Winning The House Is Not A Consolation Prize. It's The Prize

[skews13]

And it wasn’t just Kobach and Walker, Kansas and Wisconsin have been the go-to examples for Republicans, the test beds of their efforts to destroy labor, trash environmental rules, reward the wealthy, and surrender government services in the name of jobs, jobs, jobs. Both of those efforts are now in abject retreat.

If America’s states are the laboratories of democracy, Kansas and Wisconsin have demonstrated that all the conservative mix produces is an explosion.

Boom.

In fact, Republicans blew up Kansas so well that the blowback from that effort is likely to still be echoing for several elections to come.

Winning the House is not a consolation prize. It's the prize.

 

[BlackFlag]

And it wasn’t just Kobach and Walker, Kansas and Wisconsin have been the go-to examples for Republicans, the test beds of their efforts to destroy labor, trash environmental rules, reward the wealthy, and surrender government services in the name of jobs, jobs, jobs. Both of those efforts are now in abject retreat.

If America’s states are the laboratories of democracy, Kansas and Wisconsin have demonstrated that all the conservative mix produces is an explosion.

Boom.

In fact, Republicans blew up Kansas so well that the blowback from that effort is likely to still be echoing for several elections to come.

Winning the House is not a consolation prize. It's the prize.

True the House is all that mattered. Other stuff would have been nice, but the future of the country rode on some part of the government being taken from the Trump cabal, and we got it.

 

[MarathonMike]

Of course it is, you did very well last night. Just remember it's the Senate who will pick the next Supreme Court Justice and make the SCOTUS Conservative for the next 25 years.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

LOL ....The Daily Kook?

It explains volumes about the OP

 

[MisterBeale]

I heard today that during the Clinton years, he lost the House by 60 seats, and Obama by nearly 70?

And Trump only lost it by what, 25, 30?

Maybe I have those numbers wrong, but I think that liberal propaganda is really minimizing the position that the lack of coherent Democratic vision that is killing the DNC. . .

Just an observation. . .

 

[protectionist]

True the House is all that mattered. Other stuff would have been nice, but the future of the country rode on some part of the government being taken from the Trump cabal, and we got it.

And exactly what do you think you're going to be able to DO with it ?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Like we said

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

And it wasn’t just Kobach and Walker, Kansas and Wisconsin have been the go-to examples for Republicans, the test beds of their efforts to destroy labor, trash environmental rules, reward the wealthy, and surrender government services in the name of jobs, jobs, jobs. Both of those efforts are now in abject retreat.

If America’s states are the laboratories of democracy, Kansas and Wisconsin have demonstrated that all the conservative mix produces is an explosion.

Boom.

In fact, Republicans blew up Kansas so well that the blowback from that effort is likely to still be echoing for several elections to come.

Winning the House is not a consolation prize. It's the prize.

More like a Popsicle.

 

[candycorn]

I heard today that during the Clinton years, he lost the House by 60 seats, and Obama by nearly 70?

And Trump only lost it by what, 25, 30?

Maybe I have those numbers wrong, but I think that liberal propaganda is really minimizing the position that the lack of coherent Democratic vision that is killing the DNC. . .

Just an observation. . .

Perhaps. What the Dems don’t realize is this though….

When there was a conflict between the Congress and the President, the President usually came out smelling like a rose after it was over. I wonder how it will go between Trump and the Dem controlled House. I’m completely unsure who carries public opinion if there is a stalemate.

 

[rightwinger]

I heard today that during the Clinton years, he lost the House by 60 seats, and Obama by nearly 70?

And Trump only lost it by what, 25, 30?

Maybe I have those numbers wrong, but I think that liberal propaganda is really minimizing the position that the lack of coherent Democratic vision that is killing the DNC. . .

Just an observation. . .

Neither the Clinton or Obama House was Gerrymandered to the degree where you have to win by ten percent of the vote just to break even

 

[skews13]

True the House is all that mattered. Other stuff would have been nice, but the future of the country rode on some part of the government being taken from the Trump cabal, and we got it.

And exactly what do you think you're going to be able to DO with it ?

Enjoy the holidays. It's not going to be enjoyable after New Years.

If you're a trumpling.

 

[MisterBeale]

I heard today that during the Clinton years, he lost the House by 60 seats, and Obama by nearly 70?

And Trump only lost it by what, 25, 30?

Maybe I have those numbers wrong, but I think that liberal propaganda is really minimizing the position that the lack of coherent Democratic vision that is killing the DNC. . .

Just an observation. . .

Perhaps. What the Dems don’t realize is this though….

When there was a conflict between the Congress and the President, the President usually came out smelling like a rose after it was over. I wonder how it will go between Trump and the Dem controlled House. I’m completely unsure who carries public opinion if there is a stalemate.

