Will November 2012 see another swing of the pendulum?

[Wry Catcher]

IMO the "I hope he fails" crowd has demonstrated they cannot govern and that "ain't it awful" fear mongering isn't leadership. It's past time to put pragmatic leaders who believe in America and Americans back in office and chase the Eric Cantors and the other extreme ideologues of the world back into obscurity.

Now that Boehner has caved, and the ideologues in the House have recognized their collective effort to stonewall government to embarrass the President for solely political reasons has failed, it appears to me that the tide has changed and next November the American people will once again reject the party that had power and overreached.

Both parties need to recognize that most Americans want stability and real world solutions to problems real Americans face, not pie in the sky promises or fear mongering.

 

[ba1614]

IMO the "I hope he fails" crowd has demonstrated they cannot govern and that "ain't it awful" fear mongering isn't leadership. It's past time to put pragmatic leaders who believe in America and Americans back in office and chase the Eric Cantors and the other extreme ideologues of the world back into obscurity.

Now that Boehner has caved, and the ideologues in the House have recognized their collective effort to stonewall government to embarrass the President for solely political reasons has failed, it appears to me that the tide has changed and next November the American people will once again reject the party that had power and overreached.

Both parties need to recognize that most Americans want stability and real world solutions to problems real Americans face, not pie in the sky promises or fear mongering.

Shouldn't leadership start at the top? I know it does with almost every organization I can think of, except the obama administration.

 

[Care4all]

more than likely, it will swing, imho.

More people will come out and vote in the 2012 election than in 2010, and more voters usually means more democrats voting....so the possibility of swinging back is certainly there.

Plus, the Democrats have been energized by losing the 2010 elections and dem voters DO NOT want to see more republicans like the ones in the House in 2010 winning more seats, especially after all the 'congress of No', has done/not done.... since their election 2 years previously....is what I am thinking....

so, this could bring more voters to the voting booth....again, this is just speculation.

 

[PoliticalChic]

IMO the "I hope he fails" crowd has demonstrated they cannot govern and that "ain't it awful" fear mongering isn't leadership. It's past time to put pragmatic leaders who believe in America and Americans back in office and chase the Eric Cantors and the other extreme ideologues of the world back into obscurity.

Now that Boehner has caved, and the ideologues in the House have recognized their collective effort to stonewall government to embarrass the President for solely political reasons has failed, it appears to me that the tide has changed and next November the American people will once again reject the party that had power and overreached.

Both parties need to recognize that most Americans want stability and real world solutions to problems real Americans face, not pie in the sky promises or fear mongering.

The pendulum doesn't stop in the middle.
Either end of the pendulum swings is invested with excess.


You can look forward to a century of the opposite of what the Left has created.
And it may not be good.


"Someday I’d like to see a true right-wing court just to demonstrate what ‘conservative’ judicial activism would really look like. To correspond to the ‘living Constitution’ wielded by liberal jurists, the court would have to start discovering constitutional clauses invalidating the income tax, prohibiting abortion across the nation, and protecting the right to suck the brains out of Democrats- all in the penumbras, you understand."
Coulter

 

[deaddogseye]

Now that Boehner has caved, and the ideologues in the House have recognized their collective effort to stonewall government to embarrass the President for solely political reasons has failed, it appears to me that the tide has changed and next November the American people will once again reject the party that had power and overreached.

Both parties need to recognize that most Americans want stability and real world solutions to problems real Americans face, not pie in the sky promises or fear mongering.

i wouldnt put to much into the latest drama as a voting issue in november. people just wanted to see this tax cut continued -- and it was. lets agree at least for arguments sake that on this one the republicans were outmanuevered (which seems to be the case but not looking for an argument from anyone on that) . come november assuming that the tax cut remains in place no one will remeber who outmanuevered who on this anymore than they will remeber the other times when the dems caved (which i cant recall at the moment either). thats all inside the beltway stuff and sunday talk show stuff -- not voting stuff. so i wouldnt put too much in to that aspect of this.

plus with the democrats in the white house and control of the senate who can fairly be called the party in power, if either of them can be?

plus at the end of the day if the attempt is made to put to much on the republicans for this they have an easy response for most people -- to get extended this measure had to pass thru the republican house -- and at the end of the day it did.

so i hear you but dont see it

 

[deaddogseye]

more than likely, it will swing, imho.

