Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

The Republicans now get a chance to prove themselves...

Old 11-03-04, 09:51 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,527
The Republicans now get a chance to prove themselves...

Obviously, I'm disappointed with the results. Despite my inability to see how Bush's victory can be good for this country, from the bottom of my heart I hope the government will collectively do the right things to take this country in the right direction. In other words, I will expect the worst, but hope for the best.

The Republicans now control Presidency, Senate, House, AND, essentially (though not technically) Supreme Court. There is no longer anyone to stand in the way of the conservatives and also, no longer anyone to blame.

I'm mostly disappointed because I do not believe this is a healthy balance of power. I would not even want the Democrats to control all these arms of government. I believe it has been the checks and balances of our system along with a more or less equal input of opposing views that have kept us going in the right direction all these years. I do not see this one-sided power as a good thing, but I hope I'm wrong. May the cooler heads in government prevail.
hahn is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 09:53 PM
  #2  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
They had all three after the mid-term elections in 2002. Obviously the voters liked what they saw and gave them even higher majorities in Congress and re-elected a rep. to be the chief of the executive branch.
bhk is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 09:59 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,527
Originally posted by bhk
They had all three after the mid-term elections in 2002. Obviously the voters liked what they saw and gave them even higher majorities in Congress and re-elected a rep. to be the chief of the executive branch.
The majority in Senate and House has widened. I don't think that this is a good thing since obviously quite a lot of people's interests (nearly 50% by popular vote numbers) have almost no voice or say in any matter anymore. But hey, what do I know?
hahn is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 10:03 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: |-|@><0r [email protected]|)
Posts: 17,214
Originally posted by hahn
The majority in Senate and House has widened. I don't think that this is a good thing since obviously quite a lot of people's interests (nearly 50% by popular vote numbers) have almost no voice or say in any matter anymore. But hey, what do I know?
You know exactly what National Review knows - that Bush and a strong Republican Congress will take advantage of this imbalance to push the right-wing agenda hard. This will likely cause a popular backlash that leads to an interesting 2008 election... as long as the DNC can recuperate and put forth a candidate with an ounce of message and personality.

- David Stein
sfsdfd is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 10:04 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Capitol of the Empire! Center of all Commerce and Culture! Crossroads of Civilization! NEW ROME!!!...aka New York City
Posts: 10,909
If almost 50% of the populace would force thier party to stop mocking and looking down on the rural citizens, we'd have a more healthy balance of power in this country, instead of what we have now...one national and one regional party
Tommy Ceez is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 10:09 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,527
Originally posted by Tommy Ceez
If almost 50% of the populace would force thier party to stop mocking and looking down on the rural citizens, we'd have a more healthy balance of power in this country, instead of what we have now...one national and one regional party
I think you meant to say TWO regional parties. I think it's a bit insulting and presumptuous to suggest that the current Republican administration represents the entire nation, while Democrats only represent the urban areas. And let's also please not suggest that there are only Democrats who mock and look down.

Last edited by hahn; 11-03-04 at 10:21 PM.
hahn is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 10:34 PM
  #7  
Moderator
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
This will likely cause a popular backlash that leads to an interesting 2008 election... as long as the DNC can recuperate and put forth a candidate with an ounce of message and personality.
I suspect if they push hard (which they probably will) the backlash will come quicker than 2008 (aka the 2006 election). I do agree the 2008 Presidential race is going to be interesting...
nemein is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 10:56 PM
  #8  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,527
Originally posted by sfsdfd
You know exactly what National Review knows - that Bush and a strong Republican Congress will take advantage of this imbalance to push the right-wing agenda hard. This will likely cause a popular backlash that leads to an interesting 2008 election... as long as the DNC can recuperate and put forth a candidate with an ounce of message and personality.

- David Stein
I just wish we didn't have to create such an imbalance in order to get back to balance. I view the Democratic and Republican interests as being two halves of a whole. We really need both sides to be in there to keep each other in check and ALSO to complement each other. It's a shame more people don't see it this way. I just hope there are enough moderate Republicans to keep their own extreme right in check.
hahn is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:04 PM
  #9  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Rosemount, MN
Posts: 31,698
I'm not sure why people think there will be a backlash. A majority of people in this country obviously prefer the conservative agenda.
Draven is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:08 PM
  #10  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Nazgul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Jayhawk Central, Kansas
Posts: 7,125
Will the Dems stand in the corner and pout for another 4 years? I'd like to see more bi-partisan work, but I'm not sure the Dems will allow themselves to do this.
Nazgul is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:11 PM
  #11  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: |-|@><0r [email protected]|)
Posts: 17,214
Originally posted by nemein
I suspect if they push hard (which they probably will) the backlash will come quicker than 2008 (aka the 2006 election).
You may be right, but that would only produce an incremental shift back to center. OTOH, it would be a strategic sweep to give the Republicans all the rope they want, let them hang themselves with corrupt uses of power, and bash them over the heads with those mistakes in 2008.

- David Stein
sfsdfd is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:12 PM
  #12  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Willow Grove, PA
Posts: 3,055
Re: The Republicans now get a chance to prove themselves...

Originally posted by hahn
Despite my inability to see how Bush's victory can be good for this country, from the bottom of my heart I hope the government will collectively do the right things to take this country in the right direction.
This election, despite what you may think, or others may claim, proves that a majority of the people LIKED what Bush did over the last four years. Period. It really is that simple. The country like BUSH, he got relelcted.

In fact, this is the FIRST time in the last 4 presedential races (yes even Clinton) that a candidate got MORE than 50% of the popular vote.

So, the country it MORE united today, than it has been in the last 12 years.

The fact that house, senate, and a majority of governors are republican only goes to further show that the majority of the voting poluation feel that the republican ideals are the best.
Sloth911 is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:14 PM
  #13  
Needs to contact an admin about multiple accounts
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,830
Originally posted by Draven
I'm not sure why people think there will be a backlash. A majority of people in this country obviously prefer the conservative agenda.
...a relatively thin majority.
Cygnet74 is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:15 PM
  #14  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: |-|@><0r [email protected]|)
Posts: 17,214
Originally posted by hahn
I just wish we didn't have to create such an imbalance in order to get back to balance.
Me too, but the reality of modern politics is a climate of <i>extreme</i> apathy. It takes high drama to galvanize people into voting. Contrast the emotion (and high vote count) in this election vs. 2000, 1996, 1992...
Originally posted by hahn
I view the Democratic and Republican interests as being two halves of a whole. We really need both sides to be in there to keep each other in check and ALSO to complement each other.
Agreed, again. But lately, they've both been pushing the same way on about 95% of issues. So in that context, the DNC is just a shadow of the RNC, and thus dispensible. When was the last time a presidential candidate strongly advocated civil liberties, labor unions, huge increases in corporate taxes (to return us to where we were in 1980), or equal rights?

- David Stein
sfsdfd is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:19 PM
  #15  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 15,108
Re: Re: The Republicans now get a chance to prove themselves...

Originally posted by jasonr114
This election, despite what you may think, or others may claim, proves that a majority of the people LIKED what Bush did over the last four years. Period. It really is that simple. The country like BUSH, he got relelcted.
Damn!
MJKTool is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:22 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: |-|@><0r [email protected]|)
Posts: 17,214
Re: Re: The Republicans now get a chance to prove themselves...

Originally posted by jasonr114
In fact, this is the FIRST time in the last 4 presedential races (yes even Clinton) that a candidate got MORE than 50% of the popular vote.

So, the country it MORE united today, than it has been in the last 12 years.
I don't think that follows. The closer elections in years past were due to lower voter turnout; a larger portion of the public didn't see the election as an important issue, because the candidates were equally effective/lame/whatever. It's telling that the public was so divided this year that it drove them to the polls in record numbers.

Bush has achieved remarkable cohesion among the supporters of his agenda, but at the expense of a huge portion of America. In fact, his arrogant disregard for opposing arguments like equal rights for gays <i>was</i> a tactic for solidifying his base.

- David Stein

Last edited by sfsdfd; 11-03-04 at 11:25 PM.
sfsdfd is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:34 PM
  #17  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Willow Grove, PA
Posts: 3,055
I heard a lot about these record numbers of voters: radio, tv, here, artciles... is there any validity to this "record number" statement?

I realize the number of voters was higher this year... but so was the population... i would be interested in reading/seeing a comparison between past elections (nixon, clinton, etc) to see if a "record" was really set or if this really just conjecture...
Sloth911 is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:40 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bartertown due to it having a better economy than where I really live, Buffalo NY
Posts: 29,702
it'd be nice if they cut spending. and real cuts, not these "it's less of an increase than last year" things that are still increases
mikehunt is offline  
Old 11-03-04, 11:46 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 20,726
When was the last time a presidential candidate strongly advocated civil liberties, labor unions, huge increases in corporate taxes (to return us to where we were in 1980), or equal rights?
Is there a difference between equal rights and civil liberties?

I doubt this is the best time to advocate huge increases in corporate taxes.

And for the labor unions issue, I don't know why it would be an an issue. Labor unions have a powerful influence in government (think teachers, firemen, police officers). But labor unions seems ot have weakened much in general, because people are more independent and mobile due to higher education and other factors. I bet if all the unemployed IT guys had gotten organized and formed unions before the bubble burst, they would be less likely to be laid off. But that's not going to happen, because this is the "me me me" generation ( I am not saying if that is a good or bad thing) and I doubt it will change.

I hope both parties can keep the wheel steady while driving together for a better future and stronger America.

Hey, I like that one, I'll have to use that one again.
Ranger is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:20 AM
  #20  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Michael T Hudson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Formerly known as "BigDaddy"/Austin, TX
Posts: 11,371
Originally posted by jasonr114
I heard a lot about these record numbers of voters: radio, tv, here, artciles... is there any validity to this "record number" statement?

I realize the number of voters was higher this year... but so was the population... i would be interested in reading/seeing a comparison between past elections (nixon, clinton, etc) to see if a "record" was really set or if this really just conjecture...
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Driven by an intense race for the presidency, a greater percentage of Americans voted Tuesday than at any time in more than three decades.

Figures tabulated Wednesday by The Associated Press showed that 114.9 million people had voted with 99 percent of precincts reporting.

However, the total figure is closer to 117.8 million based on estimates of uncounted absentee and mail ballots in California, Oregon and Washington, said Curtis Gans, director of the nonpartisan Committee for the Study of the American Electorate.

Another 2 million votes remain, given incomplete tabulations in some states, provisional ballots and other absentee ballots, he said.

Gans put the total turnout at nearly 120 million people. That represents just under 60 percent of eligible voters -- the highest percentage turnout since 1968, Gans said.(Voters turn out to beat the rush)

One county clerk in Illinois spoke for poll workers across the country on Election Day when he summed up the turnout with one word: "Gangbusters."

Four years ago, in the election that led to Republican George W. Bush's narrow victory over Democrat Al Gore, slightly more than 54 percent of eligible voters, or about 105.4 million, voted.

President Clinton's 1996 re-election bid drew just 49 percent of eligible voters, about 96.3 million.

But his 1992 challenge to the first President Bush brought out 55.2 percent of eligible voters, or about 104.4 million. (It's the turnout, not the economy)

Officials had eyes on whether Tuesday's turnout would rival the 1960 benchmark, when about two-thirds of eligible voters came out to back either Democrat John Kennedy or Republican Richard Nixon.

At least six states -- Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia -- and the District of Columbia set new voter-turnout highs, according to Gans' analysis.

"On both sides, the presidency of George Bush was a lightning rod," he said. "For those who supported him, they supported him for traditional values, strong leadership, the war on terrorism and some rejection of things that the Democrats advocate," such as abortion rights and gay civil unions.

"On the other side, it was the war on Iraq, debt, the feeling he hadn't been candid with the American people, too conservative values and division in the country," Gans said.

An estimated 9 percent of voters Tuesday were 18 to 24, about the same proportion of the electorate as in 2000, exit polls indicated. The youth vote accounted for 17 percent of turnout when broadened to the 18-to-29 age group, also about the same share as in the last presidential race.

Still, the actual number of young voters was up, given that overall voter turnout was higher.

When it comes to voting, the United States still has some distance to go to match the participation of voters in other democracies.

But by U.S. standards, Tuesday shaped up as an impressive show. (New signups could make history)

In California, the estimated voter turnout was 12 million, a record for the state.

"It's a landslide of people coming out, which is nice," voter Theresa Cocco, 45, a business owner, said outside the Surfing Museum in Huntington Beach. "It renews my faith in society."
Michael T Hudson is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 12:22 AM
  #21  
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,201
I don't think you will be happy. I think we all want the same things, but we differ on how to get there. Even if we achieve a goal, some will be unhappy with how we got there.
kvrdave is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 06:51 AM
  #22  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Willow Grove, PA
Posts: 3,055
Bigdaddy - thanks, that is what I was looking for...

Year - % Registered Voters
1992 - 55.2%
1996 - 49%
2000 - 54%
2004 - 60%
Sloth911 is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 07:03 AM
  #23  
DVD Talk Legend
 
raven56706's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Back in the Good Ole USA
Posts: 21,762
Vote or I suck


Begun the clone wars has.....
raven56706 is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 07:06 AM
  #24  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 68,522
The power that the Republicans have now is essentially the same power the Republicans had in 2001 when Bush assumed the presidency. Nothing really has changed. They have about the same number of House seats and they still are far short of a 'working majority' (60 votes) in the United States Senate.

The Supreme Court has the same number of members that there were when Clinton was President. The cast of the court is the same as when Clinton was President.

Tell me again what's the big change?

Once again - the balance of power doesn't depend on one party controlling the White House & another party controlling the Congress.

There is an effective balance of power (and there has been for a long time) because of the U. S. Senate.

Any controversial bill that the Repubs want to bring up still will most probably need 60 votes in the upper chamber of the legislature.

In other words - very very little has changed.

Things are just as 'balanced' as they were in 1997.

What's the problem?

There is no longer anyone to stand in the way of the conservatives and also, no longer anyone to blame.
See the above.

It seems as if sometimes the workings of the legislative process are forgotten by some on this forum.
classicman2 is offline  
Old 11-04-04, 08:53 AM
  #25  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: in da cloud
Posts: 26,196
Originally posted by sfsdfd
Me too, but the reality of modern politics is a climate of <i>extreme</i> apathy. It takes high drama to galvanize people into voting. Contrast the emotion (and high vote count) in this election vs. 2000, 1996, 1992...

Agreed, again. But lately, they've both been pushing the same way on about 95% of issues. So in that context, the DNC is just a shadow of the RNC, and thus dispensible. When was the last time a presidential candidate strongly advocated civil liberties, labor unions, huge increases in corporate taxes (to return us to where we were in 1980), or equal rights?

- David Stein
Richard Gephardt has been losing primaries for as long as i can remember.

why would you want to go back to 1980? you really want to pay 15% interest on your mortgage?
al_bundy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.