True. If the Dems can come up with something other than identity politics and how the white male patriarchy is bad, they might have a chance.

But the politics of hate don't seem to work well for Trump, so I doubt they will work well for the DNC.

Only a positive message of hope ever really resonates with the independents. It worked well for Obama, and that is the core of MAGA. This is what will draw them like honey. . . or jobs, growth, and a positive economy.

These parties need a plan and a way to implement it.

 

[candycorn]

I heard today that during the Clinton years, he lost the House by 60 seats, and Obama by nearly 70?

And Trump only lost it by what, 25, 30?

Maybe I have those numbers wrong, but I think that liberal propaganda is really minimizing the position that the lack of coherent Democratic vision that is killing the DNC. . .

Just an observation. . .

Perhaps. What the Dems don’t realize is this though….

When there was a conflict between the Congress and the President, the President usually came out smelling like a rose after it was over. I wonder how it will go between Trump and the Dem controlled House. I’m completely unsure who carries public opinion if there is a stalemate.

True. If the Dems can come up with something other than identity politics and how the white male patriarchy is bad, they might have a chance.

But the politics of hate don't seem to work well for Trump, so I doubt they will work well for the DNC.

Only a positive message of hope ever really resonates with the independents. It worked well for Obama, and that is the core of MAGA. This is what will draw them like honey. . . or jobs, growth, and a positive economy.

These parties need a plan and a way to implement it.

Platform? Yes
Plan? It would be nice but not necessary. I think the only way you’d signal to the other side that you are serious about bi partisanship on day 1 is to put a moderate from the other party on your ticket as VP and give her or him a real role in policy implementation. More on this later.

 

[MisterBeale]

I heard today that during the Clinton years, he lost the House by 60 seats, and Obama by nearly 70?

And Trump only lost it by what, 25, 30?

Maybe I have those numbers wrong, but I think that liberal propaganda is really minimizing the position that the lack of coherent Democratic vision that is killing the DNC. . .

Just an observation. . .

Perhaps. What the Dems don’t realize is this though….

When there was a conflict between the Congress and the President, the President usually came out smelling like a rose after it was over. I wonder how it will go between Trump and the Dem controlled House. I’m completely unsure who carries public opinion if there is a stalemate.

True. If the Dems can come up with something other than identity politics and how the white male patriarchy is bad, they might have a chance.

But the politics of hate don't seem to work well for Trump, so I doubt they will work well for the DNC.

Only a positive message of hope ever really resonates with the independents. It worked well for Obama, and that is the core of MAGA. This is what will draw them like honey. . . or jobs, growth, and a positive economy.

These parties need a plan and a way to implement it.

Platform? Yes
Plan? It would be nice but not necessary. I think the only way you’d signal to the other side that you are serious about bi partisanship on day 1 is to put a moderate from the other party on your ticket as VP and give her or him a real role in policy implementation. More on this later.

Considering that both parties meet with the corporate press at the CFR, and they depend on creating a heated divide in the nation to distract voters from substantial issues and sell ads on the propaganda that they push on us?

I think that is the LAST thing that they really want.

NATURALLY, it is what WE want, but the ruling class? Fat chance.

 

[candycorn]

I heard today that during the Clinton years, he lost the House by 60 seats, and Obama by nearly 70?

And Trump only lost it by what, 25, 30?

Maybe I have those numbers wrong, but I think that liberal propaganda is really minimizing the position that the lack of coherent Democratic vision that is killing the DNC. . .

Just an observation. . .

Perhaps. What the Dems don’t realize is this though….

When there was a conflict between the Congress and the President, the President usually came out smelling like a rose after it was over. I wonder how it will go between Trump and the Dem controlled House. I’m completely unsure who carries public opinion if there is a stalemate.

True. If the Dems can come up with something other than identity politics and how the white male patriarchy is bad, they might have a chance.

But the politics of hate don't seem to work well for Trump, so I doubt they will work well for the DNC.

Only a positive message of hope ever really resonates with the independents. It worked well for Obama, and that is the core of MAGA. This is what will draw them like honey. . . or jobs, growth, and a positive economy.

These parties need a plan and a way to implement it.

Platform? Yes
Plan? It would be nice but not necessary. I think the only way you’d signal to the other side that you are serious about bi partisanship on day 1 is to put a moderate from the other party on your ticket as VP and give her or him a real role in policy implementation. More on this later.

I listened to a podcast the other day called "The Hidden Duopoly". It was done by Freakonomics and it's founder Stephen J. Dubner. Google Freakonomics Radio if you want to hear it.

