November 6, 2002
12:53 AM   Subscribe

I'm moving to Canada. Who's coming with?
posted by LimePi (213 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason:



 
Funny how things can reverse in two years.

(Life, it tends to come and go.)
posted by The Jesse Helms at 12:57 AM on November 6, 2002


Have fun!
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 1:02 AM on November 6, 2002


Makes me glad I already moved away (not for political reasons), but terribly sad to know that if it keeps on this way I am not likely ever to want to live there again.
posted by Tholian at 1:04 AM on November 6, 2002


Can you take this post out when you leave? Thanks!
posted by Danelope at 1:04 AM on November 6, 2002


Sure, run. Don't you have the courage to stay and fight for your ideals? If not, the liberals who stay to rebuild the Democratic party are better off without the likes of you.
posted by mischief at 1:08 AM on November 6, 2002


Hama7, (moments ago in election thread): Does anybody have any news about the election? Like exit polls and things? Don't bother responding here, just post it up on the front page!

Six more people just voted H7! Buuuuhhhh
posted by planetkyoto at 1:11 AM on November 6, 2002


I'm sure Barbra Streisand will come along.

Don't let the door slap you.
posted by dagny at 1:13 AM on November 6, 2002


The Netherlands and Australia also sound like good options...

Y'know, I really don't understand the appeal of the Republican party at all. Maybe someone could explain it to me. Or better yet, point out something beyond punditry out there that could explain why this has happened.
posted by namespan at 1:13 AM on November 6, 2002


Or better yet, point out something beyond punditry out there that could explain why this has happened.

In a word: oil. It is all about oil, sweet sweet black gold!
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 1:16 AM on November 6, 2002


Oil and guns! And hot chicks!

Hot, oily chicks with guns!
posted by Danelope at 1:19 AM on November 6, 2002


Mischief, not with the sort of Judiciary packing which is probably going to occur-- and judges are for life.

Besides, my fellow citizens made their choice-- they want this country to be more conservative. Who am I to argue?

Waiting until the appointees die off is going to take a while, too, and I'm not entirely sure if I want to stick around to see the carnage from the Bill of Rights being completely eviscerated (although the Patriot Act(s) have already done a pretty decent job, but I have a feeling that it's not even going to compare to whatever'll be next).
posted by LimePi at 1:24 AM on November 6, 2002


Lime: You forgot to scream, "The sky is falling. The sky is falling."

The Dems got beat by public relations: lack of leadership on their side and Rush Limbaugh rhetoric by the jackasses. Your first impulse to surrender indicates you certainly are not the leader needed for the grass roots fight facing the liberals over the next two years.

Go on, scram!
posted by mischief at 1:32 AM on November 6, 2002


"In paranoid thinking a person believes he has detected a conspiracy--that is,
a hidden (and malevolent) pattern in the behavior of friends, associates or
governments--where in fact no such pattern exists. If there is such a
conspiracy, the subject may be profoundly anxious, but his thinking is not
necessarily paranoid. A famous case involves James Forrestal, the first
U.S. Secretary of of Defense. At the end of World War II, Forrestal was
convinced that Israeli secret agents were following him everywhere. His
physicians, equally convinced of his idee fixe, diagnosed him as
paranoid and confined him to an upper storey of Walter Reed Army Hospital,
from which he plunged to his death , partly because of inadequate supervision
by hospital personnel, overly deferential to to one of his exalted rank.
Later it was discovered that Forrestal was indeed being followed by Israeli
agents who were worried that he might reach a secret understanding with
representatives of Arab nations. Forrestal had other problems, but having
his valid perception labeled paranoid did not help his condition.

In times of rapid social change there are bound to be conspiracies, both by
those in favor of change and by those defending the status quo, the latter
more than the former in recent American political history. Detecting
conspiracies when there are no conspiracies is a symptom of paranoia;
detecting them when they exist is a sign of mental health. An aquaintance
of mine says, "In America today, if you're not a little paranoid you're out
of your mind." The remark however, has global applicability."

Carl Sagan
"The Dragons of Eden" 1977

:::positivity::: Now we're into the ten year plan.
posted by crasspastor at 1:35 AM on November 6, 2002


The implications of an all-Republican majority federal government certainly give liberal causes that much more urgency. That is a pretty pathetic silver lining, though.

That said, I plan to continue to fight for what I think is right.

I fear the day when Bush makes corporate tax cuts permanent and contributes even more to the increasing gap between rich and poor. Not to mention judicial appointments and all kinds of other fun stuff.

Maybe Mondale can pull it out in Minnesota and, as I've heard rumored, another Republican will become an "independent", restoring a slim majority or a tie to the Democrats. It's still possible.

On preview, thanks for the Sagan quote, crasspastor. People in this country seem to be too afraid to ask the tough questions. (See Wellstone's death: an accident? and World Socialist reader responses, via Google. Too bad the mainstream media isn't posing these questions.)
posted by gohlkus at 1:49 AM on November 6, 2002


Hot Damn!

LimePi: Make sure to take plenty of warm clothes, and say hi to Alec Baldwin!

Six more people just voted H7! Buuuuhhhh

Good news, but crap posts.

How sweet it is.
posted by hama7 at 1:51 AM on November 6, 2002


Yeah i'm gonna stay. I'll just drink more. And kvetch. Maybe even march.

As sad as it is for a lib'rul like myself to see the dem's senate majority go, I think it probably had to happen. They need to regroup, differentiate themselves from the republicans better, and find a more coherent voice.

In the meantime, I've developed a diabolical phrase to scare Republicans: Hillary Clinton in '04.
posted by condour75 at 1:54 AM on November 6, 2002


mischief- Ever hear of hyperbole? ...apparently not.

I've been looking at a map of Canada, and Québec seems like a nice place to live.

Crasspastor- That reminds me of Slopthrop's Third Proverb for Paranoids:

If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.
posted by LimePi at 1:57 AM on November 6, 2002


Hillary doesn't scare the Republicans. She could never carry the South. The Democrats need strong unknowns willing to piss off the hard left to woo back the center, and not just politicians either, but mouthpieces who can get themselves heard over the airwaves.

Limey: Hyperbole is what got the Democrats beat!
posted by mischief at 2:00 AM on November 6, 2002


the dems need to regroup. they've lost their touch in a serious way. as both lib icky faggot, i say: you need to stay. pretty please?
posted by patricking at 2:03 AM on November 6, 2002


(missing "and", sorry, fairly obvious where it should be.)
posted by patricking at 2:04 AM on November 6, 2002


My personal prediction:

Looking for a reason for last night's results, the Democrats will go hard-left, following Gore's lead, in order to attract the Dem "core" This will alienate the center of the Democrat party, and more so with American's as a whole. Republicans will be very successful in passing legislation, with the help of the remaining Democrats in the center. With a combination of war and a recovering(ed?) economy, Bush will be re-elected in '04.

Just my thoughts, that I am sure some of you will disagree with.
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 2:11 AM on November 6, 2002


Hyperbole utterly aside, I fear for the country I love tonight.

Let me say that again, plainly and clearly: I love America. I enlisted and served in the United States Army partly out of that love.

I hold the Constitution of the United States of America as one of the highest achievements of the human species, and the Bill of Rights as a profoundly decent statement of the best that is in us.

Despite their posturing, George Bush, Dick Cheney, and John Ashcroft hold neither of these compacts sacred, and for that reason if for no other I call them traitors, with full understanding of that word's weight. It will take decades to repair the damage they are doing and will continue to do to the land, the place, and the nation I call home.

I fear for my nation tonight.
posted by adamgreenfield at 2:17 AM on November 6, 2002


And the fields will be littered with corpses, of course.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:18 AM on November 6, 2002


Whoops. That was meant to add to Steve's prognostications above.

What Adam said, but me, I fear for the whole damn planet.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:20 AM on November 6, 2002


condourI've developed a diabolical phrase to scare Republicans: Hillary Clinton in '04.

I printed "Hillary2000" bumper stickers in 1992, a week after the election, back when Gore was chiefly thought of as the guy who hypnotizes chickens. I am now thinking "Clinton-Boxer 2004". Why not give the ladies a chance? Of course, I am now woefully out of touch with the times.
posted by planetkyoto at 2:21 AM on November 6, 2002


Funny Adam, I see this as the beginning of the repair...
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 2:25 AM on November 6, 2002


Aye LimePi. Pynchon. Good lord people, what are we going to do? This does not bode well for any of us, repub or progressive. We're now forever enlisted in the act of demanding another's papers. It will get worse. We unfortunately have no other leg to stand on than to take to the streets and hop up and down on that one leg.

What a disaster America has become. I'm so sorry planet Earth.
posted by crasspastor at 2:26 AM on November 6, 2002


planetk: that works too! Or Clinton-Winfrey. First National book club entry: Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire

Conservatives: sorry if we liberals are Xtra-snarky tonight. Y'all won, we're pissed. Let us vent. Thanks!
posted by condour75 at 2:29 AM on November 6, 2002


How, Steve? How can you honestly say that?

Invade Iraq without a global consensus that the time is come, and mark my words there will be hell to pay for generations. Not from Iraq, which will fall in a week, but from the economic, social, ethical, environmental and technological fallout from our having declared ourselves a rogue nation.

