NY-23 House Race (merger) - Page 3 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

Marcus1124 · #31 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

timj219
You may have noticed that obama and the dems did not even whisper the words "single payer" during this whole legislative process. That's a good indicator that neither pres nor congress is particularly "left" on the issue. You're right they will be seen as buckling to the insurance companies. And rightly so. But it will be difficult for republicans to make hay on that since they have been carrying the spear for insurance companies themselves for years. As for layoffs, it will be difficult to say they come from mandated insurance and not from the economic catastrophe which dems will be able to blame on bush for at least the '10 election and probably the '12 too.

A lot will come down to execution of campaign strategies. But IMO the only way the republicans have a chance is if they tone down the extreme right and come back to the middle. So far I see no signs of that and if the conservative wins the NY 23 it may be even harder for them to do so.

Wong again, of course Obama and the leaders of the Party in Congress are incredibly left-wing, but that doesn't mean they are completely stupid. If they thought there was a chance in hell they could actually PASS a single payer system, they would do it. What their reticence to even mention it as a serious option tells us is not that THEY are not far to the left, but that the country is nowhere near as liberal as they are (Obama HAS said he thinks single payer is the best system).

The democrats have enough members of their caucus in both houses to pass things with NO GOP support. The only way to interpret their failure to pass what they want is that what they want is too far left to even keep all of their own members onboard.

daddio · #32 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillRockwell

What a joke. NY23 was just denied a choice, in such a blatant case of rightwing bullying that the former Republican candidate has just endorsed the Democrat. This will only cause the Republican party to get smaller, and even more irrelevant.

lets check back on this after the election. upstate is NOT NYC.

and I doubt anyone is surprised she endorsed the donkey,that was basically her problem.

Marcus1124 · #33 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

daddio
lets check back on this after the election. upstate is NOT NYC.

and I doubt anyone is surprised she endorsed the donkey,that was basically her problem.

Exactly, in fact, if we were to strip away the names and party affiliations, and have people guess who was the Democrat, who was the "liberal republican" and who was the Conservative party candidate based soley on their public policy positions, most people would be guessing that the democratic candidate just dropped out and endoresed the republican candidate over the conservative party candidate.

daddio · #34 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus1124

Exactly, in fact, if we were to strip away the names and party affiliations, and have people guess who was the Democrat, who was the "liberal republican" and who was the Conservative party candidate based soley on their public policy positions, most people would be guessing that the democratic candidate just dropped out and endoresed the republican candidate over the conservative party candidate.

pretty much.

the DNC realizes that a rightward shift is bad for them and had attempted to institute this notion that its a good thing for them. I thnk conservatives will dispel that in 2010 when conservative options make themselves available.

timj219 · #35 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus1124

Wong again, of course Obama and the leaders of the Party in Congress are incredibly left-wing, but that doesn't mean they are completely stupid. If they thought there was a chance in hell they could actually PASS a single payer system, they would do it. What their reticence to even mention it as a serious option tells us is not that THEY are not far to the left, but that the country is nowhere near as liberal as they are (Obama HAS said he thinks single payer is the best system).

The democrats have enough members of their caucus in both houses to pass things with NO GOP support. The only way to interpret their failure to pass what they want is that what they want is too far left to even keep all of their own members onboard.

So he implements a centrist policy but that's just in order to hide the fact that he's really a leftist?

Marcus1124 · #36 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

timj219
So he implements a centrist policy but that's just in order to hide the fact that he's really a leftist?

Well, in case you haven't been paying attention, so far he's not really implemented much in the way of policy (he keeps lying about how those mean republicans and special interests are getting in the way when his party has total control of both houses) for the very reason I pointed out, what they are putting forward is STILL too liberal to hold his party's entire caucus together in both houses.

Contrast this with the Bush tax cuts, which passsed with significant BIPARTISAN support in both Houses of Congress. Republicans practice bipartisanship and seldom get credit in the media or from Dems; while dems seldom practice bipartisanship but lie that they do.

Tanngrisnir3 · #37 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by timj219

So he implements a centrist policy but that's just in order to hide the fact that he's really a leftist?

Nah. What you're seeing here is a Republican tendency to drag their feet on every, single piece of legislation in an effort to make the Dems look like they're running a 'do nothing' Congress.

All the 4th class legal minds will dispute this, but it's pretty obvious to all sentient being.

timj219 · #38 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus1124

Well, in case you haven't been paying attention, so far he's not really implemented much in the way of policy (he keeps lying about how those mean republicans and special interests are getting in the way when his party has total control of both houses) for the very reason I pointed out, what they are putting forward is STILL too liberal to hold his party's entire caucus together in both houses.

Contrast this with the Bush tax cuts, which passsed with significant BIPARTISAN support in both Houses of Congress. Republicans practice bipartisanship and seldom get credit in the media or from Dems; while dems seldom practice bipartisanship but lie that they do.

It looks to me like the bill that passes will be a c entrist bill. Andobama has done nothing to push it further left. In fact he made it clear that the public option would not be necessary for him to sign it. And he gave up on the pulbic option at a very early stage. After not even using single payer as a bargaining chip as would have been expected from anyone even remotely left of center.
Bipartsan support was easy during the w years becasue the dem leadership has no spine and because the elected dems occupy a spectrum from left to moderate right as I have already said. Republicans are increasingly found only on the far right. That obviously makes it much easier to for them to act as a monolithic bloc.

