General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf Dems Don't Get The House - Essentially No Government Until January 2017.
If the 2014 elections go badly for the Dems there will be no effective government for over 2 years. That is the way the GOP wants it. And it has pretty much said there will be no government in the US until voters give them control of all three branches of government.
As long as we have to many Americans who will not vote and have too many voters who keep the GOP in office the country will continue to deteriorate and decay. As of now the GOP wants to change the Constitution to fit a more religious and states rights model. And in essence wants to give 50 different states supremacy over federal authority and pass a "balanced budget" amendment.
Our complacency, apathy, and stubborn ignorance is giving the GOP what it wants.
polichick
(37,152 posts)And yep, that was the result of an election.
MineralMan
(146,288 posts)In all places, election activism is needed.
polichick
(37,152 posts)Just the fact that such insane redistricting is legal keeps people from wanting to be involved.
It really is a corrupt and perverse system.
MineralMan
(146,288 posts)Unfortunately. However, many states are very careful with redistricting. My state, Minnesota, does a good job of it after each census. The rules were carefully drawn years ago, and are followed. We do have two congressional districts that are majority republican, but they're geographically drawn, and were redrawn property after the 2010 census.
Again, this is a state issue. The federal government can step in, and has, in some cases, but it remains a state by state thing. Sadly, some states are what they are, and no amount of redistricting will change that. In other states, like Pennsylvania, the boundaries are primarily geographical and seem to be divided more between rural an urban districts than anything else.
The facts are that there are places where Republicans are in the majority. In many states, rural counties and districts vote Republican consistently, and have done so for decades.
However, in every state, there are districts that are nearly equally divided between Republicans and Democrats. In every state, there are districts that can go either way. That's true here in Minnesota, and we stand an excellent chance of getting a Democrat elected in Michele Bachmann's district. People may think that's impossible, but Bachmann only won with a 1% margin in 2012. We can turn that district in 2014, and will be working hard to do that.
In every state, Democrats need to be looking closely, district-by-district, to identify districts where change is possible and focus efforts in those districts. If we do that, we will gain the majority in the House. If we do not, we will still end up with a Republican majority.
I live in Minnesota. So, I'm going to be working on the two districts with a Republican incumbent. Both are possible switches, if the right candidate runs on the Democratic side. I'm hopeful. In both districts, a Democrat who can win will not be progressive enough for a lot of people's liking. But a Democrat who will vote with the Democratic caucus is far better than any Republican, especially if a progressive Democrat cannot possibly win.
That's my opinion. It's one I've always maintained. And I'll be working to get one or two pickups for Democrats in my own state. Beyond that, it's up to Democrats in other states to do their part.
polichick
(37,152 posts)This is about politicians choosing voters, not voters choosing politicians.
Just saying, I get why more and more people don't want any part of this game.
MineralMan
(146,288 posts)Other states are better about redistricting. Not all states are the same.
Redistricting is done by states. State-by-state. What can I tell you. Minnesota districts don't look like that.
MineralMan
(146,288 posts)I don't. I have friends in that state, though. They're Democrats, too.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)MineralMan
(146,288 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)throw their weight behind....they want to just stand on the sidelines and lob epithets....
polichick
(37,152 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)certainly not this person...
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/barack_obama.htm
polichick
(37,152 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and up against Republican Obstruction...but then you knew that..
Did you not read what this OP said?
polichick
(37,152 posts)Like it or not.
elleng
(130,895 posts)NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)They'll be just as obstructive for Hillary too.
wandy
(3,539 posts)Sure, any government can get carried away and become "bad government", still, "no" government IS "bad government".
The obstructionism we have now not only prevents progress it prevents repair.
How much longer can our infrastructure hold out without necessary maintenance.
How much longer can we maintain a standard of living without jobs. Even if a part of those jobs are to repair roads and to provide water.
How many more chemical spills will it take until we realize that corporate negligence is the terrorism we need most be concerned about.
Should that come to pass, do you have any believe that GOP.co will work to fix anything?
VOTE!
Rex
(65,616 posts)We shall see what happens when we have a super majority, it will be no excuses time.