What will happen if the GOP keeps the house and senate?, Some in the DNC are already

[OrangeEmpire]

Isnt it just as unAmerican to constantly try to silence your opposition?

Bush is closer to Bin Laden than most Americans realize. They are the perfect foil.

Both extremely rich, either manipulate the masses to their will....

Yes, the perfect foil my little socialist!

 

[therealUT]

Well there is one in Congress now. Ron Paul is Libertarian but runs as a Republican to ensure he's in office. Many think that is the strategy to actually getting into office. Since people have this stigma of Libertarians, that might be the only way to get a viable number initially in office. Then say in five years, have one large coming out party....so to speak.

That would make two, as I am pretty sure that John Linder, of your fair state, is a Libertarian.

 

[GAVol]

As for seeing through his agenda, the same concept applies. I see so much hate and emotion on the left that it appears to color the perception of every action the Bush administration takes. Every single act is viewed in the most nefarious, self-serving manner. I certainly understand that politicians have agendas but I also suspect that there are times where they are doing things they think are the right thing to do. Further, even if Bush is as bad as the left would suggest, the damage he can do to our way of govenrment and our situation is very limited. The sky is not falling.

That's pretty much where I am as well. I've got plenty of disgreement with the current administration on issues like Immigration, Federal Spending, education etc., but I've never been able to figure out the level of venom that the left has for Bush.

As much distaste as I have had for some other politicians, it has never really crossed my mind to just flat out hate someone and assign all sorts of negative traits to them merely for their political views.

 

[GAVol]

That would make two, as I am pretty sure that John Linder, of your fair state, is a Libertarian.

I don't know that I'd call Linder a true Libertarian. He's just latched onto the Fair Tax idea more than anything else.

 

[CSpindizzy]

That would make two, as I am pretty sure that John Linder, of your fair state, is a Libertarian.

No he's not. He's quite plugged in to the social conservatives as well. He just does not vocalize it. He's my congressman and I know he does lean that way but there are numerous items that pull him back to the social conservative side of things.

 

[CSpindizzy]

I don't know that I'd call Linder a true Libertarian. He's just latched onto the Fair Tax idea more than anything else.

That's pretty much been his baby from the get-go. He was the only one for some time to dare mention it. The campaign I was on in 2002 had this as one of three key issues and we were laughed at by the party for even bringing it up.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

WP: Democrats strengthen Senate chances - washingtonpost.com Highlights - MSNBC.com

By Charles Babington and Dan Balz

Updated: 2:10 a.m. ET Oct 22, 2006
function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,((''.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('632970942580970000');

WASHINGTON - Democrats in the past two weeks have significantly improved their chances of taking control of the Senate, according to polls and independent analysts, with the battle now focused intensely on three states in the Midwest and upper South: Missouri, Tennessee and Virginia.
Democratic challengers are in strong positions against GOP incumbents in four states -- Pennsylvania, Montana, Ohio and Rhode Island -- a trend that leaves the party looking for just two more seats to reclaim the majority. The main targets are states where Republicans in recent years have dominated but this year find themselves in hotly competitive races.

 

[CSpindizzy]

Yep. It's firewall time. The GOP is picking select seats to basically hold back the tide.

IF the GOP holds on and keeps both or one of the houses, it could be even worse for them in 2 years for the Presidential race and for Congress. Bush will more or less be lame duck with a weakened party and Congress. Little will be accomplished with threats of fillibusters and no chance to break them. The GOP could come out as even more impotent. A weakened party in the majority would create internal dissention and new attempts at leadership positions. They'll basically eat their own.

It might be even worth it and better off if they did lose and let the Dems botch it for two years to regroup and regain composure in '08.

 

[GAVol]

That line of reasoning may have merit, but it escapes me. I just don't see how it's ever a bad thing to be in the majority.

 

[CSpindizzy]

When nothing is accomplished and the risk of losing is greater? I'm just throwing that out there as something for better long term results. They don't want to give up the majority but they'll lose more as a VERY weak one in the long run.

 

[GAVol]

The reason I disagree with that is that I believe what we are seeing has a lot to do with an off year dynamic more than anything else. Hopefully, whoever wins in '08 will have coat tails.

 

[CSpindizzy]

Off year in 2002? What were the results then?