Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Boy you just love to continue on a path of nonsense; it is rather amusing

What does a whole list of totally-irrelevant meanings have to do with any discussion on this board?

If you are not interested in predictions, why are you on a discussion board dedicated to that purpose?

Why indeed.........

Sadly, I see very few who are willing to open their eyes to what possibilities Obama's second term will mean for all of us. Eric, here's a prediction that I wish wouldn't come true. But there's a big part of me that knows what the future holds because I've seen his actions in the past.

What concerns me most, is not only what he will do, but those who will only continue making excuses for his taking this country further down the hole.


Who Will Stand Up to Obama Now?

TKO by the Technocrats

by JEFFREY ST. CLAIR

Barack Obama is a technocrat and he just won a technocratic victory. His reelection campaign, lacking any kind of arching philosophy or defense of his own disturbing tenure as president, became a bland exercise in political calculus, targeting individual precincts, swing counties and fractionated demographic sectors.

Obama’s victory, at the cost of $2 billion, is about as thrilling as completing a game of Sudoku. Obama was propelled to his slender popular vote victory by those that the Republicans almost ritually abused: women, blacks, gays and Hispanics. Ironically, these are people that the Obama administration has also ruthlessly strafed for four years. But Obama smiled as he cut the lower-classes adrift in the midsts of a cratering economy, while Romney expressed only contempt for them.

Mitt Romney ran an inept campaign. As a candidate, he was even more aloof, arrogant and emotionally distant than Obama. If Obama’s campaign lacked any unifying message, Romney’s resembled a kind of political Brownian Motion of constantly drifting themes in a tank of rancid and racially-charged sludge. He doomed his chances with his peculiar choice of Paul Ryan as his running mate, who personified the budgetary cruelties of the Republican right and alienated aging white voters who otherwise might have wandered into his camp.

Where does Obama go now? The House remains firmly in the hands of militant right-wingers. The Senate will continue to be paralyzed by the filibuster-happy minority and a spineless Democratic majority. Stalemate? Probably not. Second terms are almost always about polishing a presidential legacy, already being harped upon by the withered likes of Tom Brokaw. Obama will be desperate for some signature legislative victories.

So what to expect from Obama? An aggressive new plan to combat climate change? A real federal jobs program aimed at full-employment? Liberalization of immigration policies? Decriminalization of marijuana? Deep cuts in the defense budget? Rollback of the Patriot Act? A ban on assassinations by drones? Movement toward single-payer health care? Sure.

No. Clinton will be his template: the Clinton who pushed for the elimination of the Glass-Steagall Act, the gutting of welfare and the war on Serbia. Obama will pursue bi-partisanship with a vengeance. Obama has always been a committed neoliberal, a closeted agent of austerity. Now he no longer needs to even play-act for his political base. He can openly betray their interests.

In a few months, the president will reach out to his old pal Paul Ryan to take a stroll across that tragic terrain known as the common ground in pursuit of those twin obsessions of the elites: deficit reduction and entitlement reform. In the name of political conciliation, Obama will piously move to slash away at Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and the last frail fabrics of the federal social welfare programs. These savage cuts will be enthusiastically cheered by the mainstream press, Wall Street and the Washington establishment.

Who will stand up to challenge him?

Election results by county, colored in by me. Spent most of last night and this morning on different state's websites.

Alaska and Washington are the only two "iffy" states where all their vote is in, but they only give me half information about where which votes are from which county.



~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Disuaded by the fear, no doubt, that you might need to pay them a living wage and provide adequate working conditions.

Common sense. It's a lot easier and a lot less issues and headaches to provide for a select few vs several workers and their families.

Originally Posted by Chas'88

Election results by county, colored in by me. Spent most of last night and this morning on different state's websites.

Alaska and Washington are the only two "iffy" states where all their vote is in, but they only give me half information about where which votes are from which county.



~Chas'88

Wow, awesome map! I think (my eyesight isn't what it used to be) you got my Georgia county incorrect. Cobb County should be red instead of blue.

Originally Posted by Deb C

Sadly, I see very few who are willing to open their eyes to what possibilities Obama's second term will mean for all of us. Eric, here's a prediction that I wish wouldn't come true. But there's a big part of me that knows what the future holds because I've seen his actions in the past.

What concerns me most, is not only what he will do, but those who will only continue making excuses for his taking this country further down the hole.


Who Will Stand Up to Obama Now?

TKO by the Technocrats

by JEFFREY ST. CLAIR

Barack Obama is a technocrat and he just won a technocratic victory. His reelection campaign, lacking any kind of arching philosophy or defense of his own disturbing tenure as president, became a bland exercise in political calculus, targeting individual precincts, swing counties and fractionated demographic sectors.

