Third Party & Independents Archives

Chaffetz and That Big GOP Puzzle

When did Jason Chaffetz decide to ride a tank into Kevin McCarthy’s nomination party? Clearly, McCarthy is not that popular with some conservative GOP House groups, and his ingenuous stumble on the Benghazi Committee has thrown Hillary a possible lifeline. Was McCarthy’s flub on Hannity a key moment in convincing Chaffetz to suit up and aim high? Chaffetz has promised a more confrontational approach with regard to issues like the latest debt ceiling coming in early November. That means lining up McConnell’s we-will-not-default promise and place-kicking it off the hill. And that does not sit will with moderate member of both chambers.

But there's two magic numbers facing all three candidates - with Daniel Webster rounding out the trio - 125 and 218. Those are the votes needed to win, in the first place, the nomination. And then 218 votes needed to win the House floor election where everyone votes and the nominee will need every Republican vote he can get to ensure victory. And that's where the stinging resentments left by McCarthy's 3+ years as House Whip, as well as his stance as a moderate within the GOP, has conservative groups threatening to vote against him. Or least saying they'll need some convincing by McCarthy before he can be assured of their support on the floor when the final vote for Speaker is cast.

Can McCarthy hold off Chaffetz in the nomination and then gather back those House Republicans who supported the Utah congressman, all in time for the floor election? That seems to be the game plan for the current House Majority Leader. And what would Jason Chaffetz have to do to upset that plan? His first goal is just the nomination: get that and then worry about the floor election. And perhaps moderate GOP members of the House, who it can reasonably be assumed, will not give him the nomination, may be less willing to blow up the floor election. In other words, if Chaffetz actually wins the nomination, he may have an easier time of it on the floor than McCarthy would as nominee. Uncertainty is king in just about everything to do with GOP politics today. This is one more piece to add to that Big GOP Puzzle.

Posted by AllardK at October 7, 2015 8:27 PM
Comments
Comment #399389

Kevin McCarthy quits speaker race.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 8, 2015 1:54 PM
Comment #399390

McCarthy has withdrawn from contention for Speaker of the House, and will remain as Majority Leader. Since there is no viable candidate that can garner 218 votes, the most likely scenario is that Boehner will remain Speaker through 2016.

I feel a little bit sorry for Boehner. I think he truly wanted to step down.

So what happened to McCarthy? His biggest problem (that we know about) was going on Sunday talk shows recently and, when asked what was the biggest accomplishment of Congress, stating that the Benghazi Committee successfully drove down Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers. He admitted it! Twice! It completely undermined the effort to create distrust for Hillary, and conservatives were pissed that McCarthy made them look so bad on national television. That, combined with other public speaking gaffes made too many conservatives conclude he could not succeed as Speaker.

Of course, there might be a skeleton in the closet, but no one’s talking. It’s possible. Anyone remember the Clinton impeachment, when Gingrich resigned, as his designated successor resigned over having an affair, and so the House chose Denny Hastert to lead the impeachment hearings, because he was so morally upright by GOP standards. Really great character, unimpeachable character. Oh. Except the part about paying hush money to keep that boy quiet about Denny molesting him while coaching HS wrestling.

As for Chaffetz, he isn’t going anywhere. He blew it almost as bad as McCarthy with his PP hearing, looked like a total fool. He wanted to refer to the doctored movie, but when others asked to see it, he refused to let anyone have access to the actual one. The head of PP, Richards, ran rings around him in a public forum. Chaffetz lost his big chance.

So the GOP has blown up in pretty spectacular fashion this morning. Let’s just hope the conservatives can govern at least well enough to keep the government open and pay our bills by raising the debt ceiling.

Posted by: phx8 at October 8, 2015 2:26 PM
Comment #399391

Boehner won’t remain speaker. Either the Tea Party will elect one of their own or RINOs and Dems will unite to elect a bipartisan one. Daniel Webster still looks formidable.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 8, 2015 2:50 PM
Comment #399393

WP,
This morning I looked at Webster’s bio. He has a lot of experience in legislating at the state level, but not much at the federal level. The Koch Brothers have funded him in the past. Not a good sign. Nevertheless, he might be a plausible candidate, at least, more plausible than Chaffetz.

There is no way the RINOs and Dems will elect a bipartisan one. The GOP would never allow that vote to happen.