Look, I don't often take Tom Friedman seriously, but read his piece in today's NYTimes. Surely you've traveled enough to know that what he says is true: much of the world still (sorry stav, other international folx) looks to America for hope and optimism. When we put forward the most craven and self-serving among us, we piss all over that hope. How on earth is that repair?

I could go on.
posted by adamgreenfield at 2:31 AM on November 6, 2002


Hot investment tips for 2003!

* Porn! Ashcroft will be sure to get rid of all that awful smut.
* RU-486: Why would anyone want to mess with back-alley butchers when a bit of (soon to be) black market Mifepristone will do the trick from the comfort of your own home?
* KI Tablets: With the new tactical nukes we'll be testing, a bit of the ol' fallout will be about (well, healthful background radiation-- no more than a chest X-ray, they'll say). But, decay products are no problem with a thyroid flooded with the good iodine, not the bad radioactive cancer-y kind.
* Guns: Because we're Americans, dammit, and Louis Theroux needs something to snigger at. Wait, he's already done the guns, right? Ah. Because concealed carry permits will be as easy to get as a library card, and just as common.
posted by LimePi at 2:44 AM on November 6, 2002


Thanks for linking to the Friedman adam, I hadn't seen that.

He's right about American optimism, and it's up to the tattered remnants of the Left to provide it. This isn't the time for cynicism, resignation, and shoulder-shrugging. Don't go softly into the next two years. Organize, march, discuss, promote your viewpoint. Be angry at this loss, at the failure of your friends to come out and vote. Demand more from the government which asks for your allegiance. And sacrifice more for the ideals you were brought up with.
posted by condour75 at 2:46 AM on November 6, 2002


Well, first off Adam, we have not invaded Iraq with out global consensus, the UN is yet to vote. And even if the UN does not agree with us, their are many other nations that stand with us, regardless. As for the United States being a "rogue nation", well as long as we have a military budget the size of the next 15 countries combined, and remain the preeminent trading partner in the world, I'm not going to sweat it. No civilized nation has reason to attack us.

As for pissing on hope, how about this view point: We are helping the world rid itself of an evil that threatens everyone, we are encouraging democracy in the Middle East by ridding it of a dictator that threatens it's middle eastern neighbors. I think the young people in Iran, who overwhelmingly support the US, would be very hopeful about that.

I guess the fundamental issue that I see us disagreeing on, is that you belive that the U.S. owes something to the "world community" where I do not. Treaties and alliances are to be used to our advantage, and should be abandoned when they are an obstacle to our goals.

There is no point in being the biggest kid on the block, when you voluntarily tie your hands behind your back.

But nevermind, because I am sure that these are inflammatory opinions that immediately collapse under scrutiny...
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 2:46 AM on November 6, 2002


No, they're valid and internally consistent, but they're not conducive to the long-term survival of the society I think we both care quite a good deal for.

BTW, Iranian kids - and I actually know a few - do seem to love America. They also hate George Bush. (For the wrong reasons, namely that "he's run by the Jews", but at least they do hate him.)
posted by adamgreenfield at 2:51 AM on November 6, 2002


Thanks, guys, for reminding me that it's not only conservatives who are capable of spouting ridiculous, hyperbolic, chicken little conspiracy bs when their team doesn't do well in democratic elections.

I came of political age during Bush I's term, but I didn't really witness examples of this unfortunate behaviour (spouting ridiculous, hyperbolic, chicken little conspiracy bs) until Clinton's presidency. As we're all aware, the conservatives were responsible for blathering loads of BS during those dark (according to many) times.

Since I had never seen liberals engaging in the same sort of stupidity, at least to the degree that some conservatives had, I though (naively), that said stupidity was something that belonged purely in the domain of right wing nuts.

This thread is a welcome reminder that nuts exist on both sides of the spectrum. As for me, I'll remain somewhere in the middle, happy that I'm not caught up in some groupthink, frothing at the mouth about impending (not really) doom.
posted by syzygy at 2:52 AM on November 6, 2002


but at least they do hate him

wow
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 2:53 AM on November 6, 2002


Al Gore is hard left?

Al Gore?

That's sort of like saying that Pat Benetar is Death Metal.
posted by Grangousier at 2:53 AM on November 6, 2002


Steve_at_Linnwood: wow

Yeah, Steve, I remember hearing this kind of invective coming out of the mouths of some conservatives not too long ago. I always cringed when I heard it, and thought it made them look pretty much like fools.

Now I'm hearing it from liberals, and, well, my reaction is about the same...
posted by syzygy at 2:56 AM on November 6, 2002


Well. Gore's last major speech was blatant pandering to the hard-left... I am not alone in believing that Gore is attempting to recreate his self in that image.
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 2:56 AM on November 6, 2002


If you think it's ridiculous now syzygy wait a bit. It's destined to get out of hand. Since we don't have guns to muzzle we instead have mouths to cork up. Cork 'em up boys. Get set. Your uniform is pressed and ready.
posted by crasspastor at 3:03 AM on November 6, 2002



posted by The Jesse Helms at 3:12 AM on November 6, 2002


syzygy- Whoa, there, kiddo. No actual conspiracy theories have entered the arena, only some comments about paranoia. And, despite your (and other's) claims of "chicken little"-ism, this is something that hasn't happened since 1932, and lookit all the nifty stuff that FDR got to do when it was 1932...

The ad-hoc "system" of checks and balances provided by the Senate/Executive opposition prevents either side from doing anything too extreme (and, yes, liberals can be extreme, retarded, or extremely retarded. Many are).

Well, it did.

And I'd say there's a big difference between conservatives pissing and moaning about Clinton, who "finally" got rid of welfare and didn't accomplish much else, as opposed to Dubya (and his crew's) incessant attempts to trigger WW III in the new powder keg of the world-- the Middle East.
posted by LimePi at 3:14 AM on November 6, 2002


Finally..........the Rock.......I mean the Republicans.......have come back to Congress and the Senate!

Seriously though, 8 years of Uncle Bill, and when he leaves office it's all messed up. If he was that good as all the democrats say, then why did everything go south so fast?!?
posted by ericdano at 3:14 AM on November 6, 2002


Hah! Posted at 3:14 AM. Folks, that was not planned in the least. Really. It was a coincidence.
posted by LimePi at 3:16 AM on November 6, 2002


If you are a Dem and upset by Tuesday, I have but fourteen words which, if heeded, will change the fate of your party in two years:

Quit Listening To Bill Clinton and his Parroting Puppet Boy Terry McAuliffe.

Especially McAuliffe, who was too busy bragging and making ludicrous predictions ("Kirk is our sleeper!" "Jean Carnahan has energized Missourians, she's a lock." "Bush is definitely going to lose!") to actually do a damned thing to organize his party and present them as a real, believable alternative with real, believable alternative goals, ideals and positions that they would institute on behalf of Americans if they were elected over their GOP counterparts.

It's all about leadership. If you devastated Dems continue to allow your party to be led by the likes of McAuliffe and Daschle (who shot his wad on his boy Tim Johnson while ignoring the rest of the country and just lost his Senate leadership in the bargain) then you will continue to lose.

Btw, the AP just called Minnesota for Norm Coleman.
posted by Dreama at 3:17 AM on November 6, 2002


No actual conspiracy theories have entered the arena, only some comments about paranoia.

Really? What about this:

People in this country seem to be too afraid to ask the tough questions. (See Wellstone's death: an accident? and World Socialist reader responses, via Google. Too bad the mainstream media isn't posing these questions.)
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 3:44 AM on November 6, 2002


I would agree with the McAuliffe animosity. What an a-hole. And that Wellstone "memorial," it's enough to confirm every bad taste, indecency fear I ever had about liberals. Truly disgusting.

Guess I'm an independent voter, now.
posted by ParisParamus at 3:46 AM on November 6, 2002


Great. Now the whole damn country is run by Republicans... the White House, Congress, and even the Supreme Court. Abortion rights? The environment? Wars? Big business? What are we in for? Everyone I know in Minnesota thought Mondale was a sure thing. I can't bring myself to say Senator Coleman. *shudder* We may indeed have to move to Canada. Or at least bitch a whole lot.
posted by Dok Millennium at 3:50 AM on November 6, 2002


This is my Final Post.

Enter: E.Dole. The Big E. Edoe. Lizzy Big Frizz.

Cross my heart and - I'm dead.
posted by The Jesse Helms at 3:53 AM on November 6, 2002


Guess the big anti-war protest in Washington did a (A-)HOLE lot of good...
posted by ParisParamus at 3:57 AM on November 6, 2002


Strap on your jack boots, boys, it's time to goose step!
posted by Hall at 3:58 AM on November 6, 2002


LimePi: Dubya (and his crew's) incessant attempts to trigger WW III in the new powder keg of the world-- the Middle East.

Steve covered the conspiracy angle already, but just to clarify, when I say, "ridiculous, hyperbolic, chicken little conspiracy bs," I'm casting a wide net. Here's what I wish to catch therein:
"Ridiculous bs," "hyperbolic bs," "chicken little bs," "conspiracy bs," and any combination of those modifiers and the noun "bs."

