Good or bad if Democrats lose House and Senate in November??

[kentuck]

A serious question?

To many folks, it seems like the Republicans have been running the Senate anyway, with all the obstruction and the constant attacks upon the President.

If the Democrats do lose, what have they lost?

They have lost the worst economy since the Great Depression and it does not appear that it is going to boom anytime soon. The President will still have his veto.

If the Repubs show their incompetence in the next two years, 2012 will be a much better year for the Democrats.

We all understand that a bird in the hand is worth two in the Bush. If the economy has not improved or has worsened by 2012, the voters will not look gently upon the Republicans.

We have all heard the pollsters predictions. Democrats are going to get slaughtered. From my perspective, that will not be as bad as people say, even if the Republicans take both Houses. In fact, it may be a blessing in disguise.

Go ahead. Attack.

[liberal N proud]

1. How can it be good?

I saw something on Tweety's round-table question saying it would help Obama win a second term.

But really can the country withstand having the Republicans back in power? The last round dealt the country a near fatal blow from which we are not recovering from. Put them back in control and it could very well be the end.

The end of many social programs, but the war department will do well.

[kentuck]

6. What do you think the Repubs will pass over Obama's veto??

Over the next two years. I doubt the economy will improve that much, even if they extend the Bush taxcuts.

If there was justice, the Republicans would be made to clean up their own mess. But we know the only remedies they have are the same ones they had under George W Bush. They do not work.

They will make Obama a stronger President and the Democrats would be in a better position to take back the House and Senate in 2012. Just my opinion.

[geek tragedy]

36. They can defund any federal policy they don't like.

They can defund the EPA, defund health care regulatory bodies, defund the UN ambassador office, defund the civil rights division of the DOJ.

[breadandwine]

37. Kentuck, do you really want us all to play devil's advocate here? OK, "Only Nixon could go to China"

If you don't mind 2 years of ALL IMPEACHMENT ALL THE TIME,

here's something to consider.

They used to say, "Only Nixon could go to China."

In other words, being the right wing standard bearer, he could get away with going to China when nobody else could.

By this standard, only Obama could end internet freedom, privatize Social Security, allow BP to ruin the Gulf of Mexico, continue building the Pentagon's "FEMA" camps, let the recession turn into a depression by cutting government spending the way Herbert Hoover did after the stock market crash of 1929, and let America go FASCIST right before our very eyes.

We are already seeing massive evidence of runaway global warming. Drought and crop failure in Russia, drought followed by devastating floods in Africa, heat in Asian waters destroying coral, famine, rising global food prices, the list just goes on and on. If Democrats retain control of Capitol Hill there is a chance that some things can still be done about all this. But who needs a planet? Planets are for squares! Let's all go live on Venus! On Venus there is a gigantic greenhouse effect and surface temperatures are normally hot enough to melt lead. Once you've lived on Venus for a while IT WILL TEACH YOU A LESSON about greenhouse effects and make you finally REGRET greenhouse effects. So we need MORE greenhouse effects, not less!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Vote Republican! LET 'em take over!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When germs take over one's tonsils, it's time to cut them out. If Obama has gone over to the other side, it's time to cut our losses and have some REAL gridlock in Washington.

When the impeachment hearings start, there will even be some Democrats who, frustrated that Obama went over to the other side, will kind of accidentally-on-purpose let Obama be impeached so that they can be rid of him and the wreckage he caused on Capitol Hill by letting the GOP take over. Clinton let the GOP take over in '94 and Obama let the GOP take over in 2010 so the quicker the GOP takes over the quicker we can get rid of Obama and the quicker we can take back Capitol Hill. Circular firing squads are GOOD for you!

GOP takeover is good for you!

In fact, DOOM is good for you. It'll teach you a lesson for wanting doom!

Ever seen a small child playing with a firecracker? LET him! After he's blown off his hand and somebody else's eye it'll TEACH HIM A LESSON!

Just like the last 8 years under Bush was good for you!

WHAT COULD POSSIBLY BE WRONG WITH THAT??????????????