Obama’s victory, at the cost of $2 billion, is about as thrilling as completing a game of Sudoku. Obama was propelled to his slender popular vote victory by those that the Republicans almost ritually abused: women, blacks, gays and Hispanics. Ironically, these are people that the Obama administration has also ruthlessly strafed for four years. But Obama smiled as he cut the lower-classes adrift in the midsts of a cratering economy, while Romney expressed only contempt for them.

Mitt Romney ran an inept campaign. As a candidate, he was even more aloof, arrogant and emotionally distant than Obama. If Obama’s campaign lacked any unifying message, Romney’s resembled a kind of political Brownian Motion of constantly drifting themes in a tank of rancid and racially-charged sludge. He doomed his chances with his peculiar choice of Paul Ryan as his running mate, who personified the budgetary cruelties of the Republican right and alienated aging white voters who otherwise might have wandered into his camp.

Where does Obama go now? The House remains firmly in the hands of militant right-wingers. The Senate will continue to be paralyzed by the filibuster-happy minority and a spineless Democratic majority. Stalemate? Probably not. Second terms are almost always about polishing a presidential legacy, already being harped upon by the withered likes of Tom Brokaw. Obama will be desperate for some signature legislative victories.

So what to expect from Obama? An aggressive new plan to combat climate change? A real federal jobs program aimed at full-employment? Liberalization of immigration policies? Decriminalization of marijuana? Deep cuts in the defense budget? Rollback of the Patriot Act? A ban on assassinations by drones? Movement toward single-payer health care? Sure.

No. Clinton will be his template: the Clinton who pushed for the elimination of the Glass-Steagall Act, the gutting of welfare and the war on Serbia. Obama will pursue bi-partisanship with a vengeance. Obama has always been a committed neoliberal, a closeted agent of austerity. Now he no longer needs to even play-act for his political base. He can openly betray their interests.

In a few months, the president will reach out to his old pal Paul Ryan to take a stroll across that tragic terrain known as the common ground in pursuit of those twin obsessions of the elites: deficit reduction and entitlement reform. In the name of political conciliation, Obama will piously move to slash away at Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and the last frail fabrics of the federal social welfare programs. These savage cuts will be enthusiastically cheered by the mainstream press, Wall Street and the Washington establishment.

Who will stand up to challenge him?

The answer to your last question probably is, or at least should be, those who voted for him. But I feel we would have been screwed regardless of which candidate won, but I did go to the polls and vote for one of them so I can feel free to bellyache when things don't go well.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Common sense. It's a lot easier and a lot less issues and headaches to provide for a select few vs several workers and their families.

My brother has a couple of employees. He has them working for him because he has the work to do. I am quite sure that if he could do ALL of the work (and get all of the pay) he would, but opportunity costs come into play if he does work that he can pay others to do.

Originally Posted by playwrite

And you wonder why the magic pony land has stuck to you.

At least I acknowledge outright and up-front that my fabrications are imaginary. You try to convince people to live according to yours.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

I don't think anyone on your side gives a shit about jobs and the economy. I think the bulk of the posters here are liberal spoon feds who are more interested in their social issues and political gains. My only concern is relative to the nature of our eventual split. I don't see the two America's staying together for the long term without another war being fought to keep America together.

Unfortunately, those "social issues" are important to quite a few people. A woman of child-bearing age might just take issue with creepy old white men talking cavalierly about rape, as though it is only some "out" to get an abortion or get away with infidelity. Latinos may not like the visuals when some rich politician demands drones along the Mexican border taking potshots at migrant workers. Etc., Etc.

Sorry, "your side" doesn't look very attractive to at least half the population.

Originally Posted by Deb C

I have consistently held Obama accountable. And I didn't vote for him.

Um... How exactly have you "held Obama acountable"?

Originally Posted by Aramea

Wow, awesome map! I think (my eyesight isn't what it used to be) you got my Georgia county incorrect. Cobb County should be red instead of blue.

My info is based off of the Sec. of State of GA's website where they kept updating it. I stopped after each county had been reported at 90%, though admittedly I haven't checked GA since last night, so it's possible close counties tipped one or the other direction since then.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Chas'88

My info is based off of the Sec. of State of GA's website where they kept updating it. I stopped after each county had been reported at 90%, though admittedly I haven't checked GA since last night, so it's possible close counties tipped one or the other direction since then.

~Chas'88

Ah, ok. I saw it blue on NY Times for awhile last night, but I knew it couldn't hold. No way Cobb goes to Obama.