Sorry if it wasn't clear - I traded away some clarity in return for brevity. As a further clarification, I lead off this post with a quote from you. My intention was to provide everyone here with an example of a statement that, in my opinion, fit squarely in my aforementioned wide net.
posted by syzygy at 4:01 AM on November 6, 2002


I'm a independent and here's just some of the things we can expect.

War and more war. After Iraq, Bush goes for Iran. Not to mention whatever the hell is going on in Afghanistan.

More Corporate tax breaks.

Capital Gains tax abolished, Estate tax abolished.

Social Security at least partly transferred to Wall Street.

Minimum Wage law abolished.

Flag Burning amendment passed.

School Prayer amendment passed.

Censorship of the arts and NEA abolished.

Musicians and filmakers sued.

Public Broadcasting funding eliminated.

Brady Bill abolished.

Ashcroft's Narc Squad (TIPS) returns: Your phone man is taking notes and the cable guy is taking pictures. Your ISP just handed over your logs.

Crackdowns on internet content. Clean your hard drive.

At least 2 Supreme Court Justice retirements in the next year. Jerry Falwell picks the replacements. Bork returns.

Ladies, your uterus now belongs to the Republican Party. So what if the condom broke? You're having it.


My conscience is clean, I didn't vote for any Repubs. Have a nice day.
posted by BarneyFifesBullet at 4:01 AM on November 6, 2002


No civilized nation has reason to attack us.

Of course not.
Steve, I'm afraid you'll have to worry about Al Qaeda attacks (radiological et al.), not about Sweden trying to invade you

Treaties and alliances are to be used to our advantage, and should be abandoned when they are an obstacle to our goals.

Cool. BUt you have to decide once and for all, Steve: is the US this great democratic force that will enlighten all those dark-skinned people, or is it simply the biggest bully around? Choose your opinion, and try to stick with it if you want to be consistent

Guess I'm an independent voter, now

So you're not a Likud registered voter anymore?


Barney:
no, not Bork, he's too old now.
I'd say Chief Justice Kennneth Starr
posted by matteo at 4:05 AM on November 6, 2002


I'm a liberal, and I'm angry and frustrated this morning, and I wonder what I an do to get Democrats elected over the next six years.

We all know what the Republicans are for: tax cuts, increased defense spending, Social Security privatization, making sure that pharmaceutical companies make a lot of profit so they can continue to do research and market new drugs, securing access to oil, and, above all, securing civilians against terrorist attack.

On the other hand, I don't know what Democrats are for. And I'm a Democrat.

Liberals can agree with some, but not all, of the GOP's goals. Liberals can disagree with ways to achieve some of those goals. But most of all, liberals can explain what their goals are and how they plan to achieve them.

Or they can bitch and moan like the Republicans did for eight years. Or make empty "threats" of moving to Canada.
posted by Holden at 4:07 AM on November 6, 2002


Oh, yeah. Heh. Didn't notice that world socialist conspiracy dealymabobber. That's just as bad as the right's previous blather about the "assassination" of Vince Foster, who (apparently) eliminated his own map...

Hell, both theories are saner than David Icke, though-- and speaking of alien lizards:

I'm voting for Cthulu in 2004, or Lyndon LaRouche. Maybe they'll share the Reform ticket.
posted by LimePi at 4:11 AM on November 6, 2002


be afraid, be very afraid!
posted by JonnyX at 4:18 AM on November 6, 2002


Holden- your final comment is quite ironic, especially when compared to the thoughts of your literary namesake-- "Screw the cabin up North in the middle of nowhere, I'm going to hang out with all these (political) phonies," you seem to say.

Then again, Holden WAS eventually institutionalized...
posted by LimePi at 4:19 AM on November 6, 2002


Canadian Comment:
I encourage all American Democrats to stay home and fight for the causes they believe in. We have too many left wingers here already.
posted by pooligan at 4:23 AM on November 6, 2002


As a liberally minded independent, I find yesterday's congressional elections thoroughly frightening. But: what honestly can one expect? The Democrats ran a 'me, too' campaign, having both abandoned the majority of the issues that made them a viable second party and lacking the leadership to articulate a vision entirely distinguishable form the Republican party. Instead, we had Democrat policy positions like: war in Iraq? Yeah, me too. Tax cuts? I like tax cuts, too. Come gun control, abortion rights, or the environment--all the issues that one could most readily challenge the Republican machine--and all the Democrats provided was shameful silence. They are, quite honestly, the worst run party in over two decades. I would like to think that the bright spot here is that the Democrats will reorganize, transform themselves. But I don't think it's going to happen. Despite poll after poll showing that the political centre of the populace is slightly to the left, the certainty of the political centre of the money (which is slanted firmly to the right) will continue to prohibit real leadership for the Democrats and even the viability of a two party system. The really horrifying reality check comes when you ask yourself, had Dems retained control of the Senate, would the majority of the policies pushed through Congress be any different?
posted by hank_14 at 4:32 AM on November 6, 2002


Matteo: What are you talking about?

I'm afraid you'll have to worry about Al Qaeda attacks (radiological et al.), not about Sweden trying to invade you

We haven't invaded Iraq, and al-Qaeda is already attacking us.

That makes no sense.

And being the "great democratic force" means sometimes you have to be pushy. Not everything comes as easy and neat as we would all like. That is reality.
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 4:49 AM on November 6, 2002


I'm a liberal, and I'm angry and frustrated this morning, and I wonder what I an do to get Democrats elected over the next six years.

Fuck Democrats. Fuck Republicans. Fuck them both up their stupid asses.

If the Democrats actually had vision and integrity, people might actually want to vote for them. The fact that Wellstone is dead is actually less tragic than the fact that there is hardly a Democrat in Congress who can fit into the shoes he left behind.

Anyone in the role of leadership becomes an instant hero-figure in the wake of national tragedy. Remember how we all sat back and laughed at our idiot President? His daily dysfunctional utterances were one of the highlights of the day. Remember how New Yorkers loved to hate Giuliani? These men did nothing to turn the tide of public opinion, other than to wrap themselves in the flag and ride on the coattails of 3,000 murdered human beings.

It takes a whole lot of integrity to shine when competing against an opponent who continues to bask in undeserved glory.

The Democrats just don't have it. If there is no groundswell for a legitimate third party, we're all screwed.

Anyway, some words of advice: Have your identification on your person at all times, and present it without question when asked. If you don't know the Pledge of Allegiance, the words to the Star-Spangled Banner, and the Lord's Prayer, learn them now. You will be required to recite them later.

Keep your hands and arms inside the car at all times. It's going to be a bumpy ride.
posted by tpoh.org at 4:51 AM on November 6, 2002


Have your identification on your person at all times, and present it without question when asked. If you don't know the Pledge of Allegiance, the words to the Star-Spangled Banner, and the Lord's Prayer, learn them now.

Oh, please. That kind of rhetoric isn't going to get Democrats elected.
posted by Holden at 5:03 AM on November 6, 2002


Remember how we all sat back and laughed at our idiot President?

You still sure about that statement? I think this "idiot" outsmarted his political opponents last night...

Just keep underestimating him...

I just watched Dick Gephardt on FOX & Tom Daschle on CNN and they both blamed their lack of vision on 9/11. That is weak. You had poor economic conditions, corporate scandals, and a President that "everyone" thought was a moron, and yet they could not take advantage of this. And you want to blame this on 9/11? You need to get a grip. The Democrats gave people no reason to vote for them.

Daschle & Co. thought "me too" would fly with voters. Why vote for a Democrat that parrots a Republican, when you can just vote for the Republican?

But you want to know who really hurt the Dems last night? The far left anti-war movement. They sure as hell didn't vote Republican, but couldn't over come the disillusionment they felt with Democrats that voted for war. Instead of voting for the Democrats, putting differences aside to keep the GOP from power, they stayed home. I hope every last one of you that has expressed angst over the war voted... If you didn't, you deserve what you got...
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 5:14 AM on November 6, 2002


The Democrats really have no one to blame but themselves for this one. The Republicans ran on the issues that President Bush has been promoting since 2000. While the Democrats liked to talk about domestic policy over and above foreign polcy, they offered no solutions. They campaigned as "Bush Lite" and failed miserably. It's time to get off the Clinton train before it derails the party completely.
posted by marcusb at 5:17 AM on November 6, 2002


Granted, it's going to be a tough ride for the next few years as our Constitution is completely done away with and the United States is not recognized as a Republic any longer, rather we are now officially a big business Oligarchy.

Now is not the time to run to Canada or anywhere else. Obviously the Democrats have a dearth of leadership. There is no real direction, no real leadership, no real feeling from the left. Now is the time for all of us who are fed up with the Republicans and the Democrats as well to get busy, to fight the power.

It's nice that we all can post here on MeFi, but what are we really doing? How many of us have actually voted? How many of us have actually volunteered for something that we believe in? From either side? Not many I would venture to guess.

Are we going to sit on our collective asses and post and whine and moan here and on other sites, or our we going to get off our fat and do something about it?

I've been volunteering, I've been working. I'm going to continue my efforts and see if I can't make a difference somehow.
posted by damnitkage at 5:18 AM on November 6, 2002


hank_14, you read my mind.

