Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    • Obama denying hs policies had anything to do with the 2010 debacle for dems. He said it was mostly the economy and that he just didn't communicate his policies well enough. So, that is saying my policies were for good but, Americans are too stupid to see that and I didn't break it down to their menial level.
    • Pelosi wants to stay as leader. Talk about "just doesn't get it".
    • Most dem leaders want to stay leaders of the minority party.

    The level of denial and not being accountable is staggering and will hurt if, they don't see the light (house) and change course.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from RevWright. Show RevWright's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    Maybe some moral support for Horseface Kerry is warranted.
    Dig deep and think of something/anything nice to say about him. As in the Washington tradition.. lying is perfectly acceptable.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from DamainAllen. Show DamainAllen's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    You are coupling issues that don't have relevance to the point you are trying to make.  Pelosi is just a punching bag, her being minority leader doesn't mean anything in terms of policy...she isn't holding the gavel so whether it is her or Steny Hoyer or Jim Clyburn the net effect is basically nonexistent. 

    Exit polling backs Obama's reading of the election.  The vast majority of all voters listed the economy as their primary concern.  Obama is also correct that his admin did not do a good job of pushing back against criticism of the stimulus package, while the the GOP was insisting it created not a single job, economists all over the country were noting had it not been implemented the economy would likely bottomed out and we would have seen potentially more than 2 million MORE jobs lost.  He isn't saying in any way that the average American is too stupid to "get it"  he is saying that he did a poor job of beating back the relentless messaging from the Right that defined the stimulus in the minds of a many voters. 

    The fact that there are still sizable chucks of the population that don't know that the sa,e stimulus also cut their taxes speaks to a rather poor communications effort from the white house.  But most importantly, this election was about the economy and the Dems didn't do a good job of appealing to the voters who didn't turn out in 2008 levels and winning over Independents. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from RevWright. Show RevWright's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    1. Pelosi wasn't a punching bag for the last 2 years. She was ruthless.
    2. Voters 'primary concern' translates to Obamas biggest failure. Lets not white wash it too much.
    3. There is nothing wrong with Obamas propaganda machine. There are so many ways to spin failure.
    4. Lets level.. the stimulus package was for the most part spent on keeping/growing political jobs. There was absolutely no ROI and there never will be.
    5. The key to the economy and job growth lies in the private sector, not in expanding government expotentially. 

    Cheers 
     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    In Response to Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012:
    [QUOTE]You are coupling issues that don't have relevance to the point you are trying to make.  Pelosi is just a punching bag, her being minority leader doesn't mean anything in terms of policy...she isn't holding the gavel so whether it is her or Steny Hoyer or Jim Clyburn the net effect is basically nonexistent.  Exit polling backs Obama's reading of the election.  The vast majority of all voters listed the economy as their primary concern.  Obama is also correct that his admin did not do a good job of pushing back against criticism of the stimulus package, while the the GOP was insisting it created not a single job, economists all over the country were noting had it not been implemented the economy would likely bottomed out and we would have seen potentially more than 2 million MORE jobs lost.  He isn't saying in any way that the average American is too stupid to "get it"  he is saying that he did a poor job of beating back the relentless messaging from the Right that defined the stimulus in the minds of a many voters.  The fact that there are still sizable chucks of the population that don't know that the sa,e stimulus also cut their taxes speaks to a rather poor communications effort from the white house.  But most importantly, this election was about the economy and the Dems didn't do a good job of appealing to the voters who didn't turn out in 2008 levels and winning over Independents. 
    Posted by DamainAllen[/QUOTE]
    I couldn't disagree more. It is the majority and minority leaders who decide committee standings. Pelosi would keep Hoyer as minority whip and many of the other "old guard" Democrats in powerful committee's. If they go with a newer younger more moderate as minority leader I think it would do them well in 2012 with an electorate that is looking for a new way.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from DamainAllen. Show DamainAllen's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    1. Pelosi wasn't a punching bag for the last 2 years. She was ruthless.

    Right, that's why her name is prominent on the lips on any GOP candidate running for office whether they be in the house, the senate.  She has been defined as a symbol of liberalism in the current congress and along with Harry Reid is used as a constant

    2. Voters 'primary concern' translates to Obamas biggest failure. Lets not white wash it too much.

    Yeah, because millions jobs lost in the blink of an eye can be replaced in two years during which the worst recession in several generations occurred.  Oh and the GOP filibustered the Jobs bill Obama proposes and held it up for over 6 months befre passing a watered down version that cut funding for food stamps.  Penalize the most vulnerable but vote for bail outs to the same companies who casused the mess...sounds like a GOP plan.