More people will come out and vote in the 2012 election than in 2010, and more voters usually means more democrats voting....so the possibility of swinging back is certainly there.

Plus, the Democrats have been energized by losing the 2010 elections and dem voters DO NOT want to see more republicans like the ones in the House in 2010 winning more seats, especially after all the 'congress of No', has done/not done.... since their election 2 years previously....is what I am thinking....

so, this could bring more voters to the voting booth....again, this is just speculation.

if i had to guess right now i think you will see this -- obama is reelected and maybe the dems take back a few house seats but not control (and those house seats are taken mostly by more conservative dems who wont jump off a cliff for pelosi like some did over health care) and the repubs pick up a few seats in the senate but probably fall short of control

and at the endof the day the current dynamic remains unchanged as a result and of course obama has lame duck status - whatever that really means

 

[Wry Catcher]

IMO the "I hope he fails" crowd has demonstrated they cannot govern and that "ain't it awful" fear mongering isn't leadership. It's past time to put pragmatic leaders who believe in America and Americans back in office and chase the Eric Cantors and the other extreme ideologues of the world back into obscurity.

Now that Boehner has caved, and the ideologues in the House have recognized their collective effort to stonewall government to embarrass the President for solely political reasons has failed, it appears to me that the tide has changed and next November the American people will once again reject the party that had power and overreached.

Both parties need to recognize that most Americans want stability and real world solutions to problems real Americans face, not pie in the sky promises or fear mongering.

The pendulum doesn't stop in the middle.
Either end of the pendulum swings is invested with excess.


You can look forward to a century of the opposite of what the Left has created.
And it may not be good.


"Someday I’d like to see a true right-wing court just to demonstrate what ‘conservative’ judicial activism would really look like. To correspond to the ‘living Constitution’ wielded by liberal jurists, the court would have to start discovering constitutional clauses invalidating the income tax, prohibiting abortion across the nation, and protecting the right to suck the brains out of Democrats- all in the penumbras, you understand."
Coulter

Well you and Coulter can wish all you want but until the American style of democracy is put asunder and the Oligarchy of the wealthy and powerful (the Plutocrats) gain full control of the Executive and Legislative branches (they already control the majority of the USSC) that won't happen.

One roadblock to the Democrats once again holding the majority in Congress is CU v. FEC which allowed for the development of Super PACs. Unlimited funds provided by unknown sources will flood our airwaves this summer. Be careful, those who attack Obama and support the New Right might very well be foreign sources. Saudi Princes or a South Americans Leftist (Hugo Chavez) might very well fund those Super PACs to persuade the American voter to support candidates which will benefit the funder and not the American people.

 

[Care4all]

more than likely, it will swing, imho.

More people will come out and vote in the 2012 election than in 2010, and more voters usually means more democrats voting....so the possibility of swinging back is certainly there.

Plus, the Democrats have been energized by losing the 2010 elections and dem voters DO NOT want to see more republicans like the ones in the House in 2010 winning more seats, especially after all the 'congress of No', has done/not done.... since their election 2 years previously....is what I am thinking....

so, this could bring more voters to the voting booth....again, this is just speculation.

if i had to guess right now i think you will see this -- obama is reelected and maybe the dems take back a few house seats but not control (and those house seats are taken mostly by more conservative dems who wont jump off a cliff for pelosi like some did over health care) and the repubs pick up a few seats in the senate but probably fall short of control

and at the endof the day the current dynamic remains unchanged as a result and of course obama has lame duck status - whatever that really means

yes, the swing in the house, won't swing all the way....the Repubs will still have control, is my guess, this far out....and the Dem senate could lose seats, but not enough for the GOP to take control of the Senate.

so I guess I am saying in my speculation, that I think there will be a swing in the house but not enough to take it over....

but honestly, the election is pretty far off in political terms and anything can happen between now and then!

 

[BluePhantom]

Well the little game that will be played now is that the Democrats will push for another extension that ends right before the elections. Then they will try to essentially blackmail the GOP because they wouldn't dare raise taxes and cut unemployment right before the election. The Republicans on the other hand will push for an extension that expires after the elections to get that out of the picture.

As far as which way the pendulum will swing...it's hard to tell. The Senators that are up for re-election are more vulnerable on the Democratic side so assuming current trends stay the same my guess is that the GOP will hold the House and take the Senate by a small margin.

 

[Dragon]

One roadblock to the Democrats once again holding the majority in Congress is CU v. FEC which allowed for the development of Super PACs.

I believe the impact of money on elections is easy to overstate. The big problem with money in our politics is not that it swings elections between the Rs and Ds so much as that it allows those with deep pockets to exercise unacceptable influence on both. CU made it so that politicians fear opposing the agenda of the plutocrats lest attack ads appear in their districts at the next election.

People seem seldom to understand this dynamic. It has nothing to do with who gets elected and everything to do with what they do after they take office. As long as a candidate has enough money to get his message out, more money on top of that suffers from diminishing returns. The candidate with less money wins often enough to dispute the idea that money determines elections (and one may question which direction causality flows when the one with the most money does win).

So I wouldn't worry too much about CU helping the Republicans. What I would worry about is it allowing money to corrupt our new Congress -- just as it does our current one.

 

[BluePhantom]

yes, the swing in the house, won't swing all the way....the Repubs will still have control, is my guess, this far out....and the Dem senate could lose seats, but not enough for the GOP to take control of the Senate.

Oh I don't know. There are 23 Democratic seats on the line in the Senate vs only 10 Republican seats. There are currently 53 Democrats (including the two Independents who caucus with the Dems) and 47 Republicans.

Just by a quick glance of the states they represent it appears that Scott Brown in MA is really the only vulnerable Republican. So the GOP would need to flip five seats. I don't know really who is running in each one but it just generally speaking they might be able to flip seats in Nebraska, Virginia, Wisconsin, Florida, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, North Dakota, and maybe West Virginia.

So just a quick initial breakdown it appears on the surface that the GOP's chances of taking the Senate are pretty decent.

United States Senate elections, 2012 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I know....wiki is a shitty resource but for a quick glance it'll do.

 

[PoliticalChic]

IMO the "I hope he fails" crowd has demonstrated they cannot govern and that "ain't it awful" fear mongering isn't leadership. It's past time to put pragmatic leaders who believe in America and Americans back in office and chase the Eric Cantors and the other extreme ideologues of the world back into obscurity.

Now that Boehner has caved, and the ideologues in the House have recognized their collective effort to stonewall government to embarrass the President for solely political reasons has failed, it appears to me that the tide has changed and next November the American people will once again reject the party that had power and overreached.

Both parties need to recognize that most Americans want stability and real world solutions to problems real Americans face, not pie in the sky promises or fear mongering.

The pendulum doesn't stop in the middle.
Either end of the pendulum swings is invested with excess.


You can look forward to a century of the opposite of what the Left has created.
And it may not be good.


"Someday I’d like to see a true right-wing court just to demonstrate what ‘conservative’ judicial activism would really look like. To correspond to the ‘living Constitution’ wielded by liberal jurists, the court would have to start discovering constitutional clauses invalidating the income tax, prohibiting abortion across the nation, and protecting the right to suck the brains out of Democrats- all in the penumbras, you understand."
Coulter

Well you and Coulter can wish all you want but until the American style of democracy is put asunder and the Oligarchy of the wealthy and powerful (the Plutocrats) gain full control of the Executive and Legislative branches (they already control the majority of the USSC) that won't happen.

One roadblock to the Democrats once again holding the majority in Congress is CU v. FEC which allowed for the development of Super PACs. Unlimited funds provided by unknown sources will flood our airwaves this summer. Be careful, those who attack Obama and support the New Right might very well be foreign sources. Saudi Princes or a South Americans Leftist (Hugo Chavez) might very well fund those Super PACs to persuade the American voter to support candidates which will benefit the funder and not the American people.

1. "the Oligarchy of the wealthy..."
This bete noire is a hypothetical construct of the Left, and very effective with the slow-witted.
Due to the mobility inherent in a free-market economy, there is no perpetual 'wealthy class' in this country.

2. "...those who attack Obama and support the New Right might very well be foreign sources."

According to the FEC, contributions to the Obama campaign from three brothers, Osama, Monir and Hosam Edwan, all from Rafah, totaled $33,000.[ii] And they weren’t alone. Al-Jazeera reported on March 31, 2008 that Gazans were manning phone banks for the Obama campaign.[iii] The brothers were vocal in their “love” for Obama – which in itself spoke volumes to Obama’s campaign. The media showed no interest, but Obama pricked up his ears. He smelled trouble; even though no reporters asked him about these contributions, he answered anyway. The Obama campaign contended in the summer of 2008 that they had returned $33,500 in illegal contributions from Palestinians in Hamas-controlled Gaza – despite the fact that records do not show that it was returned, and the brothers said they did not receive any money. And indeed, Obama’s refunds and redesignations on file with the FEC show no refund to Osama, Hossam, or Monir Edwan in the Rafah refugee camp. Photocopies of said documents at this site: FEC to Investigate 2008 Atlas EXCLUSIVE: Obama's Secret Campaign Cash: Millions from Foreign Sources - Atlas Shrugs


Could you have forgotten the Red Chinese Army contributions to the Clinton campaign? Really?

3. The 'powerful' in this nation would be the Left...hardly the right.
One example?
While Big Oil gets the blame...policy is determined by Big Green. Proof?
The Keystone XL Pipeline.
The Leftwing media keeps it sotto voce and folks like you remain willfully ignorant.


4. "One roadblock to the Democrats once again holding the majority in Congress is CU v. FEC"
Really?

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees is now the biggest outside spender of the 2010 elections, thanks to an 11th-hour effort to boost Democrats that has vaulted the public-sector union ahead of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the AFL-CIO and a flock of new Republican groups in campaign spending.

The 1.6 million-member AFSCME is spending a total of $87.5 million on the elections after tapping into a $16 million emergency account to help fortify the Democrats' hold on Congress. Last week, AFSCME dug deeper, taking out a $2 million loan to fund its push. The group is spending money on television advertisements, phone calls, campaign mailings and other political efforts, helped by a Supreme Court decision that loosened restrictions on campaign spending.
"We're the big dog," said Larry Scanlon, the head of AFSCME's political operations. "But we don't like to brag."
Public-Employees Union Is Now Campaign's Big Spender - WSJ.com



BTW, while lobbying for the EFCA, the SEIU fired 75 of its 220 employees, ‘cause, you know, they needed that $60 million for Obama, so the employees filed an NLRB unfair practices suit. (NATIONAL BRIEFING - LABOR - Union Is Accused of Violations - Brief - NYTimes.com


So, in summary: you know less than nothing.

 

[WillowTree]

The demoncraps have to their credit


Inflation..
high food prices
high energy prices
high gasoline prices.

high unemployment

a 15 Trillion dollar debt.

A downsized credit rating

a do nothing leader

class warfare

a race war



I can't imagine why you toadstools think it's going to be a slam dunk can ewe?

 

[Wry Catcher]

The pendulum doesn't stop in the middle.
Either end of the pendulum swings is invested with excess.


You can look forward to a century of the opposite of what the Left has created.
And it may not be good.


"Someday I’d like to see a true right-wing court just to demonstrate what ‘conservative’ judicial activism would really look like. To correspond to the ‘living Constitution’ wielded by liberal jurists, the court would have to start discovering constitutional clauses invalidating the income tax, prohibiting abortion across the nation, and protecting the right to suck the brains out of Democrats- all in the penumbras, you understand."
Coulter

Well you and Coulter can wish all you want but until the American style of democracy is put asunder and the Oligarchy of the wealthy and powerful (the Plutocrats) gain full control of the Executive and Legislative branches (they already control the majority of the USSC) that won't happen.