I'll be among the first here to there's simply no spin to it: Democrats just had their asses kicked brutally. But I'm not going to believe any of this gloating "oh, this is a victory for the conservative agenda" rhetoric because it isn't.

These campaigns weren't about gun control and women's rights and prescription drug coverage. It amazes me that with the elections over, all these pundits are taking twenty minutes to provide their analysis, when it really comes down to one statement: the American people support a war against Iraq.

So, although Steve was being sarcastic way up there, he was really right... this is (sorta) about the oil. The tragic irony is that yes, this wasn't about the "conservative agenda..." that's merely what's going to be slid in along the way as the great War Against Evil kicks in.

And Steve, PLEASE don't give Bush credit on this. This wasn't Republicas winning, it was Democrats losing. Bush isn't some Machiavellian genius who orchestrated this takeover- the fact is Republicans are just as suprised about this outcome as Democrats, just a hell of a lot more happily.

Of course this is about 9/11 for the exact reason you yourself cited. The economy is still going to be in the crapper and the corporate scandals still happened, and the president, I'm sorry to break to you, isn't suddenly a smarter man because 3,000 people were murdered. But to say that people wouldn't be thinking any more about all of those things without the War on Terrorism going on is foolishly naive.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 5:23 AM on November 6, 2002


Like I said: Just keep underestimating him...
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 5:25 AM on November 6, 2002


I love the smell of napalmed Democrats in the morning. Smells like victory.
posted by blogRot at 5:27 AM on November 6, 2002


This wasn't Republicas winning, it was Democrats losing.

Exactly. Until the Democrats, or another opposition party, has an agenda - some kind of motivation other than not losing, the people with the agenda, right or wrong, will continue to win. They have a drive and a strong motivation to push their agenda forward. Its basic human nature in the art of battle, if you don't have something to fight for and you're just fearing for your life, you lose.
posted by kat at 5:31 AM on November 6, 2002


the united states of sheeplike beings. buhhh.
posted by quonsar at 5:35 AM on November 6, 2002


Hey watch it, in Canada liberal does not mean the same thing as in the US. You all equate liberal to communist-like ideal system of high taxes and free money for the poor...we call that socialist up here.

Liberal is a political party, and isn't that "Liberal".

What you need to worry about is how the Repubs are changing the meaning of the word liberal, and using it against you.
posted by CrazyJub at 5:35 AM on November 6, 2002


Like I said: Just keep underestimating him...

Well, that was thoughtful and detailed, Steve.

If you bothered to read my post instead of just adding another gloat to your post count, you'd have realized that my entire point was that the only people who I underestimated were the Democrats- their long history of being complete disorganized pussies paid off in full last night.

The issue that came into play was job performance- in some weird stupid stupor that I might just have to blame on the drinking water, the American people decided that the Republicans actually do their job of trying to fuck up the country while the Democrats continuously fail at their job of trying to fix it. No one actually bothered to care about what jobs everyone was doing, only who was actually getting it done.

I've never underestimated Bush. He's done exactly what I've expected him to do the two years he's been in office. When the American people elect a right-wing semi-intelligent religious freak, they're going to get right-wing semi-intelligent religiously freakish government.

The Democrats, on the other hand, have done nearly nothing I've asked them to do. It isn't that I suddenly support the Republican agenda- it's that I'm completely disgusted that Democrats can't support the Democratic agenda. They decided to run on the typical "what are they going to do, vote Republican?" platform, and it actually happened this time.

The new control of government is going to give us, most likely, a war in Iraq, a passing of an even greater obscene tax cut, the repeal of the estate tax and other perks for rich people, more regulations and rules to restrict abortion (though always in a slow and subtle way until he just flat-out appoints new Supreme Court justices) and more power at the hands of an Attorney General who has an already proven blatant disregard for nearly every single amendment to the Constitution.

For me to "underestimate" Bush would imply that I didn't expect any of these things to have happened or to be happening again. Are you trying to convince me that he's NOT going to do any of these things, becuase that would be the first good news I've heard in the last 14 hours or so.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 5:43 AM on November 6, 2002


Steve, again, what I am talking about is:

you can either be the biggest baddest motherfucker around, and say, to use your elegantly pragmatic wording, that "treaties and alliances are to be used to our advantage, and should be abandoned when they are an obstacle to our goals". Your words, not mine. Realpolitik, et cetera, OK?

OR

You can be this great force for moral good you like to brag about

You can either be feared for your ability to do whatever the fuck you like to, or respected for your commtiment to democracy. you can't have both. you can't assume people all over the world are going to like you if you "abandon treaties when they are obstacle to your goals". Take your Fortress, and be hated by three quarters of the world's population, or more. Or, you can try to be good.
You can't be Kissinger and FDR at the same time
It's not very difficult to grasp this concept
posted by matteo at 5:45 AM on November 6, 2002


If stavrosthewonderchicken moves back to the Big Up There to throw us a welcoming party, I'll gladly move. You Canucks have better commercials on TV anyhow (I just need to be able to bring my NHL Center ICE subscription with me).

Get me a donut, you hoser.
posted by adampsyche at 5:47 AM on November 6, 2002


damnitkage: Granted, it's going to be a tough ride for the next few years as our Constitution is completely done away with and the United States is not recognized as a Republic any longer, rather we are now officially a big business Oligarchy.

tpoh.org: Have your identification on your person at all times, and present it without question when asked. If you don't know the Pledge of Allegiance, the words to the Star-Spangled Banner, and the Lord's Prayer, learn them now.

See, I read hilarious posts like these, and hope like hell that they will be followed by a punchline, or a belated </sarcasm> closing tag. All too often in this space, they are not.

I would like to suggest that some of you take a deep breath, take a break from Metafilter, and return only when you're able to string two sentences together without lamenting the impending doom of American democracy and the civilized world as we know it. Really, you'd be doing yourselves, your (seemingly almost nonexistent) level headed comrades (Holden), and your agenda a huge favor.
posted by syzygy at 5:53 AM on November 6, 2002


Who's going to be the first to blame Nader for... something? ;)
posted by cratchit at 5:53 AM on November 6, 2002


Well, cratchit, he gave W the White House two years ago. This time, he got some well-deserved rest. Isn't that enough?
posted by matteo at 5:58 AM on November 6, 2002


See, I read hilarious posts like these, and hope like hell that they will be followed by a punchline, or a belated closing tag. All too often in this space, they are not.
posted by adampsyche at 5:58 AM on November 6, 2002


This wasn't Republicas winning, it was Democrats losing.

Wrong. George and Laura Bush and Dick and Lynne Cheney campaigned like dervishes the final couple of weeks. They spent a lot of time and money and risked a lot of political credibility to get Republicans elected to Congress and governor's mansions, and the gamble paid off. They ran great campaigns and they gave people a reason to vote for Republicans.

As Steve notes, Democrats keep underestimating Bush. They'll underestimate him through 2004, when he wins in a Nixon-like landslide. The guy and his team have mad political skillz. Too bad the Democrats are unwilling to acknowledge his strengths and confront them head-on.

The first step toward defeating a capable opponent is to get over your contempt for him.
posted by Holden at 6:05 AM on November 6, 2002


The fat lady has sung. The changes in our government are qualitatively different than anything that has gone before, and yesterday's results will enable it now to change beyond recognition. Bush and his cronies are fascists, not democrats (small D), and although this is not true of all Republicans, the rotten system and their own moral cowardice ensures that they will give away the keys to the store.

Mark my words: The United States of America as it has existed for 226 years no longer exists. This is not hyperbole. I am not a liberal. I am not and have never been a Democrat. But the truth is now brutally apparent. We are at the mercy of evil men.

Chicken Little or Cassandra? Wait and see.

Canada, hmm? I'm looking at Europe myself. I repeat this plea in all seriousness.
posted by rushmc at 6:06 AM on November 6, 2002


Enjoy the Great White North. Hoser.

Seriously, though -- the Dems are going to have to face up to the fact that they are completely disconnected from the majority of people out there. The GOP victories yesterday were a resounding affirmation of the Bush administration and policies (both foreign and domestic). Whether the Left likes it or not.

Even in the Liberal bastion of Minnesota, last night we elected a GOP senator and a GOP governor. This is bad news indeed if you're a Democrat; if you can't win in Minnesota, you might as well hang it up and go into the farm-implements business.
posted by mrmanley at 6:15 AM on November 6, 2002


Nice Rushmc. I'm reminded of Marcus Aurelius' quote "Are you tired of enduring evil men?...considering you are one."
This election was simple-the majority of Americans want to fight terrorism and don't think the Democrats are up to the task.
As long as the Left sincerely believes that Ashcroft's fascism is a greater threat than the present Islamofascism-they will stay out of power.
posted by quercus at 6:23 AM on November 6, 2002


Rushmc is right, even if in abstraction. The evil at work here as a referent (though we should not forget the terrorist role in this election, more confirmation that terrorism reinforces a polarized, eithor/or worldview) is not a ideological, partisan evil found in some platform or campaign. The "evil" at work comes from the language of Bush's helpers, not Bush himself. Rumsfeld has advocated a version of NMD since before we signed, ratified, and recently abrogated the ABM treaty. Ashcroft has founded his political history on some dubious racial practices and has a largely contingent respect for the Bill of Rights. And Cheney (along with several others), who has matured and earned his fortune through close ties with defense and energy companies, sees the corporate notion of distance and abstraction and brutal efficiency as the perfect solution to the exigencies of the world. Look, the debate over underestimating Bush (or misunderestimating, as Bush himself put it) is a red herring - Bush will remain, like every President, in the grip of his handlers, and it is that grip that is problematic.