    3. There is nothing wrong with Obamas propaganda machine. There are so many ways to spin failure.

    Empty rhetoric, but when 30% of Americans think Obama passed TARP then they haven't done a good job of getting out the message.

    4. Lets level.. the stimulus package was for the most part spent on keeping/growing political jobs. There was absolutely no ROI and there never will be.

    Prove it.  Economists from all over the country from the Right and the Left disagree with you. 

    5. The key to the economy and job growth lies in the private sector, not in expanding government expotentially.

    Simply economics.  When the private sector cuts jobs and consumers reduce spending (keep in mind the US economy is consumer driven) the only remaining entity that can stimulate things is the government.  The plan was not expand government exponentially, it was and still is to stop the bleeding and get the all sectors back on level footing. 
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    It's all part of their devious, socialistic plan of how to lull repubs into a false sense of security, and then...

    ...they come screeching back like a phoenix in 2020 to take over the country (again) from the god-fearin', gun-lickin' reel 'mer'can types after another 8-10 years of dysfunctional right-wing rule.

    That'll show 'em....

    </sarc off/>
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Super77. Show Super77's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    All the way to the end, this mother  father  still lying to his teeth.
    He simply a harvard stupid and thinks he knows more than what people wants.

    Pelosi? why she wanted to be the leader of the failed party?

    Yes sir: Dems setting the stage for their own self destruct!!
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

     The fact that there are still sizable chucks of the population that don't know that the sa,e stimulus also cut their taxes speaks to a rather poor communications effort from the white house.   
    Posted by DamainAllen[/QUOTE]

    Actually, the White House deserves credit for fooling as many people as they did with the phony talk about stimulus "tax cuts". Much of the alleged 'tax cuts' went to people who dont pay federal taxes.... this was formerly called a handout or welfare payment.

    Most of the stimulus was payoff to public employee unions and other government entities...rewarding them for overspending.
    The stimulus was an unmitigated disaster. Period. I dont care how many liberal economists say otherwise-the same liberal cheerleading economists who predicted unemployment would be 5% by now... 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from DamainAllen. Show DamainAllen's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    I do find it ironic that conservatives who were trounced in 2 of the last 3 elections feel qualified to tell Dems who should be in ther party leadership.  Really?  You guys JUST GOT BACK to the big kids table, so maybe you all should focus on putting some specifics to all those campaign promises you made to cut spending while trying not to cut any spending and staying off the radar of the emboldened Tea Party wing of the party. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    In Response to Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012:
    [QUOTE]I do find it ironic that conservatives who were trounced in 2 of the last 3 elections feel qualified to tell Dems who should be in ther party leadership.  Really?  You guys JUST GOT BACK to the big kids table, so maybe you all should focus on putting some specifics to all those campaign promises you made to cut spending while trying not to cut any spending and staying off the radar of the emboldened Tea Party wing of the party. 
    Posted by DamainAllen[/QUOTE]
    Not Repubs or conservatives. It is her own party...

    "Madam Speaker, fairly or unfairly, Republicans made you the face of the resentment and disagreement in our races. While we commend your years of service to our party and your leadership through many tough times, we respectfully ask that you step aside as the top Democrat in the House."

    Read more: http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/11/08/fox-exclusive-defeated-democrats-pen-letter-implore-pelosi-step-aside#ixzz14ig7HK74
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from DamainAllen. Show DamainAllen's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    In Response to Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012:
    [QUOTE] The fact that there are still sizable chucks of the population that don't know that the sa,e stimulus also cut their taxes speaks to a rather poor communications effort from the white house.    Posted by DamainAllen[/QUOTE] Actually, the White House deserves credit for fooling as many people as they did with the phony talk about stimulus "tax cuts". Much of the alleged 'tax cuts' went to people who dont pay federal taxes.... this was formerly called a handout or welfare payment. Most of the stimulus was payoff to public employee unions and other government entities...rewarding them for overspending. The stimulus was an unmitigated disaster. Period. I dont care how many liberal economists say otherwise-the same liberal cheerleading economists who predicted unemployment would be 5% by now... 
    Posted by BobinVa[/QUOTE]