Part of me is like "duh"...it's not that hidden. But one of the conclusions they came up with was that the two major parties do not even try for the middle; they find easier vote-mining on the far ends of the spectrum. The middle--soft Dems and soft Repubs and true independents do not matter. If that is true, there is an opportunity for a true change agent.

Okay. Lets go back in time (harp music playing in the back) to June 7, 2008. It is the date Obama won the Democratic Nomination. McCain won on 9/4/2008. But unlike Obama, McCain had the thing sewn up long before that in March. Dubner contends that the parties don't care about them because there is no viable alternative..."Where are they going to go?" is how they put it. Now, lets say for the sake of argument that the running mate Joe Biden isn't picked at the time the nomination is sealed and McCain doesn't nominate Palin at the convention or toys with Lieberman prior to the convention. Once the nominations are in, they really cannot be changed so there is theoretically time between the nomination and election when someone who is a change agent can upset the system and nominate a prominent equal partner as running mate. It will take planning of course and a clear division of labor between the two people on the ticket on what they are going to try to accomplish.

There are two major things they can do to make it work.

Divide up appointments and national policy. Let the VP submit the names of Federal/SCOTUS judges and they and the top of the ticket hash out who will be picked for which judgships ahead of time. This is a big thing you can give to the other side in return for an easier go of it and the VP (who will be the presumptive nominee of their party when they are no longer are or going to be VPOTUS and will be in the position to cash in favors) helps you push through an agreeable agenda. Lets say minimum wage for example. Few conservatives continue to push the notion that a rise in the minimum wage is not necessary. Fewer still hold out the long debunked notion that it kills the economy. This is something that could be agreed upon if politics were not at play.

Divide by international/national priorities. And during times of international dischord (like we had in 08), let the VPOTUS essentially take the lead in military operations in return for the help on the domestic agenda.

----------------

Pipe dream? Maybe. But I think it will take a major shift at the top of the ticket before any serious bipartisanship will be possible.

 

[Oldstyle]

And it wasn’t just Kobach and Walker, Kansas and Wisconsin have been the go-to examples for Republicans, the test beds of their efforts to destroy labor, trash environmental rules, reward the wealthy, and surrender government services in the name of jobs, jobs, jobs. Both of those efforts are now in abject retreat.

If America’s states are the laboratories of democracy, Kansas and Wisconsin have demonstrated that all the conservative mix produces is an explosion.

Boom.

In fact, Republicans blew up Kansas so well that the blowback from that effort is likely to still be echoing for several elections to come.

Winning the House is not a consolation prize. It's the prize.

True the House is all that mattered. Other stuff would have been nice, but the future of the country rode on some part of the government being taken from the Trump cabal, and we got it.

Interesting...so if Donald Trump takes a page out of the Barack Obama handbook and decides that he'll do end runs around the Democratically controlled House (just like Barry did after the 2010 mid-terms) are you liberals going to OK with that? I'm just asking...LOL

 

[percysunshine]

The Democrats are a bit slow on the uptake.

Now Trump can blame them for overspending.

Duh...

 

[BlackFlag]

And it wasn’t just Kobach and Walker, Kansas and Wisconsin have been the go-to examples for Republicans, the test beds of their efforts to destroy labor, trash environmental rules, reward the wealthy, and surrender government services in the name of jobs, jobs, jobs. Both of those efforts are now in abject retreat.

If America’s states are the laboratories of democracy, Kansas and Wisconsin have demonstrated that all the conservative mix produces is an explosion.

Boom.

In fact, Republicans blew up Kansas so well that the blowback from that effort is likely to still be echoing for several elections to come.

Winning the House is not a consolation prize. It's the prize.

True the House is all that mattered. Other stuff would have been nice, but the future of the country rode on some part of the government being taken from the Trump cabal, and we got it.

Interesting...so if Donald Trump takes a page out of the Barack Obama handbook and decides that he'll do end runs around the Democratically controlled House (just like Barry did after the 2010 mid-terms) are you liberals going to OK with that? I'm just asking...LOL

Sure. Nothing he passes will be meaningful. His EO's can be reversed as easily as they were signed.

 

[candycorn]

The Democrats are a bit slow on the uptake.

Now Trump can blame them for overspending.

Duh...

Oh yeah...like Trump hasn't blamed the democrats for every thing he's failed at already...

 

[MisterBeale]

I heard today that during the Clinton years, he lost the House by 60 seats, and Obama by nearly 70?

And Trump only lost it by what, 25, 30?

Maybe I have those numbers wrong, but I think that liberal propaganda is really minimizing the position that the lack of coherent Democratic vision that is killing the DNC. . .

Just an observation. . .

Perhaps. What the Dems don’t realize is this though….

When there was a conflict between the Congress and the President, the President usually came out smelling like a rose after it was over. I wonder how it will go between Trump and the Dem controlled House. I’m completely unsure who carries public opinion if there is a stalemate.