Consider a couple important linguistic shifts (ideographic shifts, to use the expression of the recently departed Michael McGee): 1) liberal now refers in mainstream media use to everything from communism to centrist gun control. Anything involving government regulation, sans abortion, the definition of marriage and the drug war, falls under the liberal purview. 2) The Axis of Evil, a self-fulfilling amalgam of WWII and Reagan rhetoric has become a part of everyday life. At the same moment when every politician declares the war on terror to be unlike any previous war (a facile claim), the discourse of that war enjoins a state-centered approach to the conflict that dooms it from the get go. We will be distracted by Iraq, and North Korea, infamous for their nuclear brinksmanship games, announces a nuclear program in process (yet again) in order to force concessions from the West and its neighbors. Of course, we know that the supposed problem isn't that people have nukes (Lord knows we have tons of them, don't want to regulate them (I refer again to the abrogation of the ABM treaty) any more than we want to enforce the Biological Weapons Convention despite our supposed panic over impending biological attacks (we pulled out of enforcement negotiations about a month and a half ago). The Axis of Evil becomes a trope, one with dangerous consequences both for the efficacy of the war on terror and the diplomatic involvment, realist or idealist, with the rest of the world.

Now that being said, the sad part of the whole political debacle is the absurdity that operates under the name of the Democratic Party. Incompetent campaign managers, poor platform construction, and an inability to do anything that stands up for a belief system, much less their belief system. It's why McCain is such a phenom at this point without being a superstar; he seems like a bedrock of convictions, willing to hold to them even when the rest of his own party condemns him. Regardless of your opinion of his beliefs, an examination of his situation after the 2000 primaries to present is quite instructive if one really wants a model to revitalize politics.

Assuming, of course, and this is a large assumption, that it's worth revitalizing them at all.
posted by hank_14 at 6:24 AM on November 6, 2002


Holden: I think some people here need to read Sun Tzu's Art of War:

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.
If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat.
If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.


The Democrats knew neither themselves or their enemy...
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 6:25 AM on November 6, 2002


I, for one, welcome our new republican overlords.
posted by Stan Chin at 6:25 AM on November 6, 2002


Sigh. Anyone who thinks the elections represented a victory for the Republic platform lives in a sort of self-satisfying delusion. Check the polls, check the ethnographies. Determine where those individuals not paid by politicians find the majority of public opinion. Now compare those findings to the number of people who vote, the reasons people do not vote, the failure to distinguish between Bush and Bush Lite and add in several Billion dollars worth of advertising. If you think this election, or any election for that matter (barring a few select examples) represents a victory for a platform and/or policies, than quite honestly, you're an idiot.
posted by hank_14 at 6:27 AM on November 6, 2002


I'm surprised no one has mentioned voting patterns in all of this. I voted last night at the almost-close of the voting booths, and I was the only person from my street who voted, and the names on the list that had not been crossed off FAR outnumbered the people who came to vote. That is the true disgrace folks. Every news station I watched last night agreed that whenever there is more-than-average voter turnout, the Dems win. You can always count on the Republicans to get out there and vote. It's the Democrats who have to be kicked in the ass.

I still say that anyone who doesn't vote loses their right to vote for one subsequent election. If you didn't want to vote this year, then you won't be worried about not being allowed to vote in the next election. If that bothers you, then get out there and vote, and exercise your right. I can't even count the number of people I know who do not vote and I talk till I am blue in the face about it. But these same people who NEVER vote will get their panties in a bunch when you suggest to them that perhaos they should be denied the right to vote. Why do they care if they never exercise that vote in the first place?

The results in CT were SO close that you cannot possibly think that your one vote does not matter. Especially when you combine that with the thousands of other people who think their votes can't make a difference.
posted by archimago at 6:28 AM on November 6, 2002


Steve_at_Linnwood

I hope every last one of you that has expressed angst over the war voted...

I did, fuck you very much. I always do. I consider myself pretty liberal but I'm constantly annoyed that most liberals would rather whine than actually be bothered to vote.

Guess how many people my age I say at the polls yesterday? That right, a big fat zero. Dozens and dozens of zombie old farts though. They never ever miss an election and still people wonder why the U.S. is so conservative. I live in a nation where more than half of the voting population are too lazy to be bothered to drag their sorry asses to the polls every couple of years. It enrages me.

I hope this is finally the ass kicking that will wake up the Democrats once and for all. Trying to imitate the Republican agenda isn't going to get them anywhere. Bush laid a nice big pit trap on Iraq and the Democrats cheerfully walked right into it and got skewered.

Republicans play to win. Democrats try not to lose. The Dems have zero leadership at this point so I'm not too hopeful in the short run. Time for everyone to quit bitching, moaning and start fighting for your ideals. I'm pretty sick and tired of do nothing hand wringing liberals. Show some damn backbone for once!

Move to Canada if you like. I ain't going anywhere!

cratchit:

Who's going to be the first to blame Nader for... something? ;)

matteo:

Well, cratchit, he gave W the White House two years ago.

Only took one post, cratchit. Nicely played!

One last thing, here's a word of advice to future candidates: don't phone spam potential voters. It just pisses people off royally.
posted by mark13 at 6:28 AM on November 6, 2002


I raise my hand and ask:

"What the Hell difference does this really make?"

I didn't see Daschel on the floor of the Senate fighting for my Civil Rights. I didn't see him refusing to back down to Bush's flimsy and sometimes patently false calls for war. They all voted enthusiatically for the "Patriot" Act.

You wanna blame someone, blame Clinton. If he'd been a Man, came out and said, "Yeah, I had a thing with her. I regret it. It was a mistake that I made. I'm sorry." instead of the stonewalling campaign and linguistic gymnastics, the Middle would still listen to the Dems. Instead we have a Poster Boy for Why Not to Vote Dem.

And if you pussies want to leave, then go ahead. I don't need quitters on my side.
posted by danisaacs at 6:29 AM on November 6, 2002


Many of you MeFi conservatives are making asses of yourselves. For god's sake, can't you be sporting about winning?

My reason for posting is not to add to this conflagration, however. It is because I found the earlier comments on Iranian youth hysterically superficial and misinformative. Hi. I'm Leah, and I'm Iranian/German-American. I have an extensive paternal family in Tehran. I have lived there for a year. And I am honored to inform you that Iranian youth do not "love America." Like youth from all parts of the world that are exposed to Western "culture," yes, there are Iranian kids who like blue jeans, boy/girl-band pop music, celebrity-vehicle movies, fast food, etc. Kids worldwide endeavor to be cool, and Western culture is, for better or worse, often seen as cool. Western politics, most especially American, are not. Why do you suppose they "love America" but "hate Bush?" They love our pop-cult junk, nothing more. To expand American pop-culture to encompass all of America--its politics, its foreign policies, its economic and environmental practices, its common people, or anything else--is simplistic and irresponsible.

Please put some more thought and research into what you say about foreign nations and their people. Thanks.
posted by leahzero at 6:32 AM on November 6, 2002


quercus: As long as the Left sincerely believes that Ashcroft's fascism is a greater threat than the present Islamofascism-they will stay out of power.

I wonder why we feel such a need to differentiate fundamentalisms? Ideologies founded upon a rather violent form of exclusion, be it physical, rhetorical or legal (the latter two invariably lead to the former, albeit in slower and less spectacular ways) are the same in terms of their structure. Opposition to one does not mean that one cannot simultaneously oppose the other. Indeed, if recent events and legislative pronouncements are any indication, it may be more likely that opposition to one alone necessarily imposes the other.
posted by hank_14 at 6:34 AM on November 6, 2002


The first step toward defeating a capable opponent is to get over your contempt for him.

THat's why Bill Clinton will always win, always, always. Too bad he can't run for president anymore

Only took one post, cratchit. Nicely played!

hint: don't you suspect that, maybe, I answered that trollish question in jest? think hard
posted by matteo at 6:35 AM on November 6, 2002


This post says something about leaving the country. Don't you realize we're trying hard-as-hell to get rid of you. Please go.
posted by the_0ne at 6:39 AM on November 6, 2002


As long as the Left sincerely believes that Ashcroft's fascism is a greater threat than the present Islamofascism

Well, I can't speak for this mystical "Left" of which you speak (as a former Republican who voted for Reagan and Bush the Senior once), but I have no qualms at all about rating the risk of our own government in bad hands over a few nutball extremists on the other side of the world. One has the power to destroy this country utterly; the other, to do a tiny bit of damage, at best. The only reason they make such a good boogeyman to frighten the intellectual children of this country with is that Bush & the media tap into our rampant xenophobia via the dark color of their skin, the unknown and vaguely disturbing nature of their religion and the foreign tongue they speak.

Anyone who thinks the elections represented a victory for the Republic platform lives in a sort of self-satisfying delusion.

