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

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Looger

personally i think the whole gang should hang for high treason for the 'conspiracy' stuff.

but the level of crime that leaders in the states get impeached for is FAR below the level of crime that this administration is provably culpable in.

what aboot the $1.6 billion for paid propoganda?

something like 400 separate criminal offences according to government accountants.

each one far more impeachable than lying aboot nookie.

What the hell do accountants know about criminal law? Also, where is the evidence that would stand up in a court of law and not that proves someone in his administration is a criminal you need evidence proving without a doubt George W. Bush committed a criminal offense? An article written by a nonjournalist on indymedia.org is not considered good evidence in US court systems.

[Thunderball]

Without getting into specifics... I think the midterm elections will see moderate gains by the Democrats, and possibly, a little switch in house powers. To me, the ideal would be a resulting dem/rep split of the houses... those seem to work the best in ensuring the best policy is what is being implemented, rather than partisan policy.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Without getting into specifics... I think the midterm elections will see moderate gains by the Democrats, and possibly, a little switch in house powers. To me, the ideal would be a resulting dem/rep split of the houses... those seem to work the best in ensuring the best policy is what is being implemented, rather than partisan policy.

Well, I strongly suspect that's what we'll get. Even the most conservative projections show the Dems getting at least the 15 seats they'll need--Democratic candidates lead in Republican-held districts in something like 21 races, and another 20 are considered toss-ups. If you assume they split the tossups and win, say around 18 of the ones where they lead by a significant margin, that still gives you a Democratic pickup of 28 seats, which should be good for control of the House for the next while, given how rarely incumbents lose around here.

The Senate is another story. The Democrats would basically have to sweep all of the tossups in order to win control of it. In effect, that may be the endgame of the GOP in this election--keep the Senate for now and hope for better circumstances in the next cycle. Then Rove will spin it as a victory, noting that they beat the historical average of seats lost to a President's party in the mid-terms. (he will of course neglect to mention the role of gerrymandering and redistricting in that process, which has progressed to ridiculous proportions.)

As for the Senate, if you use the 50% rule, then a lot of GOP incumbents are in trouble, even if polls show a tight race. Chafee (R.I.), Burns (Montana), Talent (Missouri), Santorum (PA), and Dewine (OH), if that rule holds true, will all lose to-morrow.

That leaves the open races in Virginia and Tennessee, where the 50% rule doesn't apply as comfortably. In Virginia, it's looking likely (but not certain) that the Republican candidate (whose "macaca" comment you may remember) will go down to a narrow defeat. In Tennessee, I suspect that Corker will hold that seat for the G.O.P--the margin in recent polls has been pretty wide, and he did crack 50% twice.

But if the Democrats can win all of those and not lose New Jersey, then they narrowly win the Senate. My guess is they fall just short, losing either in Virginia or Missouri--but anything can happen, I guess.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Pot, meet kettle. You might also want to check the score in this thread in that regard.



Don't worry, I KNOW you don't have a clue what you're talking about. You don't even have a clue about the Kurdish cause that you continually dredge up as the ultimate support to the partitioning of Iraq. That alone speaks volumes about your credibility on the subject and why you wisely runaway when the topic starts getting down to real world issues.



I like Biden. He's an interesting guy. The whole partitioning issue is terribly flawed and will likely lead to more ethnic violence over resources. That's without even considering non-geopolitical borders that could create greater problems for all countries in the region. Partitioning is a typically "American" solution as it does not even consider the complexities of the region. It views things in as simplistic terms as possible. I guess that's why you appreciate the concept so much.

What would you know about the real world Lanny? The Biden plan which is being overhauled by the Baker commission is very likely the bi-partisan reccomendation that is going to be brought forth right after the elections and you were clueless about it. Hadn't even heard of it and you're going to spout you know about partition. HO HO HO Lanny -- your blather in the wind and completely in the dark about partition. Fart you thought it was a Republican idea -- laughable. Your credibility on the topic shot through and through. Let's see you insult your way out of that cause you've been pointed out as not knowing your stuff Laddy!!!!

