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

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Wow...that seems strange to me.

It's all about ratings here. Pretty much every network realizes that all the news networks there are like 5 or 6 are going to be covering this nonstop why lose ad revenue when you don't have to?

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

What a joke. Hey Johnny, where the hell do you think these yahoos get their ideas??? They come from the think tanks. That's what these bodies do. Dream up ideas on how to deal with issues. Then they get a politician to sponsor the idea and promote it as their own pet project. Meanwhile the think tank provides any supporting work required to make the idea come to fruition. The guys doing the face time don't hatch these plans, they are the talking heads that get them some credibility in the political arena. I can't believe you think that these guys dream this stuff up themselves! Hilarious!!!

Oh, and its also damn comical when YOU say don't let the facts get in the way. YOU have completely ignored the FACT that this is a regional problem, NOT an American one. REGIONAL stability is not something that can be enforced at the end of a gun, nor at the end of policy that the people of the region do not believe in. The countries of the region want NOTHING to do with this lame plan and have stated as much. Bush has stated he wants nothing to do with this. THOSE are the facts. Its been pointed out by multiple people. You're the only one claiming otherwise. That makes you the "someone", and the butt of the joke (as usual).

BTW, I'm still waiting for you to answer the basic questions that sink your "heroic plan", oh Artless Dodger. When can we expect a brilliant destruction of those points using your air tight framework of peace in Iraq and stability in the region?

The countries have stated they oppose the Baker plan --An outright LIE and beyond stupid. Bush hasn't received the Baker plan --How dense are you?

It's a regional problem --Yeah sure Lanny and the Americans aren't part of the problem or won't be part of the solution. Like they weren't in the Balkans I suppose.

You would make a brillant politician. I can see your first interview. Ahhh that idiot Obama and that dufus Holbrooke along with that bozo Baker and his think tank should just leave the decision on whether American troops leave IRAQ to the Syrians and the Iraquis. You would be laughed off Capitol Hill and dismissed as an idiot by every American politician from every political persuasion alive in the country.

Facts :

1. Countries have never said zilch about the Baker plan.

2. Bush has never had the Baker plan presented to him.

3. Americans will be making up their own minds about American troops.

Your rubbish that there is known opposition to the Baker plan is of course unfactual and unprovable as it dosen't exist. Your knowledge that Bush is against the Baker plan is as per usual unfactual and unprovable. Your idea that Americans will give the decision over what to do with American troops and policy over to the Iranians and Syrians is not only unfactual and unprovable but ridiculous.

Meanwhile that the Baker plan was called for by Congress --FACT.
That it has bi-partisan support with a growing number of movers and skakers on board --FACT.

Face it. You have nothing but BS to offer. You can't offer a single substantiated fact about the Baker plan. NOT ONE!!!!

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Sowa

Not pure speculation on my part Saudi's foreign minister came out and said it a week ago... I'll find the link in a second. Nevermind he said it a year ago but was quoted in an article from a week ago. but nevertheless here's the quote sounds like all the mideast wants seperate states right?



http://salon.com/opinion/feature/200...on/index1.html

Wow year old news about a different plan. Sounds like Lanny -- a year behind the times.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by troutman

Is Dancing With The Stars more important than these elections in the US?

Obviously you've never seen the television tour de force that is Dancing With The Stars.

In all seriousness, the 24-hr. news stations will probably keep going, but networks cover elections reluctantly in the first place. It cuts into their advertising revenue and generally garners poor ratings.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

With the only riding left to report being Burns, I think Burns would take it given the dramatic differences and disparities from county to county in Montana (it will be close though)

Webb's will win, the state uses automated ballots, the machine reads the number. Recently they had a District Attourney or Judge vote and a recount only changed 26 votes.

MYK

Tester has declared victory. With only 800 votes left to count he leads by around 3000. It looks like a Democratic Senate will hinge on 3000 votes in Montana and 8000 votes in Virginia.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

The countries have stated they oppose the Baker plan --An outright LIE and beyond stupid. Bush hasn't received the Baker plan --How dense are you?

It's a regional problem --Yeah sure Lanny and the Americans aren't part of the problem or won't be part of the solution. Like they weren't in the Balkans I suppose.

You would make a brillant politician. I can see your first interview. Ahhh that idiot Obama and that dufus Holbrooke along with that bozo Baker and his think tank should just leave the decision on whether American troops leave IRAQ to the Syrians and the Iraquis. You would be laughed off Capitol Hill and dismissed as an idiot by every American politician from every political persuasion alive in the country.

