GOP Stabbed In The Back

[The_Limit]

Wow, this is crazy news if true.

This could not come at a worse time for the GOP.

Seating Franken is now just icing on the cake for the Dems.

The GOP is literally collapsing with this latest move. But, to be sure, Specter did betray them.

How much more of a beating can the GOP withstand before a new party springs up out of the shattered pieces.

==============================================

Longtime GOP Sen. Arlen Specter to become Democrat

Veteran Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, intends to switch from the Republican to the Democratic Party on Tuesday, multiple sources said.

A Specter party switch would give Democrats a filibuster-proof Senate majority of 60 seats.

Another thing, if Al Franken holds his current lead in the disputed Minnesota Senate race.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/28/specter.party.switch/index.html

[GetAClue]

He might as well switch. He has been voting in step with the Dems for many years.

[The_Limit]

He might as well switch. He has been voting in step with the Dems for many years.

I'm interested more in how this news affects the macro political landscape.

My guess, is that its like a meteor hitting Camp GOP.

[Moby]

The GOP is literally collapsing with this latest move. But, to be sure, Specter did betray them.
Two things worth thinking about.

1. Should a politician have loyalty to a political party? Why not have loyalty to America, his/her supporters or at least his/her own belief. Lieberman did this.

2. Did Specter do the betraying after Steele's push?

[Moby]

Personally, I don't like any political party having this much control. I hope that next election people will start voting against incumbents.

[bairdi]

Two things worth thinking about.

1. Should a politician have loyalty to a political party? Why not have loyalty to America, his/her supporters or at least his/her own belief. Lieberman did this.

2. Did Specter do the betraying after Steele's push?

Statement by Senator Arlen Specter

I have been a Republican since 1966. I have been working extremely hard for the Party, for its candidates and for the ideals of a Republican Party whose tent is big enough to welcome diverse points of view. While I have been comfortable being a Republican, my Party has not defined who I am. I have taken each issue one at a time and have exercised independent judgment to do what I thought was best for Pennsylvania and the nation.

Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.

When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.

Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.

I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary.

I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election.

I deeply regret that I will be disappointing many friends and supporters. I can understand their disappointment. I am also disappointed that so many in the Party I have worked for for more than four decades do not want me to be their candidate. It is very painful on both sides. I thank specially Senators McConnell and Cornyn for their forbearance.

I am not making this decision because there are no important and interesting opportunities outside the Senate. I take on this complicated run for re-election because I am deeply concerned about the future of our country and I believe I have a significant contribution to make on many of the key issues of the day, especially medical research. NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done. And my seniority is very important to continue to bring important projects vital to Pennsylvania’s economy.

I am taking this action now because there are fewer than thirteen months to the 2010 Pennsylvania Primary and there is much to be done in preparation for that election. Upon request, I will return campaign contributions contributed during this cycle.

While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation.

My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords’ switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.

Whatever my party affiliation, I will continue to be guided by President Kennedy’s statement that sometimes Party asks too much. When it does, I will continue my independent voting and follow my conscience on what I think is best for Pennsylvania and America.

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2009/04/28/arlen-specter-switching-parties.aspx

[GetAClue]

Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.


I think this one statement says it all. However, what he is forgetting is that 200,000 Republicans were not switching because they believed in the Democrats. They switched to vote in the primary to vote for Hillary and slow down Obama.

[GetAClue]

Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right.


I'm not sure which Republican Party he is talking about. The one that I am familier with has moved so far to the left that it is hard to distinguish them from the Democrats.

[Moby]

However, what he is forgetting is that 200,000 Republicans were not switching because they believed in the Democrats. They switched to vote in the primary to vote for Hillary and slow down Obama.
Does this mean that you think ALL 200,000 voters did as Rush Limbaugh told them to?

Bahhhhh.

[GetAClue]

Does this mean that you think ALL 200,000 voters did as Rush Limbaugh told them to?

Bahhhhh.

No more so than all of the sheep that voted for Hope and Change.

The point is that Alen S. is changing parties on the assumption that the demographics in his state have changed based on a false assumption. However, given you propensity for sheep, I can see how you strayed.

But instead of trying to derail yet another topic, can we continue to discuss the topic of the thread?

[doctordog]

Wow, this is crazy news if true.

This could not come at a worse time for the GOP.

Seating Franken is now just icing on the cake for the Dems.

The GOP is literally collapsing with this latest move. But, to be sure, Specter did betray them.

How much more of a beating can the GOP withstand before a new party springs up out of the shattered pieces.

==============================================

Longtime GOP Sen. Arlen Specter to become Democrat

Veteran Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, intends to switch from the Republican to the Democratic Party on Tuesday, multiple sources said.

A Specter party switch would give Democrats a filibuster-proof Senate majority of 60 seats.

Another thing, if Al Franken holds his current lead in the disputed Minnesota Senate race.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/28/specter.party.switch/index.html

This is bad news for Obama. It will keep him from winning a consecutive term as the people will be fed up with the moonbat ideas of the progressives and retaliate. This is good news for us. Thanks for making me smile.:D

[Mr. Blue]

Two things worth thinking about.

1. Should a politician have loyalty to a political party? Why not have loyalty to America, his/her supporters or at least his/her own belief. Lieberman did this.

2. Did Specter do the betraying after Steele's push?

Question is, did Spectre do this because of the betterment of America or was he just scared to lose his seat to a tough Democratic challenger? I'm thinking the latter, but doesn't really matter.

Just like when Lieberman supported McCain, some Dems called him a traitor, etc, meh...he just was going with what he thought was right and I supported that. If Spectre honestly feels this, then go with my blessing, if he's just being a politician covering his own ass...I hope he loses his seat to a Republican challenger.

[Mr. Blue]

Also, quick sidenote...yet another lifetime politician...let's all chant Term Limits and maybe someone will listen eventually.

[bairdi]

I think this one statement says it all. However, what he is forgetting is that 200,000 Republicans were not switching because they believed in the Democrats. They switched to vote in the primary to vote for Hillary and slow down Obama.
Ummmmmmm....,yeah, right.

Pennsylvania Electoral Votes: 21
President 100.0% of 9,284 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Counts Votes Cast
Barack Obama Dem 3,192,316 54.7%
John McCain GOP 2,586,496 44.3%
Ralph Nader Ind 41,520 0.7%
Bob Barr Lib 19,926 0.3

[The Professor]

his defection is a WIN for the gop

he left because he was gonna get beat in red PRIMARY

WE have totally had it with him

you're not gonna like him much better

congrats

cliff

[mwillman]

Fortunately, the Democratic party allows people with differing views.

All this wishful thinking from the right is to be expected, with everything

going bad for them they have to find anything they can to hope for.

[The Professor]

we can't stop obama

we don't want to stop obama

everything that happens from jan 20 on is 100% his responsibility

good luck

fix the economy or you're dead

deficit is 12.3% of gdp...

[bairdi]

Question is, did Spectre do this because of the betterment of America or was he just scared to lose his seat to a tough Democratic challenger? I'm thinking the latter, but doesn't really matter.

Just like when Lieberman supported McCain, some Dems called him a traitor, etc, meh...he just was going with what he thought was right and I supported that. If Spectre honestly feels this, then go with my blessing, if he's just being a politician covering his own ass...I hope he loses his seat to a Republican challenger.
As a resident of PA, here is my take on it. The Republican Party in PA has lost quite a few supporters as the country in general has rejected the neo conservative philosophy of the last eight years. The electorate here in PA has shifted to the left as shown by the defeat of a very conservative Rick Santorum four years ago. The base of the Republican Party is made up of hard core people who still cling to the neoconservative politics of Bush and Cheney and are pushing for a challenge by Pat Toomey who is a hard core righty who is even more conservative than that nutcase Santorum. Since only party affiliated voters can vote here in the primaries, Toomey will most probably defeat Specter who has been ostracized by the party because of his support for the stimulus. Toomey, in all probability will get crushed in the general election by the Democratic nominee.

Specter, on the other hand, is well liked by a majority of voters here in PA, as evidenced by his re-election. If he wants to continue as a Senator, he has two choices, either run as an independent or switch parties. My opinion is he cannot win as an independent but would coast to an easy victory should he capture the Democratic nomination.

Imho, Specter is doing this not for the betterment of America, but for self preservation.

