Why are the WW2 vets angry at the Obama Admin?

[laklak]

I hate when that happens, but I've heard there's medication that helps.

[piscator]

Yeah, and he can get that through his Government health care plan, but you'll have to wait.

[laklak]

It's good to the the King, or at least highly placed in the nobility. If I'd only known, as a youngster, how lucrative just ONE term in the House was I would definitely not have got caught with the hookers and coke. The electorate round these parts frowns on that sort of thing.

[piscator]

"What happens in Vegas should stay in Vegas." -- Famous Greek philosopher Testicles


My girlfriend just got reelected to the City Council. Her ex and babydaddy (a friend of mine) lives and surfs in Sinaloa. I went ahead and sold my time share in Haleiwa...

[Seth]

If Obama and the Dems are so horrible, then why did 'the People' vote Obama for a second term?

If Obama and the democrat party are so wonderful, why did the People turn the House over to the Republicans?

It's called "checks and balances," something we, the People, value greatly.
...

Bunkum. You are implying that the electorate possess some sort of group conciousness. It would only have taken a swing of a few percentage points in some key battlegrounds for the Democrats to have full control.

Indeed. But that swing didn't happen. QED

The "people" don't "decide" at all in situations like this. Did someone casting their votes in (say) Iowa have a full appreciation of how the national vote was likely to pan out, and vote accordingly? Of course not.

Well, the point of voting at all is that it's the only true measure of the temper of the public. And each vote does count, as we can see.

[Seth]

If Obama and the democrat party are so wonderful, why did the People turn the House over to the Republicans?

Gerrymandering, genius. Democrats got what, like five million more votes than Republicans did in 2012?

What's your point? Both parties gerrymander whenever and however they can. It's a sub-rosa part of the combat of politics.

You must be feeling terrible frustration lately though, and I don't blame you.

Well yeah, but I have hopes for Rand Paul in 2016. Ted Cruz as a backup.

The GOP is in the midst of not only a civil war but a demographic death spiral.

Yes, there's an ideological battle going on in the Republican party right now, that's true. It may also be the moment for a viable third party to emerge.

Either they'll have to change what they believe or they'll have to get used to permanent minority status. It'll be the former rather than the latter though - too bad for angry old white guys who cling to their guns and rant about Marxists everywhere.

Well, they are everywhere, I'm just courageous enough to say so and identify them.

And if the Republicans are in such dire straights, how is it that they hold the House? And why is the democrat party so worried about the mid-terms?

[Seth]

Wouldn't it be delicious irony if the Speaker of the House were somehow tapped to be President?

A "President Boner" may sound delicious to you, but not to me.

Well, there ya go, sometimes you eat the bear, sometimes the bear eats you.

[Seth]

It's good to the the King, or at least highly placed in the nobility. If I'd only known, as a youngster, how lucrative just ONE term in the House was I would definitely not have got caught with the hookers and coke. The electorate round these parts frowns on that sort of thing.

Yah, hookers and blow, the downfall of many a nacent politician.

Could be worse though, could be little kids and AIDS.

[klr]

If Obama and the Dems are so horrible, then why did 'the People' vote Obama for a second term?

If Obama and the democrat party are so wonderful, why did the People turn the House over to the Republicans?

It's called "checks and balances," something we, the People, value greatly.
...

Bunkum. You are implying that the electorate possess some sort of group conciousness. It would only have taken a swing of a few percentage points in some key battlegrounds for the Democrats to have full control.

Indeed. But that swing didn't happen. QED

... sorry, I'll stop for a minute ... now, that won't do it ...



Since many Republicans - especially amongst the leadership - were cock-sure they were going to win the presidency, that would make for some truly confused voters.

The simple answer to why the voting patterns for the Presidency, Senate and House are all different is that people are voting for three different things, influenced by a multitude of factors, often local as opposed to national. Any combination of outcomes is possible in terms of who controls what. There have been times in the not-too-distant past when one party has held both Houses of Congress and the Presidency, and it will happen again.

The "collective will" of the electorate doesn't exist. Never has, never will, especially for such a a large and diverse federal democracy as the USA. If you really want "checks and balances" to be party of the system so as to prevent one-party control, then propose and pass laws that will explicitly guarantee this.

[Tero]

Votes are counted separately for president and house and senate. The congressional districts are made up to maximize the number or Republicans for each state. So you may get 5 republicans and 4 democrats from a state that went 60% for Obama.

Is this too complicated?

[pErvinalia]

I wonder if Americans are aware of the absolute incredulity this whole rolling disaster is viewed from the outside. No one gives a shit about the desperate blame game from either of your sides of politics.

Interestingly, neither do most of us.

{snip}

That is WHY the Republicans took back the House...because the democrat party abused its majorities in the House, Senate and White House in passing Obamacare in the first place. The public took offense at that and gave control of the public purse to the Republican controlled house, and they did so for a reason...and a good one: The House can refuse to appropriate money to allow Obamacare to function. That's within its constitutionally mandated powers.

So its the democrat party that's shutting things down and people know that full well, and they will hold them accountable at the mid term elections.

Lol. You couldn't win a debate in primary school, Seth.

Which, if true, makes you less intelligent than a primary school student, given the fact that I've won every single debate I've ever had with you, and you've lost them all because you run out of brain power and resort to ad hom as a universal practice.

How do you actually write this stuff?

I engage my considerably-superior-top-your intellect and I rely on facts, reason and logic, which I then turn into rational, factual and logical arguments...

So then how did you manage to write that most of you don't give a shit about the blame game, and then go straight onto blaming the Democrats for this?!

[pErvinalia]

The GOP is in the midst of not only a civil war but a demographic death spiral.

Yes, there's an ideological battle going on in the Republican party right now, that's true. It may also be the moment for a viable third party to emerge.

What, like the Tea Party??

[JimC]

The GOP is in the midst of not only a civil war but a demographic death spiral.

Yes, there's an ideological battle going on in the Republican party right now, that's true. It may also be the moment for a viable third party to emerge.

What, like the Tea Party??

It would be great if all the libertarian loonies gathered in one, small, unelectable party that could just rant impotently from the sidelines...

[Ian]

There's a few never-heard-of parties that are always nominating people for office. But they never win, so it does make sense to call yourself a member of one of the two major parties. They're supposed to be big enough tents, right? So quite a few do, even if they're distinct enough and unwelcome enough to annoy the others already in the party.

The Tea Party are the true RINOs. It's a damn shame what they've done to the GOP.

[pErvinalia]

what a RINO?

edit: Republican In Name Only?