Could 2012 be a critical election?

[NJNetz]

Why/Why not?

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

No. We're already screwed.

 

[OSUBlazerfan]

No. We're already screwed.

so negative

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

realistic. its a false recovery being masked by further debt. It'll take 20 years to recover, minimum.

 

[OSUBlazerfan]

realistic. its a false recovery being masked by further debt. It'll take 20 years to recover, minimum.

Well i didnt say it recoverd... but you said... too late... like this country is doomed... I think we can still get out of the rut, evn if it takes 20 years

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

The country is doomed. There has to be a systemic failure before it gets back on track. Either that or World War III.

Inflation will be out of control with the FED's monetary policy. We're seeing it already with commodities. Unless some new magic industry pops up and revolutionizes everything...but really what would it be? AI and nanotechnology is all I can think of, but instead we're focusing on redistribution of wealth and less efficient/more expensive energy production.

 

[NJNetz]

Btw, I need this question answered for a test I'm taking. So, thanks!

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Btw, I need this question answered for a test I'm taking. So, thanks!

bullshit your answer then. teachers don't like to hear the truth, they want their own egos massaged.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Your answer should compare and contrast the needs for the republicans and democrats.

include how Obama hasn't had enough time to implement his policies (whatever they are...when in reality he's just learning on the job really). Green energy, job creation, universal healthcare coverage

for the republicans, go over how the budget decifit is out of control. about how obama's policies have failed to deliver and there hasn't been a strong recovery and little to no change.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

basically the best you can do is go to Obama's re-election website and Romneys and take their strongest points and rephrase them.

 

[NJNetz]

It's a short answer question. I don't need much. A few sentences is good.

 

[MARIS61]

All elections are an illusion, and the POTUS is a clumsy puppet at best.

The same people have been in power for most of my life, and none of them have been President.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

It's a short answer question. I don't need much. A few sentences is good.

Yeah.

Dems: Obama's policies haven't had time to be fully realized. If they change leadership in the white house, the last 4 years have been a waste.

Repubs: Obama's policies are dangerous and damaging and need to be reversed as soon as possible before the country is deeper in the shitter.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Every election is critical. That is the real answer. Leader of the free world, etc.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

WE NEED A LIBERTARIAN!!!

 

[barfo]

WE NEED A LIBERTARIAN!!!

Agreed. It's healthy to have something to laugh at.

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

bullshit your answer then. teachers don't like to hear the truth, they want their own egos massaged.

This. They don't want to hear the truth, they just want you to tell them what they want to hear.

 

[barfo]

This. They don't want to hear the truth, they just want you to tell them what they want to hear.

Those damn teachers! If only we could get rid of them all.

barfo

 

[PapaG]

This. They don't want to hear the truth, they just want you to tell them what they want to hear.

Nate, I don't envy you trying to compromise your beliefs to get grades. I did it at a much younger age than you, and would never have done it with the experience I've received over the past 15 years.

 

[Natebishop3]

Nate, I don't envy you trying to compromise your beliefs to get grades. I did it at a much younger age than you, and would never have done it with the experience I've received over the past 15 years.

It's the whole damn school. I just keep my head down and say "sustainability", "green", and "environmental" every few minutes and I blend right in.

 

[Denny Crane]

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/56_1...T=rollcall:e10143:80020084a:&st=email&pos=eam

The Uneven Senate Landscape of 2012 (and 2014)
By Stuart Rothenberg

Republican won 24 of the 37 Senate contests last year, giving them a head start not only on winning a Senate majority in 2012 but possibly winning a 60-seat supermajority two years later.

They will need to net 26 or 27 of the remaining 67 contests over the next two cycles to win a majority in 2014, or 36 of the next 67 to get to 60 seats during the next midterm elections.

The Senate is always a different kind of numbers game than the House. With unbalanced classes, Senate control — to say nothing about a filibuster-proof majority — hinges on which party has more seats up for election in a particular election cycle.

When one of the political parties has a huge election night, as Republicans did last year, it automatically gives that party an opportunity to take over the Senate, whether two years later or four.

The 2012 Senate class includes 23 Democrats and only 10 Republicans, and the stunning imbalance means that Democrats will be on the defensive throughout the cycle unless the political environment shifts dramatically to their party.

 

[maxiep]

I don't expect Susan Collins or Olympia Snowe to remain Republicans after 2012. IIRC, there are 32 seats up in 2012, 22 held by Democrats/Independents that caucus with Democrats and 10 held by Republicans. This budget deal included some guarantees to hold uncomfortable votes for swing state/red state Democrats in the Senate, such as health care and Planned Parenthood. It was done to hurt senators like Claire McCaskill (MO), Ben Nelson (NE), Bill Nelson (FL), Debbie Stabenow (MI), Jon Tester (MT), Sherrod Brown (OH), Bob Casey, Jr. (PA) and Joe Manchin (WV) all running for re-election.

The Democrats may get a few pickups because John Kyl (AZ) and John Ensign (NV) are retiring and Scott Brown (MA) and Olympia Snowe (ME) are running for re-election in states with a strong blue shading.

 

[mook]

I think Republicans are going to have some really hard times campaigning on a platform that calls for pretty drastic changes to Medicare. They're kind of stuck between a rock (the Tea Party movement) and a hard place (their traditional older voting demographic who like Medicare). It's simply impossible to please both constituents, although they are trying to walk that line by not proposing any changes to people over 55. It's just that the old folks hear "Medicare changes" and if it ain't more spending, they ain't happy.

I suspect any cuts Democrats make in Medicare are going to look pretty tame by comparison. I could be wrong though.

Anyway, I think this election will be a wakeup call for extremists on both ends of the spectrum. Both sides have spent so much time working themselves up into a lather about how evil the other side is...but next year I think we're going to see a compromise emerge on budgeting because it just has to. And the extremists are going to kick and stamp their feet that they were betrayed because they didn't get it their way, when that's just how our system of government works.

You don't get your way a lot of the time, more so true the more extremist your positions are.

 

[maxiep]

I think Republicans are going to have some really hard times campaigning on a platform that calls for pretty drastic changes to Medicare. They're kind of stuck between a rock (the Tea Party movement) and a hard place (their traditional older voting demographic who like Medicare). It's simply impossible to please both constituents, although they are trying to walk that line by not proposing any changes to people over 55. It's just that the old folks hear "Medicare changes" and if it ain't more spending, they ain't happy.

I suspect any cuts Democrats make in Medicare are going to look pretty tame by comparison. I could be wrong though.

Anyway, I think this election will be a wakeup call for extremists on both ends of the spectrum. Both sides have spent so much time working themselves up into a lather about how evil the other side is...but next year I think we're going to see a compromise emerge on budgeting because it just has to. And the extremists are going to kick and stamp their feet that they were betrayed because they didn't get it their way, when that's just how our system of government works.

You don't get your way a lot of the time, more so true the more extremist your positions are.

These aren't normal times. The problem with entitlements is that there's no slack in the line left. The money that should have been reserved for this population bubble has been spent. There's no room not to make drastic changes to entitlements to people under 55. You can't touch anything for those 55 and older; we have to stick to the deal we made with them because they don't have time to adjust.

As extreme as the Tea Party's position is, it's the responsible one. We're fooling ourselves if we think we can tweak the system. We have two choices: dramatically change entitlements or lose the programs altogether.