uponit7771
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:05 AM
Original message |
QUESTION: Do you think we'd be talking about SS cuts if congress was 83% progressive dems? |
|
Seems like we'd be better off putting our energy into getting some red areas blue no?
Your take?
Regards
|
Kurmudgeon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:06 AM
Response to Original message |
1. 2010, the most disastrous midterm election in US history. |
uponit7771
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
Art_from_Ark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
10. One could argue that it was tied with 1994 |
|
After all, 1994 got us Newt Gingrich and the Contract On America
|
beanwire
(13 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:07 AM
Response to Original message |
|
If congress was 83% progs, there would be a lot of discussion somewhere else about turning blue areas red.
|
boppers
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:08 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Yes, because idiotic rumor-stories know no party. |
|
Remember the whole Palin-baby thing?
|
uponit7771
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. Yeap, ...Im starting to wonder if DU isn't full of people who work for the M$M |
leftstreet
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:08 AM
Response to Original message |
4. It's odd there was no talk of SS cuts when the GOP had the majority |
|
They could never EVER EVER pull it off
|
boppers
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
7. You missed it, I think. |
|
They wanted to "privatize" the program, cutting government funding.
|
uponit7771
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
8. Wasn't W willing to "privatize" SS? |
leftstreet
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
12. What stopped him? They had the majority |
|
All Republican pols have been tossing out those talking points since FDR.
|
21st Century FDR
(398 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:12 AM
Response to Original message |
9. We had 60 alleged Democrats in the Senate and a huge majority in the House |
|
...and all we got to show for it was the Mandatory Corporate Insurance Enabling Act.
|
uponit7771
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. We still didn't have a controlling share in the senate to enact any REAL change for too long |
Liberal Veteran
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
13. Key phrase: "alleged Democrats in the Senate". |
|
Many of whom knifed our party in the back when we did have a majority (on paper at least) for their own selfish reasons.
The House did a pretty good job. The Senate...not so much.
|
freshwest
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 12:21 AM
Response to Original message |
dbonds
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 01:01 AM
Response to Original message |
15. Seems like that 17% would be able to push the dems around. |
|
There is always some excuse for the corporatist to get what they want.
|
vi5
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 06:00 AM
Response to Original message |
16. Yes. Same answer as last time you posted this. N/T |
customerserviceguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jul-08-11 06:10 AM
Response to Original message |
17. Being as the Simpson Commission |
|
was formed during a time where we had solid Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, and we had what can arguably called the most progressive President in the White House since JFK, I guess I disagree with your thesis.
There are good reasons to turn red areas blue, but we dilute the Democratic Party with the only electable Democratic representatives that those areas could possibly send to Congress.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 06:36 PM
Response to Original message |