One roadblock to the Democrats once again holding the majority in Congress is CU v. FEC which allowed for the development of Super PACs. Unlimited funds provided by unknown sources will flood our airwaves this summer. Be careful, those who attack Obama and support the New Right might very well be foreign sources. Saudi Princes or a South Americans Leftist (Hugo Chavez) might very well fund those Super PACs to persuade the American voter to support candidates which will benefit the funder and not the American people.

1. "the Oligarchy of the wealthy..."
This bete noire is a hypothetical construct of the Left, and very effective with the slow-witted.
Due to the mobility inherent in a free-market economy, there is no perpetual 'wealthy class' in this country.

2. "...those who attack Obama and support the New Right might very well be foreign sources."

According to the FEC, contributions to the Obama campaign from three brothers, Osama, Monir and Hosam Edwan, all from Rafah, totaled $33,000.[ii] And they weren’t alone. Al-Jazeera reported on March 31, 2008 that Gazans were manning phone banks for the Obama campaign.[iii] The brothers were vocal in their “love” for Obama – which in itself spoke volumes to Obama’s campaign. The media showed no interest, but Obama pricked up his ears. He smelled trouble; even though no reporters asked him about these contributions, he answered anyway. The Obama campaign contended in the summer of 2008 that they had returned $33,500 in illegal contributions from Palestinians in Hamas-controlled Gaza – despite the fact that records do not show that it was returned, and the brothers said they did not receive any money. And indeed, Obama’s refunds and redesignations on file with the FEC show no refund to Osama, Hossam, or Monir Edwan in the Rafah refugee camp. Photocopies of said documents at this site: FEC to Investigate 2008 Atlas EXCLUSIVE: Obama's Secret Campaign Cash: Millions from Foreign Sources - Atlas Shrugs


Could you have forgotten the Red Chinese Army contributions to the Clinton campaign? Really?

3. The 'powerful' in this nation would be the Left...hardly the right.
One example?
While Big Oil gets the blame...policy is determined by Big Green. Proof?
The Keystone XL Pipeline.
The Leftwing media keeps it sotto voce and folks like you remain willfully ignorant.


4. "One roadblock to the Democrats once again holding the majority in Congress is CU v. FEC"
Really?

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees is now the biggest outside spender of the 2010 elections, thanks to an 11th-hour effort to boost Democrats that has vaulted the public-sector union ahead of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the AFL-CIO and a flock of new Republican groups in campaign spending.

The 1.6 million-member AFSCME is spending a total of $87.5 million on the elections after tapping into a $16 million emergency account to help fortify the Democrats' hold on Congress. Last week, AFSCME dug deeper, taking out a $2 million loan to fund its push. The group is spending money on television advertisements, phone calls, campaign mailings and other political efforts, helped by a Supreme Court decision that loosened restrictions on campaign spending.
"We're the big dog," said Larry Scanlon, the head of AFSCME's political operations. "But we don't like to brag."
Public-Employees Union Is Now Campaign's Big Spender - WSJ.com



BTW, while lobbying for the EFCA, the SEIU fired 75 of its 220 employees, ‘cause, you know, they needed that $60 million for Obama, so the employees filed an NLRB unfair practices suit. (NATIONAL BRIEFING - LABOR - Union Is Accused of Violations - Brief - NYTimes.com


So, in summary: you know less than nothing.

You've missed the point. You've pointed out past donations where the money man is known. CU v. FEC allows for total anonymity. Of course both sides will have Super PACs, the question is, is such good for our unique democratic republic? Is it okay that Hugo Chavez can now influence the American voter? Do you like the fact that any Saudi Prince can influence members of Congress?

I support getting the money out of politics. How, I don't know; as long as members of Congress put their own election first and the nation and those they represent as an after thought it matters less which party is in power. That said, the greater risk comes from the right.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Well you and Coulter can wish all you want but until the American style of democracy is put asunder and the Oligarchy of the wealthy and powerful (the Plutocrats) gain full control of the Executive and Legislative branches (they already control the majority of the USSC) that won't happen.

One roadblock to the Democrats once again holding the majority in Congress is CU v. FEC which allowed for the development of Super PACs. Unlimited funds provided by unknown sources will flood our airwaves this summer. Be careful, those who attack Obama and support the New Right might very well be foreign sources. Saudi Princes or a South Americans Leftist (Hugo Chavez) might very well fund those Super PACs to persuade the American voter to support candidates which will benefit the funder and not the American people.

1. "the Oligarchy of the wealthy..."
This bete noire is a hypothetical construct of the Left, and very effective with the slow-witted.
Due to the mobility inherent in a free-market economy, there is no perpetual 'wealthy class' in this country.

2. "...those who attack Obama and support the New Right might very well be foreign sources."

According to the FEC, contributions to the Obama campaign from three brothers, Osama, Monir and Hosam Edwan, all from Rafah, totaled $33,000.[ii] And they weren’t alone. Al-Jazeera reported on March 31, 2008 that Gazans were manning phone banks for the Obama campaign.[iii] The brothers were vocal in their “love” for Obama – which in itself spoke volumes to Obama’s campaign. The media showed no interest, but Obama pricked up his ears. He smelled trouble; even though no reporters asked him about these contributions, he answered anyway. The Obama campaign contended in the summer of 2008 that they had returned $33,500 in illegal contributions from Palestinians in Hamas-controlled Gaza – despite the fact that records do not show that it was returned, and the brothers said they did not receive any money. And indeed, Obama’s refunds and redesignations on file with the FEC show no refund to Osama, Hossam, or Monir Edwan in the Rafah refugee camp. Photocopies of said documents at this site: FEC to Investigate 2008 Atlas EXCLUSIVE: Obama's Secret Campaign Cash: Millions from Foreign Sources - Atlas Shrugs


Could you have forgotten the Red Chinese Army contributions to the Clinton campaign? Really?

3. The 'powerful' in this nation would be the Left...hardly the right.
One example?
While Big Oil gets the blame...policy is determined by Big Green. Proof?
The Keystone XL Pipeline.
The Leftwing media keeps it sotto voce and folks like you remain willfully ignorant.


4. "One roadblock to the Democrats once again holding the majority in Congress is CU v. FEC"
Really?

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees is now the biggest outside spender of the 2010 elections, thanks to an 11th-hour effort to boost Democrats that has vaulted the public-sector union ahead of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the AFL-CIO and a flock of new Republican groups in campaign spending.

The 1.6 million-member AFSCME is spending a total of $87.5 million on the elections after tapping into a $16 million emergency account to help fortify the Democrats' hold on Congress. Last week, AFSCME dug deeper, taking out a $2 million loan to fund its push. The group is spending money on television advertisements, phone calls, campaign mailings and other political efforts, helped by a Supreme Court decision that loosened restrictions on campaign spending.
"We're the big dog," said Larry Scanlon, the head of AFSCME's political operations. "But we don't like to brag."
Public-Employees Union Is Now Campaign's Big Spender - WSJ.com



BTW, while lobbying for the EFCA, the SEIU fired 75 of its 220 employees, ‘cause, you know, they needed that $60 million for Obama, so the employees filed an NLRB unfair practices suit. (NATIONAL BRIEFING - LABOR - Union Is Accused of Violations - Brief - NYTimes.com


So, in summary: you know less than nothing.

You've missed the point. You've pointed out past donations where the money man is known. CU v. FEC allows for total anonymity. Of course both sides will have Super PACs, the question is, is such good for our unique democratic republic? Is it okay that Hugo Chavez can now influence the American voter? Do you like the fact that any Saudi Prince can influence members of Congress?

I support getting the money out of politics. How, I don't know; as long as members of Congress put their own election first and the nation and those they represent as an after thought it matters less which party is in power. That said, the greater risk comes from the right.

1. " past donations where the money man is known. CU v. FEC allows for total anonymity."
So....this applies to both Left as well as Right...
Up 'til now, only the Left has used said tactics.

The Court has merely leveled the playing field.
And, to show how really, really absent of thought you are, aside from the unions, do you know which party gets the lion's share of Wall Street donations???

2. " good for our unique democratic republic?...I support getting the money out of politics."
What's scary is that you believe this....and you vote!!??

This must be your fav song:

"In the Big Rock Candy Mountains,
There's a land that's fair and bright,
Where the handouts grow on bushes
And you sleep out every night.
Where the boxcars all are empty
And the sun shines every day
And the birds and the bees
And the cigarette trees
The lemonade springs
Where the bluebird sings
In the Big Rock Candy Mountains."

And I mean this is the kindest way....you think like a child.
I love children...but I don't want them to cancel my vote.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama 2012: 84% full employment, only downgraded once, record debt, deficits and poverty and he needs one more term to "Finish the job"

If you're not terrified of what he means by "Finish the job" you're a fucking moron

 

[NoNukes]

The demoncraps have to their credit


Inflation..
high food prices
high energy prices
high gasoline prices.

high unemployment

a 15 Trillion dollar debt.

A downsized credit rating

a do nothing leader

class warfare

a race war



I can't imagine why you toadstools think it's going to be a slam dunk can ewe?

Someone stupid enough to write this cannot imagine much, they follow what they are told without any thought.

 

[Wry Catcher]

1. "the Oligarchy of the wealthy..."
This bete noire is a hypothetical construct of the Left, and very effective with the slow-witted.
Due to the mobility inherent in a free-market economy, there is no perpetual 'wealthy class' in this country.

2. "...those who attack Obama and support the New Right might very well be foreign sources."

According to the FEC, contributions to the Obama campaign from three brothers, Osama, Monir and Hosam Edwan, all from Rafah, totaled $33,000.[ii] And they weren’t alone. Al-Jazeera reported on March 31, 2008 that Gazans were manning phone banks for the Obama campaign.[iii] The brothers were vocal in their “love” for Obama – which in itself spoke volumes to Obama’s campaign. The media showed no interest, but Obama pricked up his ears. He smelled trouble; even though no reporters asked him about these contributions, he answered anyway. The Obama campaign contended in the summer of 2008 that they had returned $33,500 in illegal contributions from Palestinians in Hamas-controlled Gaza – despite the fact that records do not show that it was returned, and the brothers said they did not receive any money. And indeed, Obama’s refunds and redesignations on file with the FEC show no refund to Osama, Hossam, or Monir Edwan in the Rafah refugee camp. Photocopies of said documents at this site: FEC to Investigate 2008 Atlas EXCLUSIVE: Obama's Secret Campaign Cash: Millions from Foreign Sources - Atlas Shrugs


Could you have forgotten the Red Chinese Army contributions to the Clinton campaign? Really?

3. The 'powerful' in this nation would be the Left...hardly the right.
One example?
While Big Oil gets the blame...policy is determined by Big Green. Proof?
The Keystone XL Pipeline.
The Leftwing media keeps it sotto voce and folks like you remain willfully ignorant.


4. "One roadblock to the Democrats once again holding the majority in Congress is CU v. FEC"
Really?

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees is now the biggest outside spender of the 2010 elections, thanks to an 11th-hour effort to boost Democrats that has vaulted the public-sector union ahead of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the AFL-CIO and a flock of new Republican groups in campaign spending.

The 1.6 million-member AFSCME is spending a total of $87.5 million on the elections after tapping into a $16 million emergency account to help fortify the Democrats' hold on Congress. Last week, AFSCME dug deeper, taking out a $2 million loan to fund its push. The group is spending money on television advertisements, phone calls, campaign mailings and other political efforts, helped by a Supreme Court decision that loosened restrictions on campaign spending.
"We're the big dog," said Larry Scanlon, the head of AFSCME's political operations. "But we don't like to brag."
Public-Employees Union Is Now Campaign's Big Spender - WSJ.com



BTW, while lobbying for the EFCA, the SEIU fired 75 of its 220 employees, ‘cause, you know, they needed that $60 million for Obama, so the employees filed an NLRB unfair practices suit. (NATIONAL BRIEFING - LABOR - Union Is Accused of Violations - Brief - NYTimes.com


So, in summary: you know less than nothing.

You've missed the point. You've pointed out past donations where the money man is known. CU v. FEC allows for total anonymity. Of course both sides will have Super PACs, the question is, is such good for our unique democratic republic? Is it okay that Hugo Chavez can now influence the American voter? Do you like the fact that any Saudi Prince can influence members of Congress?

I support getting the money out of politics. How, I don't know; as long as members of Congress put their own election first and the nation and those they represent as an after thought it matters less which party is in power. That said, the greater risk comes from the right.

1. " past donations where the money man is known. CU v. FEC allows for total anonymity."
So....this applies to both Left as well as Right...
Up 'til now, only the Left has used said tactics.

The Court has merely leveled the playing field.
And, to show how really, really absent of thought you are, aside from the unions, do you know which party gets the lion's share of Wall Street donations???

2. " good for our unique democratic republic?...I support getting the money out of politics."
What's scary is that you believe this....and you vote!!??

This must be your fav song:

"In the Big Rock Candy Mountains,
There's a land that's fair and bright,
Where the handouts grow on bushes
And you sleep out every night.
Where the boxcars all are empty
And the sun shines every day
And the birds and the bees
And the cigarette trees
The lemonade springs
Where the bluebird sings
In the Big Rock Candy Mountains."

And I mean this is the kindest way....you think like a child.
I love children...but I don't want them to cancel my vote.

I really do believe that members of Congress are influenced by "campaign donations"; such are bribes, of that there is no doubt. Those who suggest the money donated does not effect their vote are liars, that too is self evident for any member of Congress who has served more than one term. Of course it is easy to delude oneself, and take an ends and means mentality to accept the money, make the 'proper' vote and pretend that in doing so they are protecting their constituents from the greater evil.

Yes both sides benefit, but to highlight unions is more evidence you're little more than a right wing hack. You may baffle with your totally partisan bullshit some of the people some of the time - and the dumber ones all of the time - but for the most part you're no different than CrusaderFrank or Willow Tree.

 

[JoeB131]

IMO the "I hope he fails" crowd has demonstrated they cannot govern and that "ain't it awful" fear mongering isn't leadership. It's past time to put pragmatic leaders who believe in America and Americans back in office and chase the Eric Cantors and the other extreme ideologues of the world back into obscurity.

Now that Boehner has caved, and the ideologues in the House have recognized their collective effort to stonewall government to embarrass the President for solely political reasons has failed, it appears to me that the tide has changed and next November the American people will once again reject the party that had power and overreached.

Both parties need to recognize that most Americans want stability and real world solutions to problems real Americans face, not pie in the sky promises or fear mongering.

Only about 1% of the population even notices this fight about $20.00 a week. For two months.

Reality. Democrats might gain 10-15 seats back in the House, but they'll lose 4-5 seats in the Senate. Obama will probably win a second term because Romney is such an awful candidate.

 

[Wry Catcher]

IMO the "I hope he fails" crowd has demonstrated they cannot govern and that "ain't it awful" fear mongering isn't leadership. It's past time to put pragmatic leaders who believe in America and Americans back in office and chase the Eric Cantors and the other extreme ideologues of the world back into obscurity.

Now that Boehner has caved, and the ideologues in the House have recognized their collective effort to stonewall government to embarrass the President for solely political reasons has failed, it appears to me that the tide has changed and next November the American people will once again reject the party that had power and overreached.

Both parties need to recognize that most Americans want stability and real world solutions to problems real Americans face, not pie in the sky promises or fear mongering.

Only about 1% of the population even notices this fight about $20.00 a week. For two months.

Reality. Democrats might gain 10-15 seats back in the House, but they'll lose 4-5 seats in the Senate. Obama will probably win a second term because Romney is such an awful candidate.

Eleven months is a long-time for any of us to make predictions. That said I suspect many many more Americans have noticed how the Republican 'leadership' has stonewalled efforts by the Obama Administration on myriad issues and how little Speaker Boehner has accomplished. That and McConnell's stated priority to defeat Obama in 2012 do not forbade well for the GOP brand in 2012.

And what is the GOP 'brand'? IMO, they are under the spell of a reactionary force which rejects the uniquely American system of checks and balances to limit the power of our representative government.