[Mr. Blue]

As a resident of PA, here is my take on it. The Republican Party in PA has lost quite a few supporters as the country in general has rejected the neo conservative philosophy of the last eight years. The electorate here in PA has shifted to the left as shown by the defeat of a very conservative Rick Santorum four years ago. The base of the Republican Party is made up of hard core people who still cling to the neoconservative politics of Bush and Cheney and are pushing for a challenge by Pat Toomey who is a hard core righty who is even more conservative than that nutcase Santorum. Since only party affiliated voters can vote here in the primaries, Toomey will most probably defeat Specter who has been ostracized by the party because of his support for the stimulus. Toomey, in all probability will get crushed in the general election by the Democratic nominee.

Specter, on the other hand, is well liked by a majority of voters here in PA, as evidenced by his re-election. If he wants to continue as a Senator, he has two choices, either run as an independent or switch parties. My opinion is he cannot win as an independent but would coast to an easy victory should he capture the Democratic nomination.

Imho, Specter is doing this not for the betterment of America, but for self preservation.

Thanks for the insight on this bairdi...I wasn't completely sure of the political landscape in PA at the moment and how it would play out.

How does that make you feel though that Specter is more or less switching sides to win an election and keep his stale view of the world going on for one more term?

I mean the guy is like 79 years old, he could have lost the seat to a real democrat, given them a solid incumbent that could have been the next lifelong politician, lol.

[bairdi]

Thanks for the insight on this bairdi...I wasn't completely sure of the political landscape in PA at the moment and how it would play out.

How does that make you feel though that Specter is more or less switching sides to win an election and keep his stale view of the world going on for one more term?

I mean the guy is like 79 years old, he could have lost the seat to a real democrat, given them a solid incumbent that could have been the next lifelong politician, lol.
This puts me in one hell of a quandary. Personally, I do not vote for any politician who has already served two terms. Because of this, I didn't vote for Specter last time he was elected. However, I do not think I can vote for someone like Toomey whose political position is in complete opposition to my own. My hope is that the Dems nominate someone other than Specter.

[The_Limit]

This is bad news for Obama. It will keep him from winning a consecutive term as the people will be fed up with the moonbat ideas of the progressives and retaliate. This is good news for us. Thanks for making me smile.:D

How and why is it bad news for Obama?

By the way, no one is going to beat Obama in 2012. The GOP needs a miracle/disaster for them to win in 2012. Your claim that "people will be fed up with the moonbat ideas of the progressives and retaliate," is a hyper partisan comment not even remotely connected to reality.

Put it this way, Obama and his political machine is to the U.S. political community as the U.S. military is to the rest of the world's armed forces.

Too rich, too big, too strong to be overcome by any competitor.

[doctordog]

How and why is it bad news for Obama?

By the way, no one is going to beat Obama in 2012.

you are kidding yourself, he will prove worse than Carter:hi:

[The_Limit]

you are kidding yourself, he will prove worse than Carter:hi:

No, I'm not kidding.

Your Carter comparison is bizarre and lacks context. It also ignores established history.

Realistically speaking, Obama's political machine suffers no other rivals.

Like I said, too rich, too big, too strong.

To compare Carter's machinery with Obama's is quite the absurd claim.

They're not even close to the same.

[The Professor]

just 6 months ago, new york congressional district 20 elected ms gillibrand by a 24 point margin

about 2 weeks ago, it went dem by 50.1 to 49.9

northeast new york

worry

[The_Limit]

just 6 months ago, new york congressional district 20 elected ms gillibrand by a 24 point margin

about 2 weeks ago, it went dem by 50.1 to 49.9

northeast new york

worry

And the point of this is...

[Moby]

Question is, did Spectre do this because of the betterment of America or was he just scared to lose his seat to a tough Democratic challenger? I'm thinking the latter, but doesn't really matter.
I thought I read that Steele wanted to pull funds and push for another republican to win in the next primary which would have pushed Arlen out. I could be wrong but I don't think he was going to get funding from the GOP.

It's possible that 200k people changed parties because they were following Rush or because they didn't like the GOP politics. It's hard to tell.

There's little doubt that Arlen did this to protect his own future.

The question is should he support his political party, the will of the people or his own ideas?

[Moby]

you are kidding yourself, he will prove worse than Carter:hi:
Carter pretty much left the economy in the same shape as when he took over. The problem was it was in really bad shape after Nixon/Ford and banks didn't want to lend any money because unemployment had been high for so long.

My guess is that in 2012, unemployment and deficit spending will be better then when he took over.

That's just based on data from the last 40 years or so.

[Richard Poor]

Two things worth thinking about.

1. Should a politician have loyalty to a political party? Why not have loyalty to America, his/her supporters or at least his/her own belief. Lieberman did this.

2. Did Specter do the betraying after Steele's push?
1. Lieberman did, Specter is not... he is only protecting his coveted seat - not for America, not for his party, but only for himself.

2. This has everything to do with saving Mr. Specter's seat and nothing to do with America, the Republican Party, or Mr. Steele.


Wow, this is crazy news if true.

This could not come at a worse time for the GOP.

Seating Franken is now just icing on the cake for the Dems.

The GOP is literally collapsing with this latest move. But, to be sure, Specter did betray them.

How much more of a beating can the GOP withstand before a new party springs up out of the shattered pieces.

==============================================

Longtime GOP Sen. Arlen Specter to become Democrat

Veteran Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, intends to switch from the Republican to the Democratic Party on Tuesday, multiple sources said.

A Specter party switch would give Democrats a filibuster-proof Senate majority of 60 seats.

Another thing, if Al Franken holds his current lead in the disputed Minnesota Senate race.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/28/specter.party.switch/index.html
Mr. Specter was one of the three Republicans who broke rank, against both America and the Republican Party, when he voted for that bloated self-proclaimed Stimulus Bill. He knew that few, if any, Republicans would actually vote for him after choosing to weaken America with the Democrats.

Further, this had nothing to do with crisis of conscious – as he would make it seem, by invoking that Kennedy Statement. In the end, Mr. Specter knew that he lost all Republican support and did not want to lose his too comfortable seat in Congress… all he is doing is trying to preserve his own seat.

If this is true, which makes sense, then this is just a self-preservation move on his part for his own good, rather than his country’s or party. Ironically, he chose the wrong Kennedy to quote; perhaps he should have looked at Joe Kennedy.

[Moby]

[QUOTE=Richard Poor2. This has everything to do with saving Mr. Specter's seat and nothing to do with America, the Republican Party, or Mr. Steele[/QUOTE]
Why is this stabbing the GOP in the back?

[MintJulep]

Fortunately, the Democratic party allows people with differing views.

All this wishful thinking from the right is to be expected, with everything

going bad for them they have to find anything they can to hope for.Sorry, but there seems to be a lot more RINOs than there are DINOs. In fact, the only one I can think of is Joe Lieberman. The repubs have a LOT of RINOs though.

[doctordog]

No, I'm not kidding.

Your Carter comparison is bizarre and lacks context. It also ignores established history.

Realistically speaking, Obama's political machine suffers no other rivals.

Like I said, too rich, too big, too strong.

To compare Carter's machinery with Obama's is quite the absurd claim.

They're not even close to the same.

Their beliefs are similar and should you have doubt, go back a look at how bad Reagan beat Carter. It was by a higher margin thatn Obama won over Bush.

[Life_Long_Dem!]

Their beliefs are similar and should you have doubt, go back a look at how bad Reagan beat Carter. It was by a higher margin thatn Obama won over Bush.
dont you mean Obama won over McCain?

[Richard Poor]

Why is this stabbing the GOP in the back?
Well, one could argue that he is attempting to save his own skin at the expense of the Republican Party.

[doctordog]

dont you mean Obama won over McCain?


yeah McCain sorry, I just got some of the worst news I have ever had.

[Mr. Blue]

I thought I read that Steele wanted to pull funds and push for another republican to win in the next primary which would have pushed Arlen out. I could be wrong but I don't think he was going to get funding from the GOP.

It's possible that 200k people changed parties because they were following Rush or because they didn't like the GOP politics. It's hard to tell.

There's little doubt that Arlen did this to protect his own future.

The question is should he support his political party, the will of the people or his own ideas?

It raises an interesting point on why a person goes into politics and why they stay in politics so long.

You and I are simpatico on the idea of incumbents and maybe even term limits, so a person like Arlen Specter is a bit of a curiosity to people like us and probably many others.

So what becomes interesting to me is the why? In Specter's case it appears that it's not about party, it's not about ideology, it's about him seeing the poll numbers and trying to avoid a loss.