Originally Posted by The Rani

I wondered the same about this:

Eric has been communicating with the prez on an astral plane, perhaps?

That would sure explain an awful lot of things.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Boy you just love to continue on a path of nonsense; it is rather amusing

What does a whole list of totally-irrelevant meanings have to do with any discussion on this board?

If you are not interested in predictions, why are you on a discussion board dedicated to that purpose?

Why indeed.........

Does our predictions match? Your chart confirms my prediction.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Why not ask your crystal ball what ETA means, Mr. Smart Guy?

OK, enough picking on Eric. In this context, ETA = Edited to Add, though there are other options

California Swings More Democratic; State Legislature Now Fully Two-Thirds in Dem Hands
by ANDY COHEN on NOVEMBER 7, 2012 · 0 COMMENTS
in GOVERNMENT, POLITICS
Republican incumbents Bono-Mack, Lungren, and Bilbray down in their re-election bids; GOP further marginalized in California

Lost in the wake of President Barack Obama’s sizeable win over Mitt Romney and the high profile Congressional races in California were the gains California Democrats made in both houses of the State Legislature.

During the wave midterm election in 2010, where California bucked the national trend that went Tea Party wild, California swung even deeper blue, with Democrats winning every statewide election and solidified their majorities in the Legislature. Following a new redistricting procedure that took politics out of the district mapping process and removed the responsibility entirely from partisan politicians, the nation got to see just how big a Democratic stronghold the largest state in the union has become.

But despite large majorities in the State Assembly and the State Senate, Republicans still maintained the power to derail just about any piece of legislation they wanted for whatever reason they wanted. Prop 13, the 1978 initiative that limits the state’s ability to raise property taxes, also limited the Legislature’s ability to raise revenues and pass major budget measures, adding a two-thirds majority requirement into the state’s constitution for any such actions. California Democrats enjoyed exactly a two-thirds majority in the Assembly, but fell one seat short of that threshold in the Senate.

Until last night, where Marty Block’s victory over Republican George Plescia in the 39th Senate District race in San Diego helped put Democrats over the top with a 28-13 edge. Democrats also managed to increase their advantage by two seats in the Assembly to 54-26.

One way of looking at the significance of these results is this: Had Democrats been working with full two-thirds majorities in both houses, ballot initiatives like Props 30 and 39—both of which emerged victorious with California voters—would have been unnecessary, and would have saved tens of millions of dollars and a whole lot of headaches along the way. The Legislature would have simply been able to take the action it needed to in order to pass the legislation without having to resort to the costly ballot initiative process. Until now, and despite overwhelming majorities in both chambers of the California Legislature, lawmakers have been handcuffed by an intransigent minority. California lawmakers were unable to do the job they were sent to Sacramento to do. I’ve covered this issue more in depth here.

That all changes now. At least for the next two years. Perhaps in 2014 we won’t have to deal with all of these budget adjusting ballot proposals again. Maybe now the Legislature will actually be able to get a budget done on time and without decimating public school funding and state healthcare programs.

“With a working two-thirds majority, the Senate can move California forward without running headlong into a recalcitrant minority party to place ideology above balance solutions that spur job growth,” State Senator Darrell Steinberg told the LA Times.

Of equal—or perhaps greater—significance is the further marginalization of the GOP in California. In 2010, back when the rest of the country was shading slightly more red, California went the opposite direction, as already noted. But it was hard to imagine California Republicans sinking any lower. Now we don’t have to imagine it, because it’s happened.

In addition to devastating losses for Republicans on Props 31, 32, 39, and 40, Democrats also managed to flip a handful of Congressional seats. Longtime Republican Congresswoman Mary Bono-Mack, who succeeded her late husband Sunny Bono in the Palm Springs area, is unexpectedly losing her bid to maintain her 36th district seat. As expected, Democratic challenger Ami Bera and incumbent Republican Dan Lungren are locked in a tight race that as of the time this story is being typed has Bera in the lead by fewer than 200 votes. And here in San Diego, Scott Peters has taken a 685 vote lead over incumbent Republican Brian Bilbray with all precincts reporting an presumably only provisional and mail-in ballots remaining to be counted.

Combine that with Republican losses in the San Diego Mayoral race, where Bob Filner becomes the first Democrat to win that office in more than 20 years, and Dave Roberts becoming the first Dem to win a County Board of Supervisors seat in a similar time frame, and it’s clear that Republicans are a withering party, at least in California.