So LET the Republicans win! Al Gore in 2000 DESERVED to have the election stolen from him ---- for being boring! That sumbitch Gore shoulda oughta KNOWN better than ta be boring! NEXT time Democrats will KNOW better and be less boring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah sure.........................

[kentuck]

38. All that you say may happen...

let's agree that we would all like to see the Democrats win the next election. But, most of the polls show them in trouble. We may lose the House and the Senate? Maybe not?

If not, the Repubs will only intensify their attacks and their obstructionism, if the Democrats don't do something about it. They act as if they have no responsibility to do anything in this time of crisis.

The economy is not going to recover, no matter who is in power, in the next two years, in my opinion. This will only give people incentive to put the Repubs back in power in 2012. I would say it would be better to put them in for a couple of years now than in 2012. That is just my opinion. We cannot survive another 4 or 8 years of Republicans.

[Xipe Totec]

2. All politics are local

How does your congresscritter represent you?

Vote accordingly.

[davidinalameda]

3. I think it just might be a good thing

maybe voters will realize that the Democrats have been trying to do a decent job with the economy and it will help whomever we put up in 2012 for president

I do not believe that Obama will be the Democratic nominee in 2012-at least I hope not

[Kievan Rus]

4. Bad -- for as bad as the DINOs are, the Teapublicans are 50 times worse

[DJ13]

5. Bad for the people

....good for the politicians who have continued to move right regardless of what the people want.

[NC_Nurse]

7. Who knows? I don't look forward to endless pointless investigations of Obama, tho.

I'd hate to see a repeat of all those Clinton witch hunts. Otherwise, I'm not sure what difference it will make. The current bunch of loser Blue Dogs we have make it impossible to pass anything truly progressive anyway.

Good point, kentuck.

[kentuck]

8. It would serve two purposes.

It would show the Democrats that the people want them to clean up their act.

But, more importantly, it would show the people that the Republicans have nothing to offer. If they go too radical, Obama has his veto pen. It's not as bad as some folks might think, in my opinion.

It is going to take a while to fix this economy. I would say at least two more years.

[EstimatedProphet]

11. No it wouldn't! It would show everyone that the country wants Republicans in charge!

If you think anyone would draw a conclusion any different than that from the Repubs taking the House and Senate, you're crazy!

[geek tragedy]

35. They would defund the EPA's efforts to regulate greenhouse gases

as well as the good parts of the recently passed healthcare reform bill--such as the subsidies and federal regulatory bodies.

In other words, a complete and utter disaster for the country and the world.

And it's almost certain to happen.

[tritsofme]

9. I fear the constant threat of government shutdown.

Boehner would use every appropriations bill to creatively look for ways to undermine and defund the PPACA, forcing an Obama veto.

It could get pretty hairy.

[kentuck]

10. No doubt.

Do you think it would help or hurt the Repubs in 2012?

[tritsofme]

16. It all depends on who wins the message war.

Clinton got the upper hand against Gingrich in the 1995 government shutdown,
but congressional Democrats are generally held to have won the battle
in the government shutdown politics of the 80s.

It takes a lot of political will to continually veto several hundred billion dollar appropriation bills over what might be a tiny provision undermining the PPACA. I hope he would hold firm.

[rusty fender]

39. A Repub takeover will hurt us--

all of us. Nothing good can come of the Repubs in charge. At least with the Dems we get a few crumbs...aww...to hell with it all...:hide:

[old mark]

12. Don't know how it could possibly be good - I don't want to see any republicans

elected for any office anywhere ever again, but I admit that may be too lofty a goal...

mark

[Steely_Dan]

13. What Kind...

of question is this...I don't understand. How could it be "good."

-P

[Juche]

14. Long term, it may be good

It may be a repeat of what happened from 2001-2006 when the public realized how radical and inept the GOP was. This led to the landslides of 06 and 08 for the dems.

So if the GOP does gain seats and ends up being grossly incompetent and dangerously radical, it could backfire and make their party even more of a minority.

However, who knows. I don't think it'd be good if the GOP gained control of either house of congress because they'll gain all chairmanships if that happens.

[SargeUNN]

15. you seem to be assuming the Republicans

won't be trying to impeach Obama which you better filter in because that is exactly what they plan to do no matter who has to suffer for it.

[kentuck]

19. The Democrats will have to defend him...

and obstruct if they try that crap. Democrats cannot surrender.

[AldebTX]

17. Bad

This group of repugs are nothing like the repugs of the 90s. They make them almost look good.

[denimgirly]

18. The Underlying Problem will STILL Remain -- Corruption runs Deep in Both Houses

Regardless of who is in power, it is clear that both parties are working mostly for special interests and not for the people. Yes republicans are 100% wholly owned but seeing as democrats havent really accomplished much simply because they have been playing nice with corporations instead of doing what they campaigned on doesnt look good for democrats. So seeing repubs get back into power wont change much except that at least we have a president who has the veto power...but sadly we've seen that he will buckle when repubs say boo. My hope is that if democrats lose in November they will FINALLY start genuinely listening to its people and make progressive moves instead of just talking about it and looking for excuses not to do it.

The first party that actually listens to its voters (and that does not include the 1% richest, nor the corporations) who are clearly progressive will hold both houses for many decades. But it seems personal greed is the most important...this is why democrats are in trouble...AGAIN!

[elocs]

20. Nothing but bad. Huge Democratic loses will move the party to the right.

For those not in touch with reality, wait and see what happens if there is a big Democratic loss in November.

If the economy does not improve by the 2012 election, no matter who is in power, Obama will get the blame and he will be toast. Then we can look forward to Republicans again controlling things for years. Choices have consequence and if you choose not to help Democrats to be elected you will be aiding the Republican cause.

[kentuck]

23. At this moment, it looks like they may lose....

with or without my blessing. I don't think it would be as much of a negative as some folks seem to think. What happens if the Republicans accomplish nothing in the next 2 years??

[elocs]

25. A lose by the party in power is historically usual. Loss of either or both houses would be worse.

I still think Obama will get the blame no matter what. Most Americans would believe that the buck stops with him. Let's be real, if the economy greatly improved he would certainly be taking the credit. That sword cuts both ways.

[TomCADem]

21. I Understand The Perspective That Inaction = Empowerment, But I Disagree

I recall your prior post equating President Obama with Jimmy Carter. I have heard similar posts advocating that liberals and progressives should stay home in this election to teach the Democrats a lesson. Well, I really don't recall many movements that were successful through lack of participation in the political process.

Also, I don't see Republicans and the right wing taking a similar approach even though Republicans have only been able to stop any activity. Why do we not see a similar demand amoung the right to sit on their hands as a means of empowerment?

[kentuck]

24. Well, let's get every Democrat we can to the polls this November.

and see if that will make the Party or the country stronger by 2012. I have my doubts.

[emulatorloo]

29. Most people won't start paying attention until October

Or right after labor day at the earliest.

[jobycom]

22. Oh, it will be good to have the Republicans decide what bills we get to vote on.

It will be helpful to the Democratic cause to have a president who already compromises too much to have to make a compromise every time he signs a bill. It will be good when this Congress passes a budget like Gingrich's Rollback Budget and instead of having Clinton shut down the government to defeat it, we have a compromise bill that only rolls the our nation back to pre-Civil Rights days instead of pre-FDR days.

Can't wait. It will at the very least wake DU the fuck up and unite us again.

[kentuck]

27. Do you think we have time to turn it around by November?

We are only about 8 weeks away. Is there time?

I must say, I don't think it helps to be too fearful. Fear is usually a bad reason to vote for anyone.

[bigwillq]

26. Bad

But would be a wakeup call for the DEMS who get to keep their jobs, and for the current administration, which may turn out to be a good thing.

[Skink]

28. Just a few tea partiers would be enough for us to make gains later in Obamas presidency.

[Imajika]

30. It would be very bad...

People still view the President as the one in charge. If the economy sucks in 2011 and 2012, the President is still going to get the blame - and Republicans will do everything they can during that time to make sure Obama can't get anything done to help create jobs, lift the economy, etc. A Republican congress would mean there will be zero chance of getting things signed into law such as money for the states to avoid laying off hundreds of thousands of teachers, firefighters, etc.

"If the economy has not improved or has worsened by 2012, the voters will not look gently upon the Republicans."

No, see, the public will still mostly blame the President.

There is some good in almost anything, but it would be very bad if the Republicans won the House and/or Senate. Just think of the endless, silly investigations that would commence immediately.

[totodeinhere]

31. It would be very bad. We could kiss any chance of any more unemployment extensions goodbye.

We could kiss the repeal of DADT goodbye, and there would be no chance that DOMA could be repealed. And card check would be a distant memory. I'm not saying that these things will happen if the Dems remain in charge, but we know they sure as hell won't happen if the GOP returns to power.

[quaker bill]

32. A good answer

Would be modest gains for the repugs, particularly if the t-party scores one or two wins. A couple of wins will just encourage them and bring more looneys out of the woodwork into the open. It will facilitate open warfare among the repugs for the 2012 Presidential Nom.

Of course the best answer would be an unexpected defeat for the repugs, 63 to 64 reliable votes in the Senate, a new round of stimulus and stonger policy changes. This would also lead to open warfare among them in 2012.

[Arkana]

33. Absolutely bad.

If we lose Congress, say goodbye to any thought of actual governing for two years. It will be an orgy of subpoenas and open ended investigations into everything Obama does, probably including whether he wears boxers or briefs and what he likes in his coffee.

I don't care how odious you think the Senate and House are--you get your ass to the polls, hold your nose, and you vote for the Democrats, because the GOP has gone FUCKING CRAZY.

[kentuck]

34. I don't like to vote out of fear...

but I like your urgency.

[AnArmyVeteran]

40. I wondered if the democrats were deliberately choking to allow republicans to 'win'.

If democrats lose one or more houses in congress they can blame all the country's woes on the republicans in 2012. If democrats remain in power after November all the blame will be on them. Since democrats apparently have no intention of passing any meaningful legislation they might as well lose and then blame the republicans in two years.

Something smells about what democrats are doing. With all the ammunition they have been given they should be soaring in the polls and crushing the republicans. But they decided to never confront republicans. They dont confront republicans in congress to try to pass meaningful legislation and they aren't attacking republicans horrendous records.

I believe democrats have decided to intentionally lose this November. Like the OP said it won't make much difference anyway since 41 republican senators control our country without a peep from the inept Reid or any real actions from the president.

[kentuck]

41. Bingo!

However, there are a few Congressmen that do not want to lose their seats. They will fight to keep them. However, I do not expect them to get much assistance from the Democratic Leadership or from the White House for just the very reasons you stated. Just my opinion.

[GSLevel9]

42. both good AND bad.

right now... the incumbents of the party in power are in the most trouble... the public sees them by and large as failures. If the Pubs win the House and or Senate in '10 and the economy still SUCKS in '12 it will be EASIER for Obama to be reelected... because the "not my fault" excuse might work. The danger is... if the economy improves, and it probably will... the Pubs will take credit.

[kentuck]

46. ".. if the economy improves, and it probably will... "

"... the Pubs will take credit."

So you are assuming the economy will improve enough for someone to take credit in the next 2 years?

Usually the President gets credit or blame for the economy. However, I would not expect any dramatic improvement in the next two years. The Repubs really, really screwed it up this time.

[thelordofhell]

43. If history is any indicator, we will lose some seats

But we will not lose the majorities.

[DFW]

44. The Senate? Ponder this, and then you tell me:

If another Seat on the Supreme Court opens up and Obama can't get his nominee confirmed, is that good or bad?

(Hint: it's not good)

[varelse]

45. Bad

Bipartisanship is a fantasy that was never embraced by the "other side". We will be faced with unrefutable evidence of this, if we lost the house and senate this fall.

[kentuck]

47. True.

The only weapon the President will have is the veto.