Unless the GOP is willing to go through the spectacle of multiple votes in order for a bloc to take over the party, with no clear favorite to reach 218 votes in sight, the most likely scenario will be to leave Boehner in place for another year.

This caps the failure of the GOP to govern. They brought this on themselves. It has become a party with a substantial number of “whacko birds,” as Senator McCain (R) said, and now it is beginning to look like a Hitchcock movie- “The Whacko Birds”- and more and more of a flock of ‘fired up crazies’ are landing on the telephone wires and cawing about every nut job issue that’s out there. Let’s just hope they don’t shut down the government or tank the economy.

Posted by: phx8 at October 8, 2015 3:13 PM
Comment #399395

WP,
Btw, per the original article: It is pretty amazing when McCarthy is referred to as a “moderate.” At this point, “moderate” seems to mean being in favor of not shutting down the government, and raising the debt ceiling in order not to plunge the economy into an economic depression. That is how bad conservatism has become.

Somewhere I saw a line… At any time, anywhere, in any given population, 25% of the people are howling-at-the-moon mad.

Posted by: phx8 at October 8, 2015 3:51 PM
Comment #399404

Yup, the libs have it right. Our most pressing need is to go deeper in debt. Are we looking at $20 Trillion in debt by the end of the emperors reign or perhaps a tad more?

What the hell, it’s only our kids and grand-kids money we’re spending and who gives a shit about them? Let’s really hang an albatross around their necks.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 8, 2015 6:16 PM
Comment #399406

7 short years ago Remer and his bunch were BI***ING about Bush’s doubling of the debt, My how things change when a Democrat is in the W.H.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 8, 2015 6:44 PM
Comment #399407

The far left’s wettest dream would be for Sanders to win the presidency. Socialism on steroids. Debt…What debt? Debt doesn’t matter. Bernie can end poverty forever. Government jobs for everyone with stay at home privileges and great wages. They will pretend to work and Bernie will pretend to pay them.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 8, 2015 7:08 PM
Comment #399408

RF,
The debt ceiling is a misnomer. It authorizes paying the bills for money already spent. It has nothing to do with increasing the amount of debt.

The doubling of the debt under the Bush administration was a matter of policy. It was the result of tax cuts, the War in Iraq, and the expansion of government spending on the TSA and medical costs.

The increase in the debt under the Obama administration was a RESULT of the Bush administration- TARP, the stimulus, various bailouts, and increased spending on SNAP and unemployment due to the cratered economy.

I can understand how anxious you must be to change the subject from the chaos resulting from conservatives in the House. Conservatism in the House has been described as “a dumpster fire” and “a governmental tire fire.” The divisiveness plaguing this country is on blatant display, and it is entirely the fault of the GOP.

The good news? Boehner has repeated his request to Paul Ryan that Ryan be Speaker. After giving point blank refusals, Ryan appears to be reconsidering. That would be a good thing for all of us. No one can afford to have an utterly dysfunctional party in control of Congress; at least, not to this degree.

Some great tweets:

So how’s that Obamacare replacement legislation coming?
by Simon Miloy

And my favorite:

Leads for house speaker
Pestilence
Louis Gohmert
A writhing mass of gibbering entrails
Paul Ryan
The Lich
A head that never stops screaming
by Rich Uncle Skeltal

Posted by: phx8 at October 8, 2015 7:11 PM
Comment #399410

Now according to phx8 it’s all Bush’s fault Obama increased the debt double of what it was when Bush left office. This is another example of the left not having the decency to accept blame for anything that happens on Obama’s watch. Way to go phx8 tell us some more Obama lies.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 8, 2015 8:07 PM
Comment #399412

“I can understand how anxious you must be to change the subject from the chaos resulting from conservatives in the House.”

I can’t understand how anxious the left must be to change the subject away from Hillary’s collapse in the polls.

Posted by: Blaine at October 8, 2015 9:16 PM
Comment #399413

KAP,
When Bush left office, his last annual budget had a $1 trillion deficit. Since Obama took office, that deficit has been reduced every single year, and Obama has reduced the annual deficit more than any other president in history.