Facts :

1. Countries have never said zilch about the Baker plan.

2. Bush has never had the Baker plan presented to him.

3. Americans will be making up their own minds about American troops.

Your rubbish that there is known opposition to the Baker plan is of course unfactual and unprovable as it dosen't exist. Your knowledge that Bush is against the Baker plan is as per usual unfactual and unprovable. Your idea that Americans will give the decision over what to do with American troops and policy over to the Iranians and Syrians is not only unfactual and unprovable but ridiculous.

Meanwhile that the Baker plan was called for by Congress --FACT.
That it has bi-partisan support with a growing number of movers and skakers on board --FACT.

Face it. You have nothing but BS to offer. You can't offer a single substantiated fact about the Baker plan. NOT ONE!!!!

So you think Bush doesn't know what the Baker plan is? I mean I find it hard to believe that all these other people know about it including you and Bush hasn't seen anything about it. The fact is you raise this plan as some huge savior of a plan that will knockdown any obstacles and can permeate to please everyone. Let me let you in on something there's going to be a lot of opposition in the Middle East. It's great that everyone in the US gov't is getting along about this plan, but they aren't the ones that really matter. Btw, from the few articles I've read the say this "loose federation" plan is closer to the deal struck in Yugoslavia in 1990 then the Dayton Accord, you know the one that sent the country into civil war?

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

2. Bush has never had the Baker plan presented to him.

I thought he had...

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Tony Snow said that Bush had rejected the Baker partition plan on October 20th. Tony said the idea of paritioning Iraq was a 'non-starter'.

"We've thought about partition, for a series of reasons," but Mr. Bush has categorically rejected the idea of breaking Iraq into regions, Mr. Snow said in reply to questions about an article in The Washington Times.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

I thought he had...

You see that was phase 37 of the ultimate permutation he hasn't seen version 1.6.7.4 which includes the resurrection of Jesus...

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

A Montana update: CNN has called Montana for Tester. Unless there's a miracle in Virginia, this has been a bad election for the GOP--they've essentially lost everything.

In his press conference, Bush himself conceded that it was "a thumpin'."

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Fart! Blab blah blah blah blahbdy blah! Fart! Blah blah. Fart'n fart!

Face it. You have nothing but BS to offer. You can't offer a single substantiated fact about the Baker plan. NOT ONE!!!!

Not one fact about the ISG Plan? Hmmm, how about all of those links that say the countries in question will NOT support partitioning (which is exactly what the ISG Plan is). Well, here's some more that says the Bush admin is against the idea too.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...w101841D58.DTL

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...iraq19-ON.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2586828

Now here is a graphical representation of the ethnic makeup of Iraq. Also remember that these ethnic groups do not stop at the geopolitical border of Iraq, that they extend well into the neighboring countries. Now you get a much better picture of of how those ethnic groups can have a major impact on the neighboring countries and the region itself.



As you can see, an ethnic partition is just not possible as it impacts the other countries in the region and creates potential for their own social unrest.

Now here is the history of the ISG, and will fill in the obvious holes that Johnny is missing, and when I say missing, I mean not even aware of.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ton_Commission

Oh, and finally, just to push Johnny over the edge, the ISG Plan does indeed follow through on my suggestion of including the Syrians and Iranians in the solution, as it is in their best interest to maintain Iraq in one piece.

http://westhawk.blogspot.com/2006/10...udy-group.html

http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,116497,00.html

It sucks, but the only way to stabilize the region is to allow the regional powers to find the solution, not some over-the-hill hasbeen politicans in America. The United States screwed up the region, now someone has to clean up their mess.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

I thought he had...

The report hasn't come out yet. Hmm will maybe last nights results have an influence on what is to come in US policy?

Still, the spokesman left some wiggle room.
"Ideas like partition had been studied. What you're talking now about are tactical adjustments that may be made along the way. And I'm not saying yes and I'm not saying no because I don't know. What you end up doing, again, is you respond to the people on the ground," he said.

Yep a Whitehouse spokesman responding and already leaving it as a possibility. Bush has only rejected partition -- the Baker plan isn't partition but a union of states --that gives him wiggle room.

Whether Bush decides to heed the advice is an unknown but the plan is sound and those that think so are a growing number and include top thinkers from both sides.

Will Bush be hammered on all sides to change course? I would think - NO DOUBT. Would he agree to just pulling out the troops - NOT A CHANCE.

Are there other alternatives that the US will consider other than stay there or get out. ONLY one that is indeed being considered and yeah Bush admits they have thought about it is partition by some other name.