I understand your point, but disagree strongly, because IT DOESN'T MATTER WHY they won! All that matters is that they now have the power to implement that platform across the board, with virtually no significant checks or balances.

Consider this thread Godwinized.
posted by rushmc at 6:40 AM on November 6, 2002


A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.

Edward Abbey

- perhaps a little cliched but no less true.
posted by johnnyboy at 6:41 AM on November 6, 2002


Bye bye Iraq.
posted by timbley at 6:43 AM on November 6, 2002


The Republicans have gained a margin of two plane crashes to control the Senate.
posted by gimonca at 6:45 AM on November 6, 2002


ruchmc: with virtually no significant checks or balances.

Not true. It only takes 41 votes to filibuster in the Senate. Dems have 47 seats.
posted by blogRot at 6:45 AM on November 6, 2002


Demographics (as always) was a huge factor in this election. I don't know about turnout elsewhere, but turnout here in MN was huge. But it was mostly folks 30+ and older. In the whole long line I was in, I didn't see a single young person -- I appeared to the the youngest there, and I'm 35.

Democrats fucked themselves to death in this election. The MN crew turned a Paul Wellstone memorial into a hysterical slogan-spouting rally, and the voters punished them for it. Trotting out a fossil like Mondale as the Great Hope of the DFL party just shows how desperate and out-of-touch the Democratic leadership is. Lots of us are old enough to remember the miserable Carter/Mondale years; I'd vote for Kermit the Frog before I'd vote for Mondale.

They didn't get out the vote for their power bases: women, minorities, and young folks. Why? Because they have no message for these groups.
posted by mrmanley at 6:50 AM on November 6, 2002


Does anyone else think that the timing of the 'leak' about the CIA missle destroying the terrorist car was, well, planned?

I don't think you could have planned a better public relations scoop for 'Wow, our current government is doing something effective against those terrorists.'

And with all the speculation 'No confirmation that President Bush personally authorized the attack.'

I'm disappointed things didn't stay at least the way they were. And I think that things will tend to get worse before they get better for the average person in America. I just hope the Democrats come up with a strong leader to go up against Bush in 2 years.
posted by rich at 6:54 AM on November 6, 2002


If anyone was underestimated (or "misunderestimated" to quote our President) it was not Bush. One would be hard-pressed to underestimate Dubya. The gains the repubs made result from the strategies of Karl Rove and his think tank. Bush is only a marionette and those guys hold the strings. That said, I think Terry McAuliffe should resign.
posted by wsg at 6:55 AM on November 6, 2002


Right, Steve. Just let me get to the chapter where Sun Tzu explains how best to spread over a billion dollars and get the Emperor to travel around the countryside promoting individual investment accounts for the serfs. Can people please stop using stupid military analysis for elections? War is about force, politics is about persuasion. To say that the two are similar simply because they both involve tactics is like saying reading The Art of War will make me better at GTA3.

And the whole "getting over contempt" stuff is priceless, too. I'm sure Jeb Bush making a speech that included "Jesse Jackson is here! Hillary Clinton is here!" and another candidate claiming that a triple amputee didn't have a good war record is really getting over the contempt of your opponent. I'm sorry, what color kettle did you want again?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 6:56 AM on November 6, 2002


Goodbye, Iraq. Goodbye, Iran. Goodbye North Korea. Been nice knowing ya. </sarcasm></sarcasm>

Why vote for a Democrat that parrots a Republican, when you can just vote for the Republican? But you want to know who really hurt the Dems last night? The far left anti-war movement. They sure as hell didn't vote Republican, but couldn't over come the disillusionment they felt with Democrats that voted for war.

I haven't often found myself agreeing with Steve politically, but he's spot-on here. What reason did the undecideds have to vote Democrat? "Hey, at least we're not Republicans (we just vote like them a lot...)" Chicken Little thought the sky was falling, an event that can't take place. Predicting the dilution of our civil liberties, changes in the tax code to favor the rich, and the strengthening of our belligerent stance is different: the Republicans have been working hard to do these things already, and now what little opposition they faced is gone. We may not initiate World War III, but is it hyperbolic to predict a war? Ashcroft might not actually urinate on the Bill of Rights, but is it paranoia to worry that the PATRIOT ACT will be more strongly enforced, that US citizens will continue to be held without recourse to the justice system? Canada begins to sound quite nice, indeed.
posted by dilettanti at 6:58 AM on November 6, 2002


rich, they'r already speculating, and right now it doesn't really look good. Daschle and Davis are crippled, they'll be horrible candidates. The sweep for the GOP makes Gore look bad, which leaves right now John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, both of whom will be considered Northeast Libruls and face a harsh chance in the general election.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:00 AM on November 6, 2002


Please put some more thought and research into what you say about foreign nations and their people

There was a recent BBC poll that found that 70% of Iranian youth approved of America, contrary to the "Death to America" bullshit....

Thank You, very much...

XQUZYPHYR : The Art of War can be applied to every aspect of life...

But no worry, I am not going to let you rain on my parade...
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 7:01 AM on November 6, 2002


You know, people, there have been Republican majorities before, and we somehow managed to avoid becoming either an radioactive cinder or (Godwin rolls over one more time in grave) a nation of haughty brownshirts.

Easy, big fellas. This is not the End of the World as We Know It. This is Business As Usual. Only this time, sans a Nader to blame for spoiling or a rather ludicrous Supreme Court intervention.

One might also consider that this might - might - not be a nefarious Machiavellian plot, but rather the general (if ill-focused) will of the majority of American people who could be bothered to vote.

I'm just sayin'.
posted by UncleFes at 7:05 AM on November 6, 2002


If Daschle lived in certain ancient cultures, he'd have to die - either by his own hand or someone else's. Perhaps he could set himself on fire. Gephardt is the one who really has to go, though, I think. He couldn't be any more lame. "Tax cuts? Where do I sign up?" This, immediately after the 2000 elections debacle. Sheesh. Can you really argue that things will be that much different now? Me, I'm only depressed today because I have to get a root canal on Friday, and I have a sore tooth in the meantime.
posted by raysmj at 7:07 AM on November 6, 2002


XQUZYPHYR : The Art of War can be applied to every aspect of life...

So can Kevin Bacon, Steve, that doesn't mean it's actually a valid argument. You have every right to be happy your party won, just drop this "they were all brilliant military strategists" crap, because you just look silly.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:09 AM on November 6, 2002


I'd vote for Kermit the Frog before I'd vote for Mondale

That statement is the BEST part of this thread, and the funniest too.
posted by a3matrix at 7:13 AM on November 6, 2002


Except for the two weeks in early 2000 before Sen. Jeffords left the Republicans, the last time they controlled House, Senate and White House at the same time was--and this is from memory--1954. Eisenhower was president. Notable GOPer's included Sen. Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin.

Republicans took control of the Senate under Reagan, but they never controlled the House during the 80's.

I think the last time the Democrats held all three was when Carter was president. Not sure if they did under LBJ, and the Democrats were all fractured then anyway.
posted by gimonca at 7:19 AM on November 6, 2002


Steve at Linnwood:
As for the United States being a "rogue nation", well as long as we have a military budget the size of the next 15 countries combined, and remain the preeminent trading partner in the world, I'm not going to sweat it. No civilized nation has reason to attack us.

By this reasoning, Iraq ought to pour as much money into developing scary weapons as they can, so that they too can become mighty and thus ensure that Truth and Justice will enter the battlefield on their side.

'Might makes right' is a scary road to walk and is not at all compatible with all the "helping the world rid itself of evil" moral superiority rhetoric you've been serving up.

Well. Gore's last major speech was blatant pandering to the hard-left... I am not alone in believing that Gore is attempting to recreate his self in that image.

Phoning in from the "hard left", here, I can assure you that he still has a long way to go.
posted by Mars Saxman at 7:19 AM on November 6, 2002


There could be a bright side to all of this. As a nation, we're in a perilous spot and it's now up to the GOP to "guide us out." Some of this trouble just seems epochal though; I'm not sure how much effect even a governing body can have on this massive corrective cultural spin-out.

If get involved in a drawn-out, bloody war and the markets continue to tank, the GOP will suffer by association for generations to come.
posted by Pinwheel at 7:20 AM on November 6, 2002


gimonca: And Carter didn't ram through everything he wanted with a Democratic majority. Far from it. Dems. were not as ideologically cohesive as Republicans are now, but our system is still marked by fragmentation. (Oh, Clinton also had a Democratic majority in 1993-94. He never used the veto, but his health care plan failed, and he hacked off members of the party and union backers by pushing hard for NAFTA.)
posted by raysmj at 7:24 AM on November 6, 2002


XQUZYPHYR: Please explain how I can apply Kevin Bacon to every aspect of life? I would really like to know...
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 7:25 AM on November 6, 2002


steve_at_linnwood:

Well shit, thanks so much for clarifying what I obviously missed with my own eyes while in the country itself!

Link to the poll, please. Burden of proof is on you.
posted by leahzero at 7:25 AM on November 6, 2002


That's right, LimePi! Run! Run to our queen! Run to Her Britannic Majesty! HAHAHA!
posted by Pretty_Generic at 7:26 AM on November 6, 2002


I understand your point, but disagree strongly, because IT DOESN'T MATTER WHY they won! All that matters is that they now have the power to implement that platform across the board, with virtually no significant checks or balances.

Not true, the margin the republicans hold is a slim one and issues of importance can still be filibustered if the democrats have the nads to do it.

Saying that, this has been a very interesting thread to read. I say Kudos to those dems who have sucked it up, accepted the loss and are ready to put their hearts and souls into changing things. More power to you. Being a strong rep myself, I still feel the need of a strong left to bring balance, just as long as we reps still run things. :-)

I listened on Fox news late last night as they had a dem strategist on to talk about the defeat. I wish I could remember his name, but he basically said the same thing the more moderate lefties in here have said. There were two reasons for the defeat. One, democrats with no answers and, as he repeated more than once, "No soul." Two, Bush. People bitched and moaned about his campaigning this past month, but it certainly seemed to have worked.

In my opinion, the biggest problem the dems have had these past years is lack of leadership. Leadership that truly believes in a set of ideals and is willing to speak his mind no matter what others thought. Wellstone was a guy like that. Someone I doubt I ever agreed with, but admired because of his moral center. He knew what he believed and didn't give a damn what others thought. He was civil in conversation, but a tiger when fighting for what he thought was right.

I personally think people see that in President Bush. He's a guy that believes what he believes and to hell with conforming to the beliefs of others. Despite the anti-bush rhetoric and vitriol spewed at him from the far left in here. I don't think the dems have had a national leader like that since Carter.

I'm sure most will think I'm wrong; Bush is just a puppet for big business and big oil. Whatever. Keep thinking that. We'll ride that all the way to 2008.
posted by Plunge at 7:27 AM on November 6, 2002


I wished that election results came in around noon instead of the evening, because I wind up sleeping through all the good discussions!

For what it's worth, I have a "d'oh/woo-hoo!" feeling toward elections. A democrat got my state's governorship, but I'm consoled by the fact that Reps took the nation.

The problem with the Democrats is that they seem to be Democrats out of sheer momentum. They want to raise taxes, but they can't remember why. They support minorities, but they forget about the majority. They hate Republicans for being "jack booted thugs", but people are doing enough independent thinking that they realize that it's an unrealistic stereotype.

By the time people are done with income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, etc., they've already given half their money to the government. If you're going to convince them that the way to solve the nation's problems is to give up yet more of their income (75% perhaps?), there's got to be some pretty compelling evidence that it's going to make things significantly better.

When it comes right down to it, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats (they've both had great opportunities in the past) have significantly improved this nation. That being the case, why shouldn't people vote for what will (presumably) bring them lower taxes and less government?

Steve: In a word: oil. It is all about oil, sweet sweet black gold!

And it will continue to be so, until we quit diddling around with the Middle East and become self reliant. After all, 9 out of 10 caribou support drilling.
posted by oissubke at 7:29 AM on November 6, 2002


The 2002 elections actually make things pretty good for the Dems in 2004. If recent history shows anything: 1) a heck of a lot can happen between a midterm election and the following presidential election; 2) losing can be really good for you.

1982, economy in tank; 1984, Reagan re-elected.

1986, Dems retake the Senate; 1988, Republicans win presidency.

Early 1991, George Bush's popularity at an all-time high; 1992, Clinton beats him.

1994, Republicans retake the House and Senate; 1996, Clinton re-elected.

1998, Dems make gains in Congress. After the 1998 impeachment, pundits say, "Voters will remember the Republicans' impeachment drive and will punish them in two years." 2000, Bush gets the White House.

I think the Dems have a good chance of winning the White House in '04 if they can frickin' find a charismatic candidate. Gephart? Daschle? No charisma, plus they're both tainted after last night. And Gore has continued to be pretty weak.

In 1991, most conventional Democrats were unwilling to run against the popular George Bush, leaving the field open for a fresh unknown -- Bill Clinton. If the Dems can purge themselves of their old dead wood and run someone fresh in 2004 -- maybe like John Edwards, U.S. senator from North Carolina, who, depending on whom you believe, is either the Messiah or incredibly overhyped -- they may really have a chance.

Anything can happen in two years.
posted by Tin Man at 7:30 AM on November 6, 2002


maybe like John Edwards

What, the guy who talks to dead people???

*Flashmemo to Ari: tell the Boss, then see if that Jeanne Dixon is available for '04 as a countermeasure*
posted by UncleFes at 7:36 AM on November 6, 2002


Link to the poll, please. Burden of proof is on you.

I would, save for the fact that Gallup wants $95 a year to access it...

Besides why do I really care about Iran anyways...
It isn't like there is oil there... is there?
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 7:37 AM on November 6, 2002


Raysmj...dont sweat the root canal. I just had one a few weeks ago and it was the most amazing pain relief I have ever had. A little uncomfortable during the process, but nothing and I mean nothing compared to the pain of the dying root nerve.

Limepi and the rest of you chicken little whiners...bye! Send postcards!
posted by cyclopz at 7:38 AM on November 6, 2002


Please explain how I can apply Kevin Bacon to every aspect of life? I would really like to know...

It's easy.
I have a business meeting with another company.
That company provides insurance for movie studios.
One of those movie studios backed the movie "Wild Things".
Kevin Bacon was a star (and executive producer) for that movie.
If I knew Kevin Bacon well enough, I might be able to get him to lean on the studio, who in turn would lean on the insurance company, who would in turn provide me with an advantage in our business dealings.

See, it's not that hard.
posted by grum@work at 7:40 AM on November 6, 2002


Whew! Just finished reading this entire thread and man, do I have a headache! Whining or gloating, "your side sucks.." C'mon already. Are there really more than just subtle differences between the two parties anyway? Didn't the Patriot Act and the decision to invade Iraq win hands down in Congress? But what to do about it now? Post threads? Bitch? Move? Or get involved. Raise awareness (without ranting please). Try to understand the REAL reasons our leaders are doing whatever and question their authority to do it. And don't let anybody, at any level, fuck with your Constitution.

Yes, I voted, and yes, I'm a little disappointed, but this is my home. At my house, when things break, we fix them. When the clutter gets out of control, we clean it up. I'm not moving because my neighbors don't like me and I won't be bullied out of my country because I won't humbly conform. Peace.
posted by LouReedsSon at 7:42 AM on November 6, 2002


Seriously, a true believer with even the slightest bit of pizzazz would be like a benzedrine/St. John's Wort infusion for the Democrats right now. But damned if I can think of anyone worth putting in the on-deck circle.

Maybe a popular big city mayor somewhere? I'm thinking Baltimore's O'Malley as a model. Don't know if he's a Democrat, though.
posted by UncleFes at 7:43 AM on November 6, 2002


UncleFes, you can say the world's not ending and it's going to be business as usual. But I woke up this morning finding out that now I not only have to put up with a blinkered, corporate-owned puppet in the White House, but also as my Senate representative (not to mention my governor). And I can't wait to find out what damage they'll do together over the next two years, from private school vouchers to drilling the ANWR and our national parks to appointing judges who will be empowered for life to crap all over separation of church and state, and regulate my reproductive system.

No, I'm not going to move to Canada. I'm going to organize, protest, donate, and keep voting, not that I felt like it got me anywhere last night. And in the meantime, please don't tell me the damage is minimal, because in my world it's not.
posted by clever sheep at 7:47 AM on November 6, 2002


"You know, people, there have been Republican majorities before, and we somehow managed to avoid becoming either an radioactive cinder or (Godwin rolls over one more time in grave) a nation of haughty brownshirts"

However we did have the House Unamerican Activities Commission. Just because they wore blue suits and ties in stead of brown shirts doesn't mean they didn't railroad people and ruin their lives. My grandfather got put on a black list (something his community thankfully laughed at) because he ran as a Democrat in a school board election and had the audacity to win! Boy those sure were some good times for democracy there! Before that we had the good old days leading up to the depression, sounds like some good times there too!

Oh, and I've just been wanting to say for months in a public forum that Terry Mac is a putz and makes me not want to be a Democrat anymore. There, I said it, I feel slightly better now.

This: "Goodbye, Iraq. Goodbye, Iran. Goodbye North Korea. Been nice knowing ya. " is just horrible. They were writing poetry and sipping icewater in Persia while my ancestors were living in holes in the ground and clubbing eachother with their faces painted blue, it disgusts me that their millennia of culture would be threatened by cultural infants such as ourselves. Who the hell do you think wrote your precious books like the Art of War (no, I said LIKE the art of war)? It sure as hell wasn't some dumb ass American. Hell, I haven't even heard a musician make an original album in the last 20 years and we're going to teach the Iranians a lesson in culture? Come on, we are not the end all be all of God's creation, please get off your high horse and come down to earth population 7 Billion!
posted by Pollomacho at 7:47 AM on November 6, 2002


steve_at_linnwood:

It's unfortunate that the poll is inaccessible. If you can't back up your statements, don't make them. Surely you already know that if you can't deliver the proof when pressed, you lose credibility.

I bet you'll care about Iran when the US is finished annihilating Iraq and turns its cross-hairs toward Persia, though.