When Bush took office, there was a budget surplus, and over the long term the national debt was projected to turn into a multi-trillion surplus. What actually happened? Under Bush, the national debt increased from @ $5 trillion to $10 trillion. Again, that was a matter of policy, NOT a reaction to an economic disaster.

Under Obama, the deficits have been reduced, but the national debt increased up to $18 trillion. It doubled under Bush. It did NOT double under Obama. The good news is that the economy grew so much under Obama, it made the national debt much easier to service.

Blaine,
If you’re excited to talk about Hillary, just give it a few days. The Democratic debate is coming up. In the meantime, this story about McCarthy is HUGE. The Speaker is third in the line of succession for the presidency and is an important leadership position for Republicans, if not THE most important one. The failure of the GOP to agree on what appeared to be a lock for the position has big implications for all of us, liberals and conservatives alike. The GOP is responsible for the Legislative Branch, and they do not have much time to pass some crucial legislation, including an increase of the debt ceiling.

I don’t think the GOP will cause another downgrade of US Treasuries or refuse to pay past bills, because that would result in an economic depression that would make the last Great Recession look like a laugher. Still, no one wants to see a major political party fail so badly that they can’t legislate, or even get close to that kind of failure, and failure is what is happening to the GOP right now in a very ugly, public way.

Posted by: phx8 at October 8, 2015 10:04 PM
Comment #399414

Right phx8 anyone can cook the books to make anything look good, tell us some more Obama lies.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 8, 2015 10:16 PM
Comment #399415

phx8 if you look at the 2009 deficit and gage all of Obama’s after, you can say the deficits were cut by 2/3rds but the graph also shows larger deficits then Bush or any other modern day President. Like I said tell us some more Obama lies.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 8, 2015 10:28 PM
Comment #399416

KAP,
Remember, Bush did not include the cost of the War in Iraq in the budgets. They were called emergency spending items so that they did not have to appear in the annual deficits, and instead were directly added to the national debt.

Ah, yes. “Cook the books.” It’s all a conspiracy. The numbers are fixed, the polls are skewed, the scientists of the world and every major scientific institution are engaged in a conspiracy to promote Global Warming, the economy under Bush was great and the economy under Obama has been terrible, the Federal Reserve is pumping cash into the stock market, evolution is “just a theory,” international relations have deteriorated under Obama, the Iraqis hid their chemical weapons in Syria, Saddam Hussein was in cahoots with Osama bin Laden, Obama is a Muslim and a follower of Reverend Wright, a Kenyan Indonesian communist/socialist/Marxist who is lawless, unconstitutional, and bad for business to boot… Oh! I forgot! Fast and Furious! The IRS scandal!
And the three-exclamation point Benghazi!!!

How many conspiracies am I omitting?

This is why conservatism fails. The books are accurate. But they believe the books have been cooked. And when conservatives try to act on the bad information, everything turns to crap.

Posted by: phx8 at October 8, 2015 11:16 PM
Comment #399417

I’m just saying what the graph shows phx8, you don’t need to get your panties in a tizzy because I don’t believe anything Obama says that you believe. Have you looked at the deficit graphs?

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 8, 2015 11:49 PM
Comment #399419

Of course. Just make sure when you look at deficit graphs that they include the cost of the War in Iraq under Bush. The Obama administration did include it in their deficits. Some graphs, like an especially notorious one from the Heritage Foundation, use it to make Bush look better and Obama worse.

That Heritage graph is a good example of what I said earlier. Conservatives take bad information about deficits, like ignoring the cost of the War in Iraq under Bush, but including it under Obama, and then reach bad conclusions. And those bad conclusions result in bad actions.

Now there is an unhinged conservative faction in the House that seems determined to burn the country down unless they get their way. They make bad assumptions and use bad information, and the results are predictably awful.

Posted by: phx8 at October 9, 2015 1:19 AM
Comment #399420

I’ve looked at every graph under the sun phx8 and they all say the same Obama has the highest deficits of any President. I’ll give you the one that he cut the deficit in half but that was the 2009 deficit that was really high. So even given that Obama’s deficits suck.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 9, 2015 1:37 AM
Comment #399421

The highest deficit belonged to Bush in his last year, @ $1 trillion. The Obama administration reduced the federal deficit every single year. Those deficits were not the result of a war of choice, or tax cuts, or increased costs of health care. They were not the result of policy choices. Those deficits were the direct result of the Great Recession.