Momentum is going to build for a course correction in IRAQ. Republicans are going to lose in 2008 if they don't do something. Will they gamble on doing what they have been doing? Will they cut and run and leave the very thing to happen that those other countries say they are opposed to? Cause the Americans dissapear and the Shia's will slaughter the Sunni's. Seeing them getting smoked the Syrians will jump in and the Iranians right behind them.

Do you really think those countries want the Americans to cut and run?

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Not one fact about the ISG Plan? Hmmm, how about all of those links that say the countries in question will NOT support partitioning (which is exactly what the ISG Plan is). Well, here's some more that says the Bush admin is against the idea too.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...w101841D58.DTL

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...iraq19-ON.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2586828

Now here is a graphical representation of the ethnic makeup of Iraq. Also remember that these ethnic groups do not stop at the geopolitical border of Iraq, that they extend well into the neighboring countries. Now you get a much better picture of of how those ethnic groups can have a major impact on the neighboring countries and the region itself.



As you can see, an ethnic partition is just not possible as it impacts the other countries in the region and creates potential for their own social unrest.

Now here is the history of the ISG, and will fill in the obvious holes that Johnny is missing, and when I say missing, I mean not even aware of.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...ton_Commission

Oh, and finally, just to push Johnny over the edge, the ISG Plan does indeed follow through on my suggestion of including the Syrians and Iranians in the solution, as it is in their best interest to maintain Iraq in one piece.

http://westhawk.blogspot.com/2006/10...udy-group.html

http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,116497,00.html

It sucks, but the only way to stabilize the region is to allow the regional powers to find the solution, not some over-the-hill hasbeen politicans in America. The United States screwed up the region, now someone has to clean up their mess.

Ahhh failure eh Lanny. Links to the old partitioning plan Lanny but not links to the Baker Hamilton Commission plan. It has evolved way beyond partition including going out and looking at the problems other countries would have with it. As Holbrooke has suggested the plan could easily form the basis of an agreement.

Oh and its nice to find out that Biden and Obama are over the hill has beens.

Once again the men who have come up with the plan and those who think highly of it are leap years beyond you Lanny. Also so funny to see you line up with Bush as a non-supporter of partition --perhaps he like you can see that the union of states will indeed work.

But maybe you and your buddy Bush won't see the light?

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

The report hasn't come out yet. Hmm will maybe last nights results have an influence on what is to come in US policy?

Still, the spokesman left some wiggle room.
"Ideas like partition had been studied. What you're talking now about are tactical adjustments that may be made along the way. And I'm not saying yes and I'm not saying no because I don't know. What you end up doing, again, is you respond to the people on the ground," he said.

Yep a Whitehouse spokesman responding and already leaving it as a possibility. Bush has only rejected partition -- the Baker plan isn't partition but a union of states --that gives him wiggle room.

Whether Bush decides to heed the advice is an unknown but the plan is sound and those that think so are a growing number and include top thinkers from both sides.

Will Bush be hammered on all sides to change course? I would think - NO DOUBT. Would he agree to just pulling out the troops - NOT A CHANCE.

Are there other alternatives that the US will consider other than stay there or get out. ONLY one that is indeed being considered and yeah Bush admits they have thought about it is partition by some other name.

Momentum is going to build for a course correction in IRAQ. Republicans are going to lose in 2008 if they don't do something. Will they gamble on doing what they have been doing? Will they cut and run and leave the very thing to happen that those other countries say they are opposed to? Cause the Americans dissapear and the Shia's will slaughter the Sunni's. Seeing them getting smoked the Syrians will jump in and the Iranians right behind them.

Do you really think those countries want the Americans to cut and run?

So has the plan come out or not? You seem to know a lot about it. Or are you just praising it because Baker said it works and really have no idea about it? I am sure Bush has much more knowledge of the plan then you hate to break it to you.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

I'm beginning to wonder if I'm the only person still talking about the Mid-Terms--but Bush has claimed responsibility for the GOP's losses. (or rather their "loses," as CNN's headline proclaims. You have to love blatant errors in grammar and spelling coming from a national news organization.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/...ush/index.html

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Ahhh failure eh Lanny. Links to the old partitioning plan Lanny but not links to the Baker Hamilton Commission plan. It has evolved way beyond partition including going out and looking at the problems other countries would have with it. As Holbrooke has suggested the plan could easily form the basis of an agreement.

