As the voting unfolds, I figured I should just have a separate place for folks to discuss the results. So far the Democrats seem to be kicking ášš and taking names, despite the GOP’s desperate attempts to turn John Kerry into a cause celebre.
Looking forward to the Daily Show’s live episode. It’ll be interesting to see Colbert’s reaction if it’s a Democratic sweep.
PAD
• 
> I sometimes wish I lived in Nevada. There, you can quite literally vote for “None of the Above”.
But is it binding? If that option won would it mean running the election over in that riding, with a new slate of candidates on the ballot? Now THAT would be useful.
Nytwyng, hope your wife is feeling better. Has she tried injectable Imitrix? The stuff works like a miracle on those occasions when I get a really bad migrane. (Injectable or inhalent only–the pills don’t do jack).
I, for one, welcome our new Democratic overlords!
>i love to have low taxes. don’t raise them.
Joe, I suspect most people love low taxes. Unfortunately, this is partly why the American Society of Civil Engineers put out such a scathing report on the U.S. infrastructure last year, pointing out that there would need to be a $1.6 TRILLION investment in things such as … oh bridges, dams, water purification palnts, electrical grids … you know, the little things … as a MINIMUM over the next few years if they were to be maintained in a safe condition. The U.S. is falling apart with 27.1% of bridges considered unsafe as one example. But Shrub’s tax cuts – resulting in funding cuts in many of these areas – only worked to make things worse.
“I, for one, welcome our new Democratic overlords!”
Don’t blame me! I voted for Kodos!
Those who think the Democrats are now in ‘control’ aren’t exactly correct. With a possibly 1 vote lead in the Senate, and 2/3 majority needed to pass most bills, a lot most Democrats would want to get done won’t be able to be done. They have more power now than the Republicans do in both the House and Senate. But there’s going to be an awful lot of gridlock.
Here’s a depressing, but probably accurate sum-up of what will happen vis-a-vis Iraq.
Vis-a-vis where most of America is on the political spectrum (left-center-right). Much of America doesn’t vote. This is likely due to disenchantment with the candidates. Now, why would they be disenchanted? We all know about the religious right who have sometimes stayed home in elections because they didn’t like either candidate, but may have tilted the balance for Bush. I believe there is a Left-leaning parallel that stays home too. Probably several groups on the Left and Right. (Or Up and Down) I would proffer that the majority of those who stay home are not in favor of the ‘political center’ where both parties have headed, Democrats more so…and the reason Republicans have shown greater success over the past 12 years is they have headed to the center less than the Democrats.
He’ll be thrilled. That would mean he can finally go off on how bad it actually is in Iraq but be able to blame it on the Dems.
My god! You are a prophet, sir! 🙂
You know what this means . . .
I CALLED IT!!!!
WHOOOO! WHOOOO! WHOOOO!
😉
But there’s going to be an awful lot of gridlock.
This is true, but the Dems do gain control in areas where it could hurt Bush most: in the committees, where sopoena power can reveal some ugly truths that the White House doesn’t want the rest of us knowing. And with this Administration, that means just about everything.
As for the issue of taxes, I’ve had to laugh many times over the last several weeks/months at the robotic Republican response that a Democrat-controlled Congress would automatically mean raising of taxes.
Yes, repealing Bush’s tax cuts seem inevitably.
And of course it’ll be called ‘raising taxes’, when it’s simply turning back something that is not yet permanent, something that should not have been done in the first place.
That probably wouldn’t be the case if Bush hadn’t dumped into Iraq. So, one can only hope that when the time comes, the blame is placed where it belongs: on Bush and the Republicans for trying to pass off a tax cut that this country couldn’t afford in the first place, thanks to their ugly spending habits.
But beyond that? There’s no proof that taxes will be raised. Dems are talking things like balanced budget again, which means maybe, just maybe, Repubs will realize that the neocons took things way too far on the right, and that Dems really are now the conservatives of old.
Actually, I missed this comment earlier:
In fact, any pre-2006 midterm policy that goes to šhìŧ can be then blamed on the Dems instead of the people who actually created it.
And this changes things from the current status quo how, exactly? 🙂
The Dems already were being blamed for just about every mistake and misstep the Bush Administration and GOP-controlled Congress had made.
So, I only expect the rhetoric to get worse.
“Repubs will realize that the neocons took things way too far on the right, and that Dems really are now the conservatives of old.”