The question of whether this will all lead to better governance for California remains to be seen. But given the diversity and wide range of opinions within the Democratic Party, and the fact that Democrats rarely march in lockstep, strictly toeing the party line as Republicans usually do, it’s a fairly safe bet that it will lead to better legislation and more efficient government. Haggling within the Dem caucus usually leads to more moderate outcomes. I’m betting that that’s what we’ll see……at least for a good while, anyway.

http://sandiegofreepress.org/2012/11...-in-dem-hands/

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

OK, enough picking on Eric. In this context, ETA = Edited to Add, though there are other options

Thank you. At least someone can answer a simple question without endless stupid and unecessary snark.

Originally Posted by The Rani
I wondered the same about this:

Eric has been communicating with the prez on an astral plane, perhaps?

Originally Posted by Copperfield

That would sure explain an awful lot of things.

More evidence that you guys can't or won't read. I have put up the address for emailing the president with comments endless times. How many of you use it instead of just complaining and making cynical comments here?

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

One could only wish for the picture, and not the more-accurate one. Unfortunately he left a lot of work undone. The House is still in the hands of the robber-barons. He waged a lone-ranger campaign, in the words of Mark Shields. He thinks of himself as like the picture. He thinks he can wave a wand and transform greedy sociopaths like Boehner and Bachmann into guardians of the public good. I told him over and over to demand a congress he could work with. He didn't do that, so he will not really be the man on a magic pony that he thinks he is.

A extremely important point. He is a bit too insular to understand the social dynamic of the job, and it shows. He had the coattails before the first debate, and went on a mental holiday. I'm not sure that easy sailing is something he does easily. In fact, I think he likes adversity ... not that the rest of us do, mind you..

Originally Posted by The Rani

Ok ... at least there's some insight in that edit.
I love you playdude, even if you're a sick fuck.

yea, that what's all the girls tell me.

I think I've reach that sweet age for men where I can no longer be considered a possible threat; where its okay to say you love me and I'm a sick F... and that makes me smile.

Originally Posted by Deb C

Sadly, I see very few who are willing to open their eyes to what possibilities Obama's second term will mean for all of us. Eric, here's a prediction that I wish wouldn't come true. But there's a big part of me that knows what the future holds because I've seen his actions in the past.

What concerns me most, is not only what he will do, but those who will only continue making excuses for his taking this country further down the hole....
Who will stand up to challenge him?

It's we the people who need to educate ourselves. Too many Americans hold too fast to outdated ideologies, instead of considering facts and what happens to real people because of actual policies. Some people here at this website are among them. CA and the pacific is slowly moving in the right direction, along with the northeast. The South continues to cling to the past. As long as he perceives where the political power lies, and what the people think, Obama will not move on the real issues that you posted, unless and until we the people open and change our minds and are ready to move forward-- past libertarian economics, religious-right social conservatism and militarism. Then they can move politicians like Obama forward too.

btw thanks for the map Chas. You should publish it if it isn't already.

Originally Posted by unormal

Gawd, I love these things! Thanks for posting!

I see a rather large powerful vibrant Blue beast wanting to break free of an ugly Red net that has it trapped.

Break free, Blue beast, break free! (use cadence from "Forest Gump" - and you know what I referring to).

Originally Posted by Copperfield

Um... How exactly have you "held Obama acountable"?

more evidence; you are an "intellectual" and yet you don't read Deb's posts?

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

I don't think anyone on your side gives a shit about jobs and the economy. I think the bulk of the posters here are liberal spoon feds who are more interested in their social issues and political gains. My only concern is relative to the nature of our eventual split. I don't see the two America's staying together for the long term without another war being fought to keep America together.

OK, works for me. Now, which pieces go where, in your view? I guess the Red-Up-The-Middle is part of RED nation. Blue-On-The-Left-Coast is easy, and so is the Northeast (well, mostly). You do the rest.

- whose heads did not explode last night.

Puerto Rico Approves Statehood

A slim majority of Puerto Ricans voted Tuesday to approve a non-binding referendum that would make the island the 51st U.S. state. The measure requires final approval from Congress, so it means little for Puerto Rico right now. Still, nearly 54 percent of Puerto Ricans voted for a change in the island’s relationship with the U.S. — and President Obama promised to uphold their vote in the case of a “clear majority.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ves-statehood/

This is the first time this measure has passed. It is in both the Dems and GOP plateforms to accept whatever decision the Puerto Ricans decide. But it takes Congress to bring them in - hmm, two Senators and a Congressmen, likely all Democrats, yea, that's going to happen.

However, this could be another thing to put in front of the Congressional GOP to either hang themselves with the Hispanic vote or with the GOP's baggers. They can't win on it, so the Dems should press on it hard.