Actually Johnny, I was going to link directly to the "published" ISG plan, but the page has been marked as inactive and returns a timeout error. I thought you would have cried more crocodile tears for posting an inactive link. But hey, here it is anyways.

www.usip.org/isg

It's funny Johnny, but you are chasing your tail and seems more than a few are calling you out on it. On one hand you say this plan is the basis for the solution, but then you say it hasn't been released. How the hell do you know what is in it if it hasn't been released? Also, the report was held back so as NOT to have an impact on the election, but that does not mean that it has not been seen by the White House. NPR is talking about the subject right now (and the Rumsfeld resignation and Iraq), and they (the experts talking about the plan) are refering to the plan as partitioning. But hey, what do they know. The "bus driver" has spoken.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

I'm beginning to wonder if I'm the only person still talking about the Mid-Terms--but Bush has claimed responsibility for the GOP's losses. (or rather their "loses," as CNN's headline proclaims. You have to love blatant errors in grammar and spelling coming from a national news organization.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/...ush/index.html

I'd still be talking about them, but I think we're in a holding pattern. Until the recounts are done, we are unsure what is going to happen in the Senate. One thing is for certain, it was a major thumpin'!

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

I'm beginning to wonder if I'm the only person still talking about the Mid-Terms--but Bush has claimed responsibility for the GOP's losses. (or rather their "loses," as CNN's headline proclaims. You have to love blatant errors in grammar and spelling coming from a national news organization.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/...ush/index.html

Well you know politics in the USA. The minute one election is over the next one starts. Funny but that was something else Obama mentioned after the comment on the Baker plan was that the neverending election cycle sucks( a JohnnyFlame paraphrase).

To me I wonder will they do anything constructive? Will the Democrats just waste the next two years doing nothing but whining and hoping Bush hangs the Republicans in IRAQ? I think the CNN panel was right and this wasn't a pro Democrat vote but an anti-Bush one. The vote in 2008 could swing back the other way really easily if the Democrats do nothing with their majorities.

I'm Bush and the Dem's I get together and run with the Baker plan and get IRAQ right off the map. Dem's can still point to it as folly but if the body bags keep on arriving and they have done zilch to stop it they will start to get their share of the blame.

I don't know but I get the feeling that the anti-government feeling which has been growing in the USA is going to do nothing but continue to grow if the politicians continue to do nothing but spend all their time and money to get elected and do it by blaming the other party without when they get in doing anything besides pork barrel for their own buddies.

I'd like to see Bush the Texas governor who would actually work with the Dem's and get some stuff done --starting in IRAQ.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

^^, well Bush did strike a conciliatory tone in his news conference--we'll see if he and Pelosi can work out their differences and try to get something done.

I agree that this vote was more anti-Bush than pro-democrat--but it does give the Dems an opportunity to show what their vision for the country could be. If they fail, they have no-one but themselves to blame if they lose everything in 2008.

On a lighter note, here's another Onion take on the election:
http://www.theonion.com/content/node...ce=slate_rss_1

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Actually Johnny, I was going to link directly to the "published" ISG plan, but the page has been marked as inactive and returns a timeout error. I thought you would have cried more crocodile tears for posting an inactive link. But hey, here it is anyways.

www.usip.org/isg

It's funny Johnny, but you are chasing your tail and seems more than a few are calling you out on it. On one hand you say this plan is the basis for the solution, but then you say it hasn't been released. How the hell do you know what is in it if it hasn't been released? Also, the report was held back so as NOT to have an impact on the election, but that does not mean that it has not been seen by the White House. NPR is talking about the subject right now (and the Rumsfeld resignation and Iraq), and they (the experts talking about the plan) are refering to the plan as partitioning. But hey, what do they know. The "bus driver" has spoken.

More than a few have called me on what Lanny? A few bozo messageboard posters is your lame attempt --WEAK. Or what the plan is called is your other --WEAK.

I'll trump your bozo messageboad posters with Obama and Biden and Baker. You know those people who are actually Americans and in a place of influence.

YEP you betcha it's being talked about and yeah I'm sure they will worry about whether some bozo's on a messageboard who wouldn't know their arse from a hole in the ground think the plan won't work. YEP keep up the WEAK stuff Lanny.

You haven't put even the slightest dent in the plan nor those who have proposed it or worked on it or those who are now going to work on it further.

All the trump cards reside in my hand --you've got nothing but well yeah your fellow messageboard bozo's.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

I'm beginning to wonder if I'm the only person still talking about the Mid-Terms--but Bush has claimed responsibility for the GOP's losses. (or rather their "loses," as CNN's headline proclaims. You have to love blatant errors in grammar and spelling coming from a national news organization.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/...ush/index.html

For crying out loud it's still there, and the same mistake is contained in the body of the article.

President Bush on Wednesday took responsibility for his party's loses on Election Night and said he is

Anyway, yeah he did have a "conciliatory" tone in the press conference. At one point I thought he was going to cry.