Posted by: phx8 at October 9, 2015 2:18 AM
Comment #399422

I said the huge deficit of 2009 phx8, he may have reduced the deficit from that but his are still the largest deficits of any president. Look at the graphs.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 9, 2015 8:25 AM
Comment #399423

FY 2009 began on October 1, 2008 when Obama was still a Senator from Illinois.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 9, 2015 8:34 AM
Comment #399424

Warren, NO KIDDING, I never said it belonged to Obama.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 9, 2015 9:09 AM
Comment #399427

Some commenters are not a good barometer when judging the performance of President Obama due to their preconceived notions of his intentions. That’s OK, it’s called dissent. But when provided with the evidence to the contrary you might think that there could be some movement, not hardly. If President Obama had a rainbow coming out of his patoot these people would be critical of the deviations that could be found from the prismatic color scheme. I am content with the vote I cast twice for his Presidency.

Now back to the original posting. Chaos reigns in the Republican party, the inmates are running the asylum, we are witnessing the death throes of a once proud political party, are just some of the comments I have read about the Speaker of the House decision making process. I cannot relish in the demise of leadership in the Republican party and can only ask “why would you have thought it could turn out any different given the objective of disabling the government and disavowing any movement towards compromise that was brought by these people and applauded all of the way?”

Posted by: Speak4all at October 9, 2015 11:43 AM
Comment #399428

Speaks, everyone has an opinion of Obama some favorable some not. As far as the chaos in the House it belongs to the electorate we are the idiots who put those morons in charge and I mean that for both parties, Democrats have some zingers in there to.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at October 9, 2015 12:08 PM
Comment #399431

Only the left would consider the election of a speaker to the house as chaos. There is no chaos, it’s simply democracy at work. The way I figure, there are 2 groups in DC who are in panic mode; the Democrats and the republican establishment. For the past several elections, republican voters have been sending conservative politicians to the congress. They have either caved or they have been nullified by the Boehner/McConnell establishment. But there are enough conservatives to now make a difference. The establishment is losing power and the liberals are in panic mode that they will be facing a Republican Party that will not cave to the desires of the left.

There is no logical reason that a minority of liberals control the agenda of a totally conservative nation. Before the left goes spastic over that comment; perhaps the left could explain why governorships and state legislatures have been captured by republicans over he past election cycles.

Posted by: Blaine at October 9, 2015 1:15 PM
Comment #399435

House conservatives have joined together in an attempt to get a Speaker who understands the harm of deficit spending and its causes.

U.S. Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Huntsville

“Continuing resolutions are the absolute worst way to fund the federal government. They continue past spending habits that do not reflect changing circumstances and priorities. They continue America’s irresponsible deficit spending. They are last-second spending bills timed to risk calamity in order to force bad policy and pork spending down the throats of otherwise responsible senators and congressmen,” he said. “Simply stated, a bad process is likely to yield bad results. Today I voted against a continuing resolution born of bad process that yields bad results that will burden Americans for a long time to come.”

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 9, 2015 2:25 PM
Comment #399436

Uh, I don’t know Mr. Rocket Scientist. Could gerrymandering have anything to do with this? You know that the liberal movement is on the rise and that scares the living bejeesus out of you. Get over it, you will be long gone by the time it takes hold and guides this country to greatness. You and your disgusting avoidance of truth along with the rest of the Tea Party crazies will be relegated to that dust bin of history, good riddance.

Posted by: Speak4all at October 9, 2015 2:26 PM
Comment #399437

No chaos? In historical terms, the Speaker is stepping down in a highly unusual manner. His likely successor lost in a secret vote, so an orderly succession has failed. No credible Representative in the GOP will accept the position of Speaker, other than some of the “whacko birds” who threaten to shut down the government or crash the economy. Meanwhile, there is a deadline, because unless the GOP acts, some critical legislation will not be attended, and that will have very bad consequences for the country.

Don’t like ‘chaos’? How about ‘a hot mess’?

“There is no logical reason that a minority of liberals control the agenda of a totally conservative nation.”

Not according to voters, and not according to polls. Voters elected Obama to the White House twice, with over 50% both times. Furthermore, the Senate needs 60 votes to override a filibuster, so that means ‘the left’ owns one branch of government, and retains some control over half of the legislative branch.

