be back to normal until 2015.

The longest continuing downturn in American history was "only" three and one-half years -- Autumn 1929 - Spring 1933. The one that we now endure has lasted about a year and a half. We may have further to go, but this time the leadership addresses the downturn on the brink of a depression. The upturn begins within a year. 

"Many" are often wrong, and without attribution one has a fallacy of anonymous authority.

Names, please.



Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Mr.Phips on February 08, 2009, 10:14:55 PM
I agree the economy won't be recovered by then; as such, we are likely in for a less-than-stellar election.  (thankfully, the economy will probably recover by 2012, and with the typical "are you better off than you were four years ago?" argument, Obama should be re-elected fairly comfortably)

Many are now saying that the economy will not be back to normal until 2015.

The longest continuing downturn in American history was "only" three and one-half years -- Autumn 1929 - Spring 1933. The one that we now endure has lasted about a year and a half. We may have further to go, but this time the leadership addresses the downturn on the brink of a depression. The upturn begins within a year. 

"Many" are often wrong, and without attribution one has a fallacy of anonymous authority.

Names, please.



Suze Orman was one.  Another was Paul Krugman.  Even though the downturn was staunched in Spring 1933, it still felt like a Depression until the early 1940's. 


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on February 08, 2009, 10:17:59 PM

Suze Orman was one.  Another was Paul Krugman.  Even though the downturn was staunched in Spring 1933, it still felt like a Depression until the early 1940's. 

The number of jobs in this country had already increased 34% during FDR's first two terms. True, it was only an increase of 7% over the pre-Hoover numbers, but there was only an increase of 1.6% during the Bush administration, so we don't exactly compare well there.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Reaganfan on February 11, 2009, 06:22:11 AM
Uh..."Had Enough?" is what the GOP will use and people would be more likely to understand why they'd be using it.

It depends on how things go, but I'm generally in agreement with you. I'm not sure how the Dems can say "had enough" when they're the ones in power.

Of course, Republicans can't use "Had enough?" if things are improving. But we'll see.

Exactamundo


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Coburn In 2012 on February 12, 2009, 07:19:36 PM
It will be the GOP theme.  And it will work.  Because people will have had their fill of welfare/nanny state socialism by then.  And if not by 201o then certainly by 2012.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: pbrower2a on February 13, 2009, 08:12:18 PM
It will be the GOP theme.  And it will work.  Because people will have had their fill of welfare/nanny state socialism by then.  And if not by 2010 then certainly by 2012.

If things are better in 2012 than they are now, then people won't give a d@mn about the deficits and big spending that got them there. Most people would rather make a living off the welfare state than starve in the street. Merchants who accept food stamps/TANF and medical professionals who treat Medicaid patients will support the "nanny state". Employees of contractors doing big government projects don't care that the money ultimately comes from government grants.

People won't accept cold, hunger, and idleness as proof of some virtue of a government that might do otherwise -- not even in Oklahoma.

 


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Coburn In 2012 on February 14, 2009, 04:41:40 PM
It will be the GOP theme.  And it will work.  Because people will have had their fill of welfare/nanny state socialism by then.  And if not by 2010 then certainly by 2012.

If things are better in 2012 than they are now, then people won't give a d@mn about the deficits and big spending that got them there. Most people would rather make a living off the welfare state than starve in the street. Merchants who accept food stamps/TANF and medical professionals who treat Medicaid patients will support the "nanny state". Employees of contractors doing big government projects don't care that the money ultimately comes from government grants.

People won't accept cold, hunger, and idleness as proof of some virtue of a government that might do otherwise -- not even in Oklahoma.

 

Idleness is the democrat party's stock in trade.  "WHERE'S MY WELFARE CHECK???  I NEED TO BUY CIGS!!!!!"


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Stranger in a strange land on February 16, 2009, 02:40:33 PM
guys, the free market failed. Big time. Most people I think know that. Campaigning against big government won't work as well as it did 5 or 10 years ago. This is 1932, not 1980.

Remember that FDR was wildly popular throughout the country in the worst years of the Great Depression because 1) people knew the Depression wasn't his fault, 2) they knew he was doing his best to make things better, and 3) the Republicans had no credibility left. At one point there were 16 Republican senators. It wasn't until 1968, or perhaps 1980, that Lazziez Fair economics made a comeback and America was again willing to elect a Conservative Republican president.


Idleness is the democrat party's stock in trade.  "WHERE'S MY WELFARE CHECK???  I NEED TO BUY CIGS!!!!!"

rhetoric like this is insulting. I know many people who are trying to find jobs but can't because of the economic situation. Assuming such people are lazy, labeling them, and attacking them, is equivalent to liberals in the Bush years who called his supporters "hicks" who lived in "flyover country."


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Lunar on February 16, 2009, 02:47:26 PM
i don't think he's real dude


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Eraserhead on February 16, 2009, 02:47:40 PM
"Exterminate the Republican Party, once and for all"

That sounds like a good campaign theme to me.




Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Stranger in a strange land on February 16, 2009, 03:15:41 PM

go read some of the posts on Free Republic.


Title: Re: "Had Enough?"
Post by: Queen Mum Inks.LWC on February 17, 2009, 02:54:06 AM
"Exterminate the Republican Party, once and for all"

That sounds like a good campaign theme to me.




I know that you meant it jokingly (I think), but people would see that as desiring a one-party system, and that will never fly in America.