Does a politician like that serve the greater good or is he going to forever take the route that protects his own interests. Specter had a few options here and I think he took the most self serving avenue. I think a lot of the lifelong politicians follow that same pattern and it's damaging America.

[The Professor]

yeah McCain sorry, I just got some of the worst news I have ever had.

hope you're ok, friend

cliff

[Richard Poor]

How and why is it bad news for Obama?

By the way, no one is going to beat Obama in 2012. The GOP needs a miracle/disaster for them to win in 2012. Your claim that "people will be fed up with the moonbat ideas of the progressives and retaliate," is a hyper partisan comment not even remotely connected to reality.

Put it this way, Obama and his political machine is to the U.S. political community as the U.S. military is to the rest of the world's armed forces.

Too rich, too big, too strong to be overcome by any competitor.
Lol, this coming from the party that lost to 'W' twice!

I am not stating that Obama will definitely lose; however his chances of repeating are significantly smaller than was his chance to win this past election.

His party is in control; they increased spending and debt; they bowed to kings; and cowed to tyrants... and yet, this happened all within his first 100 days.

Many believed partisan lies simply because incumbents are easy to blame and the media was all too willing to sacrifice Bush and the Republican Party to lies and ignorance. Now, that argument is hollow - they cannot run on a blame Bush platform nor stand for true change when they have revealed themselves proved to be more of the same if not worse - they promised no former lobbyists in Obama's administration and yet there are lobbyists in his administration; they promised to be transparent and allow the public a chance to read a bill before passing it, yet they passed a bill without even allowing time for them to read it themselves; they promised more, but they did not deliver... hope and change may have fooled some who wanted to believe, but that ship has sailed.

However, Obama is still popular and the left-leaning media is in his back pocket, so the next election will by no means be an easy win for the Republican Party. However, if they actually run a conservative Republican, rather than a lukewarm centrist, they have a chance to win... a better chance than they did before Obama took office.

[Richard Poor]

No, I'm not kidding.

Your Carter comparison is bizarre and lacks context. It also ignores established history.

Realistically speaking, Obama's political machine suffers no other rivals.

Like I said, too rich, too big, too strong.

To compare Carter's machinery with Obama's is quite the absurd claim.

They're not even close to the same.Actually, if you look closer, you will see that Carter and Obama are quite similar.

1. They are both far left candidates
2. They both seemingly came from no where
3. They both captured the imagination of the people with their high sounding, but empty, rhetoric.
4. Both have/had a disdain for America and apologize for her enemies
5. Etc.

However, your point about the machinery behind Obama and Carter has some merit, but in the end falls just short of being correct. Similarly, both Carter and Obama were not their party’s first choice, rather they became so through their so-called grassroots efforts [so-called for Obama, because the far-left subsidized his campaign - Carter did initially have more of a genuine grassroots contingent, but he too enjoyed a lot of support from the far left of his time]...

Ultimately however, they both enjoyed the support of their respective political machines... however, to your point, Obama's machine is far bigger, but conversely, for their particular times in history, they both enjoyed the support of their political machines and both liberal machines were significantly larger than their opposition’s.

[Eagle1]

Let's see....a 28 year sellout Senator-- lifelong compromiser, with no core values....Is joining the liberal democrats?

Like that's a bad thing? Or a surprise? Please-----

And he's doing it because his party has veered to the right? Quite the opposite I say....The repubs have drifted left in recent years--much to their own demise.

Specter is just trying to cling to power....Sellout as always.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass!

[Eagle1]

Oh yeah---take McCain with you.

[mwillman]

We dont want McCain.

As for Specter I think the republican party left specter, specter didnt leave the republican party.

The Republican party has gone so far right that they can't keep moderates anymore and that means they are dieing as a party. If they don't start moving to the center they will never have power again.

[Eagle1]

We dont want McCain.

As for Specter I think the republican party left specter, specter didnt leave the republican party.

The Republican party has gone so far right that they can't keep moderates anymore and that means they are dieing as a party. If they don't start moving to the center they will never have power again.

How can I phrase this in a delicate way? Um.....Bullshit.

Specter is a lib and he knew he'd get his ass kicked. Fact!

[Eagle1]

He will lose in the general election anyway. A sellout with no core principles and a loser in the end.

There is your legacy.....Enjoy him on your team while you can. A perfect fit.

[opinionator]

How can I phrase this in a delicate way? Um.....Bullshit.

Specter is a lib and he knew he'd get his ass kicked. Fact!


Absolutely right. The fact that he can just adjust his 'beliefs' on the fly only confirms his liberal status.




.

[bairdi]

How can I phrase this in a delicate way? Um.....Bullshit.

Specter is a lib and he knew he'd get his ass kicked. Fact!
Ummm.....no. Specter knew he would get his ass kicked in the primaries exactly because of what mwillman said. The Repug party in PA is in disarray and have moved so far to the right that they can't keep moderates. If Specter is a lib as you guys claim, then why was he the nominee for the Repugs for so many years? And if you think nominating a conservative here in PA will get the next Dem nominee defeated, you only have to look at what happened to conservative nutcase Rick (we found the wmd's) Santorum to understand that people in this state no longer want any part of these wackos.

[Eagle1]

Ummm.....no. Specter knew he would get his ass kicked in the primaries exactly because of what mwillman said. The Repug party in PA is in disarray and have moved so far to the right that they can't keep moderates. If Specter is a lib as you guys claim, then why was he the nominee for the Repugs for so many years? And if you think nominating a conservative here in PA will get the next Dem nominee defeated, you only have to look at what happened to conservative nutcase Rick (we found the wmd's) Santorum to understand that people in this state no longer want any part of these wackos.

Wrong. The repubs have moved to the left over the years, trying to compromise and selling out their principles in the process.

Don't get me wrong....The sellout will be right at home in the democratic camp. We can agree on that.

I think Specter will fall in the general election....You disagree?

[bairdi]

Wrong. The repubs have moved to the left over the years, trying to compromise and selling out their principles in the process.

Don't get me wrong....The sellout will be right at home in the democratic camp. We can agree on that.

I think Specter will fall in the general election....You disagree?
Whoever the Dem candidate is in the general election will win. Voters here in PA will not elect a conservative Republican. The dynamics of the state here has changed considerably and Dems hold a huge lead in registered voters. Personally, I hope Specter is defeated in the primary election, but from what I have been hearing on the news, he has practically been guaranteed the Dem nomination.

[Hog Trash]

Absolutely right. The fact that he can just adjust his 'beliefs' on the fly only confirms his liberal status.




.Specter has always been a scum-sucking, low-life, bottom-feeding liberal.

[mwillman]

Call him what you want but he does give the democrats a 60 vote majority in the Senate.

Game, Set, Match you loss.

[Eagle1]

If the PA voters can't see the shallow attempt to hang on to power, god help us all.

Personally, I have confidence that they will kick the sob to the curb.

Politicians with no core values are commonplace nowadays. Sorry to say the Arlen(e) is not the only member of this club. Getting rid of the dog is a good first step.

[Eagle1]

Call him what you want but he does give the democrats a 60 vote majority in the Senate.

Game, Set, Match you loss.

Wrong again. You think you can count on this guy? :lmao2:

What's his position on card check mensa?

[mwillman]

Democrats have room to make some compromises and he will be there to stop filibusters from the right so we don't need him to vote yes on every bill.

He bailed the republican party becuase he knew two things.

1. He had a good chance of losing the primary as a republican
2. even if he had won the republican nomination he would have lost the general election.

So the only way he can keep his job is to switch parties.

[Eagle1]

Democrats have room to make some compromises and he will be there to stop filibusters from the right so we don't need him to vote yes on every bill.

He bailed the republican party becuase he knew two things.

1. He had a good chance of losing the primary as a republican
2. even if he had won the republican nomination he would have lost the general election.

So the only way he can keep his job is to switch parties.

I agree with you...And that worries me a little--just kidding.

He will, in my opinion, end up losing in the general....As it should be. Folks don't like the wishy washy stuff. His lack of conviction will do him in.

We'll see.

[mwillman]

I don't know, he has President Obama supporting him and the democrats have a huge advantage in registered voters.
I think they will vote him in becuase like most of the nation they don't trust republicans any more.

[opinionator]

Ah yes...Pennsylvania.