Jesus! Can we at least learn what “neocons” means? It does not describe “far right wing”!
Really, the Dems in power are neocons. The repubs in power are just plain conservatives (and extreme right wing conservative).
Please, please, please, read up on what a neocon is, and the history. It’s a description of conservative liberals, not ultra conservatives.
Nytwyng-
I am sorry you didn’t get to vote but family does outweigh the vote. I really hope your wife feels better soon. My best to you both.
Kath
“Jerry C…those numbers are a bit off.”
Yeah, I know. I know the numbers, but I was typing while watching them talk numbers and crossed my wires. I blame the need for sleep. That was the last post I made before falling into bed.
😮
It’s a description of conservative liberals, not ultra conservatives.
Political pundits seem to disagree with you, otherwise I doubt they’d refer to the Bush Administration as neocons. 🙂
Favorite Lines from the Midtacular:
“The Democratic strategy of backing out of the room slowly while his brother is being yelled at for burning down the garage”
“She ran off with the election like a hobo with a sweet potato pie.”
“The hard way! The hard way! Please do it the hard way!”
“The Democrats have only had a majority for six minutes, and they’ve already ruined things in Iraq.”
It’s a description of conservative liberals, not ultra conservatives.
Political pundits seem to disagree with you, otherwise I doubt they’d refer to the Bush Administration as neocons. 🙂
Any facetiousness aside, I think it’s perfectly understandable why folks (pundits or otherwise) may refer to the Bush Administration as neocons inasmuch as the administration’s policies of more active engagement in international affairs–one of the distinguishing elements of neoconservatism–fall into a neocon worldview more so that, say, the isolationist or protectionist philosophies of other sorts of conservatives.
Still, the point that “neocon” is not synonymous with “ultra conservative” remains a worthwhile one.
I’m not sure WHAT you could call this administration…their actions certainly don’t fall into any conservative ideology.
Well, aside from crooks, liars and incompetents…
Political labels mean whatever the people applying them want them to. So, if the majority of the Bush cabel identify themselves as “neocons”, then that’s what they are.
Rumsfeld resigns! It’s like Christmas came early.
Coming in a bit late here, but it’s been a nightmarishly busy few weeks.
I don’t intend to gloat over last night, in part because the memories of other people here gloating in ’04 are still fairly strong and I’d like to not cause those memories in others. I also don’t plan on gloating because frankly, this is only the beginning of a fix and not the end of it. The country has a very long road ahead of it before we’re back to the republic we ought to be, and my feeling this morning was more one of relief than anything else — at least we’ve stopped digging ourselves into a deeper hole.
(That said, I do have one and only one gloat: the phrase “EX-senator Santorum” is deeeeeeeee-licious to say.)
More general statements:
— I’m not bitter that Joe Lieberman (I-Sanctimonious Hypocrisy) has won, but I’m certainly disappointed.
— Assuming the couple of close results hold and the Democrats retake the Senate, I agree with a lot of people here from both parties: we need to make sure we actually DO something and not simply dig in as not doing anything. (The first order of business: undo that stupid, stupid, unthinkingly blitheringly stupid habeas corpus vote.)
— A lot of words are sounding very pleasant today. “Oversight” is one of them, as is “subpoena power.”
— a Machiavellian scenario that my dad mentioned a few minutes ago (but I’ve no doubt has appeared elsewhere also): now that Rumsfeld has resigned, Bush names Lieberman to replace him. Lieberman leaves the Senate, and Gov. Rell names a Republican to his seat, flipping the Senate BACK to 50-50 and letting Cheney be the deciding vote. It’s an interesting thought, anyway.
— No matter which party people favor, I think most people would have to agree that last night was a VERY interesting night for politics-watchers. The House not only flipped, but based on the numbers appears to have flipped almost EXACTLY.
— Quick question, since I haven’t had time to pore over all the results: was there any Democratic incumbent in Congress who lost? I know there weren’t in the Senate, but I don’t know about the House. If so … wouldn’t you hate to be that one guy? You’re a trivia question for the rest of your life. 🙂
TWL
Local news update for you non-local people not blessed to be Virginians:
As of 2:00 PM, Webb is up by about 7000 votes. I think that race WILL go D. Now we just have to wait for the Allen requested recount that will come to be over (around Nov. 22 I think) and we’ll be on our way.