Marcus1124 · #39 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

timj129
It looks to me like the bill that passes will be a c entrist bill. Andobama has done nothing to push it further left. In fact he made it clear that the public option would not be necessary for him to sign it. And he gave up on the pulbic option at a very early stage. After not even using single payer as a bargaining chip as would have been expected from anyone even remotely left of center.
Bipartsan support was easy during the w years becasue the dem leadership has no spine and because the elected dems occupy a spectrum from left to moderate right as I have already said. Republicans are increasingly found only on the far right. That obviously makes it much easier to for them to act as a monolithic bloc.

A "centrist" bill that can't even get all of the "centrists" in the House and the Senate? Nice try.

Bush's first year legislative achievments were all bipartisan, centrist bills. So far none of Obama's are, or are likely to be.

You seem to think that on a scale of 1-10 (one being Stalin and Karl Marx's love child) that the democratic plans are "centrist" if they are a 2 rather than a 1!

Republicans can do NOTHING to stop, slow down, or otherwise impede anything that the democrats want if they can keep all their members in line and what they are pushing in both houses by the leadership STILL isn't centrist enough to pass with even their own party's centrists, let alone Republican centrists.

Commodore · #40 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tanngrisnir3

Nah. What you're seeing here is a Republican tendency to drag their feet on every, single piece of legislation in an effort to make the Dems look like they're running a 'do nothing' Congress.

Have you done any math lately on the composition of Congress?

Because Congress has done the math on the disposition of the electorate.

Tanngrisnir3 · #41 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Commodore

Have you done any math lately on the composition of Congress?

Because Congress has done the math on the disposition of the electorate.

Indeed I have, and I can do that in my head.

Do you understand congressional procedure?

smurf · #42 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tanngrisnir3

Nah. What you're seeing here is a Republican tendency to drag their feet on every, single piece of legislation in an effort to make the Dems look like they're running a 'do nothing' Congress.

All the 4th class legal minds will dispute this, but it's pretty obvious to all sentient being.

Or, the Republicans are trying to impede the leftist legislation of the Democrats because it is counter to every principle for which their party stands.

Either way, thanks for yet another non-partisan post.

timj219 · #43 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus1124

A "centrist" bill that can't even get all of the "centrists" in the House and the Senate? Nice try.

Bush's first year legislative achievments were all bipartisan, centrist bills. So far none of Obama's are, or are likely to be.

You seem to think that on a scale of 1-10 (one being Stalin and Karl Marx's love child) that the democratic plans are "centrist" if they are a 2 rather than a 1!

Republicans can do NOTHING to stop, slow down, or otherwise impede anything that the democrats want if they can keep all their members in line and what they are pushing in both houses by the leadership STILL isn't centrist enough to pass with even their own party's centrists, let alone Republican centrists.

You are making my point for me. Dems occupy a wide spectrum of views. Many dems held up this bill by refusing to support anything without a public option. Other dems wanted nothing to do with a public option. Some dems were very upset that single payer was not even used as a bargaining position. Some dems were upset by the concessions already made to doctors and others wanted more in the form of tort "reform". That is why the bill has not yet passed. Meanwhile virtually every republican has opposed virtually every variation of the bill and prominent republicans have spent theri time ranitng about "death squads" and "pulling the plug on grandma". That is because republicans are increasingly found only on the far right and it is easier for them to act in monolithic fashion.

Tanngrisnir3 · #44 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by smurf

Or, the Republicans are trying to impede the leftist legislation of the Democrats because it is counter to every principle for which their party stands.

Nah, I don't think so. The parties have no principles, exactly like you. They only understand power.

Quote:

Either way, thanks for yet another non-partisan post.

I don't have a party, child.

Either way, thanks for being stupid.

WillRockwell · #45 (**permalink**) 2 Weeks Ago

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus1124

Geez, stupidity just abounds. How exactly is it "rightwing bullying" that "denied a choice" to have a REAL Republican run on a third party ticket (what kind of idiot considers MORE candidates a denial of choice?) after the actual republican voters of the district had a nominee foisted upon them NOT by choice (aka a primary) but by 11 local party bosses trading on favors.

Most real republicans who are concerned with the party's values and principles would rather have the democrat Owens than Scozzafava (with a more liberal record and platform than the democrat she was running against) any day. Putting party affiliation aside, this can't be seen as anything but a staggering loss for the left, as the most liberal of the three candidates was coming in a distant third.

All that said, I still think the real republican will win.

Also, it is truly amazing that people look at the current state of politics and think it is Republicans who are pushing the center away by embracing their extremist base. The democrats have solid majorities in both houses, enough to pass ANYTHING (except for a Constitutional Amendment) without a single Republican vote, and they are still having trouble passing their agenda because it is so pandering to their left wing extremist base.

Your "real Republican" doesn't live in the district, is ignorant of local issues, and couldn't handle the questions at a debate even though they were printed in advance. Of course you don't see the humor in that....you're a Republican.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode