Who gets the blame?

Gaffer

Gaffer

Sanctimonious Prick
Lets say the dems don't pick up any new seats or even lose more seats. Who do they blame? Bush? the GOP in general? the voting machines? The courts? The voters? They always want to blame someone for their own faults.

The dems are making big plans. But they could be counting their chickens before they are hatched.
 
If they lose they should blame themselves. If they blow something this easy, then its time to gut their whole political thinktank and build from the ground up. If they lose, they're freaking idiots.
 
Beefy said:
If they lose they should blame themselves. If they blow something this easy, then its time to gut their whole political thinktank and build from the ground up. If they lose, they're freaking idiots.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The Repugnants are doing everything but gift wrap the House for them.
 
Well, the electronic voting machines in MOST STATES are not secure and our vote is not sacred, until they have paper trails imo.

There is no way that Dems will not pick up a seat as your scenario UNLESS there was cheating imo.

Because we know that you will lose at least one seat, and that is Foley's seat in Florida...and probably Santorums in the senate and probably George Allen's, (God willing :) )

So yes, if we don't pick up a seat in these elections I will be standing on Desh's shoulders screaming that your side cheated with these machines! :)

care
 
Gaffer said:
Lets say the dems don't pick up any new seats or even lose more seats. Who do they blame? Bush? the GOP in general? the voting machines? The courts? The voters? They always want to blame someone for their own faults.

The dems are making big plans. But they could be counting their chickens before they are hatched.
Click to expand...

and what if the chickens they count all hatch? Who will be to blame when the republicans get slaughtered on election day? Bush and Iraq, or will the repugs merely marginalize the importance of their defeat by putting it all on poor Mark Foley?
 
Beefy said:
If they lose they should blame themselves. If they blow something this easy, then its time to gut their whole political thinktank and build from the ground up. If they lose, they're freaking idiots.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly, but they won't blame themselves.
 
Care4all said:
Well, the electronic voting machines in MOST STATES are not secure and our vote is not sacred, until they have paper trails imo.

There is no way that Dems will not pick up a seat as your scenario UNLESS there was cheating imo.

Because we know that you will lose at least one seat, and that is Foley's seat in Florida...and probably Santorums in the senate and probably George Allen's, (God willing :) )

So yes, if we don't pick up a seat in these elections I will be standing on Desh's shoulders screaming that your side cheated with these machines! :)

care
Click to expand...

already lining up to blame something other than their own actions.
 
maineman said:
they won't need to asshole...we're gonna win a shitload of seats..... and if we get the house, we're gonna impeach that chimp
Click to expand...

But you won't be able to remove him. Just waste a lot of time like the (R)etards did to Clinton in the 90's.
 
I think it might be worth it if we can totally tie up his legislative agenda by doing so..... and then the R's have gotta find someone without any connection to bush to run in '08
 
maineman said:
I think it might be worth it if we can totally tie up his legislative agenda by doing so..... and then the R's have gotta find someone without any connection to bush to run in '08
Click to expand...

That's true. It would benefit the entire universe if W, Retard in Chief, were rendered totally impotent. I can dig that.
 
and the dirt on his administration that would be dug up by hearings run by democrats would stain the republican party for years....

and the skunk stench would be impossible to wash off. Imagine finding a republican who has NOT had his picture taken with Dubya to run in '08...

cuz any photo of the two of them together would be on democratic campaign ads 24/7. "Had enough of corrupt incompetence? then don't vote for THIS asshole"
 
I just hope we get 20 years of gridlock. One party in control of the house, senate, and Whitehouse is a freaking disaster. Especially when the Pres is a stupid, arrogant theocrat convinced that his legacy will be akin to that of Lincoln's so long as he keeps waging war and killing a lot of people for no reason.
 
Gaffer said:
already lining up to blame something other than their own actions.
Click to expand...
And you with this post are trying to set it up so that we will not have a valid voice in the security of our vote...

you are trying to do what republicans always do before an election with posts like this....

Ain't gonna work this time...this time there will be war, between the sides... if those electronic voting machines show ANYTHING "funny"....like giving the vote to republicans where we KNOW they should have lost....

the next post will be about HOW POLLING is inaccurate and doesn't work....is that your next post gaffer? that would follow the course for the conservatives on the last election...make it like the Dems are just being foolkish regarding this stuff or just cry babies...I got your story don't I??? :D


care
 
Gaffer said:
Lets say the dems don't pick up any new seats or even lose more seats. Who do they blame? Bush? the GOP in general? the voting machines? The courts? The voters? They always want to blame someone for their own faults.

The dems are making big plans. But they could be counting their chickens before they are hatched.
Click to expand...

If the generic polls still show a 10-15% generic advantage for Dems right up to election day, and republicans still pick up seats, something is seriously fishy.

That would be unprecendeted. In fact, Bush demanded the Ukraine have an election do-over, because the results of the Ukraine election was so wildly off from the polls.

On the other hand, the polls could tighten up, and the GOP could still hold the house. Its definetly possible.
 
maineman said:
I think it might be worth it if we can totally tie up his legislative agenda by doing so..... and then the R's have gotta find someone without any connection to bush to run in '08
Click to expand...
If you own the House and the Rs the Senate his legislative agenda would be tied up anyway. This is truly disingenuous nonsense and a waste of money, it isn't worth it. It wasn't worth it when the Rs did it either.
 
Damocles said:
If you own the House and the Rs the Senate his legislative agenda would be tied up anyway. This is truly disingenuous nonsense and a waste of money, it isn't worth it. It wasn't worth it when the Rs did it either.
Click to expand...

The house is powerless with regard to judicial and political appointees. Only the Senate can influence the agenda.

Just having the house is peanuts.

Holding the senate is where the real power is in the legislature. The house is just the red-headed stepchild compared to the senate.
 
Cypress said:
The house is powerless with regard to judicial and political appointees. Only the Senate can influence the agenda.

Just having the house is peanuts.

Holding the senate is where the real power is in the legislature. The house is just the red-headed stepchild compared to the senate.
Click to expand...


OH, and if Bush tries to pass more corporate-written free trade agreements like CAFTA, the Senate is the only one who has any say in approving Treaties.

the House can't do shit.
 
Cypress said:
The house is powerless with regard to judicial and political appointees. Only the Senate can influence the agenda.

Just having the house is peanuts.

Holding the senate is where the real power is in the legislature. The house is just the red-headed stepchild compared to the senate.
Click to expand...
If you don't have the same Bill and won't pass a compromise you can control the legislative agenda as easily with the house as you can with the Senate.
 
Cypress said:
OH, and if Bush tries to pass more corporate-written free trade agreements like CAFTA, the Senate is the only one who has any say in approving Treaties.

the House can't do shit.
Click to expand...
He doesn't appear to care about Treaties, look at the Meximericanada agreement that was signed and implemented without a Treaty vote of the Senate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top