Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 15 Nov 2016, 10:16 am

I think mandate is in this era of partisanship is a meaningless word. In times past there might have been a certain deference given to a president by the opposition to do what he wants. No longer. Trump has no mandate that the Ddmocratic Party recognizes. If he wants to get things done he will have 60 votes or make deals with the Democrats. Elections might have consequences but they don't change the fact that you still need the votes. Now I think Democrats are willing to compromise--unlike Republicans under Obama--but that will be on an equal basis if Trump does not have the votes.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 15 Nov 2016, 11:01 am

ahhh, Democrats are now more willing to work with the other side. Funny how they were not under Bush but now magically have changed. ...Short term memories
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 15 Nov 2016, 11:56 am

geojanes wrote:
Doctor Fate wrote:Anyone who thinks Trump doesn't have a mandate isn't paying attention.


If you win the election you have a mandate to govern as you will. Just because it was a "close" election does that mean you govern differently? I don't think so and I think you'd be hard pressed to find any president who changed his government just because the election was close.

One of the better things Obama said, "Elections have consequences."


This article describes the shambles that is Democratic Party post-Obama. https://www.commentarymagazine.com/arti ... ed-choirs/

It's not just the Presidency the Democrats have lost.

Counting CT (where one house is 50/50 but Dems have the tie-breaker), Democrats control the governorship and legislatures of 5 States (HI, CA, NV, RI, CT). Meanwhile, I believe the Republicans have 24. The number of legislature seats the Democrats runs into the 700's I think since Obama took office.

The one thing Obama was good at: getting himself elected.

On Sept 17, he said he would take it as "a personal insult" if blacks did not turn out for Hillary as they did for him. I'd say he was insulted.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 15 Nov 2016, 12:12 pm

I wonder which party controls more GDP?
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 15 Nov 2016, 12:14 pm

Be careful what you say (though nobody will remember)
Eight years ago our liberal friends here were downright giddy saying the Republican party was in ruins and might never rebound. No kidding, some said things were OVER for the Republicans.

This was a push back against ineffectual liberal ideas and no doubt things will irritate enough people to do just the same thing in reverse in 4, 8, 12 years??? But it WILL happen.
My hope is the Democrats, in order to rebound will move more centrist and drop their hard left position, I hope under Trump, not really a Republican, the Republican party also moves more to the center. In the end we have a slightly right leaning overall position (where I am).

i think the Dems worst plan of attack is to stay left or go further left, it is very possible they do, let's see how this shakes out...
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 15 Nov 2016, 12:19 pm

I wonder which party controls more GDP?

Good question

Republicans have a lot of the rich people in general but some of THE wealthiest people and most of Hollywood are Democrats.

Republicans have a lot of redneck dirt farmers while Democrats have inner city poverty folks.
many Democratic ideals are social programs to help the poor, Many Republican ideals are to reduce taxes. Republicans tend to be older (and wiser?) while Democrats are younger (as I have seen with my own kids and friends kids, they tend to move more and more right over time) leading me to believe Republicans hold more GDP but I honestly do not know.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 15 Nov 2016, 12:38 pm

GMTom wrote:Be careful what you say (though nobody will remember)
Eight years ago our liberal friends here were downright giddy saying the Republican party was in ruins and might never rebound. No kidding, some said things were OVER for the Republicans.

This was a push back against ineffectual liberal ideas and no doubt things will irritate enough people to do just the same thing in reverse in 4, 8, 12 years??? But it WILL happen.
My hope is the Democrats, in order to rebound will move more centrist and drop their hard left position, I hope under Trump, not really a Republican, the Republican party also moves more to the center. In the end we have a slightly right leaning overall position (where I am).

i think the Dems worst plan of attack is to stay left or go further left, it is very possible they do, let's see how this shakes out...


I would never say they are done. I simply think Obama overplayed his hand and the nation responded.

Trump seems an unlikely guy to preside over a Republican domination of the country.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 15 Nov 2016, 12:40 pm

freeman3 wrote:I wonder which party controls more GDP?


If only that mattered. My guess, based on a quick look, is the GOP.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U ... tes_by_GDP
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7374
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 15 Nov 2016, 3:10 pm

Doctor Fate wrote:
freeman3 wrote:I wonder which party controls more GDP?


If only that mattered. My guess, based on a quick look, is the GOP.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U ... tes_by_GDP


Interesting chart. I would recommend what the GDP/person as a better gauge of state wealth however.