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

What would you know about the real world Lanny? The Biden plan which is being overhauled by the Baker commission is very likely the bi-partisan reccomendation that is going to be brought forth right after the elections and you were clueless about it. Hadn't even heard of it and you're going to spout you know about partition. HO HO HO Lanny -- your blather in the wind and completely in the dark about partition. Fart you thought it was a Republican idea -- laughable. Your credibility on the topic shot through and through. Let's see you insult your way out of that cause you've been pointed out as not knowing your stuff Laddy!!!!

Actually bus driver, I never said the plan was Republican, YOU did. I have said it was flaw greatly. I was unaware that Biden was one of the people behind the idea, that does not mean I do not know premise of the policy or the weaknesses there of. I have read and heard plenty about the partitioning concept, and I personally think it is a "made in America" solution, not one that addresses any problems of the region. It's funny, but you natter on and on about how great the plan is yet when we get into the actual issues you make a bunch of insults, gastrointestinal sounds and run away and hide. So lets see your exit on this topic. Lets hit the issues that partitioning does NOT deal with.

1) How does this magical plan work in answering the obvious regional inequity?

2) How does this brilliant partitioning strategy create security in Iraq when there is economic and infrastructure inequity existent in the proposed regions?

3) How does partitioning create regional stability, when the neighboring nations are not having their wishes observed?

4) Who is going to support the initiative of partitioning in the region when it has the potential to affect their own internal national security and promote ethnic discord?

5) What is going to prevent this partitioning from being a land grab by certain neighboring nations and immediately break out into a larger and much more aggressive war?

Time to run along Johnny. The partitioning plan is flawed and your knowledge of the issues that plague the region and the people are sad. Just because you know who proposed a plan does not mean you know anything about the subject matter itself. That's your fall back position and its pretty clear that is all you have. So continue dropping names of the politicians promoting the concept, like that is going to gain you something, and keep running from actually defining why YOU think partitioning will work and explaining why other people's views are incorrect. Insult away bus driver.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Actually bus driver, I never said the plan was Republican, YOU did. I have said it was flaw greatly. I was unaware that Biden was one of the people behind the idea, that does not mean I do not know premise of the policy or the weaknesses there of. I have read and heard plenty about the partitioning concept, and I personally think it is a "made in America" solution, not one that addresses any problems of the region. It's funny, but you natter on and on about how great the plan is yet when we get into the actual issues you make a bunch of insults, gastrointestinal sounds and run away and hide. So lets see your exit on this topic. Lets hit the issues that partitioning does NOT deal with.

1) How does this magical plan work in answering the obvious regional inequity?

2) How does this brilliant partitioning strategy create security in Iraq when there is economic and infrastructure inequity existent in the proposed regions?

3) How does partitioning create regional stability, when the neighboring nations are not having their wishes observed?

4) Who is going to support the initiative of partitioning in the region when it has the potential to affect their own internal national security and promote ethnic discord?

5) What is going to prevent this partitioning from being a land grab by certain neighboring nations and immediately break out into a larger and much more aggressive war?

Time to run along Johnny. The partitioning plan is flawed and your knowledge of the issues that plague the region and the people are sad. Just because you know who proposed a plan does not mean you know anything about the subject matter itself. That's your fall back position and its pretty clear that is all you have. So continue dropping names of the politicians promoting the concept, like that is going to gain you something, and keep running from actually defining why YOU think partitioning will work and explaining why other people's views are incorrect. Insult away bus driver.

You are empty and your lack of knowing Biden's proposal confirms that -- further MR. NOT so well read I'll give you yet another reading lesson. Read the Baker bi-partisan plan that was built off of the Biden plan. You are so clueless and have no idea what is actually even going on. Check out the FACTS and then comeback and admit you didn't know about this either. Just the two most important plans dealing with partition -- you know -- that plan you are so read up on -- bye bye to whatever tiny bit of credibiltiy you had on the issue.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Sowa

What the hell do accountants know about criminal law? Also, where is the evidence that would stand up in a court of law and not that proves someone in his administration is a criminal you need evidence proving without a doubt George W. Bush committed a criminal offense? An article written by a nonjournalist on indymedia.org is not considered good evidence in US court systems.

indymedia?

so... should i provide no sources at all, like you?

whatever man. keep putting words in my mouth though. it's so sophisticated!

http://www.democrats.reform.house.go...0539-14835.pdf

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.