    Who needs subject matter experts like economists to sort out the direction and tendencies of THE WORLDS LARGEST ECONOMY, we'll just roll up our sleeves and yell at the economy until it shapes up, and in the meantime we'll pass an extension to the Bush Tax Cuts which will add nearly a trillion dollars to the national debt, but its okay because eventually, somehow, those tax cuts will mobilize the larger economy even though Moodys Analytics produced research that showed that the richest americans aren't swayed by tax cuts but rather the overall performance of the stock market.  But yeah, lets RHETORIC THE ECONOMY INTO SHAPE. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Super77. Show Super77's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    In Response to Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012:
    [QUOTE]I do find it ironic that conservatives who were trounced in 2 of the last 3 elections feel qualified to tell Dems who should be in ther party leadership.  Really?  ------------------------- Uhm, guess who got trounced in 7 of the last 9 elections? ooops! 23 dem seats up for grabs in 2012.  10 GOP.  Uh oh...
    Posted by GreginMeffa[/QUOTE]

    Trounced?

    I think you use the wrong word.
    You gotto remember, dem got burn completely into ashes.
    Never happened before---one party completely demoralizing the other.Laughing
    You know why? liberals don't understand the people & themselves.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    In Response to Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012 : Trounced? I think you use the wrong word. You gotto remember, dem got burn completely into ashes. Never happened before---one party completely demoralizing the other. You know why? liberals don't understand the people & themselves.
    Posted by Super77[/QUOTE]

    If that's true, then why did the more conservative dems get the lion's share of the beat down resulting in an essentially more liberal caucus...?
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from DamainAllen. Show DamainAllen's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    In Response to Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012:
    [QUOTE]More liberal caucus? You can't possibly believe the House and Senate are more liberal after Tuesday.  Can you? Maybe the Patriots really won yesterday.  Its a good thing, as the result is a more PATRIOTic, AFC?
    Posted by GreginMeffa[/QUOTE]

    He's talking about the Democratic caucus specifically.  Blue dogs bore the cross of the burden leaving a more liberal caucus remaining. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    In Response to Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012:
    [QUOTE]You are coupling issues that don't have relevance to the point you are trying to make.  Pelosi is just a punching bag, her being minority leader doesn't mean anything in terms of policy...she isn't holding the gavel so whether it is her or Steny Hoyer or Jim Clyburn the net effect is basically nonexistent.  Exit polling backs Obama's reading of the election.  The vast majority of all voters listed the economy as their primary concern.  Obama is also correct that his admin did not do a good job of pushing back against criticism of the stimulus package, while the the GOP was insisting it created not a single job, economists all over the country were noting had it not been implemented the economy would likely bottomed out and we would have seen potentially more than 2 million MORE jobs lost.  He isn't saying in any way that the average American is too stupid to "get it"  he is saying that he did a poor job of beating back the relentless messaging from the Right that defined the stimulus in the minds of a many voters.  The fact that there are still sizable chucks of the population that don't know that the sa,e stimulus also cut their taxes speaks to a rather poor communications effort from the white house.  But most importantly, this election was about the economy and the Dems didn't do a good job of appealing to the voters who didn't turn out in 2008 levels and winning over Independents. 
    Posted by DamainAllen[/QUOTE]

    On the surface people are upset about the economy so, when asked what was your primary reason for voting a certain way the logical and easy answer is "the economy" but, if you ask what is the problem with the economy people will say Obama's policies and the dems spending.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    In Response to Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012 : If that's true, then why did the more conservative dems get the lion's share of the beat down resulting in an essentially more liberal caucus...?
    Posted by Mattyhorn[/QUOTE]

    Because they were rookie blue dogsd mostly and not the long entrenched lifetime legislaters like Pelosi Reid, and Frank.
     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    In Response to Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012 : You're wrong. Most people aren't as ignorant as you.
    Posted by 12-Angry-Men[/QUOTE]

    HAHA!

    Was wrong last Tuesday to. Never thought your party would get thumped that hard!!

    What is it now at the state level over 683 pick up for the RNC????

    REDISTRICTING, OH MY!!!
     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mike473. Show Mike473's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012



    Health care is an issue that will grow in scope going into 2012. As a self employed person, I wonder if I will ever be able to buy a family health insurance plan again for under $1200 per month, or will it be my biggest house hold expense from this point forward?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Dems setting the stage for more severe losses in 2012

    Under the plan passed this year you will never see premiums below 1200.00 a month for a family but, it depends on your other household expenses on whether it will be the largest expense.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share