Again, about that Repuke mandate

[zbdent]

Have with me the World Almanac and Book of facts.

Interesting breakdown of the "amazing republicans' march into power" - or how the right spins the "country is moving to the right":

Let's start with Congress just before the Republican "landslide" of 1994

Senate breakdown:

91-92 Repubs: 44, Dems: 56
93-94 Repubs: 43, Dems: 57
95-96 Repubs: 52, Dems: 48 (the "landslide election of 1994!")
97-98 Repubs: 55, Dems: 45
99-00 Repubs: 55, Dems: 45 (uh-oh, treading water!)
01-01.5 Repubs: 50, Dems: 50 (Uh, where's that mandate?)
01.5-02 Repubs: 49, Dems: 50, Independents: 1 (WTF?)
03-04 Repubs: 51, Dems: 48, Independents: 1 (Ah, there's that rightward slide!)
05-06 (so far) Repubs: 55, Dems: 44, Independents: 1 (Back to the Glory days of the Impeachment majority! Uh, where's the outcry about lying?)

House breakdown:

91-92 Repubs: 167, Dems: 267, Ind: 1
93-94 Repubs: 176, Dems: 258, Ind: 1 (Ah, the tide turns!)
95-96 Repubs: 230, Dems: 204, Ind: 1 (the "landslide election of 1994!" - well, not as overwhelming a majority as the Dems had)
97-98 Repubs: 227, Dems: 207, Ind: 1 (Oops, slipped a bit!)
99-00 Repubs: 223, Dems: 211, Ind: 1 (Wait, the impeachment was supposed to help GAIN seats!)
01-02 Repubs: 221, Dems: 212, Ind: 2 (start crying about patriotism, boys, we're losing ground!)
03-04 Repubs: 229, Dems: 205, Ind: 1 (ah, the old Repuke standby - smear and fear!)

Essentially, the 2004 election comes down to a sports analogy.

Heavily favored football team comes into Superbowl vs hated rival underdog.

Heavily favored football team scores a touchdown on the kickoff, gets a two-point conversion, then plays like shit the rest of the game. HFT 8, Dog 0.

Underdog team manages to fend off the heavily favored team the rest of the game, but still manages to score a touchdown and extra point. HFT 8, Dog 7.

Late in the third quarter, underdog team scores a field goal. HFT 8, Dog 10.

Rest of third and fourth quarters, HFT gets into enemy territory, but has to punt.

Last play of the game, Dog has the ball, first and 10 with 30 seconds left on their own 15 yard line, nobody has any time outs. Quarterback opts to take the knee. Somehow, the ball "gets loose" in a confused snap.

HFT somehow ends up with the ball. Clock is stopped with 2 seconds left in the game due to the change of possession.

HFT hastily kicks a field goal to win the game. As the heavily favored team is celebrating, the tapes are being reviewed because there was question as to whether or not there was offsides before the snap, which would have negated the "fumble".

HFT runs around the country celebrating like they won the game 97 to 0, even trying to convince the sports talk shows that they shouldn't believe their own eyes. Sports talk shows, afraid of being shut down, go along with it. Somewhere along the line, one of the key officials is seen partying with the owner of the heavily favored team.

Bush may have gotten a break with the fumbled snap. The tapes are being reviewed. BUT HE DID NOT SCORE A WIN COMPERABLE TO THE MANNER THAT THE REPUBLICANS ARE CELEBRATING!

The country, despite what the pundits say and despite the media's complicity in trying to frame the election as a tidal wave, is still very centrist.

[Dr Fate]

1. I thought the Republicans opposed Man Dates.

???

[NoodleBoy]

2. damn, very well put

I'm going to have to bookmark this.

[GFGOHR]

3. Let him run with his man-date.

Clinton only received 41% of the vote in 92 he then turned around and tried to push his agenda or mandate (an agenda I agree on) never the less he stepped on his dick and we all saw how we got our arses handed to us in the 94 election. In other words let Bush push a huge mandate, anytime anyone does some major changes it always backfires.

[AndyTiedye]

4. and Gerrymander those Dem seats away

> 03-04 Repubs: 229, Dems: 205, Ind: 1 (ah, the old Repuke standby - smear and fear!)

and Gerrymander, even between censuses!
Why not? They own the courts as well as the state legislatures?

[zbdent]

12. Thanks, I didn't even remember to put in the Texas Redistricting!

Also, forgot about the attack on that idiot Traficant, Dem that he was . . .

[PROGRESSIVE1]

5. No landslide at all!!!

[zbdent]

11. I hoped that someone would pick up that sentiment

I guess that I don't always have to stick in the obvious.

[Old and In the Way]

6. Amazing that,in spite of the facts that they own the media

and spent 3/4 of a billion dollars....they still have to rely on controlling the voting machines and the count to pull a win.

The bad news for them is our numbers are growing and will begin to accelerate over the next few years. More bad news on the economy, more info on their criminal activities will leak out and they are going to have to reform the voting system. And when we take control back, we'll have long memories about the crimes that have been commited by this Party of tyrants and war-profiteers.

[AndyTiedye]

7. The numbers don't begin to show how desperate our situation has become.

We may actually have more VOTERS on our side now than in 1994,
but they have total control over every branch of government and
they own the news and the voting machinez. We are on the verge
of losing the last bit of power we have in Washington when they
strip away our ability to filibuster when the new Senate convenes
in January.

By completely excluding the Democrats, they have concentrated all
power in the "majority of the majority" -- the hard-core Fundies.

We can reasonably assume that everyone in Washington knows that
the election was stolen by now, and everybody knows that the
Dominionists did it. If they get away with it, will any in DC
stand against them, knowing that they can steal elections at will?

[Lexingtonian]

8. That's about right

Despite all the hype and partisan numbers, the political center has stood still- in my opinion it has actually moved a little to the left on some absolute scale. Both sides have become more extreme over the years- but the effect has been to keep the center staying, and moving slowly to, where it must be for the country to remain functional.

I don't think many people here remember the Democrats of 1991-1994 in Congress very well. A very split, collectively gutless crowd dominated by its conservatives and DINOs.

In a sense the near standing-still of the center is a Republican accomplishment. Overtly running the country backwards in time didn't work, culminating in their disaster trying to exploit the Lewinsky affair. They've been trying to do it in more subtle ways since- but it's not getting them real gains, only greater efficiency.

They've won most of the battles but are still, ever more so, sure to lose the war at large. Which will be accompanied by the center making a lurch to the left, probably briefly an overshoot.

[LimpingLib]

9. Well on the other hand

They only one time they had more than 229 seats (since the 30s or 40s) the day after the elction was 1994 and they had 230 then. They could still beat that Saturday.

Since FDR they never had more than 55 in the Senate which is what they have now.


Whats even worse , is that if you go back to 2000 when WE WON nationally , the GOP won 234 of the congressional seats adjusted for redistricting. They still are actually shorter in congressional members than their potential which based on the last election is probabilly about 245 now. I believe the 2000 numbers are more accurate since the nation was evenly split but still.

We also have a Senate seat in Montana , South Dakota , 2 in North Dakota , plus Nebraska.

The truth is that ONLY at the presidential level do we have the advantage. WE have at least 269 electoral votes wrapped up in any close election starting in 2008 and 289 if you count Ohio which with a progressive nominee we can win.Colorado is 50-50 now in a 50-50 election.

The problem is that the DLC and "Democratic southern strategy" cocktail has failed us.

Another problem is that the GOP has 3 powerful "moderates" (being defiened as a Pro Choice conservative or McCain) that can kill any of our top tier candidates plus we keep wanting to nominate a candidate that simply packages himself "correctly" and doesnt take a stand on progressive issues to appeal to workers ,minoritys , and white progrrssives (we need to appeal to all 3 in STRONG terms).2004 could be the last election where we nominate somebody based on whether or not they are an "attractive candidate" who make a nice pro choice alternative to openly right wing REpublican nominees.Im not saying we wont nominate similar candidates in 2008 , but we ill get killed from here on out.

(Kerry proved that a "Massachusetts liberal" can come within a few thousand votes of defeating the best the GOP has to offer. The funny thing is we had to select him to counter "unelectable Dean" yet we still ended up with a candidate tarred as a "left wing northeasterner" and thus were able to prove that type is electable)

[LimpingLib]

10. Also we BADLY need to win governors mansions in 2006,2008,and 2010.

Even ifs its a DINO or DLCer simply because we need to not get killed in the redistricting process again. We also need to build on our success in regainning state legislatures.

In Texas we need to run either a stauch progressive (which is how to build toward winning in the future)or nominate somebody like Stenholm for a possible win today that help us in redistricting. No DLC MISH MASHed potatoes this time. They dont do shit for us in a state like Texas. Sharpton would have done better than Edwards or Clark in Texas, honestly. (actually , does the Texas Governor have much power there,anyway.....)

California and New York , man we need to do something there. Michigan is ripe for us undoing the GOPs crap in 2000... same in Pennsylvania and Ohio.