http://www.democrats.reform.house.go...0444-05660.pdf

Over two and a half years, the Bush Administration spent more than $1.6 billion in taxpayer dollars on 343 contracts with public relations firms, advertising agencies, media organizations, and individual members of the media.

each single act is illegal. each single act is a different criminal offense.

this is some OLD info, the numbers are way behind the current reality. this just happens to be the last time pelosi and company had balls. on occasion the two-party system does result in some investigations of illegal activity, some of the minor stuff anyway in this managed stage play.

here's one that made a little news:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...itehouse_x.htm

Seeking to build support among black families for its education reform law, the Bush administration paid a prominent black pundit $240,000 to promote the law on his nationally syndicated television show and to urge other black journalists to do the same.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200501070008

In May 2004, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) determined that the Bush administration violated federal law by releasing television "news segments" that favorably depicted a new Medicare law -- without indicating that the government created and paid for the segments. On January 6, the GAO announced that the Bush administration again broke the law by producing similar "news segments" about drug use, saying the segments "constitute covert propaganda" because they did not identify the government as the source of the materials. The GAO added that the administration "made it impossible for the targeted viewing audience to ascertain that these stories were produced by the government."

the new york times link in this text requires a login.

personally to me these crimes are a total joke compared to the big ones, but they're investigated, documented, proven, and all that by the democratic party.

new york times, USA today, the democratic party websites.

yep, indymedia.

indymedia???

[mykalberta]

Dems increase 24 House seats, take the house
Dems increase 4 Senate seats, Republicans retain senate.

MYK

[North East Goon]

Can someone explain the House of Reps vs. The Senate to me? How does each govern and what are their responsibilities. I think I know the difference, but would like to really know?

[Looger]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

Can someone explain the House of Reps vs. The Senate to me? How does each govern and what are their responsibilities. I think I know the difference, but would like to really know?

the senate represents states, as in each state has two senators so that montana - with less people than calgary - has similar stature with california - more people in southern california than canada.

acts have to pass both houses, 'upper' and 'lower'.

the congress / house controls the purse strings, the budgets, the oversight committees - it's considered the real power.

the senate has committees like the homeland security committee, the senate intelligence committee, etc. that direct policy but don't control procurement. it could be said that a given senator has less direct power than a given congressman.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Dems increase 24 House seats, take the house
Dems increase 4 Senate seats, Republicans retain senate.

MYK

That's a pretty reasonable prediction. My own feeling is that they take 5 senate seats, leaving a 50/50 split (still GOP controlled because Cheney would get the tiebreaking vote). A lot depends on whether the recent shifts in poll numbers reflect a natural "tightening" of the race in the final days, or if there's really a surge in the GOP's favour. If such a surge has happened, my guess is we'll see more modest gains in both houses--in the neighbourhood of 16 House seats and 3 in the Senate.

[FlamingLonghorn]

I didn't have the burden of proof because I wasn't making the claims of criminal activity.

Originally Posted by Looger

indymedia?

so... should i provide no sources at all, like you?

whatever man. keep putting words in my mouth though. it's so sophisticated!

http://www.democrats.reform.house.go...0539-14835.pdf

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Ok this is just a record of all the media deals that the Bush admin has made.

http://www.democrats.reform.house.go...0444-05660.pdf

Over two and a half years, the Bush Administration spent more than $1.6 billion in taxpayer dollars on 343 contracts with public relations firms, advertising agencies, media organizations, and individual members of the media.

each single act is illegal. each single act is a different criminal offense.

No each single act is not illegal. Nowhere in that document did it say every single act is illegal. The democrats believe the Bush Administration might have acted illegally in some instances but not every one. Paying media companies to do advertising for the federal gov't is not illegal. My girlfriend works for an ad firm that has being doing state and federal advertising for years.

here's one that made a little news:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...itehouse_x.htm

Seeking to build support among black families for its education reform law, the Bush administration paid a prominent black pundit $240,000 to promote the law on his nationally syndicated television show and to urge other black journalists to do the same.

