Monday May 28, 2012

Abrupt Democratic retirements unsettle political landscape

World ( 12 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Back to top

Order by Time Order by Popularity

12 Comments

Login to comment

  • 0

    adaydream

    Dodd stepped on his crank earlier this year.

    The best thing is there are more republicans jumping ship for their own reasons, also.

    Next election will be interesting to say the least. A lot of new faces. < :-)

  • 0

    Wolfpack

    I wouldn't mind seeing every incumbent in both the House and Senate decide not to run for re-election next year.

  • 0

    adaydream

    Wolfpack that would be change that we'd all like to see. < :-)

  • 0

    skipthesong

    A lot of new faces." Yeah, but they will either be dems or repubs. Nothing changes.

  • 0

    Molenir

    Dodd stepped on his crank earlier this year.

    Was bad enough he was chairman of the Senate banking committee, but then supporting the presidents socialist agenda as well, that cost him. Its likely to cost quite a few other Dem seats in both the house and senate. The latest polls I saw, showed Dems trailing against prospective challengers in 8 current Dem seats. Considering the 6 retiring Republican seats are almost certainly all going to be retained, and this puts the Dems in the Senate, in a bind. With the House already expecting a minimum of a 30 seat change, and perhaps quite a few more, Dems will be lucky to retain control of both houses of congress after the midterm elections. While its unlikely that Republicans will pick up enough seats in the Senate to regain control, it is possible, that come November, we'll finally hear the phrase, former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

    As the article says, Dems are beginning to wake up to the reality, that the more they push their agenda, the more likely they'll lose control of congress. Still, November is a long way away, and anything can happen.

  • 0

    WilliB

    Molenir:

    " As the article says, Dems are beginning to wake up to the reality, that the more they push their agenda, the more likely they'll lose control of congress. Still, November is a long way away, and anything can happen. "

    Well, the hope is of course that until they have made most of their changes irreversible. They might well be right.

  • 0

    goodDonkey

    Molenir said:

    As the article says, Dems are beginning to wake up to the reality, that the more they push their agenda, the more likely they'll lose control of congress.

    It most certainly does not state that! Nowhere in the article is there even a hint that the Democrats are realizing their agenda is causing them to lose control of Congress. Nowhere in the article does it state that the author of the article believes or anyone else believes that.

    Typical Molenir, can't seprate the truth from the editorializing going on in his head.

    The article says:

    underscoring the perilous political environment for President Barack Obama’s party as anti-incumbent sentiment ripples across the nation.

    The article reinforces the "anti-incumbent sentiment" thesis by stating:

    The Democrats are seeking to hang onto comfortable majorities in Congress and a slim edge among governors in a year when voters are angry at lawmakers of all political stripes and likely to punish the party in power.

    It just goes to show that Molenir cannot discern the truth; as I have said all along. Of course WilliB is right there behind him quoting him.

    I am not saying that Molenir's claim that "that the more they push their agenda, the more likely they'll lose control of congress" is not up for debate; although I vehemently disagree. I am simply saying that the article does not contain any reference and Molenir said it did. Molenir may want to read an article before he states, "as the article says." He may also wish to ignore the editorializing going on in his head when paraphrasing the news.

    I expect the Democrats to lose more than 30 seats in the House. I also expect the Democrats to lose the 60/40 majority in the Senate needed to win cloture votes. The Democrats could face a crushing defeat this Autumn but it seems unlikely at the moment. I saw Newt Gingrich on a show and he said that if the Republicans want to win a back either house they need to become less the party of "no" and more the party that presents a clear alternative choice. Although I don't especially care for Newt, I do recognize his political savvy.

    The days where Republicans can just say Jesus and Terrorists a lot and win elections are over (except for "the South"). I think most of these elections will be a battle for both parties and will often be based on local issues.

  • 0

    Molenir

    It most certainly does not state that! Nowhere in the article is there even a hint that the Democrats are realizing their agenda is causing them to lose control of Congress. Nowhere in the article does it state that the author of the article believes or anyone else believes that.

