The OAO 2006 US Elections Thread

[Guest Felonies!]

Was that Batista talking about porn?

 

That commercial wasn't racist, it was just poorly done. CNN was wrong on this one.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Can we stay on topic, please.

 

We are

 

She thinks if the thread is not solely about her, it is off topic.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Mike doesn't even post here anymore, so why is he mentioned? Make fun of Ann Coulter or something instead. She doesn't post here either, but at least she's in the news once in a while.

[Red Baron 0]

Wow, I'm surprised that most if not all of you are jumping for joy about Rumsfeld leaving.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Who says I am not? But really how much is there to celebrate when the damage has long been done?

[CanadianChris 0]

Wow, I'm surprised that most if not all of you are jumping for joy about Rumsfeld leaving.

Rumsfeld leaving won't change anything that's going on in Iraq, will it?

[snuffbox 0]

Yes, it definitly will.

[Guest Princess Leena]

Mike doesn't even post here anymore, so why is he mentioned?

Concurred.

 

Don't post about him here where he doesn't have the chance to defend himself.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Wow, I'm surprised that most if not all of you are jumping for joy about Rumsfeld leaving.

Rumsfeld leaving won't change anything that's going on in Iraq, will it?

 

That is mainly true, but at least there will be a real chance for a change in direction, in regards to US policy in Iraq. So, hopefully things can get better, if only a little bit for now.

[snuffbox 0]

Considering its a trade of a Bush 41 guy for a delusional neocon hawk, I think it goes without saying that some change is immenent. How big and how much remains to be seen.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

Well Rumsfeld was in charge of some of the practicalities of military deployments strategy, though he's not a general or anything. I'd imagine if the new guy thinks differently than Donnie, things may be different. I know a lot of Generals and the like were really unhappy with Donnie, so there's a good change new guy will be open to taking advice from generals and such.

[NoCalMike 0]

I know the Republican's company line is "We lost because we weren't being conservative enough" or at least the pundits are saying it, but where is the evidence.....exit polling showed that Iraq, Corruption, and the Economy were the three biggest reasons people were voting Democrat, two of the three issues, Republicans thought they were going to win on...lol.

 

This election was a national referedum on the War in Iraq and the lack of checks & balances over the past six years, and I wish pundits would stop trying to pretend it wasn't.

[snuffbox 0]

I'll repeat here what I said at another messageboard:

 

-When will the Democrats-dont-have-ideas/plans/platform thing stop? It seems to be the last shred of bullshit that the GOP toadies have to grasp onto (dignity & sense seem to be un-graspable for some). They ran on 'cleaning up corruption, raising the minmum wage, stronger national security/911 commission, Iraq changes, and middle class tax cuts' and have already said, rather bluntly, what they plan to do first. How is it dificult to admit that Americans might have voted for these things just as much as against the failed Republican policies? -

 

If the GOP doesnt realize this obvious facet of this election, they wont do any better in '08.

 

Social conservatism, ultra-liberal spending, and foreign-policy from the special-ed room does not make for a good/successful Party.

[SuperJerk 0]

The infamous Harold Ford ad.

 

 

Apparently he went to a Super Bowl party hosted by Playboy and met a woman who only breathes helium.

 

Well did he fuck her? If not, What's the big deal about it?

 

That ad help ruin him because Ford ran as a social conservative, then people found out he was a slut. His official explanation for attending the the Playboy Super Bowl Party was "I like football and I like women." Even if he could get around the charge that he was a skirt-chaser, he couldn't get around the charge that he was a social hypocrite. The RSCC ran that ad while Corker's campaign simultaneously rans ads where his daughters talked about what a great dad he was. Ford was screwed. The ad would've been effective even if Ford himself was white.

[EricMM 0]

I wasn't making fun of him, I was quoting him.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

I know the Republican's company line is "We lost because we weren't being conservative enough" or at least the pundits are saying it, but where is the evidence.....

 

It is also put to lie by the fact that Ahnold was extremely successful running as pro-environment, socially liberal, & fiscally conservative.

[Guest Felonies!]

There's nothing conservative about wasting lives and money in Iraq, so maybe that's where they were going with it?

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

As the canvassing continues in Virginia, Sen. George Allen, R-Virginia, is sequestered in his home, "shell shocked," and going through "a nightmare," during this period of limbo, a senior Allen staffer tells CNN.