By votes, 20 million more Americans voted for Democratic Senators rather than Republican ones. In 2012 in the House, the GOP retained a majority despite 1.5 million more votes for Democratic candidates.

As for states, GOP power tends to be concentrated in smaller states with smaller populations, and rural areas- and there are a lot of small states out there.

Posted by: phx8 at October 9, 2015 2:33 PM
Comment #399438

Since 2009, CRs have been used every year, and in fiscal 2011, Congress passed seven, ultimately funding the government for six months.

Conservatives believe that all funding of non-essential spending should be subject to sun-set laws requiring such funding to be voted upon every few years.

We all know of the massive amount of pork spending being done by both sides. That must end. The current congress and Speaker seem unable to end the practice.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 9, 2015 2:33 PM
Comment #399440
Only the left would consider the election of a speaker to the house as chaos. There is no chaos, it’s simply democracy at work.

The last time we were in such a situation was in the late 1850s. If you consider the US Civil War simply democracy at work, then I guess you are right.

But there are enough conservatives to now make a difference.
Not only is the number of uncompromising conservatives in Congress no greater today than it was last month, but it is such a paltry number that such people make up only a small minority of the GOP caucus. You do understand that roughly 200 GOP representatives don’t think we should monkey around with the debt ceiling next month. Those same 200 would rather sign a status quo FY 2016 budget rather than shut the government down in December. 40 extremely conservative Republicans are powerless to enact the conservative agenda. It takes 218 votes to get things done in the House and you are roughly 180 votes short.
perhaps the left could explain why governorships and state legislatures have been captured by republicans over he past election cycles.
Because Obama wasn’t on the ballot. It really is that simple. This is a center-left nation where a huge chunk of the population isn’t motivated enough to vote when the President isn’t on the ballot because they can’t afford to take off from work. Because Democrats are more likely to a part of the Labor Force than Republicans are, it makes sense that this benefits Republicans. Posted by: Warren Porter at October 9, 2015 2:46 PM
Comment #399441

“Because Obama wasn’t on the ballot.”

Warren, for an intelligent person you do write some very silly things.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 9, 2015 2:51 PM
Comment #399445

RF,

Were the demographics of the electorates in 2010, 2012 and 2014 the same? Or did they differ? If they differed, why do you think this was the case?

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 9, 2015 3:34 PM
Comment #399446

Warren, please explain this.

“President Barack Obama’s home state of Illinois elected a Republican governor on Tuesday night. Massachusetts will have its first Republican governor since Mitt Romney.

Stunning Republican gubernatorial victories came in reliably Democratic states, including those won overwhelmingly by Obama in 2012. Illinois ousted Democrat Pat Quinn in favor of Republican Bruce Rauner, while Maryland voters opted for Republican Larry Hogan over Democrat Anthony Brown. Republican Charlie Baker won a Massachusetts match-up against Martha Coakley, the state attorney general who lost a special Senate election to Scott Brown in 2010.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/05/politics/midterms-governor-2014/

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 9, 2015 3:40 PM
Comment #399447

Or this Warren

“Last Tuesday, Republicans made historic gains in the nation’s state legislatures. The GOP now controls 68 out of 98 partisan state legislative chambers — the highest number in the history of the party. Republicans currently hold the governorship and both houses of the legislature in 23 states (24 if Sean Parnell wins re-election in Alaska), while Democrats have that level of control in only seven.

Democrats dominated these elections for most of the postwar era, often controlling between 60 and 80 chambers. Three specific factors — the increasing strength of Southern Republicans, recent strategic efforts to gain state chambers, and the national political conditions of 2014 — together explain how the GOP has turned the tide in recent years and built a massive advantage in the state capitals on Tuesday.

Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/11/11/the_other_gop_wave_state_legislatures__124626.html#ixzz3o6O6X1Vd
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 9, 2015 3:50 PM
Comment #399449

RF,

Nothing you shared sheds any light regarding demographics or turnout. Of course, if only conservatives show up at the polls, then Republicans will win. My contention isn’t that the GOP didn’t have unprecedented success in 2010 & 2014. My contention is that the success is fleeting because it is due to quirks in demographics or turnout rather than an actual change in mood. Answer the questions I posed in Comment #399445.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 9, 2015 4:29 PM
Comment #399450

Warren, you wrote; “This is a center-left nation…”

Yet, I have given you facts that refute that. Presidents running for reelection sometimes have “coattails” and sometimes not. It proves nothing about the ascendancy of the Republican Party.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 9, 2015 4:40 PM
Comment #399451

You argument rests on the premise that it would be impossible for the GOP to have so much success in a center-left nation. I argue that it is quite possible for the majority of the population to support Democrats and center-left policy initiatives, but for a majority of voters in a particular election to support Republicans and center-right policy initiatives.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 9, 2015 5:47 PM
Comment #399452

Not consistent with your original statement.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 9, 2015 6:17 PM
Comment #399453

If the Republican Party is imploding and chaotic, as the left wants to proclaim; why isn’t the liberal media happy about it?

This was from Rush Limbaugh’s show today; the question is, why aren’t the liberal media rejoicing over the republican chaos?

RUSH: Grab sound bite number five. Here’s Charlie Rose. This is this morning on CBS. And he’s having a chat with John Dickerson of Face the Nation talking about this race in the House for speakership.

ROSE: Can anybody control these people that represent the Freedom Caucus? Can anybody in the Republican Party —

DICKERSON: For right now, it doesn’t look like anybody can.

ROSE: — cause unless they get their way, they’re willing to take the House down?

DICKERSON: Well, yeah, because they think the House has been selling out Republicans and conservatives for the last many years, and it’s finally their chance to stop that.

RUSH: You know, Charlie Rose here… This is the voice of establishment thinking here, by the way, “Can anybody control these out of control conservatives? These freedom people? Can anybody control ‘em? I mean, for crying out loud, they’re willing to take the House down.” It’s what happens. See, when the establishment is taking it on the chin, that means the government is under assault and attack, and it’s falling, or is about to fall. Dickerson had it more right than wrong in his answer.

It even sounds like the WB lefties are upset about the “Chaos” in the congress.

Posted by: Blaine at October 9, 2015 7:28 PM
Comment #399454

If a majority of the population supports Democrats and center-left policy initiatives, how can it can be anything other than a center-left nation?

why aren’t the liberal media rejoicing over the republican chaos?

Because the media isn’t in the tank for the Democratic Party. They try to maintain a facade of objectivity.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 9, 2015 7:44 PM
Comment #399456

“If a majority of the voting population”…puts Republicans in charge in our national and state governments it must be…?

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 9, 2015 7:53 PM
Comment #399457
Because the media isn’t in the tank for the Democratic Party. They try to maintain a facade of objectivity.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 9, 2015 7:44 PM

WP, you can’t possibly believe what you just said. There is not one shred of proof for this comment.

Posted by: Blaine at October 9, 2015 7:54 PM
Comment #399458
“If a majority of the voting population”…puts Republicans in charge in our national and state governments it must be…?

Let me guess…it must be…because they want more liberal democrat policies?

Posted by: Blaine at October 9, 2015 7:58 PM
Comment #399459

The people who actually turnout and vote are a mere subset of the nation of a whole. The nation as a whole can be center-left while the subset is not.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 9, 2015 7:59 PM
Comment #399469

Obama was elected the first time because the republican party insisted on running a an establishment RINO, and since Obama was a novelty of being the first Black president, he garnered a lot of votes from people who wanted to go down in history as being the voter who voted for the first black guy.

The second election was against another republican establishment liberal RINO. It is a fact that many Republicans just stayed home. The second point is that Obama had already been in for 4 years an the American people were willing to give him a chance to complete what he had promised. Of course, he told us that he was going to screw the American people, but they just weren’t listening to him. Now he has screwed the whole country big time and wouldn’t stand a snowballs chance to getting elected now. In fact the majority of Americans consider him a liar and untrustworthy and are just hoping to make it another 1 1/2 years with the least amount of damage as possible.

20 trillion in debt, another 120 trillion in unfunded liabilities, 95 million people out of work, 50 million on food stamps, millions more applying for SS disability just to have an income, and the average workers income down $6k a year. We are losing in the Middle-East and in the Far East, the world nations have no respect for us, and do not fear us, Putin and the Iranians have who-do’d Obama, the dollar is sinking and Russia/China would love to see the dollar go bust.

