If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   Deja vu: The feeling you've gone through this democratic process before. Deja vu: The feeling you've gone through this democratic process before   (politico.com) divider line 30
    More: Amusing, obama, democratic process, red states, Boehner, bipartisanship, lame duck, Bush Tax Cuts, carbon sequestration  
•       •       •

1606 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Nov 2012 at 11:34 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



30 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-11-07 09:43:50 AM
The Campaign About Nothing


Okay wait, what if, because he lost the election, the electorate decrees that Romney has to be Obama's butler for the next four years?
 
2012-11-07 10:35:43 AM
3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-11-07 10:41:22 AM
- as the government tries to deal with a pending fiscal calamity that includes the expiration of the Bush tax cuts,...

LOLs. I actually know some people who think Politico doesn't have a slant.

/I didn't say they were bright people.
 
2012-11-07 11:38:24 AM
Goddamn it Boehner.

The lines in the sand about taxes don't resonate with the public.

Just let them go, tie that compromise to bypassing sequestration, and claim victory.
 
2012-11-07 11:39:41 AM
Nobody can look at the election as anything but a total draw.

Obama's performance against Romney was nice on an electoral level, but very poor as compared to his peformance overall 4 years ago.

Congress is pretty much unchanged.

If this was an election to support the president & his policies, he would have won more in the fashion of 4 years ago and the D's would have made some serious ground in congress.

What I get from last night is the US isn't picking one ideology over the other, but more about specific candidates. The R's lost senate seats where they had a couple of idiots running, but held the house almost exactly.

The R's could have won the whitehouse if they put up a good candidate. Obama was pretty vulnerable.. Romney shouldn't have been this close.
 
2012-11-07 11:42:57 AM
Biggest reelection mandate since 84
 
2012-11-07 11:44:03 AM
Deja vu: The feeling you've gone through this democratic process before. Deja vu: The feeling you've gone through this democratic process before

Deja vu: The feeling you've gone through this democratic process before. Deja vu: The feeling you've gone through this democratic process before


Deja vu: The feeling you've gone through this democratic process before. Deja vu: The feeling you've gone through this democratic process before
 
2012-11-07 11:45:29 AM

Lost Thought 00: Biggest reelection mandate since 84


Yeah, something tells me we won't be hearing "MANDATE!" like in 2004 when Bush racked up a whole 286 Electoral votes. Of course, that bluff worked out well for him since he was able to privatize social security and cut taxes dramatically further.
 
2012-11-07 11:45:47 AM

Lost Thought 00: Biggest reelection mandate since 84


That's *their* word!

/god, I'm gonna love telling teatards that this was a referendum on their agenda
 
2012-11-07 11:46:58 AM
When you see familiar faces
But you don't remember where they're from
Could you be wrong?

When you've been particular places
That you know you've never been before
Can you be sure?

'cause you know that this has happened before
And you know that this moment in time is for real
And you know when you feel deja-vu
[ Lyrics from: http://www.lyricsfreak.com/i/iron+maiden/deja+vu_20068060.html ]
Feel like I've been here before
Feel like I've been here before
Feel like I've been here before
Feel like I've been here before

Ever had a conversation
That you realise you've had before
Isn't it strange

Have you ever talked to someone
And you feel you know what's coming next
It feels pre-arranged

'cause you know that you've heard it before
And you feel that this moment in time is surreal
'cause you know when you feel deja-vu

Feel like I've been here before
Feel like I've been here before
Feel like I've been here before
Feel like I've been here before

every Fark thread can be associated with an Iron Maiden song. Well, this one can be at least.
 
2012-11-07 11:49:09 AM

MugzyBrown: Nobody can look at the election as anything but a total draw.

Obama's performance against Romney was nice on an electoral level, but very poor as compared to his peformance overall 4 years ago.

Congress is pretty much unchanged.

If this was an election to support the president & his policies, he would have won more in the fashion of 4 years ago and the D's would have made some serious ground in congress.

