Prediction:

[billh58]

In 2010, the Republicans will regain at least one of the Houses of Congress -- most likely the Senate. In 2012, the Republicans will strengthen their power in Congress, and very possibly control both Houses of Congress, albeit with slim margins. In 2012, the Republicans will regain the White House. In 2013 the Democratic Party will once again find itself in dire need of a "new direction," and desperately searching for a "messiah" to lead it out of the wilderness.

Why? Because, as usual, we Democrats are splintered by the Far-Right DLC contingent of Blue Dog traitors, the Far-Left ideologues who expect instantaneous miracles and tend to eat their young, and the apathetic "elite" middle who believe that ALL politicians are corrupt, and therefore will vote for the (usually Third-Party) "best man or woman."

We Democrats are our own worst enemies and sadly will, in all probability, never again achieve the kind of unity it takes to implement a new "New Deal" for our nation and its people. The narrowly-focused Republicans have no such problem, and will once again use the strategy of waiting until we Democrats self-destruct, and snatch Democratic defeat from the jaws of Republican victory.

Oh, look! A shiny object! Gotta go now...

[Stinky The Clown]

1. :yawn:

That game of flip flop has been going since Washington and Jefferson were around.

[liberal N proud]

2. With 311 post on this board, you are here to set us straight?

PLEASE!

You have no idea what is going to happen between now and 2010 or 2012 that gives you the ability any more than the pundits on teevee that want us all to believe their drivel.

[billh58]

5. Since when does the number

of posts on DU disqualify anyone from participating, or posting an OP? No, I'm not trying to set anyone "straight," just offering my take on what I observe.

And, of course I don't know what will happen, that is why I called it a "prediction." See how that works...?

[abq e streeter]

7. Rational, well thought observations, and as you said, just your prediction from what you've observed

You have every right to express that opinion even if it's your first post. I've been posting a lot of pessimistic doom and gloom here myself, and it comes from a lifetime of being politically aware and educating myself to see trends developing etc. I don't agree with everything you said, but it's a reasonable analysis even if I don't agree with parts of it. I'm sorry you were disrespected by another poster for having the nerve to make a prediction here before accumulating a post count in the tens of thousands.

[billh58]

9. Thanks for

the civility, and I appreciate it. For the past five years or so, I was a moderator on another Democratic site, so I am used to flamers. I have met some very nice people, and kindred spirits, since becoming active on DU (I have been a "lurking" member since 2005), and hope to learn to "fit in" with some of the 1000+ "regulars" as I feel my way around.

[truth2power]

8. ad hominem...

Why not address the substance of the poster's remarks?

No, no one has a crystal ball, but if the poster had 15,000 posts, would that make him/her any less credible on the merits? Geez!

[elocs]

10. You once had only 311 posts, so did I. Did that make anything we had to say then less valid?

Is DU supposed to be a big mutual admiration society where everyone agrees and differing opinions are told to get lost because they don't have the requisite and required number of posts? What might that number be? Does someone with 5000 posts have 5 times the validity of one with only 1000? Or how about this paragraph in the rules under "Civility":

Do not draw negative attention to the fact that someone is new, has a low post count, or recently became a member of Democratic Underground. Do not insinuate that because someone is new, they are a troll or disruptor.

[liberal N proud]

11. When I had 311 post, I treaded very lightly

And this board was much less polarized back then and less infiltrated.

We had a common cause.

[elocs]

12. That was your choice, I did too, but not everyone is like us.

I know it would be a much more perfect world though if everyone did as I did and believed as I believe.

[liberal N proud]

14. It takes time to be credible

Also at one time you didn't make statements on this board unless you could back them up with fact.

Not so anymore. Anything seems to go.

[billh58]

16. What

"facts" are required in order to make a prediction? It seems to me that all that is required, is to stand back and observe, and make an educated guess. If you do not agree, then by all means say so. I did not just become an active participant in grass roots Democratic activism -- I have been doing this for well over 30 years.

To assume a low post count equates to a lack of knowledge and experience, or credibility, seems a little elitist to me.

[billh58]

13. That was what

I was attempting to point out -- there is no longer a solid Democratic "common cause" like an imminent election. I am not new to Democratic activism, just relatively new to active participation on DU. I realize that this is a diverse community of thinking individuals, and I apologize if you actually believe that I "overstepped" my boundaries as a newbie (in your eyes).

[peacetalksforall]

3. DLC - their sole purpose is to continue to turn it all over to corporations via the Republican

Party.

Nelsons, Wasserman-Schultz, Landrieau, Leiberman, Hoyer, etc. I hope/pray that I am wrong.

[RagAss]

4. Another toilet bowl epiphany !

Get Lost.

[billh58]

6. How very

adult of you...;-)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. "All politics is local." Tip O'Neill. If the party in office screws up out they go.

The voting public doesn't give a rip about ideology. They're interested in keeping their jobs, getting their kids educated, keeping up with the neighbors, feeling "safe", and doing it all cheaply.

They'll vote for the politicians that promise them the above, whether it's actually doable or not. The reason Obama's in office is that his predecessor made such a monumental hash out of everything not because "liberal" ideology triumphed.

[billh58]

17. I agree

to a point, and the lines separating the de-facto two-Party system in this country are blurring. That does not mean, however, that those of us who actually are "bleeding heart Liberals," do not oppose the views of those we view as "cold-hearted neoconservatives."

The whole point of my "prediction," is to point out that the Republican Party (at the National level) does not bog itself down with listening to, or embracing, different and diverse points-of-view, nor does it allow splinter (and divisive) groups such as the DLC.

[tekisui]

18. I don't think your prediciton is right. I think we'll lose

some House seats. But, I don't see us losing the majority in either house. I still see probable modest gains in the Senate, 1-3 seats.

And, there is no repuke that has what it takes to win the White House against Obama. It is Obama's to lose and I don't think he has come anywhere close to that possibility. As long as the jobs numbers are better the Summer of '12, he'll be fine. If the jobs numbers are better by the Summer of '10, the House and Senate will be fine.

[billh58]

19. I sincerely hope

that I am wrong, and I will continue to do everything in my power to support President Obama and the Democratic Party.

I guess that the persistent PUMA-like presence on DU, and other Liberal boards that I frequent, wears away at my resolve from time-to-time. I believe that constructive criticism of President Obama is both allowable, and necessary, but calls for his replacement because he does not live up to everyone's immediate expectations are unproductive, and highly divisive.