True. If the Dems can come up with something other than identity politics and how the white male patriarchy is bad, they might have a chance.

But the politics of hate don't seem to work well for Trump, so I doubt they will work well for the DNC.

Only a positive message of hope ever really resonates with the independents. It worked well for Obama, and that is the core of MAGA. This is what will draw them like honey. . . or jobs, growth, and a positive economy.

These parties need a plan and a way to implement it.

Platform? Yes
Plan? It would be nice but not necessary. I think the only way you’d signal to the other side that you are serious about bi partisanship on day 1 is to put a moderate from the other party on your ticket as VP and give her or him a real role in policy implementation. More on this later.

I listened to a podcast the other day called "The Hidden Duopoly". It was done by Freakonomics and it's founder Stephen J. Dubner. Google Freakonomics Radio if you want to hear it.

Part of me is like "duh"...it's not that hidden. But one of the conclusions they came up with was that the two major parties do not even try for the middle; they find easier vote-mining on the far ends of the spectrum. The middle--soft Dems and soft Repubs and true independents do not matter. If that is true, there is an opportunity for a true change agent.

Okay. Lets go back in time (harp music playing in the back) to June 7, 2008. It is the date Obama won the Democratic Nomination. McCain won on 9/4/2008. But unlike Obama, McCain had the thing sewn up long before that in March. Dubner contends that the parties don't care about them because there is no viable alternative..."Where are they going to go?" is how they put it. Now, lets say for the sake of argument that the running mate Joe Biden isn't picked at the time the nomination is sealed and McCain doesn't nominate Palin at the convention or toys with Lieberman prior to the convention. Once the nominations are in, they really cannot be changed so there is theoretically time between the nomination and election when someone who is a change agent can upset the system and nominate a prominent equal partner as running mate. It will take planning of course and a clear division of labor between the two people on the ticket on what they are going to try to accomplish.

There are two major things they can do to make it work.

Divide up appointments and national policy. Let the VP submit the names of Federal/SCOTUS judges and they and the top of the ticket hash out who will be picked for which judgships ahead of time. This is a big thing you can give to the other side in return for an easier go of it and the VP (who will be the presumptive nominee of their party when they are no longer are or going to be VPOTUS and will be in the position to cash in favors) helps you push through an agreeable agenda. Lets say minimum wage for example. Few conservatives continue to push the notion that a rise in the minimum wage is not necessary. Fewer still hold out the long debunked notion that it kills the economy. This is something that could be agreed upon if politics were not at play.

Divide by international/national priorities. And during times of international dischord (like we had in 08), let the VPOTUS essentially take the lead in military operations in return for the help on the domestic agenda.

----------------

Pipe dream? Maybe. But I think it will take a major shift at the top of the ticket before any serious bipartisanship will be possible.

Yeah, it does sound like a pipe dream. Mostly b/c the establishment politicians could never appear to be destroying the divide, it is what keeps the system working for them.

I love Stephen J. Dubner and Steven Levitt's work.

Have you read their original book? It's terrific. Siting on my book shelf. It's why I am positive Roe v. Wade will NEVER be over turned. Most on the left forget that it was a conservative leaning court that ruled for it, and those pragmatic bastards know why crime fell. They would never overturn it.

Their follow up work and continuing work tended to get more and more partisan, and less and less objective, so I started to pay less attention. Still, it sounds interesting.

I do wish I had the time like I used to, that really is something I should look into, but I am afraid that the very premise, "Hidden Duopoly" should be the clue. Much like my previous reply, hinting at the historian and professor, who was Bill Clinton's mentor, none other than Carroll Quigley, the archivist of the CFR, all of these folks are already working together, the system is already working just they way they want it to. The folks in charge don't WANT you to know what is really going on, wake up.



Folks have now set up a whole web site dedicated to his work, Tragedy and Hope. The system is set up to create conflict and discord, not cooperation, or at least that illusion of it.
Freedom Begins Between Your Ears

They should do a little more research and retitle, try "Hidden MONopoly."

They, and the economic elites cannot afford to have cooperation, they are actually trying to think of more and more ways to purposely create silly reasons for conflict, you haven't noticed?

With each passing year we get more and more stupid and inane "scandals" in the press, and more investigations of politicians of one type or another. Was Hillary really trying to hide nefarious activity? Yeah, probably not. Was Trump, actually colluding with Russians? Fat chance. But all these elites know this, that isn't the point. The point is, they don't want the public paying attention to nearly two decades of war, or that they are sub-contracting out death and destruction and uniting against undeclared imperialism for the benefit of only a handful of multi-billionaires. Anything to keep us distracted and controlled.