Isn't that the same place where, after drooling traitor/moron Murtha claimed they were all stupid rednecks and ignorant hillbillies, they voted for him?


democrat morons:
" I like that he despises us"
" I just like the cut of his jib"
" I like it when he drools like a child..."
" I like it when he betrays our troops"

yeah, I like Specters chances there
.

[Moby]

Call him what you want but he does give the democrats a 60 vote majority in the Senate.

Game, Set, Match you loss.
Unfortunately this isn't a game and without checks and balances, any political party will end up being vastly corrupt. This isn't really a great thing for America.

[Eagle1]

like most of the nation they don't trust republicans any more.

I agree, because they have abandoned their priciples and moved to the left in recent years.

The electorate will tire of Pelosi, Reid, and their marxist cohorts in due time....6 months to a year is my guess. Just in time for 2010.


The GOP shedding Sen. Spectacle is a good thing. Look-up sell-out in the dictionary and you'll see his picture. Really.

Voters don't like pandering sellouts, even in PA.

[Moby]

His lack of conviction will do him in.

We'll see.
We will see but actually he has a very strong conviction. Just not a strong party affiliation. He was a democrat before entering politics.

He pushed against Bork.
Pushed for allowing military personal access to the Supreme Court (Lindsey Graham blocked it).

He did some good things that weren't popular with The Party but I respect politicians that break with party politics.

[mwillman]

Well I'm glad you haven't lost your fight but I don't think you realize the changes that have occurred to this nation. The demographics have changed and the young voters are very active and very much liberal. Not all that's true, but far more are then aren't and that means conservatives will be a minority for a long time to come.

I hear you Sir Moby, We will just have to make sure they only have real power long enough to get some things done like fixing the economy, fixing the health care system, and getting us closer to losing our dependency on foreign oil.

There are times for checks and balances keeping the status quo but right now we have a lot of work to do and that doesn't get done when there is to much balance.

[bairdi]

I agree, because they have abandoned their priciples and moved to the left in recent years.

The electorate will tire of Pelosi, Reid, and their marxist cohorts in due time....6 months to a year is my guess. Just in time for 2010.


The GOP shedding Sen. Spectacle is a good thing. Look-up sell-out in the dictionary and you'll see his picture. Really.

Voters don't like pandering sellouts, even in PA.
6 months is not going to fix the bad taste left in the mouth of voters after 8 years of the most incompetent administration since Herbert Hoover.

[Eagle1]

6 months is not going to fix the bad taste left in the mouth of voters after 8 years of the most incompetent administration since Herbert Hoover.

I have twenty bucks that says 6 months of marxist policies might just do the trick.

Never underestimate the dems ability to squander their good fortune my friend.

Watch and see....

[radioguy]

Democrats have room to make some compromises and he will be there to stop filibusters from the right so we don't need him to vote yes on every bill.

He bailed the republican party becuase he knew two things.

1. He had a good chance of losing the primary as a republican
2. even if he had won the republican nomination he would have lost the general election.

So the only way he can keep his job is to switch parties.

I agree with you 100%.

[GetAClue]

Ummmmmmm....,yeah, right.

Pennsylvania Electoral Votes: 21
President 100.0% of 9,284 precincts reporting
Candidate Party Vote Counts Votes Cast
Barack Obama Dem 3,192,316 54.7%
John McCain GOP 2,586,496 44.3%
Ralph Nader Ind 41,520 0.7%
Bob Barr Lib 19,926 0.3

And that proves what? My assertion is that 200,000 Repubs voted in the Dem primary to vote for Hillary. Your numbers disprove that how?

[GetAClue]

I thought I read that Steele wanted to pull funds and push for another republican to win in the next primary which would have pushed Arlen out. I could be wrong but I don't think he was going to get funding from the GOP.

It's possible that 200k people changed parties because they were following Rush or because they didn't like the GOP politics. It's hard to tell.

There's little doubt that Arlen did this to protect his own future.

The question is should he support his political party, the will of the people or his own ideas?

I agree with this post completely. :thumbsup:

[GetAClue]

Whoever the Dem candidate is in the general election will win. Voters here in PA will not elect a conservative Republican. The dynamics of the state here has changed considerably and Dems hold a huge lead in registered voters. Personally, I hope Specter is defeated in the primary election, but from what I have been hearing on the news, he has practically been guaranteed the Dem nomination.

I agree with you to a point. However it has more to do with Philadelphia than anything else. Philadelphia had a very large turnout in this last election which carried the stated. However, you removed Philadelphia from the equation, and a conservative wins easily.

[GetAClue]

Call him what you want but he does give the democrats a 60 vote majority in the Senate.

Game, Set, Match you loss.

No, Game, Set, Match AMERICA losses.

[GetAClue]

Well I'm glad you haven't lost your fight but I don't think you realize the changes that have occurred to this nation. The demographics have changed and the young voters are very active and very much liberal. Not all that's true, but far more are then aren't and that means conservatives will be a minority for a long time to come.

I hear you Sir Moby, We will just have to make sure they only have real power long enough to get some things done like fixing the economy, fixing the health care system, and getting us closer to losing our dependency on foreign oil.

There are times for checks and balances keeping the status quo but right now we have a lot of work to do and that doesn't get done when there is to much balance.

But remember; as those young voters begin to grow up, get jobs, start carriers and families, their views begin to change. They quit looking at the world thru Rose Colored glasses and see things as they really are. With age comes wisdom and most (not all) young people begin to realize that sometimes life isn't fair. They begin to realize it is usually a lack of personal responsibility that leaves some behind.

Those young liberals usually end up becoming conservatives. As Winston Churchill once said, "If at 20 you are not a liberal you have no heart. If at 30 you are not a conservative, you have no brain."

[mwillman]

Its nice that you have hope GetAClue but always remember its only hope.

And no its not America losses its conservative America losses when you recognize that then you will have a leg to stand on.

[doctordog]

hope you're ok, friend

cliff

thanks cliff

[GetAClue]

Its nice that you have hope GetAClue but always remember its only hope.

And no its not America losses its conservative America losses when you recognize that then you will have a leg to stand on.

Hey it was good enough for you liberals to vote for Obama. :lmao2:

[The Professor]

losses is a noun

loses is the verb you're looking for

this forum is supposed to be an INTELLIGENT discussion of ideas...

cliff

[mwillman]

Prof

Why dont you take your spelling lessons and shove them up your ass.

If you have nothing to add to the political discussions then maybe you should hang out with other spelling nazi's rather then come to a political forum and spew your nonsense.

[mwillman]

Hey it was good enough for you liberals to vote for Obama. :lmao2:

Not at all, it was far more then hope that won us liberals the election and both houses of congress.

[doctordog]

But remember; as those young voters begin to grow up, get jobs, start carriers and families, their views begin to change. They quit looking at the world thru Rose Colored glasses and see things as they really are. With age comes wisdom and most (not all) young people begin to realize that sometimes life isn't fair. They begin to realize it is usually a lack of personal responsibility that leaves some behind.

Those young liberals usually end up becoming conservatives. As Winston Churchill once said, "If at 20 you are not a liberal you have no heart. If at 30 you are not a conservative, you have no brain."

My son is almost 24 now an realizes how out of touch his liberal professors really are and is beginning to understand their carzy views and teachings.:disbelief:

[mwillman]

Its pretty common for a conservative to have children that become conservative even if they rebel for a while.

So keep up the hope but just remember right now you have no power as a political group all you have is your hate and vitriol.

[doctordog]

Its pretty common for a conservative to have children that become conservative even if they rebel for a while.

So keep up the hope but just remember right now you have no power as a political group all you have is your hate and vitriol.

Like the hate we had to listen to for the last 8 years, we are more than familiar with how hate works thanks to your party.

[mwillman]

Yes, well call it what you want.

The difference is we had good reason, becuase Bush won the election by a 5 - 4 vote rather then the will of the people and secondly he started all kinds of destructive policies that have put us where we are today.

[The Professor]

with no hate or anger i say, The Prof ADDS to the political discussion a unique and original piece almost every day

awhile is one word

this forum is supposed to be an INTELLIGENT discussion of ideas

[Hog Trash]

Its pretty common for a conservative to have children that become conservative even if they rebel for a while.

So keep up the hope but just remember right now you have no power as a political group all you have is your hate and vitriol.Too many times conservatives send there children off to college and they come back, little brainwashed marxist liberals, denouncing capitalism and everything American.

They rant about white racism, the plight of minorities, "undocumented" immigrants, global warming and how evil America is...Sometimes it takes years to un-fuck their minds!

[GetAClue]

with no hate or anger i say, The Prof ADDS to the political discussion a unique and original piece almost every day

awhile is one word

this forum is supposed to be an INTELLIGENT discussion of ideas

Yes, but we still welcome liberals anyway.:lmao2:

[radioguy]

For the first time in recorded history, I agree with mwillman and he doesn't say a word.

[Zebulon0351]

Too many times conservatives send there children off to college and they come back, little brainwashed marxist liberals, denouncing capitalism and everything American.

They rant about white racism, the plight of minorities, "undocumented" immigrants, global warming and how evil America is...Sometimes it takes years to un-fuck their minds!

So are you against the pursuit of higher-education?

[Hog Trash]

So are you against the pursuit of higher-education?I am in pursuit of quality education....Teaching them how to think and make decisions, not what to think and deciding for them.

[SeedyROM]

Two things worth thinking about.

1. Should a politician have loyalty to a political party? Why not have loyalty to America, his/her supporters or at least his/her own belief. Lieberman did this.

2. Did Specter do the betraying after Steele's push?

1. No, that's a problem with both parties....tarp 2 is proof. Specter wants to keep his job, that all. Sure Lieberman did it too but he's good for the country in comparison. Sellouts in both parties are in the tank for industry not the people. Political speeches are bunk.

2. No, Steele is not the problem, Specter screwed up when he voted for TARP The stimulus was too big and the CBO report said the money wasn't needed and predicted the economy was in recovery.

Sellouts like Specter and Chris Dodd are no longer welcome in DC. I'm sending money to whomever looks best to beat the 2 dirtbag crooks. They are out of touch with America.

Both men are proof that Term Limits are needed to gain control of the country so the people are better represented.

[SeedyROM]

I think this one statement says it all. However, what he is forgetting is that 200,000 Republicans were not switching because they believed in the Democrats. They switched to vote in the primary to vote for Hillary and slow down Obama.

Those 200k voters will grow in numbers.

I feel the man will lose the election no matter what. People don't like defectors who switch parties. Spector is not as popular as Lieberman.

[The Professor]

the MEANING of specter is:

the GOP will be conservative, not moderate

opposition generated against the mushy politics of a bill clinton MIGHT be moderate

opposition vs the EXTREMIST obama CANNOT be moderate

MEANING of specter---gop will be conservative

ie, hello

cliff

[Zebulon0351]

I am in pursuit of quality education....Teaching them how to think and make decisions, not what to think and deciding for them.

So if a kid graduates college and comes back with progressive views, that means he/she did not get a quality education?

What exactly in your mind is a quality education?

[The Professor]

the ability to talk for at least an entire sentence without resembling jethro bodine is a good start

[mwillman]

The more conservative the republican party becomes the smaller and less powerful they will be. Every time you push to the right you loss more. Pretty soon it will be 5 southern states and some farmers and ranchers in the sticks and that my friends is not enough voting power to change the name of a street let alone making the nation into your dreams.

[mwillman]

the ability to talk for at least an entire sentence without resembling jethro bodine is a good start


You forgot the period.

If you cant finish a sentence how can we know you ever had an education.

[The Professor]

lose, not loss

the republican party is in the wilderness NOW

it's still 100 days

after the severity of the butt kicking it received it should be wandering for a year

due to obama's totally tin eared obtuseness, the gop is coming back months ahead of schedule

we picked up 24 points in eastern new york, new york 20, since jan

the point---no matter what happens for NOW, the gop is powerless, impotent and irrelevant

where will it be when things next begin to matter, ie, in nov, 2010?

that ALL depends on obama, who's messing up BAD

if the economy is up, obama wins

if the economy is down, the reds do

it's that simple

fix the economy or he's dead

all this gop talk is a total waste of time, signifies naught

the only game in town is obama

and he's getting straight F's in politics/leadership and in foreign policy as well

tomorrow his economic report card will be posted

perhaps he'll grade a bit better

the point---NOT ONE defense for the myriad errors of the bigeared rookie

he's undefendable

and yes, you are right, conservatives right now are extremely weak

but if obama continues to screw up as bad as he did in the skies over new york city, we'll be back by summer

cliff

[mwillman]

Could you please use punctuation.

Its like reading cliff notes and I don't believe in cheating.

[bairdi]

The more conservative the republican party becomes the smaller and less powerful they will be. Every time you push to the right you loss more. Pretty soon it will be 5 southern states and some farmers and ranchers in the sticks and that my friends is not enough voting power to change the name of a street let alone making the nation into your dreams.
Almost beyond imagination....a strange adventure into the unknown! The Incredible Shrinking Party....coming to a theater near you soon! :lmao2:

[Life_Long_Dem!]

I believe there needs to be some kinda balance in both parties. All though overall I am a very liberal person I dont believe the extremes can work, the farther right the republicans get the more people are turned off by it alot. Also if we had more balance on the left the Dems might not be hated as much, I believe something does need to be done about the direction of this country but to go too far to the extreme on either side does not really work at all. Just my 2 cents.

[Richard Poor]

The more conservative the republican party becomes the smaller and less powerful they will be. Every time you push to the right you loss more. Pretty soon it will be 5 southern states and some farmers and ranchers in the sticks and that my friends is not enough voting power to change the name of a street let alone making the nation into your dreams.
This is exactly the wrong type advice... not surprising considering the source. :banghead:

On the contrary, if you look at recent elections, you will see a trend; Bush, not a centrist, won twice; McCain, a centrist, lost; Obama, not a centrist, won – over a centrist no less.

America is becoming more polarized - though not surprisingly. The more the left over-reaches with their attempts at brain-washing via the media and schools, the more recognizable their attempts have [and will likely] become and thus, the more recalcitrant people are [will be] to their lies. Hence people will be forced to believe or not believe and in that choice a decision will be made.

Moreover, with the advent of the internet, it has become easier to appeal to one's base and thus more likely that a candidate will be successful in their desire, by appealing to their base; rather than by attempting to appeal to moderates who either, do not pay enough attention or do not care enough to seek out the truth [see swing voters for Obama]. Either way, a moderate is less likely to both vote and contribute to an election whereas a partisan will likely vote and contribute both time and money – this, in essence, is why it is very difficult, if not impossible, for a centrist to win.

In the end, we are a polarized nation and judging by the climate, will become even more so and since candidates need the support of their bases, they need to embrace them.

Interestingly, I am not arguing that this is good for America; however, conservatives need to understand that running moderates will not win them elections... and America is far better off with a conservative who is too far to the right, than a liberal who is too far too the left; for the biased media and school system will automatically work to temper a far right candidate, but a far left candidate will have no such balancing weight - see Obama, Pelosi, and the so-called Stimulus Bill.

[Hog Trash]

So if a kid graduates college and comes back with progressive views, that means he/she did not get a quality education?
Yes, they absolutely did not recieve a "quality education"...Marxist indoctrination is not education!What exactly in your mind is a quality education?To graduate and be proficient in a chosen discipline, including all related subjects of study.

[Zebulon0351]

Yes, they absolutely did not recieve a "quality education"...Marxist indoctrination is not education!To graduate and be proficient in a chosen discipline, including all related subjects of study.

So that would exclude the majority of potential college students. Not everyone can afford a private education from a Liberal Arts college.

And by defining a "quality" education as one that only produces right-wind conservatives sounds a little like brain washing as well. I go to a public university in the middle of the Bible belt, and there are students from every side of the political spectrum. You seem to be painting with very broad strokes Hog Trash.

[Bill Cosby]

but to go too far to the extreme on either side does not really work at all. Just my 2 cents.

I don't agree....... IMO the country needs to move far to the left just to get back to the traditional center.......

[doctordog]

I don't agree....... IMO the country needs to move for to the left just to get back to the traditional center.......

Whoa? Cos, it is already as far left as it needs to go.

[Bill Cosby]

Whoa? Cos, it is already as far left as it needs to go.

Not enough for me...........

I want to see a lot less money going to those other countries as well. That money should stay home. Pull out most of these bases around the globe & put that money here in Education & health for Americans........

That sounds a lot like that O' time conservTiZm...... lol

[bairdi]

Not enough for me...........

I want to see a lot less money going to those other countries as well. That money should stay home. Pull out most of these bases around the globe & put that money here in Education & health for Americans........

That sounds a lot like that O' time conservTiZm...... lol
I agree with you cos. This country has moved way too far to the right over the past 30 years.

[Hog Trash]

I agree with you cos. This country has moved way too far to the right over the past 30 years.The republican party has progressively become more and more a proponent of big government and big spending.

How in the world does that translate to more conservative?...Are you sure you know what conservative ideology is?

If the Republican party is becoming more conservative then why are they loosing their conservative base of voters?

[bairdi]

The republican party has progressively become more and more a proponent of big government and big spending.

How in the world does that translate to more conservative?...Are you sure you know what conservative ideology is?

If the Republican party is becoming more conservative then why are they loosing their conservative base of voters?
The reason there has been bigger government and bigger spending on the part of Republicans, at least in the past eight years, is because the Republican party chose to adopt the neo conservative agenda of the far right.

"You are wrong as usual and I, of course, am right as usual.

I offer my expert opinion as evidence of my correctness and your stupidity as evidence of your wrongness."

[The Professor]

for someone so right, you sure misuse the term neocon

google it

[Hog Trash]

The reason there has been bigger government and bigger spending on the part of Republicans, at least in the past eight years, is because the Republican party chose to adopt the neo conservative agenda of the far right.Well you just made my point by basicly saying they abandoned conservatism for neoconservatism.

Apparently from what you yourself just said, conservatism and neoconsevatism are two seperate political ideologies!

Neoconservatism has adopted policies and beliefs from both the left and the right, thus big government and spending."You are wrong as usual and I, of course, am right as usual.

I offer my expert opinion as evidence of my correctness and your stupidity as evidence of your wrongness."I need an attorney and a moderater in here right now!.....I Hog Trash, have been plagiarized by bairdi!

Bairdi has used my words without crediting me as being the original author of this literary masterpiece!

This has caused undo stress and affected my physical and mental health! I demand to be made whole!
You are wrong as usual and I, of course, am right as usual.

I offer my expert opinion as evidence of my correctness and your stupidity as evidence of your wrongness. :lmao2:http://www.dcjunkies.com/showthread.php?p=96529#post96529

[Hog Trash]

for someone so right, you sure misuse the term neocon

google itIt's a liberal thing Professor!....It's part of their indoctrination and programming.

[The Professor]

i don't think i have seen one person on dcj use that term correctly, neocon, so cavalierly thrown about

the most abused word since, what, gravitas?

stategery?

change?

LOLOL!

[bairdi]

Well you just made my point by basicly saying they abandoned conservatism for neoconservatism.

Apparently from what you yourself just said, conservatism and neoconsevatism are two seperate political ideologies!

Neoconservatism has adopted policies and beliefs from both the left and the right, thus big government and spending.I need an attorney and a moderater in here right now!.....I Hog Trash, have been plagiarized by bairdi!

Bairdi has used my words without crediting me as being the original author of this literary masterpiece!

This has caused undo stress and affected my physical and mental health! I demand to be made whole!
http://www.dcjunkies.com/showthread.php?p=96529#post96529
Hey I put it in quotes but was hoping you would not recognize your words and tell me how arrogant I was. :lmao2:

[bairdi]

for someone so right, you sure misuse the term neocon

google it
The last person in the world I need to lecture me on the meaning of a word is you professor. I know perfectly well what a neo conservative is.

[The Professor]

why, of course you do, bairdi

it's the "agenda of the far right"

LOLOLOL!

i don't think irving kristol himself could've said it any better

[Hog Trash]

Hey I put it in quotes but was hoping you would not recognize your words and tell me how arrogant I was. :lmao2:"Arrogance" is plagiarising someone and sending the material back to the original author as if it were your own!

[bairdi]

"Arrogance" is plagiarising someone and sending the material back to the original author as if it were your own!
It was a fucking joke meant for you. Get over it already.

[Eagle1]

The republican party has progressively become more and more a proponent of big government and big spending.

How in the world does that translate to more conservative?...Are you sure you know what conservative ideology is?

If the Republican party is becoming more conservative then why are they loosing their conservative base of voters?

That's correct. The repubs have clearly moved left from the Reagan days. There is really no debating that fact.

I equate "left" as more government services and higher taxes...As opposed to limited government, lower taxes, individual freedom...etc...etc.

[Hog Trash]

That's correct. The repubs have clearly moved left from the Reagan days. There is really no debating that fact.

I equate "left" as more government services and higher taxes...As opposed to limited government, lower taxes, individual freedom...etc...etc.I have learned that a liberal will argue any point, no matter how rediculous.

[Hog Trash]

It was a fucking joke meant for you. Get over it already.You get over it!.....I was the one making a "fucking joke" einstein.

[bairdi]

You get over it!.....I was the one making a "fucking joke" einstein.
No argument here. I always consider your posts a fucking joke.:lmao2:

[Hog Trash]

No argument here. I always consider your posts a fucking joke.:lmao2:I'm happy to hear it!.....I wasn't aware you had a sense of humor.

[bairdi]

Republicans Are Shrinking: Sen. Specter's Defection Is a Promising Sign for the Dems
By Kevin Zeese, OpEdNews.com
Posted on April 29, 2009, Printed on April 29, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/story/138899/

Senator Specter is following the voters. ABC News reported this week that only 21% of voters consider themselves Republicans. The Republican Party has shrunk to only the true believers in their extreme conservative ideology.

In Pennsylvania 150,000 to 200,000 voters left the Republican Party in the last year. Senator Specter's switch to the Democratic Party was based on the reality that the Republican Party has become more conservative, indeed right wing. Senator Specter could not operate in what is left of the party.

The 2010 elections are likely to cement Democratic control over the senate, so the Specter switch gives them an extra year of one party rule. If they use their power for the people's interests this could last for a generation, if not, it ends in 2012.

One concern for the Dems is they no longer have the "Republican excuse." The Dems can no longer say that the Republican filibuster is stopping their agenda from moving forward. Now, they will have to blame some of the conservative members of their own party. This is not as clear a message and does not allow them to say - "elect more Democrats."

The liberal base of the Democrats will expect more from a party that controls both Houses of Congress, i.e. end the Iraq war more quickly, stop the escalation in Afghanistan and Pakistan, cut the military budget, act more aggressively on climate change, put in place single payer health care not a subsidize the insurance companies health plan, stop funding Wall Street and start funding Main Street. And, if that agenda does not move forward - it is no longer the fault of the Republicans.

Specter was always a moderate Republican, but when push came to shove he did what the party wanted. In order to strengthen his re-election, Specter needs to have Democratic support, especially the support of labor. While Specter said his opposition to the Employee Free Choice Act has not changed, he still has important wiggle room. When that legislation comes up for a cloture vote, he can vote to end cloture and allow a majority vote. The Democrats should be able to achieve majority support for Card Check. If they do, it will help labor unions grow and further strengthen Democratic majorities. Specter's switch may just be another step in ushering in an era of Democratic Party dominance.

Indeed, the 2010 senate races have the Democrats well positioned. They will be defending 17 seats and the Republicans will be defending 19 seats. Already, five Republicans have already announced they are not running, which greatly increases the odds of those seats flipping. And, no Democrats are retiring.

The five states with no incumbent - Delaware, Ohio, Florida, Missouri and Kansas - also help Dems. Ohio has been moving Democrat since the corruption of the Taft era. Delaware is very likely to stay Democrat with Beau Biden, the VP's son as the likely heir. And, recent polls in traditionally Republican Kansas show a close race between the leading candidates. Sen. Mel Martinez is retiring at the end of his term, which will set off a free for all for this competitive Senate seat. No strong Republican has come forward, so this is up for grabs. Four-term senator Kit Bond has decided to retire in Missouri. The Dems have a strong contender in Robin Carnahan, the current secretary of state who comes from a strong Missouri political family.

One challenge for the Democrats is the appointed senators who filled vacancies due to Obama nominations. The Clinton replacement, Kirsten Gillibrand, will seek the two years left on Clinton's six-year term, and then turn right around and run again in 2012. Obama's own seat in Illinois, now filled temporarily by the controversial Roland Burris could be a challenge, but it is looking less and less likely that Burris will run. That should increase Democrats chance of retaining the seat. And, the Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar's seat in Colorado, now filled on an interim basis by Michael Bennet, were both due for a regular six-year-term election in 2010.

In 2012 things switch and begin to favor the Republicans in the senate. In that year 24 Democrats (including Lieberman and Sanders) are up for re-election and only 9 Republicans. So, one-party rule could be short-lived. Continuing to keep power after 2012 is going to require the Democrats to pass legislation that is more populist in nature. They will have to stop their tilt toward Wall Street and militarism and instead invest in policies that allow the working class to build a stronger wallet. Thus, the conflict in the Democratic Party will be clearer - the monied interests that fund the party and the peoples interests that vote for the party. The Dems will finally be forced to choose.

But for now, the Dems are on a path to one party rule that should last at least three years. And, if they find a way to break with their corporate backers and put in place populist economic policies, they could have a much longer run.

Kevin Zeese is Executive Director of the Campaign for Fresh Air and Clean Politics.
© 2009 OpEdNews.com All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/138899/

[Cat slave]

That's correct. The repubs have clearly moved left from the Reagan days. There is really no debating that fact.

I equate "left" as more government services and higher taxes...As opposed to limited government, lower taxes, individual freedom...etc...etc.


They have definitely lost their way and are just like the libs. If they dont
get their act together we will have a totalitarian government for sure.....
singular ruling party, monarchy or whatever anyone wants to call it.
Dictatorship.....sounds right.

[Zebulon0351]

That's correct. The repubs have clearly moved left from the Reagan days. There is really no debating that fact.

I equate "left" as more government services and higher taxes...As opposed to limited government, lower taxes, individual freedom...etc...etc.


Today's conservative base is the creation of Reagan. Which is why it has gradually left since he left office. And the more left they continue to move, the better chances they will have to regain control of the Oval Office and Congress.

[Bill Cosby]

The republican party has progressively become more and more a proponent of big government and big spending.

How in the world does that translate to more conservative?...Are you sure you know what conservative ideology is?

If the Republican party is becoming more conservative then why are they loosing their conservative base of voters?

Just goes to show you know nothing about WTF your talking about. SPending more money & bigger gov......... Long as all that money is going towards war & other waste you can't tell the difference.......

What base are they loZing??? The wackO fringe....

[Bill Cosby]

I agree with you cos. This country has moved way too far to the right over the past 30 years.

AMEN!!!!!!!!! Yep......... Score one big one for VoodOO ecOnumics..........

[Bill Cosby]

..I Hog Trash, have been plagiarized by bairdi!

Bairdi has used my words without crediting me as being the original author of this literary masterpiece!

This has caused undo stress and affected my physical and mental health! I demand to be made whole!
http://www.dcjunkies.com/showthread.php?p=96529#post96529

Sounds like you need some tissues & perhaps a little time out in the corner. What a bitch..........

Gee crying to the mod is becoming a habit for some :lmao2: :lmao2: :lmao2:

[Bill Cosby]

i don't think i have seen one person on dcj use that term correctly, neocon, so cavalierly thrown about

the most abused word since, what, gravitas?

stategery?

change?

LOLOL!

Hey cliff........

I would say the same about liberal......... Being a dumbOcrat is not= to liberal.....

For some of these fools anything they don't like is patched "LIB"........

[Bill Cosby]

Today's conservative base is the creation of Reagan. Which is why it has gradually left since he left office. And the more left they continue to move, the better chances they will have to regain control of the Oval Office and Congress.

:thumbsup:

WHAT HE SAID!!!!!!

[ROdger Right]

Not at all you foolish liberals, you forgot who owns the guns in this country.

Going toward the left views is worse than killing other Americans. Every good conservitive knows this:lmao2:

[Hog Trash]

Not at all you foolish liberals, you forgot who owns the guns in this country.

Going toward the left views is worse than killing other Americans. Every good conservitive knows this:lmao2:Just imagine?....If the nation's economy fails and America declines into chaos and lawless anarchy,

just imagine how much fun we could have with the liberals, having no law or cops to protect them?

[Bill Cosby]

Not at all you foolish liberals, you forgot who owns the guns in this country.

Going toward the left views is worse than killing other Americans. Every good conservitive knows this:lmao2:

What are you smoking tonight son.????

SObber up. PUt doWn the pipe & get help...............

[The_Limit]

Lol, this coming from the party that lost to 'W' twice!

I am not stating that Obama will definitely lose; however his chances of repeating are significantly smaller than was his chance to win this past election.

His party is in control; they increased spending and debt; they bowed to kings; and cowed to tyrants... and yet, this happened all within his first 100 days.

Many believed partisan lies simply because incumbents are easy to blame and the media was all too willing to sacrifice Bush and the Republican Party to lies and ignorance. Now, that argument is hollow - they cannot run on a blame Bush platform nor stand for true change when they have revealed themselves proved to be more of the same if not worse - they promised no former lobbyists in Obama's administration and yet there are lobbyists in his administration; they promised to be transparent and allow the public a chance to read a bill before passing it, yet they passed a bill without even allowing time for them to read it themselves; they promised more, but they did not deliver... hope and change may have fooled some who wanted to believe, but that ship has sailed.



No one will beat Obama in 2012. Just like no army can destroy the U.S. military. He has to beat himself, which I guess is always a possibility.

The reality is though, the size of his political organization is immense, the funding abundant, and it has an ability to deliver a message with murderous efficiency. Its nothing like any political observers have ever seen, much less Jimmy Carter's own organization.

Republicans and many other objective observers have said Reagan inherited a troubled America from Carter. Most Americans today would agree Bush left Obama in a tough spot as well.

Obama finds himself in a position much like Reagan, not like Carter. Bush is to Obama as Carter was to Reagan.

Point is, the two statesmen are nothing alike. It is irresponsible to even suggest such a foolish comparison.

Obama's political organization is nothing like Carter's.

Obama did not inherit the same problems as Carter.

Obama is not living in the same world as Carter.

One man will go down in history as the first African American president.

The other cannot claim such a feat.

I do not care to respond to the rest of your post because it reeks of hyper partisanship.

[The Professor]

1. libs run away from the L-word, all of them at the national level, still

2. they usually call themselves progressives, or some such similar dodge

3. once in a while, they try to wrap up in the conservative mantle, obama has even done this

4. the limit is absolutely correct---only obama can beat obama, conservatives and the gop, which are not the same thing, of course, are both pretty weak right now, have been for over 100 days, even

5. bush is to obama as carter is to reagan---yes

6. reagan succeeded, only reagan could beat reagan, and he didn't, he was universally successful

7. deficits under obama are already 12.3% of gdp, even keynes says this can't be done

8. new york 20 has seen the blues lose 24 points since january, ny20 is the only plebiscite of any reality we have yet to go by

9. economically, 12.3%, yes, trouble---politically, he has foolishly painted HIMSELF as a pelosi clone, SF extremist

10. the tea parties were grassroots, they were generally but not totally conservative, they are a strong indication that his extremism has really pissed off a lot of people, which is only natural

11. his support in chatrooms across america is lukewarm and replete with caveats---i too am worried about the spending, i don't like the bailouts either, i'm offended by the lobbyists and tax cheats...

12. the only ones still kinda gung ho for obama are the THRILLED and ENCHANTED folks like eleanor clift and chrissy matthews in the media

13. conservatives in chatrooms across america are kicking in obama's rushmore teeth, daily, repeatedly, laughingly, his supporters offer no defense for literally 100 missteps in 100 days

14. time will tell, but The Prof is old, wise and extremely experienced

15. he is not partisan when he says---obama is in big trouble

16. flying dc6's and fighter escorts over new york---pretty dumb, yet pretty typical of this bigeared idiot (ok, maybe a little partisan)

17. the greatest SIMILARITY between james earl and barak hussein is their almost stunning stupidity when it comes to understanding the american people

18. "no one will beat obama in 2012" is so far out, so distantly removed---talk about partisanship

19. one terrorist attack alone can paint that dreamy claim as unreal

20. the flu in mexico holds the potential to undo the ostrich like prez

21. and that's outside the economy

22. if unemployment numbers remain hi, he is doomed, it's really very simple---fix the economy or you're dead

cliff

[The Professor]

Hey cliff........

I would say the same about liberal......... Being a dumbOcrat is not= to liberal.....

For some of these fools anything they don't like is patched "LIB"........

ah, c'mon, friend

only lib is lib

1. yanking e-verify from plan pelosi

2. taxing carbon at both ends

3. 1.75T deficit, according to the white house itself

4. floating a guy for state who's said friendly things about sharia law

5. cozying up to america's enemies abroad

6. laying a greedy govt finger on home interest deduction

7. doing same to charitable giving

8. siding against sdi

9. going overseas and blaming america

10. denying our nation's Christian roots

11. suggesting we replace the sawbuck with international currency

12. renaming gitmo detainees, man made terrorists

13. renaming the war on terror, overseas contingency operations

14. attempting to take census away from commerce

15. attempting to end secret ballot in union elections

16. writing a domestic enemies list comprised almost solely of people who think like The Prof

bill, that's just off the top of my head, it's late, and if i consulted my notes i could come up with 50

in just 100 days

it's not like YOU to dodge so, please

one cannot fairly look at the actions of this talented but naive young president and describe his disposition as anything but liberal

extreme lib, as a matter of fact

maybe a step to the LEFT of frisco nance, i never heard her take on home interest mortgage deduction

either way, he's right there with her

cliff

[Life_Long_Dem!]

I am in the boat of having been a democrat my whole life but to am seeing the two parties mold into one, right now I am an independent on the outside looking in, dont feel the dems fit me anymore, dont feel i believe enough in what the republicans believe to fall in line with them, personally I wish third party candidates would get a better stake in elections, it would shake up the system and get alot more people believing again.

[SeedyROM]

I am in the boat of having been a democrat my whole life but to am seeing the two parties mold into one, right now I am an independent on the outside looking in, dont feel the dems fit me anymore, dont feel i believe enough in what the republicans believe to fall in line with them, personally I wish third party candidates would get a better stake in elections, it would shake up the system and get alot more people believing again.

Dems definitely need to be split up to segregate the idiot spendthrifts and liars from the minority of repsonsible spenders. Problem is the far left has infested the party and they beat down on anyone who disagrees with them. They can't hold intelligent conversations without getting personal or deflecting to other subjects. I see more idiots popping up, the Clinton democrats have been pushed aside, what left is corrupt spenders, liars and fools.

Dems have changed too much for me right now, maybe in the future but it will take a strong candidate because I only vote for who can best represent the country. Wild and crazy spending with war deficts makes Obama a poor choice for the USA.

Reps may have some hope if newt Gingrinch has his way. Whether the party spilts up or not, who knows. But the fear of splitting up may scare some to fall in line or more likely they'll be replaced in future elections. Read this

http://www.dcjunkies.com/showthread.php?t=8862

[Bill Cosby]

ah, c'mon, friend

only lib is lib

1. yanking e-verify from plan pelosi

2. taxing carbon at both ends

3. 1.75T deficit, according to the white house itself

4. floating a guy for state who's said friendly things about sharia law

5. cozying up to america's enemies abroad

6. laying a greedy govt finger on home interest deduction

7. doing same to charitable giving

8. siding against sdi

9. going overseas and blaming america

10. denying our nation's Christian roots

11. suggesting we replace the sawbuck with international currency

12. renaming gitmo detainees, man made terrorists

13. renaming the war on terror, overseas contingency operations

14. attempting to take census away from commerce

15. attempting to end secret ballot in union elections

16. writing a domestic enemies list comprised almost solely of people who think like The Prof

bill, that's just off the top of my head, it's late, and if i consulted my notes i could come up with 50

in just 100 days

it's not like YOU to dodge so, please

one cannot fairly look at the actions of this talented but naive young president and describe his disposition as anything but liberal

extreme lib, as a matter of fact

maybe a step to the LEFT of frisco nance, i never heard her take on home interest mortgage deduction

either way, he's right there with her

cliff

Well I don't agree.... Hell pelosi is not liberal........... She is a straight up corporate dumbOcrat bought & paid for by wall street & the MIC.....

[The Professor]

a lot of libs are bought and paid for

you're arguing out of abstractions in your mind

ie, looking past the 16 points i respectfully put right in front of you

san francisco and nancy pelosi are the very symbols of leftist extremism in united states politics

if pelosi's not a lib, stalin's not a comrade

you dance, my friend

still, more power to you

cliff

[bridge buff]

Both political parties have been changing for several election cycles, such that an honest man with strong convictions is left with nowhere to turn. How can this person make such a radical about face and not expect his new allies to question his motives? My advice: don't turn you back.

[Bill Cosby]

a lot of libs are bought and paid for

you're arguing out of abstractions in your mind

ie, looking past the 16 points i respectfully put right in front of you

san francisco and nancy pelosi are the very symbols of leftist extremism in united states politics

if pelosi's not a lib, stalin's not a comrade

you dance, my friend

still, more power to you

cliff

ie, looking past the 16 points i respectfully put right in front of you

Sorry cliffy I was not looking past them, I didn't really have the time to respond to them........

I have been pretty buZy but if you like I could take them one @ a time manna.........

IMHO pelosi in nothing of the kind.. she is a corp whore........ nothing more-nothing less............

We both have a pretty low opinion of her so the question then is does that make her a lib or just another corp whore that made her way to the top??

A couple nice rainy dayZ coming our way............ Some time to look into the women behind all the money............

[The_Limit]

4. the limit is absolutely correct---only obama can beat obama,

18. "no one will beat obama in 2012" is so far out, so distantly removed

19. one terrorist attack alone can paint that dreamy claim as unreal




This is one of the most irresponsible comments I've heard from you. You say that you agree that only Obama can beat Obama, but on the same hand try to put forth the proposition that if any future act of murder committed against innocent Americans by crazed terrorists were to occurr, it would be the fault of the Obama administration.

Professor, I know you want be taken seriously. But I, for one, cannot do so.

To 'pre-emptively' cast blame on the White House if another horrendous act of butchery were to occur is to your shame.

You are right up there with 9/11 lunatics who ignorantly push the malicious idea that Bush masterminded the mass elimination of Americans.

Let me tell you something sir. Nothing the Bush administration could have done would have prevented the attacks on the U.S. that day.

It was a crazed act of murder brainstormed by lunatics who think of nothing but ways to destroy men, women and children who have nothing to do with the implementation and execution of American foreign policy.

I know the game you are up to. I've seen it before, only from a different 'side.'

You remain a loud fool to think others do not know you're trying to plant the seeds of division.

If such another attack were to materialize, it would be the fault of the murderers and no one else.

You should be embarrassed of yourself for trying to score a cheap political point on the bodies of the victims who were brutally killed that day.

[MintJulep]

To 'pre-emptively' cast blame on the White House if another horrendous act of wanton murder were to occur is to your shame.
If another terrorist attack occurs on Obama's watch, it will not only be his fault but also the unwashed, sheeplet masses who voted for him.

The recent "America apologizes" world tour and the cuddling up to dictators is cringe-worthy. I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop. We're like sitting ducks with nothing but an imbecilic teleprompter in the WH who hates America as much as the Islamofascists do.

Hope & change!

[The_Limit]

If another terrorist attack occurs on Obama's watch, it will not only be his fault but also the unwashed, sheeplet masses who voted for him.



And let me guess, like always, its about you - lady liberty - deciding who is part of the"unwashed, sheeplet masses" and who is not.

Like I said to the prof, you are to be placed on the same shelf with the 9/11 skeptics.

[Bill Cosby]

If another terrorist attack occurs on Obama's watch, it will not only be his fault but also the unwashed, sheeplet masses who voted for him.

The recent "America apologizes" world tour and the cuddling up to dictators is cringe-worthy. I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop. We're like sitting ducks with nothing but an imbecilic teleprompter in the WH who hates America as much as the Islamofascists do.

Hope & change!

& if nothing happens???- well then nothing happens........

So now if anything in the works over the last several years comes about it is all his fault..........

We can thank bush & dick for saving us from everything eventhough 911 hapen on their watch & we can condemn Obama no matter what happens or what don't...............:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[ROdger Right]

That sounds like you have a soft spot for Obama. Think hes facing to much much critism. Get used to it thin skinned motha fucka, its his job.

The actions taken after 9/11 were carried out swift and deadly. As i recall bush did recieve some blame for ignoring all those warnings over the years about a possible strike from an airplane.

Obama has a chance but if suciders start popping up in America we shall see whos making it possible for letting these people into the country.

[Smurf-Herder]

Let me tell you something sir. Nothing the Bush administration could have done would have prevented the attacks on the U.S. that day.



That's not the opinion expressed in hundreds of posts by liberals on this board since I became a member. Maybe you're more objective, but they sure weren't.

[mwillman]

Why do you guys seem to want to justify everything with The Liberals Did it.

I mean you seem to hate us liberals so why would you model your behavior on what you didn't like about us.