"Probably illegal", Again I don't think you realize there has to be a criminal conviction and to get one there has to be evidence beyond a doubt. Innocent until proven guilty. Also, says that the White House had no part in that contract it was all the Dept. of Education, whether thats true who knows, but you would have to have quite a papertrail to lead it to Bush. The Sect. of Education who signed that contract was relieved of her duties.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200501070008

In May 2004, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) determined that the Bush administration violated federal law by releasing television "news segments" that favorably depicted a new Medicare law -- without indicating that the government created and paid for the segments. On January 6, the GAO announced that the Bush administration again broke the law by producing similar "news segments" about drug use, saying the segments "constitute covert propaganda" because they did not identify the government as the source of the materials. The GAO added that the administration "made it impossible for the targeted viewing audience to ascertain that these stories were produced by the government."

the new york times link in this text requires a login.

So you think that Bush should be impeached because someone left out that those commercials were paid for be the federal gov't in little text at the bottom of the ad? small potatoes.

personally to me these crimes are a total joke compared to the big ones, but they're investigated, documented, proven, and all that by the democratic party.

new york times, USA today, the democratic party websites.

Well the Democratic party sure got the independent counsel to look into all this. Oh wait no they didn't probably because it wasn't a big deal or they didn't really have enough evidence to convict. There is nothing here that would hold in a court of law, or lead directly to Bush, or is considered an impeachable offense. When you present evidence of an impeachable offense made by Bush that would hold up in a court of law then I will agree with you. Just to be clear here Bush is a terrible president and grossly incompetent unfortunately that is not grounds for impeachment.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Sowa

So you think that Bush should be impeached because someone left out that those commercials were paid for be the federal gov't in little text at the bottom of the ad? small potatoes.

nope.

i think that given what impeachment has been reached for previously, it's something the democrats, if they actually cared aboot the big crimes of this administration, could hang onto.

i think that there's enough evidence of impeachment of bush and cheney based SOLELY on norman minteta's testimony to the 9/11 commission, but there's going to have to be a serious change in how business is conducted before that stuff comes to light by the democrats.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7Vs7KNlpXU

and yes, it is illegal when those being broadcast to aren't aware that it's government-funded.

like i said, many times now, this is small-potato crime. but so is lying aboot a blow job.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Sowa

There is nothing here that would hold in a court of law, or lead directly to Bush, or is considered an impeachable offense. When you present evidence of an impeachable offense made by Bush that would hold up in a court of law then I will agree with you. Just to be clear here Bush is a terrible president and grossly incompetent unfortunately that is not grounds for impeachment.

bush has publicly stated he'd continue this policy.

i'd look but i just can't find it on indymedia.org!!!

[North East Goon]

How is Congress/House of Reps distributed across the nation? How many in each state?

[Looger]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

How is Congress/House of Reps distributed across the nation? How many in each state?

it's by district, by population.

more people in the state = more districts = more congressmen

not that state congressmen vote together, it's more a party lines / local issues thing.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

On the topic of low turnout: one of the main problems in the U.S. electoral system has long been the fact that elections here are a total gong show. It's never taken me more than 3 minutes to vote at my precinct in Calgary; you go to the polling place, they give you a ballot, you put an X on it, give it back and walk out. Here, there are frequently long lines due to technical and infrastructural problems, especially in inner-city districts, or districts with high populations.

Today seems to be no exception:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/....ap/index.html

Glitches delayed balloting in dozens of Indiana and Ohio precincts, and Illinois officials were swamped with calls from voters complaining that poll workers did not know how to operate new electronic equipment.
In Delaware County, Indiana, officials planned to seek a court order to extend voting after an apparent computer error prevented voters from casting ballots in 75 precincts.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Looger

bush has publicly stated he'd continue this policy.

i'd look but i just can't find it on indymedia.org!!!

Which policy?

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

On the topic of low turnout: one of the main problems in the U.S. electoral system has long been the fact that elections here are a total gong show. It's never taken me more than 3 minutes to vote at my precinct in Calgary; you go to the polling place, they give you a ballot, you put an X on it, give it back and walk out. Here, there are frequently long lines due to technical and infrastructural problems, especially in inner-city districts, or districts with high populations.

Today seems to be no exception:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/....ap/index.html

Well i am in a lower class minority area and my polling place was working out just fine, but then again I don't think many in my area are actually legally allowed to vote due to citizenship issues. It took me 5 mins. to vote today.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by Sowa

Which policy?

he's been challenged on the policy of paying for news, ironically enough by reporters.

did you check indymedia.org yet? must be on there somewhere...