What I get from last night is the US isn't picking one ideology over the other, but more about specific candidates. The R's lost senate seats where they had a couple of idiots running, but held the house almost exactly.

The R's could have won the whitehouse if they put up a good candidate. Obama was pretty vulnerable.. Romney shouldn't have been this close.


Dude, at least try to be gracious. In terms of modern presidential elections this was pretty decisive.
 
2012-11-07 11:50:00 AM

Sybarite: The Campaign About Nothing


Okay wait, what if, because he lost the election, the electorate decrees that Romney has to be Obama's butler for the next four years?


The Mittster is part Mexican, so I bet he enjoys saying "salsa." SALSA! SALSA SALSA SALSA! WOULD YOU LIKE SOME SALSA?
 
2012-11-07 11:54:58 AM

MugzyBrown: Nobody can look at the election as anything but a total draw.

Obama's performance against Romney was nice on an electoral level, but very poor as compared to his peformance overall 4 years ago.

Congress is pretty much unchanged.

If this was an election to support the president & his policies, he would have won more in the fashion of 4 years ago and the D's would have made some serious ground in congress.

What I get from last night is the US isn't picking one ideology over the other, but more about specific candidates. The R's lost senate seats where they had a couple of idiots running, but held the house almost exactly.

The R's could have won the whitehouse if they put up a good candidate. Obama was pretty vulnerable.. Romney shouldn't have been this close.


yep, nothing's really changed and all parties involved still got enough votes to discourage anybody from budging anytime soon
 
2012-11-07 11:55:29 AM
"You elected us to focus on your jobs, not ours. And in the coming weeks and months, I am looking forward to reaching out and working with leaders of both parties to meet the challenges we can only solve together. Reducing our deficit (aka Spend, Spend, Spend! Tax, Tax, Tax!). Reforming our tax code (aka Better stay below 100k/yr or your screwed). Fixing our immigration system (aka Amnesty). Freeing ourselves from foreign oil (Astronomical fuel prices here we come!). We've got more work to do."

It's cute that Obama says he will work with Republicans when he is a tried and true Progressive Ideologue.
 
2012-11-07 11:55:48 AM

Cletus C.: Dude, at least try to be gracious. In terms of modern presidential elections this was pretty decisive.


First, I didn't vote for Romney or any republican. Second, are Reagan and Clinton not considered modern presidents? They both crushed their opponents in re-election. This was a very close election... Bush even got more votes than Obama without adjusting for population growth (if the totals I'm looking at are true)

This is not decisive at all.
 
2012-11-07 12:01:04 PM
I don't have the photoshop skills, but somebody needs to take that cover of the British magazine with the pic of W that said "how can ###### Americans be so Stupid?!?!" and replace it with a picture of Obama at his acceptance speech that says "How can 59,987,631 Americans be so Smart?!?!" (or whatever the number ends up at)
 
2012-11-07 12:01:17 PM
Politico is especially butthurt this morning after ....

a) Getting a dud horserace

b) Nate Silver/Sam Wang/Drew Lisner/etc. proving that their particular brand of "insider" punditry is at best completely worthless and at worse completely misleading and malignant.
 
2012-11-07 12:03:48 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2012-11-07 12:04:32 PM
I'm honestly curious as to whether all the people gloating because "our guy" won think this election is going to result in any real progress made for the good of the country or if we're all so busy sticking it to the losers we don't really care about that.

We've got the same Senate, the same House, and the same President. The same combo that over the past 4 years had crippled the legislative process, and hijacked the American political system in a sad and desperate display of ultrapartisanship.

I know, I know, it's all the other guys' fault nothing is getting done. But even still, nothing is getting done. So maybe we should temper our childish celebrations about Obama winning and start to look at the reality that he's going to be stuck working with the same douchebags that prevented him from enacting anything but healthcare reform, which is still being fought tooth and nail.

Maybe we shouldn't be so eager to post "deal with it" pics, and start mourning the fact 48% of the country and the majority in the Senate aren't going to suddenly accept Obama and his plan for the future. Personally, I'm a lot more disappointed that we can look forward to four more years of gridlock, obstructionism, and partisan BS then I am glad that Obama managed to win the important swing states. I'm glad Romney didn't win. I'm not glad that Obama, or more precisely the Senate, didn't win by enough.

And I don't want to hear a bunch of whining about it the Republicans until Obama and the Democrats start pushing some of the platform that helped earn my vote and win the election.

Gay marriage was passed in (I think) 2 of the 3 states that had it up for vote. Can we expect some federal action on that during these next four years? Or should we just assume nothing will happen because it is not politically popular enough for Dems to risk pushing something forward, even though it probably gets rejected?

Marijuana was legalized in two states for personal recreational consumption. Will the DoJ start rigorously enforcing federal laws against marijuana in those states with funding threats? Will there be any move towards Federal acceptance of those states' democratically decided initiatives paving the way for Federal legalization? If not acceptance, what about non-interference at least, or should we expect the DEA to be building new offices in Colorado and Washington along with some more prisons?

What about taxes, unemployment, and the economy in general? Immigration? Is there going to be any progress made on any of those issues? If not progress, can we at least hope that we start naming names and calling out the obstructionists instead of throwing up our hands and saying "boo hoo hoo, the mean old [opposition] party won't work with us, so I guess nothing gets done". Until the next midterms when a new batch of Tea Partiers get elected since nothing has been accomplished between now and then.

I guess we'll see. Personally, I know that if in 2016 we're still in the same status of suspended animation we've been in for the past four years, all the deal with it pics and laughing at Ted Nugent and Donald Trump in the world right now isn't going to make it any better. I really won't care that my guy won because the country won't be better if that happens.
 
2012-11-07 12:06:13 PM
Conservatives got a big reality slap in the face today.

You are a minority in your own country. You are surrounded by people that hate you. Yes, get it now, they really farking hate you. You aren't misreading anything and your not failing to communicate. They hate you.

And like that dorky kid on the play ground who finally realizes it wasn't a fun, spirited tussle, that he actually has a fat lip and needs stitches, Conservatives are going to take their ball and go home. You can say don't let the door hit ya', but make no mistake about it, you will miss them.

12,937.15 Down -308.53 -2.33%

Should have played nicer and let them keep half their lunch money, soon you'll get none of it.
 
2012-11-07 12:09:28 PM

MugzyBrown: Cletus C.: Dude, at least try to be gracious. In terms of modern presidential elections this was pretty decisive.

First, I didn't vote for Romney or any republican. Second, are Reagan and Clinton not considered modern presidents? They both crushed their opponents in re-election. This was a very close election... Bush even got more votes than Obama without adjusting for population growth (if the totals I'm looking at are true)

This is not decisive at all.


Dude, Democratic incumbant won by 100+ Electoral Votes facing the headwinds of an economy that has seen 8+% unemployment for his entire term. How do you think the electoral and demographic math is going to work for Republicans when a Democrat has the wind to his back?

Democrats not only held the Senate, something seen as less than a 50/50 coin flip even a year ago, but gained seats, even in states like farking Indiana and North Dakota.

Gay Marriages is not only no longer wedge issues Republicans can use, it's a winner for Democrats anywhere it's on the ballot. Contrast this to just 6-8 years ago when Rove was tacking anti-gay marriage amendments onto any state election ballot he could find.

If it weren't for the rampant gerrrymandering in the Congressional seats which gives the GOP a +2.5% house effect on the generic Congressional ballot, the House would have basically amounted to an even split.

Only the most feeble minded and partisan could label this a draw.
 
2012-11-07 12:12:34 PM

InmanRoshi: Dude, Democratic incumbant won by 100+ Electoral Votes facing the headwinds of an economy that has seen 8+% unemployment for his entire term. How do you think the electoral and demographic math is going to work for Republicans when a Democrat has the wind to his back?

Democrats not only held the Senate, something seen as less than a 50/50 coin flip even a year ago, but gained seats, even in states like farking Indiana and North Dakota.

i>

This is exactly what GOP idiots were thinking in 2004. If you think this election represents some ideological shift in the electorate, you're insane.

 
2012-11-07 12:13:30 PM
I don't think people really have a knowledge of American history or grasp how change happens in this country.

People didn't wake up one morning in the mid 60's and all of a sudden blacks had Civil Rights whereas they had none the day before. It was an incremental process that took decades, if not centuries, of small victories (and it's still going on today).
 
2012-11-07 12:17:43 PM

MugzyBrown: This is exactly what GOP idiots were thinking in 2004. If you think this election represents some ideological shift in the electorate, you're insane.


Only idiot GOPers thought that in 2004.

Even Bush knew that the electorate was changing in 2004, which is why he desperately tried to get Immigration reform passed during his 2nd term.

Idiot GOPers said 2008 was a "wave" election. That young people weren't going to vote in as high of numbers in 2012 (they actually voted in a higher percentage). That blacks weren't going to vote in as high of a percentage in 2012 (they actually voted in a higher percentage). That latinos weren't going to vote in as high of a percentage in 2012 (they actually voted in a higher percentage).

I'm sorry, if you don't recognize this, you're as stubbornly anti-math/anti-reality as the unskewed poll deniers. Then again, maybe you were an unskewed poll denier.
 
2012-11-07 12:21:14 PM
Here, our House Representative, a Republican, was unopposed. This election he had an opponent; a Democrat.

The incumbent opposes opposes the EPA, the department of Education, and abortion. He thinks teachers are overpaid. He favors cutting social programs including food stamps, welfare, social security, and veterans' benefits. He is opposed to a Veterans' Job Bill. He favors invading Iran, increasing the military budget, and feels Obama is too weak toward North Korea and China.

The incumbent won the election with approximately two-thirds of the votes. I'd feel a lot more jubilant about the Obama win, if he weren't going to be stuck with working with people like my House Representative. Reflecting on the votes he garnered, I'm left wondering "Who are these people?"
 
2012-11-07 12:48:31 PM

js34603: Can we expect some federal action on that during these next four years? Or should we just assume nothing will happen because it is not politically popular enough for Dems to risk pushing something forward, even though it probably gets rejected?


Check out the following links. You may find a way to help make the things you want happen.

Link
Link
Link 
Link
 
2012-11-07 01:23:36 PM
Deja vu?

I distinctly remember GOP consultant Mike Murphy saying, "The GOP cannot win with a solid base of 12% of the electorate."

after the 2008 election .

He said about the same thing this morning. He said the GOP is about to disappear from relevance. Maybe the GOP needs to listen to him.
 
2012-11-07 05:59:54 PM

js34603: We've got the same Senate, the same House, and the same President. The same combo that over the past 4 years had crippled the legislative process, and hijacked the American political system in a sad and desperate display of ultrapartisanship.


We got rid of some of the more virulent Tea Party candidates, so there's that. We also have the White House. And there's the fact that the military budget is about to be cut and all the Bush tax cuts will expire if there's gridlock again, so there's that, too.
 
2012-11-07 06:46:00 PM
Nothing will be any different next week, next year, or next decade. The country (and world) has been bought and paid for, and the people in control won't put anyone in office that can rock the boat. The President works for them. He's their pick, not yours.
 
2012-11-09 05:25:58 PM

MugzyBrown: Nobody can look at the election as anything but a total draw.

Obama's performance against Romney was nice on an electoral level, but very poor as compared to his peformance overall 4 years ago.

Congress is pretty much unchanged.

If this was an election to support the president & his policies, he would have won more in the fashion of 4 years ago and the D's would have made some serious ground in congress.

What I get from last night is the US isn't picking one ideology over the other, but more about specific candidates. The R's lost senate seats where they had a couple of idiots running, but held the house almost exactly.

The R's could have won the whitehouse if they put up a good candidate. Obama was pretty vulnerable.. Romney shouldn't have been this close.


Unhand those goalposts you damn dirty ape!
 
Displayed 30 of 30 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report