🙂
— No matter which party people favor, I think most people would have to agree that last night was a VERY interesting night for politics-watchers. The House not only flipped, but based on the numbers appears to have flipped almost EXACTLY.
And I suspect it would have been more if not for recent gerrymandering.
— Quick question, since I haven’t had time to pore over all the results: was there any Democratic incumbent in Congress who lost? I know there weren’t in the Senate, but I don’t know about the House. If so … wouldn’t you hate to be that one guy? You’re a trivia question for the rest of your life. 🙂
IIRC, not a single incumbent Democrat Governor, Senetor, or Representative was unseated.
Time for the Democrats to show some guts now. The Christian Right gained so much influence during the Bush Administration that they effectively managed to shift the whole spectrum of political discussion in the US to the right. When anything short of Bible-mandated legislation is seen as “leftist”, what is the political “center”? Is there even a political center anymore?
I know it’s probably naive to expect the Democrats to be bold, but c’mon. If people still wanted the Republicans, they’d vote for them. People are getting sick and tired of the hypocrisy of the Foleys and Haggards of the world.
The radical Christians are a minority. Yes, they’re loud, energetic, and very determined, so sometimes they appear larger than they are, but they’re still a minority, and this has been proved again and again since the Schiavo case.
The Democratics shouldn’t live in fear of offending these guys. They’ll be probably feel offended anyway by anything that not conforms to their (IMO) narrow views, so what is the point?
was there any Democratic incumbent in Congress who lost?
I don’t believe so, no.
Also, not only did the House flip almost exactly, governorships flipped exactly, going from 28-22 Republican favor, to 28-22 Democrat favor.
And I suspect it would have been more if not for recent gerrymandering.
Could be. I’m also reminded of what Paul Begala said last night on CNN in a rare good point: the reason the Democrats weren’t making the gains in the Senate that they were in the House is because only a third of the Senate was up for reelection. Had all the Republican senators been up for reelection it might have been far more of a (metaphorical) bloodbath.
TWL
House and Senate seats where party control changed. This entire list consists of former GOP seats. No Democratic seat was lost.
Correction: The first entry on the list *could* be described as a Senate Democrat losing control of a seat to an Independent. But it’s the incumbent “losing” to himself, and he’s agreed to caucus as a Democrat.
Thanks for the well wishes, everyone.
Bill–
Nytwyng, hope your wife is feeling better. Has she tried injectable Imitrix? The stuff works like a miracle on those occasions when I get a really bad migrane. (Injectable or inhalent only–the pills don’t do jack).
At various points she’s had the injectable, the pill form and the nasal form of Imitrix. As of when I headed home for a bit about an hour ago, they were finally going to give her a shot of Imitrix. (Don’t know what happened…one of her doctors was in while I was there, and seemed to think that she’d already been given some, but she hadn’t.) We’re at about 36 hours from when it started, and the migraine’s still hanging in there. (But, given that they still hadn’t given her anything specifically for the migraine.) They’re keeping her overnight at least one more night. A mystery spot showed up on a CAT scan last night, and they’re trying to determine what it is and if it’s (hopefully) benign. According to the neurologist, it looks like a small calcified area, which means they’ll probably never know what it was to begin with. Fingers crossed that everything is good.
Meanwhile, I’m at home for a few hours, because I needed to grab her a few things from here, and the Imitrix will have her unconcious for a few hours.
> People are getting sick and tired of the hypocrisy of the Foleys and Haggards of the world.
One wishes this sort of thing were confined to Republicans and their ilk, but in fairness, it ain’t so. At least not up here where the then [’93 – ’06] reigning Liberal Party of Canada [our equivalent to the Democrats] had as Finance Minister a man who also happened to own the biggest shipping fleet in the country, not one vessel of which was registered here. Instead, they all flew flags of convenience to avoid paying Canadian taxes. And I remind you: that was our Minister of Finance. Top that for hypocrisy.
No single party or group of people has the monopoly on hypocrisy, sure, but still there is something particularly unsettling about this sort of strident conservative leadership who are not so conservative in their personal lives.
After all, all politicians should, in a perfect world, be totally honest in their finantial deals. Your disappointing Minister of Finance could be a conservative as well as a liberal. Now, only social conservatives run on platforms based on so-called family values.
