Political Junkies: Predictions for U.S. Mid-Terms?

[transplant99]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Republicans control congress?

Look at who voted Lanny...control or not...the Dems backed it...period.

Unless a top-secret-neuro-atom-invisible- bomb-that-would-have -the Repubs-win-any-vote-they-wanted was flown into the House and no one noticed....cept you.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Well, there's some insults from Johnny! You must be getting your ass handed to you, bus driver!

Nah you are very much like the Dem's you love --you whine without facts. Then you when you are called on the facts which is so very easy -- you call into question the opponent -- then you switch the argument to being over the insults.

Don't much matter. I remain unconvinced that you even know what you are talking about and fully unconvinced that the party you are so enamored of has anything to offer other than whining.

Now there are a few of them with some guts --Biden is one and if his plan was overhauled and adopted as Democratic policy they might actually have something.

[Looger]

do people still really believe there are effectively two parties?

if anyone does i ask you:

why has nancy pelosi pledged to not impeach the president?

[transplant99]

Well, I guess you'd know better than I. I was under the impression that Republicans (generally) wanted to 'stay the course', and Democrats (generally) want to end the war quickly and bring the soldiers home. I hate the media so much? Not sure where that comes from.

Both parties want a good ending to the thing...both parties have members that have different ideas as to how that can/will/should occur.

I don't get why the level of respect has to instantly drop. I don't recall belittling your intelligence here.

Come on now. I wasn't "belittling" anything. Read things in context. Clearly it wasn't just the Republicans that voted to go to Iraq.....that is obvious.

As for the rest of your answer...if ANYONE wants to just "pull out" right now, they aren't thinking things through. Think things are bad now...it will only get worse.

Things CAN be a disater, but can be corrected. The options go far beyond leaving or staying and believing it can only be one or the other.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Fair enough... hopefully we're both around here in a couple years and we'll find out how that works out. I think the country is going to sink into violent chaos (and the US military has colour-coded charts showing that this is the present state of affairs) and the US will leave bloody-nosed with a ruined international reputation. Since neither of us can forecast what will actually happen, we'll just have to wait and see, we can re-discuss when its over. Regardless of which way the US votes, its a disaster... I just think that its up to them how disasterous it will end up being.

I can certainly agree to disagree.

I don't think so at all. It's little more than political expediency that drives the Democrats and we all know that. Bush has two years to get things done in IRAQ -- this midterm vote is almost besides the point. He can veto any bill he wants and the Dem's won't have the votes to overturn it.

Now if he is smart he takes advice from as many people as possible. Biden and Gelb(Democrats) came up with partition and it was rejected with Turkey and wealth distribution as obstacles. Baker commission has solved those concerns with a tax policy and by troop rediistribution. American troops in Kurdish territory keeps the Kurds both safe and in check. Apparently the Turks are cool with that and it would be a matter of implementing a three state union with a federal government with a tax policy which shared the wealth.

Iraqi government already moved in this direction but stopped when there was internal opposition caused mainly by the worries over who gets the oil revenue.

Personally I've always thought this plan is as sound as it gets but hey I would at the same time spend the two years training the Iraqi army and police force and do both plans at once.

[transplant99]

why has nancy pelosi pledged to not impeach the president?

Because she was privy to the very information that Bush was when the decision was made?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

I started with saying and stuck to why should a Republican change his vote and couldn't see a reason why. Still haven't heard one. Your answer was might as well for a change ---not much of a reason is it?

It may not be much of a reason, but it's better than the alternative.

Now obviously I'm whining when I say this, but anyone who can't see that this current bunch is either impossibly inept or thoroughly corrupt is totally blind.

The Democrats may not be much better, but they can't possibly be worse. If I had a say in the matter, that would be enough for me.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Both parties want a good ending to the thing...both parties have members that have different ideas as to how that can/will/should occur.

Ok... I guess it all depends on how 'fixable' one believes the situation to be. I think its an umitigated disaster regardless of what happens. The only things that could rectify this situation (probably heavy international involvement) ain't going to happen. As far as I'm concerned its a matter of how long the US wants to draw out their pain there (and how many more billions they can spend). I suppose if you think there's a happy ending somewhere out there than you're justified in wanting to continue the occupation. I'm not so optimistic.

[FlamingLonghorn]

I think it is funny that all the headlines about the military calling for removal of Rumsfeld are just popping out now, for those who actually follow the military, they've been calling for his incompetent head for 2-3 years now...