    Wow, what an inane response. I find it sad, that rather then debate what I said, you attack me for a mistake I made in my post. Did you really not understand, or were you just looking to attack someone rather then address the argument I made? While I find that sad, I find it amusing that after you attack me, you basically turn around and agree with what I said. That Dems are going to lose big this fall. You even seemed to agree with me when I said, that with the election as far away as it is, it could still go either way. Oh wait, sorry, I didn't previously say that. Don't want to get in trouble again. I previously stated... "November is a long way away, and anything can happen."

  • 0

    yabits

    I saw Newt Gingrich on a show and he said that if the Republicans want to win a back either house they need to become less the party of "no" and more the party that presents a clear alternative choice. Although I don't especially care for Newt, I do recognize his political savvy.

    This is a very good point, I think.

    If the Republican platform is nothing more than asking the voters to return to what failed so miserably over the past 10 years, I don't see how they can make that much of an impact. The Republicans want to pretend that it was all the fault of one man, George W. Bush, but Bush was surrounded by Republican advisors in the executive branch, and Bush certainly did not run the Congress.

    So how to interpret the seeming disillusionment with Barack Obama? Certainly the left/progressive wing of the spectrum is disappointed with him on a number of issues. But making the mistake of believing that disapproval will translate into support for Republicans is utter foolishness. The bigger threat, and the one the Republicans are counting on, is that the progressives are so disillusioned they'll sit out election day. I believe that is foolish too: The Democrats have a leader in the White House who can clearly explain what is at stake and rally people to the dire threat of returning the nation to what failed it so miserably.

  • 0

    Molenir

    If the Republican platform is nothing more than asking the voters to return to what failed so miserably over the past 10 years, I don't see how they can make that much of an impact. The Republicans want to pretend that it was all the fault of one man, George W. Bush, but Bush was surrounded by Republican advisors in the executive branch, and Bush certainly did not run the Congress.

    I agree with you. To a certain extent. First, I agree that Republicans are largely to blame for going along with Bush. For getting so far away from their own core principles. That people could no longer tell them apart from Democrats. Whether or not they manage to retake the majority will at least partially depend on whether they can convince enough voters that they have returned to their old ways. Even still, I doubt that after just 2 years, whether a lot of people will be convinced to trust Republicans. I suspect a lot of people will be voting for them, not because they like, support, and believe that Republicans will do the job, but rather that when faced with just 2 choices, they'll choose the lesser evil. I think that most people on this board really underestimate how deeply unpopular Obamas policies are, on stimulus, but especially on health care. Republicans are the ones trying to stop that, and people are going to turn out and vote Republican to give them that ability.

    I realize this is a long ways away, but it wouldn't surprise me, if Republicans fail to gain control of congress this cycle, to see them taking control of everything in 2012. On the other hand, I suspect that if they do manage to get control of the house and senate, that Obama will end up with a 2nd term.

  • 0

    kp123

    American political sytem need not be viewed the same way as Japan's parlimentary system, where party members stick together as much as they can through strong party dicipline. If not, they call for new elections. Party dicipline in Congress has always been lacking. It's a good thing in some ways. Being a Republican or Democrat doesn't necessarily mean their members will toe-the-line along party-lines. Senators Snow, McCain,Lieberman and the Blue-Dog Democrats are good examples of this.

  • 0

    yabits

    I realize this is a long ways away, but it wouldn't surprise me, if Republicans fail to gain control of congress this cycle, to see them taking control of everything in 2012.

    The tone reminds me very much of the first two years of Clinton's 8 year run as president. In 1993, the Republicans swore up and down that Clinton's "massive" (as they called it) tax hikes would crash the American economy back into a deep recession. Instead, the rest of the decade saw the highest level of job creation in our nation's history.

    The post-Clinton years speak for themselves. Massive tax cuts and an economy that was lackluster at best, culminating in near total meltdown.

Back to top

Login to leave a comment

OR

Follow us

Facebook
Twitter

More in World

View all

View all