But perhaps guys like Foley and Haggard and the myriad of pedophiliac Catholic clergy are salutary in at least one respect: they’re excellent living examples of how repression only makes things worse, deformed.
Today, with somewhat more relaxed societal mores, we have many gays living in stable relationships. Now, when you look into the lives of people that DO feature all that sexual repression conservatives always tout as so good, what do you get? Guys abusing minors, hiring male prostitutes…
Nytwyng,
Lots of crossed fingers over in this neck of the woods — unexplained stuff on CAT scans can be pretty scary, and it’s tough when you’re sitting there wondering how to help. Here’s hoping it’s benign and no big deal whatsoever.
TWL
Tim, it’s good to see you back here.
If you don’t mind my asking, have things been ok with your (if I am recalling correctly) mom’s illness?
I hate to hear about all these family crisis’. Here’s hoping the worst thing we have to worry about is what some jerk in Washingtton does.
But there’s going to be an awful lot of gridlock.
If there’s a God in heaven…
Nytwyng, I pray all turns out well for you and your wife.
Tim Lynch, I too would like to know how your mother is faring if you’re inclined to share. I hope and pray the news is good.
Bill Mulligan, I don’t think gridlock is the thing to wish for during wartime. What we need is for cooler heads to come together and figure out a way to win the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I don’t think that’s going to happen, mind you, but it’s what we need.
Thanks, Bill — good to be back. Mostly I’ve been gone lately because it’s been major crunch time at school, fortunately.
My mom is doing … as well as one might expect, I guess. The cancer’s now been more fully diagnosed (stage IIb or IIIa), and she starts radiation and chemo on Monday for five weeks, with surgery to follow about a month after that. It’s not going to be a fun time ahead — but she’s also a little bit younger and a LOT healthier than the typical patient with this particular illness, so we’re very hopeful that she can come through this pretty well. Time will tell.
And no, I certainly don’t mind you asking — any concern or support is always appreciated. (Well, maybe not from Joe Lieberman. 🙂
TWL
Thanks, Bill — good to be back.
Make that “Bills” at this point, now that Mr. Myers has posted as well!
TWL
Glad to here it was “just” work that kept you away. Well, Christmas is coming soon enough…
Bill, I’m hoping that gridlock will end when it counts. I’m mostly just hoping they’ll have a harder time spending money.
Posted by: Bill Mulligan at November 8, 2006 09:29 PM
Bill, I’m hoping that gridlock will end when it counts.
These days, that’s probably a vain hope.
As a Democrat, I guess I should be dancing in the streets. But until I hear anyone — Democrat or Republican — coming up with a real coherent plan for moving this country forward, my dancing shoes will remain mothballed.
Tim Lynch, I am sorry to hear your mother has cancer. I don’t know what the types mean, but I hope her relative youth and other factors allow her to beat this if it is beatable. Take care of yourself as well. I’m sure this is taking a toll on you, also.
Hey, I’m at work so I don’t know what the cable news is saying. Local news just butted into the radio with a news flash.
Final count is Webb by just over 7000 votes. Early word is that Allen HAS said that he WILL NOT ask for a recount or fight this outcome.
VA has just gone blue in this race and thrown the Senate to the D’s.
Posted by: Jerry C at November 8, 2006 10:12 PM
Hey, I’m at work so I don’t know what the cable news is saying. Local news just butted into the radio with a news flash.
Final count is Webb by just over 7000 votes. Early word is that Allen HAS said that he WILL NOT ask for a recount or fight this outcome.
VA has just gone blue in this race and thrown the Senate to the D’s.
Huh. I wonder how all those people who predicted the death of liberalism and the demise of the Democratic party for the last 20 years will explain this.
VA has just gone blue in this race and thrown the Senate to the D’s.
Unless Lieberman decides not to caucus with the Democrats — a decision I would well understand considering that it was mostly Republican support that won him the election.
I’m not doing the happy dance yet (though it did make a brief appearance when Rumsfeld resigned). I’ll wait and see what happens in January when the new Congress takes office. 2001 had Jim Jeffords; 2007 could certainly have his equivalent.
TWL
feeling cautionary
Huh. I wonder how all those people who predicted the death of liberalism and the demise of the Democratic party for the last 20 years will explain this.
I was thinking about that a little awhile ago, how after ’04 some were declaring the Democratic Party dead.
Obviously, that was quite exaggerated. 🙂
“I was thinking about that a little awhile ago, how after ’04 some were declaring the Democratic Party dead.”
