The "REAL" Battleground: 2010-2011

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Tech_Esq, Jul 23, 2010.

  1. Tech_Esq
    Offline

    Tech_Esq Sic Semper Tyrannis!

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,408
    Thanks Received:
    558
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Ratings:
    +558
    The real battleground is not so much the battle for control of Congress this fall, although that is important. The REAL battleground is going to be for control of state houses. Why? 2010 was a census year. Soon the state legislatures will redraw the lines of Congressional Districts. Some seats will become more competitive, some will become "safe seats" for one party or the other.

    Over time, this can have an effect on the make up of Congress. Gerrymandering will effect some seats this time. In 1990, Democrats had a resounding majority and redrew the lines to benefit their party. In 2000, Republicans had a slight edge and took back some of those gains. As it stands now, there is a Democrat high watermark. Unless Republicans can make inroads in state legislature control, the 2012 campaign season will not be as fruitful for them as it might be. This is definitely an area for political junkies to watch as election seasons roll around in 2010 and 2011.
     
  2. SFC Ollie
    Offline

    SFC Ollie Still Marching

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    28,742
    Thanks Received:
    4,418
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    Extreme East Ohio
    Ratings:
    +4,458
    Which is why the White House wants to be involved in the census. You didn't think it was because Obamarama gave a shit did you?
     
  3. Tech_Esq
    Offline

    Tech_Esq Sic Semper Tyrannis!

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,408
    Thanks Received:
    558
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Ratings:
    +558
    Of course not.....LOL. It's so much better if you can "cook" the numbers before they get to the state legislatures. Then you can control the outcome even in state houses you don't control. All in time honored Cook County tradition. Interestingly, the same tactics that are used in authoritarian countries.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,766
    Thanks Received:
    4,242
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,162
    I think you can rest easy, the Supreme Court (Citizens United v. FEC) has provided the tools for (a failed, IMHO) ideology to once again begin an ascendancy. The party of supply side theory of macroeconomics will again bleed the hoi polloi even as they promise them the world.
     
  5. Tech_Esq
    Offline

    Tech_Esq Sic Semper Tyrannis!

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,408
    Thanks Received:
    558
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Ratings:
    +558
    Undemocratic laws such as McCain-Feingold will always be struck down by the Supreme Court. When they stop striking laws restricting political speech, the US will have completely turned its back on any pretense of being a representative republic. The Supreme Court struck it down in the 1970s with a more liberal court, there should have been no reason to think it wouldn't strike it with a less liberal court.

    The answer is more democracy not less. The answer is increasing representation in Congress, not ever dwindling representation. That reduces the impact of money in politics and increases the opportunity of challengers to defeat incumbents and obviates the need for things like term limits.

    As for supply side.....you have no room to talk. It's better than being crushed under jack-booted Keynsianism.
     
  6. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,548
    Thanks Received:
    8,163
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,165
    I humbly disagree.

    The real Battleground is for the individual hearts and minds of average Americans.
     
  7. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,766
    Thanks Received:
    4,242
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,162
    Debate on macroeconomics both goes beyond the scope of this MB and, more importantly, are a characteristic of ones basic mores. As for jack-booted Keynsianism don't suppose my ideas are limited to one or another popular theories.
    Since you believe so strongly in Free Speech, please give me your take on the supremes decision in "Bong hits for Jesus"?
     
  8. Big Fitz
    Offline

    Big Fitz User Quit *****

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2009
    Messages:
    16,917
    Thanks Received:
    2,473
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +2,475
    problem is, this is where republicans in particular are weakest. They don't focus enough on local or state affairs. They practically ignore county level government it seems abandoning this to socialists and the like to wreck. Maybe with the growth of the Tea Party, we can start seeing some changes to this.
     
  9. Tech_Esq
    Offline

    Tech_Esq Sic Semper Tyrannis!

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,408
    Thanks Received:
    558
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Ratings:
    +558
    Oh but why not? You supposed mine.

    As for the Morse case, I don't see how that relates to this thread. Nevertheless, without reading more than the Wiki synopsis of the case, I would say it was a very near thing and should be limited to its narrow facts.

    Do you disagree that stare decisis concerning school cases of this type is not as described by Chief Justice Roberts?

    I'm not a fan of limiting speech of students when not on campus using the "school exception" and if the banner were not within view of the campus, I would disagree with the holding completely. I think political speech should be more protected than most other speech, but since this advocated for drug use, it puts it on shakier ground. If it was "End the War" or even "Fuck the USA" (referring to another popular free speech case), then I'd say it should have been protected. So, I don't see the case as one that could be generalized beyond its specific facts.
     
  10. VaYank5150
    Offline

    VaYank5150 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,779
    Thanks Received:
    1,047
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +1,055
    Do not fret. I have NO doubt that "street wise" Michael Steele is on top of this and has a plan....
     

Share This Page