 

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Young Americans voted in the largest numbers in at least 20 years in congressional elections, energized by the Iraq war and giving a boost to Democrats, pollsters said on Wednesday.

 

About 24 percent of Americans under the age of 30, or at least 10 million young voters, cast ballots in Tuesday's elections that saw Democrats make big gains in Congress. That was up 4 percentage points from the last mid-term elections in 2002.

 

"This looks like the highest in 20 years," said Mark Lopez, research director of the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement, which compiled the data based on exit polls. "Unfortunately, we can't say if it's a record because don't have good comparable data before 1986."

 

Rock the Vote, a youth-and-civics group, said young voters favored Democrats by a 22-point margin, nearly three times the margin Democrats earned among other age groups and dealing a potentially decisive blow to Republicans in tight races.

[NoCalMike 0]

I know the Republican's company line is "We lost because we weren't being conservative enough" or at least the pundits are saying it, but where is the evidence.....

 

It is also put to lie by the fact that Ahnold was extremely successful running as pro-environment, socially liberal, & fiscally conservative.

 

 

Exactly, when Arnold forced the special election wanting to pass the plans for the re-districting, Pension reduction, and other conservative/big business-friendly measures, every single one of them was defeated soundly, so what did he do? He ran back to the middle and started pretending to act like he did during the recall campaign, basically a fiscally conservative-democrat.

[SuperJerk 0]

Check out some serious silliness from Time magazine...

 

Allen Concedes in Virginia: How He Blew It

In an election where Republicans shunned Bush's help, the Virginia Senator actually could have used more of it

By ANA MARIE COX

The pundits have determined that Democrats owe their victories to Bush's unpopularity, and at least once in the next week you will hear Bush supporters remind you that "Bush's name wasn't on the ballot." Virginia, where Senator George Allen has finally conceded the loss of his seat to Jim Webb, may be the one state where they wish that it was.

 

It's true, the Webb campaign's single strategy appeared to be to drill Allen's voting record—96% of them cast in the service of Bush's agenda—into Virginians' heads. Also, Webb, like every Democrat this cycle and some Republicans, hammered on the Administration's mistakes in Iraq. But exit polls in Virginia show that Bush has, for him, an unusually high approval rating of 45% in the state. Furthermore, while Iraq was not far from the voters' minds, they told pollsters the economy and terrorism were more important, with 45% and 44%, respectively, saying they were "extremely important." These are precisely the issues that President himself believed would turn the elections around; as he told reporters yesterday, "I thought when it was all said and done, the American people would understand the importance of taxes and the importance of security." Just 41% of Virginians in the exit poll said that the war in Iraq was extremely important, compared to 46% who said "values issues" were. These are the kind of numbers that Karl Rove was trying to conjure for every GOP candidate, and, by all conventional wisdom, they should have worked in Allen's favor—Virginia passed an anti-gay marriage amendment, after all.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...00.html?cnn=yes

 

Given that the author acknowledges that Bush's appoproval rating was only 45% in Viriginia, and that having voters worried about Iraq isn't a good thing for Republicans, I think the article's subtitle might actually be a poor attempt at sarcasm.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Well, the analyst there in "Wonkette," a crappy gossip blogger.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Wait just a goddam minute...

 

Right now Nancy Pelosi is 3rd in line for the presidency...

 

If my calculations are right, Ted Kennedy is now 4th...

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Check that, Robert Byrd.

[SuperJerk 0]

Ann Coulter reacts in her typical intellectually honest way...

 

HISTORIC VICTORY FOR DIEBOLD!

by Ann Coulter

November 8, 2006

 

History was made this week! For the first time in four election cycles, Democrats are not attacking the Diebold Corp. the day after the election, accusing it of rigging its voting machines. I guess Diebold has finally been vindicated.

 

So the left won the House and also Nicaragua. They've had a good week. At least they don't have their finger on the atom bomb yet.

 

Democrats support surrender in Iraq, higher taxes and the impeachment of President Bush. They just won an election by pretending to be against all three.

 

Jon Tester, Bob Casey Jr., Heath Shuler, possibly Jim Webb — I've never seen so much raw testosterone in my life. The smell of sweaty jockstraps from the "new Democrats" is overwhelming.

 

Having predicted this paltry Democrat win, my next prediction is how long it will take all these new "gun totin' Democrats" to be fitted for leotards.