Mmm the demicratic party craves brains…brrraaaaiinnssss. (Shuffles away from the white house)
“Huh. I wonder how all those people who predicted the death of liberalism and the demise of the Democratic party for the last 20 years will explain this.”
By pointing out that this was not a vote for the Dems, but rather a vote against the Reps. This was just a slap across the back of Bush’s hands by the voters.
Unless the Dems play the game very well, they could be right come ’08. The Dems promised a lot and can afford even fewer mis-steps then the Reps. There will also be no Bush or Cheney to be the monsters under the bed in ’08. The Dems have to get the voters to the point where they will come out in droves to vote for them rather then against the Reps in the next 18 months or they’re screwed and we get ’94 all over again.
“Mmm the demicratic party craves brains…brrraaaaiinnssss. (Shuffles away from the white house)”
🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 :p ;p
I’m a sucker for zombie humor and Bush bashing jokes.
Posted by Craig J. Ries at November 8, 2006 01:31 AM
I sometimes wish I lived in Nevada.
There, you can quite literally vote for “None of the Above”.
I want to go one step further – put a “For” and an “Against” box by each candidate’s name. You get to check one of the boxes, either voting for or against one candidate.
When the votes are counted, a candidate’s “Against” votes are subtracted from his “For” votes.
If no-one is net positive by at least one vote, we get to have a new election with new candidates.
Yes, repealing Bush’s tax cuts seem inevitably.
Actually, they’re self-repealing; they have an expiration date built in.
Posted by Joe V.
one last thing to add. Please don’t raise my taxes. Historically, this is what democrats do. i love to have low taxes. don’t raise them. did you know that was my biggest fear of democrats winning.
Well, i look at the thing and i see that Democrats may raise my taxes – Republicans increase the deficit, and thus shift the bill for their wars and their tax cuts to my step-daughter Helen and my granddaughter Maggie and my great-grandchildren of as-yet-undetermined gender and name.
I’m hoping that gridlock will end when it counts. I’m mostly just hoping they’ll have a harder time spending money.
A harder time than the ‘don’t tax but spend money like water anyway’ current Republican breed?
Personally, I’ll just be happy to see some small sigh of fiscal responsability in our beloved elected officials. I shall not hold my breath, though….
I want to go one step further – put a “For” and an “Against” box by each candidate’s name. You get to check one of the boxes, either voting for or against one candidate.
When the votes are counted, a candidate’s “Against” votes are subtracted from his “For” votes.
If no-one is net positive by at least one vote, we get to have a new election with new candidates.
Jeeze man, I don’t know.If we think negative campaigning is bad now, imagine how it would be if you could actually convince people to vote against someone…
>imagine how it would be if you could actually convince people to vote against someone…
I thought that was what we had now?
In the past 18 years, I can recall only ONE instance of voting FOR someone instead of against.
I think the “For” and “Against” bit is a wonderful idea. You not only have to convince someone to vote against the other guy, but FOR you. It separates those two actions into two distinct ones, which means you’ve got to appeal to both.
Where do I sign up?
TWL
I think the “For” and “Against” bit is a wonderful idea. You not only have to convince someone to vote against the other guy, but FOR you. It separates those two actions into two distinct ones, which means you’ve got to appeal to both.
I’ve been arguing for that system myself, for years. I wanna be convinced to vote for someone, not just against the lesser of evils.
Kelly, I think you meant “against the greater of two evils”. Unless of course, you want the lesser evil to lose.
You are not evil enough. You are only quasi-evil. You are the Diet Coke of evil.
Actually, I like Kelly’s post the way she wrote it. Why vote for the lesser evil? They’ll just do a half-assed job.
Y’know,a logical extension would be reasons WHY you were voting against someone, but there are two problems (at LEAST!) that I can see. First off, if polling locations are overcrowded now, imagine the logjam as everyone writes a message! And second, less people would vote, because everyone knows that except for freaks like me, everyone HATES essay questions.
Bill Myers, you did it again. You made me think.
A half-assed job. With the symbol of the Democratic Party being a donkey, why hasn’t someone used “My open will do a half-assed job” as a campaign slogan? It would work for either party. Republicans could say that Democrats are ALL half-assed, not even working up to their potential, and Democrats could say that the GOP wouldn’t do half-the work they would.