Oh yea, we are a center-left nation..in your dreams.

Posted by: Blaine at October 9, 2015 10:43 PM
Comment #399470

” the dollar is sinking and Russia/China would love to see the dollar go bust.”

No, it is just the opposite. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-07-29/here-s-how-much-the-strong-dollar-hurts-american-companies

Posted by: Rich at October 9, 2015 11:04 PM
Comment #399471

Obama’s approval rating today is nearly identical to what is was going into the 2012 election. In all likelihood, he would be re-elected to a third term by a similar margin to the last two elections he won, with yet another win and more than 50% of the votes.

Due to changing demographics, if the same groups voted in the same proportions in 2016 as they did in 2012, Obama’s margin of victory would increase by 1.5%

As for the economy, this is already one of the longest economic recoveries without a recession in American history, going all the way back to 1854, and with a 5.1% unemployment rate, we are nearing full employment.

Our foreign policy has been very successful. Does anyone believe the Russians going into Syria to help the Assad regime will work out well for the Russians?

And just to repeat, the dollar is rising, not sinking. It has been exceptionally strong.

But the sheer hatred of Obama is very real among the Republican base. I saw an article the other day on FB by Laura Ingraham insulting Obama. It had over 20,000 comments, and the amount of hatred, vitriol, and outright bigotry aimed towards Obama were shocking. Accusations of Obama being a Muslim were rife, and claims he did not care when Christians were killed filled the thread. Truly ugly. And it is disturbing to think there are a lot of people out there who actually believe that kind of terrible stuff.

Posted by: phx8 at October 10, 2015 12:01 AM
Comment #399473

ph, I take it the 20,000 votes wouldn’t be for Obama for a third term.

Posted by: Blaine at October 10, 2015 1:57 AM
Comment #399478

I will add that in over a quarter century of living on this planet, only once in my lifetime has a Republican managed to get the most votes in a Presidential election.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 10, 2015 10:30 AM
Comment #399485

The people who actually turnout and vote are a mere subset of the nation of a whole. The nation as a whole can be center-left while the subset is not.
Posted by: Warren Porter at October 9, 2015 7:59 PM

Warren, if you wrote such nonsense on a term paper in my class you would receive an F.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 10, 2015 12:56 PM
Comment #399486

I will add, that in almost three quarters of a century of living on this planet, the liberal Democratic Party has changed their names from progressives to liberals to progressives, but their goals have never changed; to tax more and more, to spend more and more, to lie and connive and cheat, to place the American people in bondage, to keep the blacks and minorities in their “place”, and to grow government. Some things never change, the Bible says “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?” The answer is no, and neither does a liberal democrat change.

Those pesky electoral votes…

Posted by: Blaine at October 10, 2015 12:57 PM
Comment #399488

Royal,

Considering the fact that voters are not turning out in droves for the national elections, Warrens logic could actually be sound
As fewer voters are turning out and those voters are voting in more conservative politicians the illusion the country is skewing more conservative could be just that, an illusion.

Blaine,

Please tell me that you have more than just these tired talking points you keep babbling on about.
I mean really, plus 1 for sticking to your story, but minus 50 for the lack of any originality.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at October 10, 2015 4:32 PM
Comment #399489

Rocky Marks, it really surprises me that you would be in complete agreement with WP…go figure.

But, why should I change the talking points when they’re working. Kind of like the same old GW and gun control talking points on your side.

Posted by: Blaine at October 10, 2015 6:00 PM
Comment #399490

Blaine,

“Rocky Marks, it really surprises me that you would be in complete agreement with WP…go figure.”

Apparently you can read and write, it’s the comprehension that’s the tough part.

I didn’t agree with Warren, I said his logic “could” be sound.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at October 10, 2015 6:05 PM
Comment #399491

http://www.redstate.com/diary/JSobieski/2015/06/17/real-story-tpa-freedom-caucus-sticks-boehner/

This url makes a good attempt at explaining the fracas within the GOP House. Some 30 so-called real conservatives are tired of fighting for real conservative legislation that gets watered down by the GOP establishment/Corpocracy.

One issue is that the GOP has not fought against the president usurping congressional authority in trade and budget matters: Quoting from the article: “TPA violates the Constitutional requirement for a 2/3 vote by the Senate” (which is contrary to consistent Constitutional interpretation going back to Thomas Jefferson’s day).” End quote.

Another is the desire to kill the Ex-Im Bank. The Executive wants the Ex-Im involved in ‘social welfare’ for companies as part of the TPP trade agreement.

It seems the Freedom Caucus is pushing for a party that trends toward carrying out middle class issues as opposed to pushing business/corpocracy issues.

Well, I can empathize with the Freedom Caucus but they are badly outnumbered by establishment members. I suspect that when dialing for dollars they will get a lot of hang-ups.

I’ve heard more references to a ‘third party’ in the last month or so than I’ve heard in years. It is nice to hear a growing number of folks in high places publicly stating that free trade agreements have hurt the nation, that too much support has been given to the business, such as Ex-Im support, allowing tax sheltering and hundreds of similar.

More and more, folks seem to understand that open borders and free trade are corpocratists core values and have done harm to the well being of this country.

But, it will take more than just another 3rd party to get significant reform. It will take a new 3rd party w/a/dif/pol/att designed with rules that shunts the influence of special interest in its founding.

Otherwise, we have the corpocracy we deserve - - -

Posted by: roy ellis at October 10, 2015 8:00 PM
Comment #399517
The people who actually turnout and vote are a mere subset of the nation of a whole. The nation as a whole can be center-left while the subset is not. Posted by: Warren Porter at October 9, 2015 7:59 PM

Warren, if you wrote such nonsense on a term paper in my class you would receive an F.

You have no refutation to my logic so you decide to demean me instead. I will only ask, which subset better represents the whole nation’s demographics: The 2012 electorate or the 2014 electorate?

why should I change the talking points when they’re working
If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, you baffle them with bullshit, right? Posted by: Warren Porter at October 11, 2015 10:14 PM
Comment #399519

Good one WP, I first heard that one when I was too young to laugh…I just rolled over and filled my diaper.

You must have learned that one from your granddad.

Posted by: Blaine at October 11, 2015 11:06 PM
Comment #399523

“…I just rolled over and filled my diaper.”

Yeah, and you’ve been full of it ever since.

Roy,

” Some 30 so-called real conservatives are tired of fighting for real conservative legislation that gets watered down by the GOP establishment/Corpocracy.”

The “watering down” as you call it is called governing.

To coin a phrase;
“You can’t always get what, but if you try sometime you just might find you get what you need…”

Those in the monkey house don’t seem to understand we all have to live here, and they can’t get everything they want.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at October 12, 2015 11:52 AM
Comment #399524

Rocky,
They truly do not get it. The way government functions is just a mystery for them. They’ve heard of the Constitution, but that’s about it. So when they manage a majority in the House, they think they should be able to pass whatever legislation they want. After more than 50 tries to repeal Obamacare and repeated efforts to kill Planned Parenthood without success, they are absolutely flummoxed. If Boehner bothered to let the bills go to the Senate, the Senate Democrats stopped them every time, and sometimes the Senate Republicans too.

Obama has only cast four vetoes while in office, fewer than any president in modern history. Warren Harding cast five in the 1920’s and he was only in office for a few years. You would have to go back to the 1880’s to find a president who has used veto power less.

This is the kind of thing that makes conservative heads explode. How can that be? Why, Obama is supposed to be a lawless, unconstitutional tyrant!

Hahahahahaha.

So now conservatism is an absolute mess, and everyone thinks- nay, knows- conservatives are a bunch of crazy losers. No one outside the Crazy Caucus wants to lead them. When asked why Paul Ryan did not want the Speaker position, the aide replied: “Because he is not a f****** moron.”

The Crazy Caucus wants to hold the country ransom again over the debt ceiling. They will throw United States into an economic depression unless their demands are met. They want to wage a War on Women by defunding PP and excusing all kinds of hatred and bigotry in the name of religious freedom. They want the power to introduce whatever bills and amendments they want, and everyone be damned.

And surprise, surprise: no sane politician wants their name publicly tied to this radical, extremist, destructive agenda.

Posted by: phx8 at October 12, 2015 12:29 PM
Comment #399544

Golly…after last nights dem debate we can throw out all but two of the candidates…a socialist and an old lady under FBI investigation.

What a party! Almost brings a tear to my eye.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 14, 2015 12:51 PM
Post a comment