[Displaced Flames fan]

I don't vote straight down a party ticket. I think anyone who does is an idiot.

There are good and bad people in both parties. I try to vote for the best person, not the Republican.

There are no major races in Kansas with national implications. Our Congressman is up for reelection but he has zero chance of losing and rightfully so. He's done a phenomenal job for OUR DISTRICT.

I've said I hope that John Tester, the democratic challenger to longtime Montana Senator Conrad Burns wins. I don't care if it swings the power in the Senate. He's better for Montana.

I will be voting for a Democratic incumbent governor, a democratic challenger for Attorney General and a Republican incumbent Congressman. They are the best choices and not a single one of them has been made for reasons that don't matter, like being afraid of Nancy Pelosi or hating George Bush.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Looger

do people still really believe there are effectively two parties?

if anyone does i ask you:

why has nancy pelosi pledged to not impeach the president?

Nancy Pelosi can't impeach the President.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Because she was privy to the very information that Bush was when the decision was made?

You mean that she knew Bush was lying when he said Saddam had WMD and was building a nuclear bomb. Interesting.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

You mean that she knew Bush was lying when he said Saddam had WMD and was building a nuclear bomb. Interesting.

No...i mean, as has been established ad nauseum, that the intelligence used to go to war was provided to ALL people in ALL parties and they then made their decision collectively (you know, both parties?) in a open vote AT THE TIME with the information provided....or are we now ignoring that FACT?

But thanks for being a twit...well played.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by transplant99

No...i mean, as has been established ad nauseum, that the intelligence used to go to war was provided to ALL people in ALL parties and they then made their decision collectively (you know, both parties?) in a open vote AT THE TIME with the information provided....or are we now ignoring that FACT?

But thanks for being a twit...well played.

Now ignoring?

Tranny, it's been ignored for 3 years....along with the FACT that Hussein DID have WMD's as documented by the UN, earmarked for destruction and unaccounted for!

Unbelievable.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

I don't vote straight down a party ticket. I think anyone who does is an idiot.

There are good and bad people in both parties. I try to vote for the best person, not the Republican.

There are no major races in Kansas with national implications. Our Congressman is up for reelection but he has zero chance of losing and rightfully so. He's done a phenomenal job for OUR DISTRICT.

I've said I hope that John Tester, the democratic challenger to longtime Montana Senator Conrad Burns wins. I don't care if it swings the power in the Senate. He's better for Montana.

I will be voting for a Democratic incumbent governor, a democratic challenger for Attorney General and a Republican incumbent Congressman. They are the best choices and not a single one of them has been made for reasons that don't matter, like being afraid of Nancy Pelosi or hating George Bush.

Man I still can't make up my mind who I am voting for governor. In Texas, its a four way race. Rick Perry definitely not; he has been terrible for this state. Kinky Friedman would have gotten my vote if he had shown me some level of competence in his campaigning. Carole Keetan-Strayhorn-Rylander-Johnson-Smith-Powell has been a member of every party in Texas and now is an independent, she obviously doesn't know wdf she's doing. So I think I am leaning towards Chris Bell (D), he certainly hasn't done anything to wow me, but he hasn't done anything to make me think he's going to be bad. So to sum up, I am basing my vote not on who I feel will be good for this state, but on someone who I am indifferent to because everyone else blows goats...

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Nancy Pelosi can't impeach the President.

she's an early favourite for speaker.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Looger

she's an early favourite for speaker.

Yep, if the Dems take over the House she will most likely be Speaker.

The Speaker of the House does not have the power to impeach the President of the United States.

BTW...what grounds are there for impeachment?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Now ignoring?

Tranny, it's been ignored for 3 years....along with the FACT that Hussein DID have WMD's as documented by the UN, earmarked for destruction and unaccounted for!

Unbelievable.

Yeah that as well....but Ive given up on the FACTS at the time...people on that side simply want no part of it. Period. Its like everything was just peachy keen in the country pre 2003.

Its a joke.

Im guessing the next line of BS will be Hussein was convicted of murder on fabricated eveidence. Seriously.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by transplant99

No...i mean, as has been established ad nauseum, that the intelligence used to go to war was provided to ALL people in ALL parties and they then made their decision collectively (you know, both parties?) in a open vote AT THE TIME with the information provided....or are we now ignoring that FACT?

But thanks for being a twit...well played.

False "information provided" by Bush and his neocons. If my pointing that fact out makes me a twit, so be it.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Looger

she's an early favourite for speaker.

Woohoo! Another scumbag elevated to power in America...