 

Now that they've won their elections and don't have to deal with the hicks anymore, Tester can cut lose the infernal buzz cut, Casey can start taking "Emily's List" money, and Webb can go back to writing more incestuously homoerotic fiction ... and just in time for Christmas!

 

But according to the media, this week's election results are a mandate for pulling out of Iraq (except in Connecticut where pro-war Joe Lieberman walloped anti-war "Ned the Red" Lamont).

 

In fact, if the Democrats' pathetic gains in a sixth-year election are a statement about the war in Iraq, Americans must love the war! As Roll Call put it back when Clinton was president: "Simply put, the party controlling the White House nearly always loses House seats in midterm elections" — especially in the sixth year.

 

In Franklin D. Roosevelt's sixth year in 1938, Democrats lost 71 seats in the House and six in the Senate.

 

In Dwight Eisenhower's sixth year in 1958, Republicans lost 47 House seats, 13 in the Senate.

 

In John F. Kennedy/Lyndon Johnson's sixth year, Democrats lost 47 seats in the House and three in the Senate.

 

In Richard Nixon/Gerald Ford's sixth year in office in 1974, Republicans lost 43 House seats and three Senate seats.

 

Even America's greatest president, Ronald Reagan, lost five House seats and eight Senate seats in his sixth year in office.

 

But in the middle of what the media tell us is a massively unpopular war, the Democrats picked up about 30 House seats and five to six Senate seats in a sixth-year election, with lots of seats still too close to call. Only for half-brights with absolutely no concept of yesterday is this a "tsunami" — as MSNBC calls it — rather than the death throes of a dying party.

 

During eight years of Clinton — the man Democrats tell us was the greatest campaigner ever, a political genius, a heartthrob, Elvis! — Republicans picked up a total of 49 House seats and nine Senate seats in two midterm elections. Also, when Clinton won the presidency in 1992, his party actually lost 10 seats in the House — only the second time in the 20th century that a party won the White House but lost seats in the House.

 

Meanwhile, the Democrats' epic victory this week, about which songs will be sung for generations, means that in two midterm elections Democrats were only able to pick up about 30 seats in the House and four seats in the Senate — and that's assuming they pick up every seat that is currently too close to call. (The Democrats' total gain is less than this week's gain because Bush won six House and two Senate seats in the first midterm election.)

 

So however you cut it, this midterm proves that the Iraq war is at least more popular than Bill Clinton was.

 

In a choice between Republicans' "Stay until we win" Iraq policy or the Democrats' "Stay, leave ... stay for a while then leave ... redeploy and then come back ... leave and stay ... cut and run ... win, lose or draw policy," I guess Americans prefer the Republican policy.

 

The Democrats say we need a "new direction" in Iraq. Yeah, it's called "reverse." Democrats keep talking about a new military strategy in Iraq. How exactly is cut-and-run a new strategy? The French have been doing it for years. The Democrats are calling their new plan for Iraq "Operation Somalia."

 

The Democrats certainly have their work cut out for them. They have only two years to release as many terrorists as possible and lock up as many Republicans as they can. Republicans better get that body armor for the troops the Democrats are always carping about — and fast. The troops are going to need it for their backs.

 

http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/printe...cgi?article=156

 

Notice she had to COMBINE the 1994 and 1998 election gains for Republicans to find a way to make Clinton look bad, because the Democrats actually GAINED seats in Clinton's 6th year. She RIGGED THE NUMBERS so she could cite an example that actually disproves her entire point!

 

HOW FUCKING DISHONEST CAN ONE PERSON BE?????

 

Dumb bitch.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

So however you cut it, this midterm proves that the Iraq war is at least more popular than Bill Clinton was.

 

I don't follow her logic...

 

That goes up there with the 96% tax cut.

 

Also, her writing is just really bad. The France joke was just too easy.

 

I will give her props for the Ortega reference, though.

[SuperJerk 0]

Has no conservative pundit ever passed a math class?

 

This is as bad as when Hannity said Reagan's budgets would have made the debt 25% less because he proposed 8 budgets that were on average 2.8% less a piece.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

And she had sex with Bill Maher.

 

Spoiled by LIBERAL COCK!

[snuffbox 0]

Didnt Rush Limbaugh once make up some graphs to show how Ronald Reagan didnt really spend all that money?

[Dobbs 3K 0]

I'm pretty sure Bill Clinton spent it all, according to Rush.