*IF* Obama wins and the Dems control the Senate, how will the GOP respond?

[BlueStreak]

Allow me the hypothetical that after November, Obama has a second term and Dems control the Senate, GOP controls the house -- in other words, the same balance of power that has existed for 2 years -- how do you think the Republicans will respond?

1) They will realize that their obstructionism was not a winning strategy, that they failed at their prime mission (to dispatch Obama), and facing another 4 years with the black man, they will take a more constructive stance.

2) They will be just the same as they have been -- maybe worse -- refusing to cooperate on anything, and continuing with a strategy of brinksmanship because they figure their best game is to try to freeze things until 2016.

3) They will become more splintered than ever, with many of the senior members of both bodies tiring of the teabaggery.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

1. I've wondered this too

I would love #1 but I don't really see it happening, at least not until they lose a few more elections. My guess would be #2 and eventually #3 (which will hopefully lead to #1) Soon, I'm not entirely sure that there will be any "moderates" left among the Senate Republicans. They're slowly getting wiped out and/or resigning and (mostly) getting replaced with teabagger extremists.

[BlueStreak]

2. I'd like to think that there is a chance

that some of the most extreme Republican Senators (which sadly seems to be almost all of them) will evolve in their views.

OK, that's not bloody likely. But what is possible is that this teabagging thing will lost its steam. It was really only kept alive because of the economic meltdown and the once-a-generation debate on health care. It is clear to me that with each passing day, the American public understands that PPACA is a big improvement, even if it didn't go far enough. It won't be long before people still frothing at the mouth will be regarded about the same as birthers. And it seems likely that the economy will continue to improve albeit gradually, no thanks to the Republicans.

If I am a Republican Senator and I see these winds of change -- and I also see myself getting caught up in the Ryan plan to kill Medicare -- I might rerun the calculus a little.

Perhaps I am giving them way too much credit, assuming they are capable of some independent reasoning.

[demosincebirth]

3. In the south, these teabaggers are sons, daughters, grand children of staunch segregationist who

through their progeny have kept up and continued the influence of the Old South. It's quite obvious by their vocal outcries , at times, of "liberty and freedom." I don't really know what they mean by that, but that was their battle cry during the civil war.

Hard to change something that's been ingrained in their veins.

[elleng]

4. Probably the same,

unless there are specific changes in House and/or Senate that cause some change, like we get rid of some obstructionists: http://www.powellforva.com/

Would like to see change if cantor is OUT, as I see him as chief obstructionist.

Maybe such would cause more splintering.

[davidpdx]

5. My honest opinion is they will try to impeach Obama

I know, I know, it sounds crazy. But remember these people ARE crazy!

[Cosmocat]

16. Darn straight they will, and the same scumbag MFers who

ran around saying Bush had a MANDATE when he beat Kerry by a flea's hair are going to push the meme that somehow it BOs win is the weakest reelection ever and that he needs to move more to the right because if it, and the "liberal" media will repeat it like the good drones they are.

But, it is a miracle the house had the level or restraint it has had to not impeach him in the first four years, he win's reelection, and they will absolutely find a reason in their deranged minds to impeach him.

[davidpdx]

25. I think we need to be ready for it right after the new Congress is in session

I'd bet it will happen before the recess for the 4th of July.

[Cosmocat]

28. Only a matter of time

the clock is ticking ...

[MyshkinCommaPrince]

6. About the same.

They'll find new ways to obstruct and distract, to recruit new drones, while regrouping for 2014 and 2016. It often seems like they have a fragile coalition on their side, with Neocons, fiscal conservatives, laissez faire corporatists, religious crazies, tea party crazies, racist crazies, right wing libertarians, and what-all. But I don't see any great changes on their side. Those of them with actual power are concerned about money, the rest are followers who aren't going anywhere. We have two parties and building a third would be difficult, expensive, and risky. They'll all stay together in the Repug tent.

So, no qualitative change. They may amp up the crazy again, or they may try to be more subtle and use a quieter approach, but it will be much as it has been.

I would expect more of the approach they used to foist Citizens United (can't we call it something else, instead of using this Orwellian name?) on us. But I would also consider that to be more of the same.

[freshwest]

7. +1

[BlueStreak]

8. Let me ask it a different way

For the past three years, there was one and only one thing that united the opposition. It was a hatred of President Obama. I believe that is base racism for many and a convenient bogeyman for others. Nonetheless, that was the one thing that united the Republicans. "We must get rid of Obama!"

Well, in my hypothetical, Obama is in for another 4 years, and then they will be rid of him due to term limits. In other words, it doesn't matter what any Republican does, Obama will be there 4 years and then he will gone. I think it will be hard to keep up the war cries "Obama must go". He's going anyway -- nothing they do short of impeachment will change the timeline and I do not believe they are stupid enough to try that again. I mean, you want to have to deal with Obama for another 15 years with popularity as high as Bill Clinton's? Yeah, then go ahead and try that impeachment thing again.

And heading towards 2016, there will probably not be a clear successor that can become the new Republican bogeyman.

It just seems to me it will be hard to keep the base ginned up with rage for Obama.

[Cosmocat]

17. First, it hasn't been racism

it is simple partisanship - racism is just a means to the end.

Second - they treated Clinton just as bad - they investigated him dozens of time, got a special prosecutor to fish around until they finally tripped him up on the lie over the dress. The investigated the god darned pet cat, and that is not an exaggeration. They accused him of being a drug dealer and a murder, and he was white ...

They treated him no better in his second term - they accused him of wagging the tail when he TRIED to emphazise the threat of radical Islam (and of course found a way to make him responsible when their dimwit MBA let them hit us on 9-11). They eviscerated him, and his family and frankly won the 2000 election more than anything because the country got tired of them screaming about him and Bush seemed harmless to the mushy middle, so they voted for him to shut them up more than anything.

The funny thing is, NOW most of the Rs I know are like " I actually like Clinton" and I know darn well they were foaming at their mouth hating him at the time.

They know NO bounds to their capacity to gin up hatred for democrats. There is something in them that Rush et all channel to make them believe in the evil liberal boogyman, and reality or reason has no place in their minds when a D is president.

[gkhouston]

9. They'll double down on the ugly.

It could be that a few Republicans will splinter away from the rest, but I expect a noisy mouth-foaming contigent. And if we have a "wave" election and re-gain the House, too, there will be some yahoos on the far right who will act like it's the End Times.

[Lucy Goosey]

10. Here's hoping they all "go Galt"

...but they will probably do is try to pass more and more restrictions on abortion and contraception. That seems to be what they do.

[Arkana]

11. Four words:

"We weren't conservative enough!"

[LiberalFighter]

12. How the GOP responds shouldn't be the question.

It should be how the Democrats respond to neuter the sobs.

[amerciti001]

13. I just hope that if Obama wins...

That all of the Republican nut-cases and radical Teapartiers don't go berserk and start shooting up the place. That's the usual responce it seems, these days- just go shoot up someplace.

[HeiressofBickworth]

14. Impeachment

They've wanted to do it since Mr. Obama took office. Once ACA goes into effect in 2014, there will be more wailing and gnashing of teeth from the right which will only be satisfied with an attempt at impeachment. I don't think they will consider Mr. Biden as any kind of threat -- he's not black. You've got to consider that they have two goals: one is to get rid of Mr. Obama and the other is to teach any other uppity n***** that rising above their station will not be tolerated. I can't begin to imagine how such abiding hate governs their lives, not only personally but professionally. I expect better from elected officials. Silly me.

[Jamaal510]

15. I want to hope that the G0Pee does #1,

but judging from how much $$$ the Richie Riches of the Right are dumping into Congressional races, I think they'll go with #2 just to trash the image of the Democratic Party. When 2016 comes around, they want to be able to convince enough voters that Obama's policies failed and/or didn't improve the economy efficiently enough, so we need another GOPher back in the White House.

[sakabatou]

18. More of the same, though possibly even more extreme

They'll be even try to impeach Obama.

[ncteechur]

19. house repubs impeach

[polichick]

20. They'll buy a lot of guns and claim the sky is falling.

[BlueStreak]

22. That could wipe them out in 2014

[JoePhilly]

21. More right wing terrorism.

They won't be able to get at Obama, so they'll start to attack targets that are "liberal" more and more.

[Aristus]

23. They'll survive. Just as we did with The Clown Prince.

And they can fucking-well take a seat for another four years...

[sofa king]

24. As long as they have the House, they will continue as they have.

They don't really have any other choice, even though that won't work even as poorly as it did this time. They are legislatively, procedurally, and intellectually outmatched.

The parties which were harmed the most by eighteen months of Republicans running amok in the House turned out to be the banking and finance industry, the defense industry, and the wealthy. Not a single Republican-authored bill of any consequence has passed in the Senate, much less made it far enough to be vetoed by the President.

So the hell with those guys. The House can't delay like the Senate can, and they've already ceded their ability to pull the games they pulled last year.

I do not expect them to hold on to the House, either. Most Republican voters can make money and keep their taxes lower next year by not voting at all this year. Ever met a Republican who wouldn't take that deal?

[Kalidurga]

26. This one

2) They will be just the same as they have been -- maybe worse -- refusing to cooperate on anything, and continuing with a strategy of brinksmanship because they figure their best game is to try to freeze things until 2016.


But, no problem. I can survive another 4 years I think. I will be in college for most of that time, if I go for a Masters Degree even longer. I am just kidding, it's not about me.

What will happen if they keep the house. I think they will end up losing all three branches in 2016. No matter who the Democrats run. Everyone will be sick and tired of their crap and they will know who to blame, because Republicans are proud of being obstructionists. If they lose the House what happens in 2016 is anyone's guess. I think they will still lose it all, but if things don't get better with Democrats controlling three branches, I can see the general public punishing the party at the polls.

[BlueStreak]

29. I agree on the 2016 outcome, but for a different reason

The public has STRONGLY supported positions held by Democrats. It is not even close in most cases. When you poll people on specific issues, the Democratic position often wins 70/30. Even on defense and terrorism, Obama has brought us to parity with Republicans.

The reason elections are even close is because we have a party full of pussies who are too damned timid on everything.

Obama is showing everybody how you have to deal with Republicans. You have to throw some punches. They are like the playground bully. Stand up to them and they go crying to Mommy (or Rupert Murdoch in this case, I guess.)

I hope we are cultivating a new generation of non-pussy Democrats. With that and the demographic changes that are happening, we have a real shot at a strong governing majority in 2016.

Of course, we need a compelling candidate. There are a few interesting ones waiting in the wings, but we can talk about that after the election.

[TeamPooka]

27. *WHEN* Obama is re-elected the GOP will renounce Democracy as a failed experiment

over the cliff they will go.

[BlueStreak]

30. I know quite a few right-wingers

For some reason they think that dumping a bunch of hysterical Drudge-like emails on my inbasket every day is persuasive.

I notice a distinct change in tone in the past 60 days. In fact most of them seem to have given up. I think I haven't received a single email the past 3 days -- and I normally get at least 25 a day from these morons.

I'm thinking there is a lot of write-slitting going on right now. Romney is their worst nightmare. Even if he were to win, it would still be a nightmare for them.

Actually, there is one right-winger still writing this week. He and I are actually having an intelligent conversation. He is not a dope. he has just been living in the Faux bubble fact-free for so long. Whenever he sends me one f their bogus narratives, I politely ask for references on things. That forces him to go outside the bubble. For example he was arguing that TARP was a great "investment success" the problem was "Obama's bailout" which was terrible. I pointed out that, other than saving our auto industry, Obama didn't have a "bailout program". The "bailout" WAS TARP and that was done by Bush and Paulsen months before Obama took office. I politely asked him to give me a reference to Obama's "bailout program" if I was in error. He will not be able to do so because there was no such thing, but I'd rather have him reach that understanding on his own rather than argue about it.

Same guy is arguing that Bush was great. The problem happened when Democrats took over Congress during Bush's last 2 years. I asked him to give me SPECIFIC examples of laws that the Dems passed during those two years that caused the financial collapse. I also asked him to explain why Bush didn't veto those (supposed) laws. And finally I asked him why it was that the SAME Democrats controlling Congress in 2009 began the recovery that is still underway. How could the Democratic congress be the sole cause of the collapse and then also be the rescuers in the very next term? I haven't heard the answer yet, but this ie a rare guy: a right-winger who does actually think. He has already moved off of many of the premises of his Faux narrative.

The average right-winger is in full-scale meltdown. They honestly believe that they represent America and that some freak circumstance called the black guy to sneak in the back door. When Obama wins reelection, I think this will be too much for them to bear.

[TeamPooka]

31. their in their "last throes"