sadbrownsfan Posted November 5, 2014 Report Share Posted November 5, 2014 that way you take away a lot of the Democrats firepower in 2016 away by passing reasonable legislation and allowing Obama to veto it. WSS This would be the wise thing to do the next 2 years, focus on the things you can change and make sure they are more to your base(like you mentioned immigration reform, minium wage). But what we will likely see is 50 more votes on Obamacare, worry about that kind of stuff if you can either get a veto proof congress in a few years(highly unlikey) or the presidency in 2016(possible). Maybe but I see it as a pipe dream, my friend. Reason being is an independent might be a Marxist or a Nazi. Let's say the Independent Party is slightly more liberal or slightly more conservative than the Republicans or Democrats. That should result in elections going toward the people that the majority of the voters don't want. Which is why conservatives would like to see Ralph Nader do well or Liberals would like to see Pat Robertson as a third party. Split the vote baby! WSS This plus the fact that as an independent movement gains momentum, one side usually start supporting a similar platform to capitalize on the support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 5, 2014 Report Share Posted November 5, 2014 It's amazing some of these guys won. I can only imagine the other side fucked up or was even worse. Or they were unopposed Yes it's amazing people tired of the lies, arrogance and buffoonery of the Democratic party and voted them as much out of office as possible. That being said in a few years they'll be saying the same of the Republicans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 So if a Dem wins the oval office in 2 years, the Congress will just do NOTHING, like they have since Obama was elected. GREAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 Unless the country has a staggering turnaround the Democrats don't have to worry about it after the utter ineptitude of Barack Obama. The people won't elect hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 I don't know his politics but I may be making a move to northern Ohio. Any of you Ohio residents care to chime in on the guy? He has won the last 2 elections, largely because the guys he ran against were idiots. Kind of like Obama The guy he beat in 2010 (Strickland) ran the state almost into bankruptcy. And the guy Kasich just beat, (Fitzgerald) could have been the worst candidate in my 26 years as a voter. I do know Kasich tried to sneak in a right-to-work bill into law, but then it was voted down by the people of the state. He has done well with limiting the states responsibility to fund local Governments.(that's how he balanced the budget) He has also created more jobs, by creating agencies that he can appoint people to without anyone stopping him. And then get rid of Government employees I would say he has done a decent job, but that's compared to the people that ran the state before him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 Unless the country has a staggering turnaround the Democrats don't have to worry about it after the utter ineptitude of Barack Obama. The people won't elect hillary. Sure they will elect her. Who from the Rep's is going to beat her? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 Almost anyone. I will bet you a six pack right now that the first woman president WILL NOT be Hillary Clinton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 Almost anyone. I will bet you a six pack right now that the first woman president WILL NOT be Hillary Clinton. They put a, "almost anyone" candidate against Obama last time, and he lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 Obama is black. In America no one really had a chance to beat him regardless. We're too consumed with guilt. He was a ringer. Unfortunately the next black guy won't have that luxury and will have to actually be somewhat qualified. I think the first woman will have that luxury but Clinton is too closely associated with Obama and his performance ratings are in the shitter big time. Note: the mid term elections. Also the Clinton name doesn't carry the same weight 16 years later. There's a big fat sect of voters that don't even remember Bill Clinton's presidency. Also she's a hideous old crone and in media driven celebrity worship culture that is an unforgivable flaw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 So if a Dem wins the oval office in 2 years, the Congress will just do NOTHING, like they have since Obama was elected. GREAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They have actually passed hundreds of bills, most of which I probably couldn't give a rats ass about... Still Harry Reid never let them out of the Senate and Obama would have vetoed them anyway. The Party of No? What a crock of shit. And I'm with you the more they leave me alone the happier I am. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 They have actually passed hundreds of bills, most of which I probably couldn't give a rats ass about... Still Harry Reid never let them out of the Senate and Obama would have vetoed them anyway. The Party of No? What a crock of shit. And I'm with you the more they leave me alone the happier I am. WSS Exactly. let them bicker and do nothing. It will only help this country Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 If the Union continues to run a deficit then the Republicans have not done anything. I am more amazed at the amount of otherwise intelligent adults who think that 537 elected people and 9 selected blackguards can run a union (now a nation) of 300,000,000 plus people and adequately and honestly represent these people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 If the Union continues to run a deficit then the Republicans have not done anything. I am more amazed at the amount of otherwise intelligent adults who think that 537 elected people and 9 selected blackguards can run a union (now a nation) of 300,000,000 plus people and adequately and honestly represent these people. Thats what local and state Governments are for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 States and localities are able to decided less and less for themselves, and we (the collective we) continue to elect people who grow the national government. Take the issue of who can get married. In the 1990s, Congress and Bill Clinton decided that marriage was in the province of the states. (that's the gist of DOMA) Recently, SCOTUS gave a non decidsion-decision that forces states to allow marriages that state legislatures and voter initiatves rejected. It is within the power of the House and Senate, if they wished, to put DOMA back up, and tack on that it is not reviewable by any Federal Court, including SCOTUS, and that the states again through legislation or democracy can determine marriage on a state by state basis. Any takers on whether or not that happens? Of course, any statehouse, if they had the brass could nullify the SCOTUS ruling, and according to the 9th and 10th amendments be correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 I think it is bullshit also that some federal judge can go against the majority of people and say tough shit, you will do it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob806 Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 Thats what local and state Governments are for. They do a real crappy job at that as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 I'm not a fan of Kasich's "style", but he, in conjuciton with the state legislature have done a good job of diggin Ohio out of a hole. So I would say that is an instance of good state government. And my local township trustees do what's needed, and don't do much that is unnecessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 I'm betting Reid & Co are rethinking that nuclear option strategy right about.. They'll probably want it rescinded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 The dems railed angrily against the nuclear option in past years. Because THEY wanted it used, only when it gave THEM the advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted November 7, 2014 Report Share Posted November 7, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted November 7, 2014 Report Share Posted November 7, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.