Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 22, 2014, 08:12:44 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2010 Elections (Moderator: Joe Republic)
| | |-+  "Had Enough?"
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Poll
Question: Could this be an effective Democratic campaign them in 2010?
Yes   -6 (26.1%)
No   -17 (73.9%)
Don't Know   -0 (0%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 23

Author Topic: "Had Enough?"  (Read 7278 times)
Rob
Bob
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6321
United States
Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -9.39

View Profile
« on: February 06, 2009, 06:28:54 pm »
Ignore

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? Wink
Logged

Here’s what Sarah Palin represents: being a fat fucking pig who pins “Country First” buttons on his man titties and chants “U-S-A! U-S-A!” at the top of his lungs while his kids live off credit cards and Saudis buy up all the mortgages in Kansas.
Lunar
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30616
Ireland, Republic of
View Profile
« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2009, 06:32:29 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged

this is real
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30184
United States


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2009, 06:57:21 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Sam Spade
SamSpade
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27871


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: February 06, 2009, 07:35:22 pm »
Ignore

The success of that argument depends on how the economy is, most likely.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9170
United States


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2009, 08:29:29 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged

Lunar
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30616
Ireland, Republic of
View Profile
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2009, 08:33:26 pm »
Ignore

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...
Logged

this is real
Marokai Besieged
Marokai Blue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16895
United States


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2009, 08:52:51 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged

Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9170
United States


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2009, 09:05:05 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged

ilikeverin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15525
Timor-Leste


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2009, 10:17:21 pm »
Ignore

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)
Logged

Chief Judicial Officer of the Most Serene Republic of the Midwest, registered in the State of Joy, in Atlasia
Recognized National Treasure of Atlasia
Keystone Phil
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 52496


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2009, 10:46:06 pm »
Ignore

Uh..."Had Enough?" is what the GOP will use and people would be more likely to understand why they'd be using it.
Logged


Never any doubt.
Marokai Besieged
Marokai Blue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16895
United States


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2009, 10:58:21 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged

Rob
Bob
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6321
United States
Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -9.39

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: February 07, 2009, 12:35:19 am »
Ignore

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. Wink
Logged

Here’s what Sarah Palin represents: being a fat fucking pig who pins “Country First” buttons on his man titties and chants “U-S-A! U-S-A!” at the top of his lungs while his kids live off credit cards and Saudis buy up all the mortgages in Kansas.
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10368
United States


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: February 07, 2009, 12:27:12 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged



Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30184
United States


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2009, 12:40:49 pm »
Ignore

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.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2009, 12:45:34 pm by North Carolina Yankee »Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Queen Mum Inks.LWC
Inks.LWC
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35764
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2009, 06:24:22 pm »
Ignore

No.  It worked in 2006 and 2008.  It won't work again.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9170
United States


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: February 07, 2009, 07:58:02 pm »
Ignore

No.  It worked in 2006 and 2008.  It won't work again.

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

Duke
AHDuke99
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20092


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: February 07, 2009, 09:44:48 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged
Warner for President '16
benconstine
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30667
United States


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: February 07, 2009, 10:25:13 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged

Obama High's debate team:

"Now let me be clear...I...I...um...uh...now let me be clear.  I strongly condemn the affirmative in the strongest possible terms, and I am closely monitoring their arguments.  Let me be clear on this."
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32329


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: February 07, 2009, 10:31:35 pm »
Ignore

The Democrats should try to pass a good bill. And force the Republicans to fillibuster, making them read from a freaking phone book.
Logged
Mr.Phips
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4988


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: February 08, 2009, 12:44:02 am »
Ignore

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.
Logged
Queen Mum Inks.LWC
Inks.LWC
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35764
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: February 08, 2009, 12:47:18 am »
Ignore

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?
Logged
Deliverance
Angry_Weasel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12822


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: February 08, 2009, 12:59:30 am »
Ignore

2015? Selling pot never sounded better...
Logged


"Making Congress Squeal!"- Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA)
the result is a sense that we were told to attend a lavish dinner party that was going to be wonderful and by the time we got there, all the lobster and steak had been eaten, a fight had broken out, the police had been called and all that was left was warm beer and chips.
Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9170
United States


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: February 08, 2009, 01:02:09 am »
Ignore

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)
Logged

Mr.Phips
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4988


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: February 08, 2009, 01:11:51 am »
Ignore

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. 
Logged
Queen Mum Inks.LWC
Inks.LWC
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35764
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #24 on: February 08, 2009, 02:44:51 am »
Ignore

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.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines