There are two areas that I think eventually will cause the Democrats

[mmonk]

to lose the majority in no more than 8 years. First is not pursuing the truth and justice in the Constitutional breaches and unlawful conduct during the previous administration. Second will be requiring Americans to purchase private medical insurance or be penalized instead of seeking real reform because in the end, we know the costs will only be temporarily arrested. Many people who decided to be voters again or for the first time this past election will not hold IMO.

[Fumesucker]

1. I agree with your second point..

I don't think many people honestly give a crap about the first though..

[mmonk]

3. Because they are uninformed.

[cali]

4. not only that, but they're invested in believing that

it's alright to torture our "enemies". But I do think that if dems don't provide meaningful healthcare reform, they'll end up losing the majority, sooner rather than later.

[mmonk]

5. Yep, unfortunately. And I think it will be primarily due that

their lives will not noticeably change enough.

[Bandit]

22. It really doesn't take all that many people to just stay home to change the outcome.

I for one will not vote if the two things mentioned are not even attempted..

[Fumesucker]

29. I agree with that..

There will be no quicker way to make me disgusted enough to just stay home than for the politicians to play business as usual.

[Demeter]

2. You Got That Right

In fact, things are hanging by a thread already. And you forgot to add the economic piracy that proceeds with Obama's acquiescence, if he's not totally aware of what's going on, or complicity, if he is.

[AndyA]

6. You may be right.

Exposing the horrors of the Republican-endorsed Bush years would certainly cast a shadow of shame and corruption upon the party. They did, after all, rubber stamp everything Bush wanted.

Requiring Americans to purchase private medical insurance will only help the private insurance companies, and I agree it will show the Dems to be in bad with private insurance corporations, putting their demands ahead of those of the American people.

Failure to address both swings open the door to Democratic losses in the future.

Going after Bushco will only upset the die hard Republicans, and they aren't likely to vote for Democrats anyway. Failure to go after Bushco makes a lot of the current supporters feel like there is little difference between the two parties.

[fasttense]

7. The results of this health-care bill will be a litmus test for the Obama administration and the

Democratic majority. It will reveal their true intentions.

If they pass a bill that allows for a very cheap buy-in to a public (Medicare) health-care plan then it shows that the Democratic majority from Obama on down is working for the people. BUT, if they pass a watered down bill putting minor restrictions on insurance companies like limits on pre-existing conditions, gives a larger tax deduction for health-care costs, and merely fines people who do not get health insurance then you know the Democratic majority is working for the corporate elite.

The results of this will determine who I will support in 2010.

[KharmaTrain]

8. No Bucks...No Buck Rogers...

The biggest issue that will hurt Democrats is the economy. Nothing more or less. If they fail, they'll lose seats in 2010 and beyond. It's what most people hired President Obama to do. Other issues are important, but on Election Day the first thing many voters check is their wallet...if things are better than the last election, the incumbent party benefits, if not then get tossed out. The only other element is some massive scandal (Foley) or other distraction.

Solving the health care mess will be a big advantage if President Obama can do it. While many people want this to happen, at this point I don't think a lot of people are focused on it or expect anything to pass. It's gonna be a battle of the summer and it could become a big issue if President Obama doesn't bring about any type of reform. Lower people's premiums or give them insurance or medical coverage and the Democrats could benefit for many years to come. Fail and it gives the GOOP an issue to actually run on.

I'm a strong supporter of single payer, but not inclusive of a private option. Working with my late father and his medical practice, I saw how easy a doctor or hospital could game the system like Medicare and Medicaid. A private option, like a supplemental policy, would give the consumer an option and keep the system more honest. I think the debate will eventually land somewher in the middle...but the bottom line is that ALL American should be able to get health care, period.

About the war crimes of the past regime...I have less hope about how this bears on the political system. We're suffering now from "booooosh" fatigue...many want to forget the last 8 years and it's our job to never forget and continue to demand accountability, but we're not the "common voter". While my neighbors may think booooosh was a crook, that won't be issue #1 or even in the Top 5 when they go to vote in 2 years...and by 2012, as I saw with Watergate, it'll be outta sight by then.

Cheers...

[pnutbutr]

9. The first is a minor issue for me, the second is as I understand incorrect

We have a failing economy and are just starting to see deflation. With job losses, bankruptcy, business closings and the banks hoarding money it's likely to cause a deflationary spiral. This is way more important right now than making sure Bush and Cheney get what's coming to them. Lack of action on the economy is what will kill the democrat majority. Punishing Bush won't fix anything or make anyone feel better except a few loonies who have made this their misguided priority right now.

As for health insurance. Clinton's plan was to require coverage or face penalty. Obama never supported penalties unless he has changed on that. I liked his campaign plan but it will never see the light of day cause there is no way to pay for it right now. If explained properly why this cannot be accomplished at the moment and we are given an approximate timeline of some small changes moving toward a final solution it may help preserve the democratic majority.

Oh and Democrats have to stop pushing stupid bills like the ED ad one from Jim Moran and other feel good fluff that does nothing but piss people off. Focus people. Help get us out of the economic mess before you push meaningless bullshit bills.

[mmonk]

10. Sorry to hear freedom is minor to you. Another way of looking

at it is through calculated political approaches and that many of the arguments that what they did wasn't really all that bad would be revealed to be and would be hard to spin thus making the Republican party more unpopular. I believe the private insurance model would be a national monopoly and will be paid for in some fashion under the tax code.

[pnutbutr]

15. It's not about freedom

It's about retribution and is focused on individuals and not the party.

I'm not a fan of monopolies in any form. A public health system with optional supplemental private seems to be the way to go.

[mmonk]

16. We disagree with no point of congruence but that is ok.

[mmonk]

23. I am curious however.

Do you believe that elected politicians are above the rule of law and those that work under them and that works with the concept of freedom? Do you think your constitutional rights are subject to be discontinued by the executive branch of government or any branch of government and that works with the concept of freedom? I was wondering since you said addressing it is retribution. I probably can never understand that concept.

[pnutbutr]

24. retribution

would be the push for prosecution. Addressing the constitutional violations and what allowed them to happen can be done by congress and the current president. Our government is setup to be able to fix itself when a bad administration and representatives have corrupted it. We need to push to close the holes that were opened and which allowed the violations to take place. Our government can do it and wants to do it. That's what I believe we need to push for in this area instead of dwelling on prosecution.

[mmonk]

25. That could have been done through impeachment

and wouldn't require all the additional steps. I personally think we have permanently lost many of our rights unless we stand up now. Is the domestic spying still going on? Rendition to countries that torture without trial? Journalists arrested on terrorism charges? Free speech "zones"? Crimes hidden through the state secrets privilege without legal recourse for victims of illegal activity?

[pnutbutr]

26. all that

can be fixed by congress but as you said we need to stand up, we need to push for those changes.

[mmonk]

27. We have been. They gave us instead things such as the MCA

and telecommunications industry immunity, the Patriot Act, etc. while taking impeachment off the table.

[Orsino]

11. All that lobbyist money now being hurled their way...

...will inevitably corrupt. Corrupt further, I mean. Eventually, even the Republicans may not be able to compete, given corporate media's bias.

There will be no permanent Democratic majority.

[mmonk]

12. Yes. In fact, it already has corrupted many.

I wish there were a way lobbyists could be restrained in the halls of Congress.

[snowdays]

20. It is the big issue (lobbiests) that Pres. Obama ran on but I see

little change thus far.

[snowdays]

21. It is the big issue (lobbiests) that Pres. Obama ran on but I see

little change thus far.

[mdmc]

13. Agree with the first - the second I have a different take -

The private system will never be able to compete with single payer. Eventually we will get there. It is just a matter of time - how long can the corporations keep our health hostage?
I guess they can do so until Obama's second term. Then it is legacy time and I bet Obama goes for the glory.

I just hope we haven't lost Afghanistan already...

[mmonk]

14. I guess a problem could arise should Dems lose numbers in Congress

before then.

[mdmc]

32. I really don't see that happenin, my friend

I suspect Obama will keep slippin in the polls, and that the economy will continue to tank. The thing is, unless the R.Paul wing of the GOP takes over, the other side ain't got nothin!
I mean who could beat Obama? Really? Who?

peace and low stress and enjoy the weekend..

[ThomWV]

17. I think your first issue is the greater and the second as a temporary mistake

The failure to pursue obvious wrongdoing won't do much to decrease the size of the Democratic majority but it will certainly sever ly weaken the country. Laws that go unenforced are no laws at all and a nation without law is no nation at all, or certainly can not remain one for long.

On your second point its a different thing. Mistakes in a program can be fixed and in time are or the programs are killed or any number of other responsible actions can and will take place to change the program. So as a cause to abandon a popular President and Party its weak.

Your final sentence interested me a great deal - it is a 3rd point all in itself; its surprising that the respondents only noted two points. I agree that those who returned to the booth or came for the first time won't be back if they are disappointed - particularly those who 'returned' although they already have a history of sporadic voting, but maybe not the first-time voters who came to the polls last November. At either rate neither of those groups matter much in the sense that they are not made up of individuals who will be convinced to chose one Party or Candidate over the other if they can't be convinced to even show up at the polls. With the recent stigma attached to the Republican brand and abandonment of the Grand Old Party that has gone hand in hand with it we move into the position the Republicans recently held - which is to say that Democrats will prosper if voter turnout can be suppressed, which of course is always the case for the majority party. Ain't that one hell of a note?

[mmonk]

28. Yeah, I think many new voters came out in droves because they

saw or sensed something different would occur (a new paradigm). If that difference doesn't occur as they expected, they may go away. I think if the party continues to try and appeal to that which I think this time, people rejected, they will have missed an historic opportunity.

[Romulox]

18. Blank check for Wall Street and War? nt

[patrice]

19. Red Stater here: Both of those issues reach well across party lines.

The first issue is related to EVERYONE'S understanding of how/why they supported this Damned War in Iraq. People want someone to hold responsible.

And Health Insurance is linked to Wall Street Corruption.

[WI_DEM]

30. Well, when the dems held the majority in house for 40 years (54-94)

it was finally gerrymandered away with changing congressional districts more than anything. I don't think we will ever see one party dominance of congress that we saw prior to 1994 again--for as long as they did.

[JackRiddler]

31. You can add: Performing wait-service for the bankers...

However, the Republicans are as yet monolithic in their equal fealty to the principle that private banking institutions must be assisted in their mission of stealing everything on the planet ten times over, so that humanity owes them another nine planets, with payment to be guaranteed by the government. So they're not exploiting this issue.

But if the Republicans work out some of their current contradictions and decide to take risks, watch out. Followers of Huckabee and Ron Paul are repulsive in many ways, but they know damn well that the big banks are the enemy of all mankind (even if they have a very skewed vision of how the system actually works, or its history), and they have the potential to tap into that widespread sentiment at a time when Obama and Geithner and the Goldman Sachs mob running Treasury and the Fed are assisting in the N-Trillion dollar plunder.

Populism can still bring a Republican comeback.