Sigh.
posted by leahzero at 7:47 AM on November 6, 2002


grum@work: the only thing missing is oil!

Now if I could just learn to apply Kevin Bacon to my life everyday, think of what I could get done....
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 7:50 AM on November 6, 2002


Okay, I'm calling this race. PolloMacho officially has the best post ever.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 7:55 AM on November 6, 2002


It's unfortunate that the poll is inaccessible. If you can't back up your statements, don't make them. Surely you already know that if you can't deliver the proof when pressed, you lose credibility.

Prove it. :-)

Are you saying you've never made a declarative sentence without backing it up with statistics and research?

By the way, welcome to MeFi.
posted by oissubke at 7:56 AM on November 6, 2002


So since we are talking about Democrat presidential candidates for '04...

Any thoughts on what you are going to do if Nader runs again? Can you (the people that are Democrats) stop him from running?
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 8:00 AM on November 6, 2002


please don't tell me the damage is minimal, because in my world it's not.

I get pissed with I burn the brisket. Doesn't necessarily mean that burned brisket = a huge problem for the entire country and a descent into Fascism.

All's I'm saying is that those things you mention, they are your opinions, and not necessarily engraved in the book of What's Good and What's Evil. There are a great many people whom I'm certain with disagree with you on those points, and have good arguments against, as good as yours. And yes, some bad shit can happen in two years. But two years is not all that long, the margins are very small (and the number of people willing to jump the aisle increases all the time) and as Tin Man rightly points out, a lot can happen in two years, public opinion wise.

Fact is, the majority of voters in your state and in general said, we want these guys. That's democracy. Next time, the majority of people may say they want your guys. In the meantime, you're doing the exact right thing: organize, protest, donate, and keep voting.

PolloMacho officially has the best post ever.

Heh. My great-grandfather's butcher shop was burnt because he had a German name and wouldn't go union, but I manage to avoid trotting that out when the Democrats win :)

Alright everyone! Time for a cocktail.
posted by UncleFes at 8:03 AM on November 6, 2002


To say that the two are similar simply because they both involve tactics is like saying reading The Art of War will make me better at GTA3.

That is a pretty great line.
posted by thirteen at 8:04 AM on November 6, 2002


Man oh man... this thread sounds like nothing so much as a band of monkeys hooting and hollering and throwing shit at someone who's just walked under their tree. All these hyperbolic reactions and Godwinistic allusions reaffirm in my mind that I made the right decision yesterday by, for the first time ever, not putting a mark beside the name of any Democrat.
posted by jammer at 8:06 AM on November 6, 2002


Any thoughts on what you are going to do if Nader runs again? Can you (the people that are Democrats) stop him from running?

I think after last time, the Dems have successfully brainwashed their supporters not to "throw away" their votes on third parties...
posted by oissubke at 8:07 AM on November 6, 2002


On what alternate universe is Al Gore hard-left?

Guess what, the center-left wing of the Democratic party still has the issues on their side - Clinton/Gore are and were right, but Daschle - Gephardt and MacCauliffe did a shit job of selling it to America.

Running away scared on the Iraq vote sure didn't help any.

A few things are probably going to happen:

1. The Republicans will overplay their hand like they did in 1994. Configuring a plurality as a majority will disregard at least half of the electorate.

2. Some idiots in the Democratic party will think this marks a return to old school tax and spend, pro-union old time religion borderline socialist stances. This will flame out as well. (go on ahead to Canada, send back some maple syrup)

The Democrats need leadership who is willing to play hardball of the Clinton/Begala/Carville type, and not the "Get Along Gang" of Daschle/Gephardt.
posted by owillis at 8:08 AM on November 6, 2002


LimePi

concealed carry permits will be as easy to get as a library card

Ah, but LimePi, which one will be watched more closely? From all indications, your library card. The FBI is now apparently more interested in this than firearms.

Everyone: I appreciate all the "republicans didn't win, the dems lost" comments. I see the point. I might quote Yeats: "Things fall apart; the Center cannot hold...The best lack all conviction, while the worse are full of passionate intensity."
posted by namespan at 8:09 AM on November 6, 2002


Ever seen Nurse Betty, in which the protagonist suffers a terrible shock and a soap opera becomes her reality?

I'm ready to become Nurse West Wing.
posted by mecran01 at 8:12 AM on November 6, 2002


I know how to stop Nader from running:
1) Grab him.
2) Tie him down.
3) Chop off his legs with a sharp ax.
4) Suture.
posted by Holden at 8:12 AM on November 6, 2002


I am in a double bind. I care much more about my state government than National. My state government went entirely Democrat yesterday, and that situation is just as deplorable as the larger game. The whole thing is just shocking. I do not expect to ever be happy with the government, but I never thought I would be living in such a polarized political world. I know many of you are unhappy right now, and I understand your frustrations, as they are similar to what I feel no matter who is in power. The really funny thing is that on the day the Democrats swept Illinois, the only Democrats I voted for lost!
posted by thirteen at 8:12 AM on November 6, 2002


Leaving the country will not prevent you from living under the rule of the world's only superpower. Canada is just part of the province of USNORTHCOM.

The people I voted for lost. I hope they don't lose next time. I trust that there will be a next time and that I don't have to join an armed rebellion.
posted by moonbiter at 8:15 AM on November 6, 2002


I, for one, welcome our new republican overlords.

Wonderful, I have some yard work that needs done, a car that needs washed, laundry and someone to clean out the toe jam. Can you be here by 7:00 AM tomorrow to get started? :-)
posted by Plunge at 8:18 AM on November 6, 2002


this thread sounds like nothing so much as a band of monkeys hooting and hollering and throwing shit at someone who's just walked under their tree

Yeah, it sounds like pretty much every conservative talk radio program in existence.
posted by moonbiter at 8:19 AM on November 6, 2002


What I want is the gridlock!

I trust that there will be a next time and that I don't have to join an armed rebellion.

Good thing there is no gun registry to aid in confiscation then. (just teasing)
posted by thirteen at 8:20 AM on November 6, 2002


Oissubke: That being the case, why shouldn't people vote for what will (presumably) bring them lower taxes and less government?

If only the Republicans were true to their rhetoric! The bush tax cut is a drop in the ocean with a sunset provision. And has any post-war president given us "less government"? I think the Gingrich Republicans were more inclined to be true to their stated intentions, and perhaps they could have done it, were they less adept at pissing people off.
posted by trharlan at 8:21 AM on November 6, 2002


"Heh. My great-grandfather's butcher shop was burnt because he had a German name and wouldn't go union, but I manage to avoid trotting that out when the Democrats win :) "

Hey UncleFes, the Unions tried to shoot up my grandfather's bedroom during a strike, problem was they got the wrong house and only killed the neighbors 4 year old. You know what he did later that same year? He ran for school board as a Democrat. Democrat does not mean pro-union and apparently with unionized places like Minnesota going to the Republicans, I would bet that pro-union doesn't necessarily mean Pro-Democrat either.
posted by Pollomacho at 8:23 AM on November 6, 2002


If only the Republicans were true to their rhetoric! The bush tax cut is a drop in the ocean with a sunset provision. And has any post-war president given us "less government"? I think the Gingrich Republicans were more inclined to be true to their stated intentions, and perhaps they could have done it, were they less adept at pissing people off.

And therein lies the problem of a "balanced" Congress. The Reps block the Dems, the Dems block the Reps, and we all sit back and enjoy more of the same old rubbish...
posted by oissubke at 8:27 AM on November 6, 2002


I did, fuck you very much.

Well, since you put it like that, Steve, I'm convinced.
posted by adampsyche at 8:28 AM on November 6, 2002


oissubke: Are you saying you've never made a declarative sentence without backing it up with statistics and research?

'Course not. As guilty as anyone. Just decided to call someone on it because it touched a subject close to home. I suppose making a declarative statement about a declarative statement sounded silly...meta-argument is pretty absurd. But the gut overruled the head; today's a visceral day. Thanks for the welcome, too.
posted by leahzero at 8:29 AM on November 6, 2002


Pollomacho: It does in Illinois. Regardless, I was just saying that screaming McCarthy is roughly the same as screaming Hitler or Orwell. All are convenient, basically irrefutable hot-buttons that badly simplify very broad ideas and are rarely, if ever, applicable to today's events.

That, of course, is simply my opinion. I make no claims to capital R Right or Capital W Wrong.
posted by UncleFes at 8:31 AM on November 6, 2002


How will the Republicans fund their all-seeing police state if they follow through on cutting taxes??
posted by gimonca at 8:32 AM on November 6, 2002


adampsyche: What? mark13 said that, not me...
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 8:32 AM on November 6, 2002


How will the Republicans fund their all-seeing police state if they follow through on cutting taxes??

Iraqi Oil... duh!
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 8:33 AM on November 6, 2002


How will the Republicans fund their all-seeing police state if they follow through on cutting taxes??

And a dream is born!
posted by thirteen at 8:35 AM on November 6, 2002


I was talking about Illinois!
posted by Pollomacho at 8:36 AM on November 6, 2002


How will the Republicans fund their all-seeing police state if they follow through on cutting taxes??

I trust that there will be a next time and that I don't have to join an armed rebellion.


*walks slowly away from moonbiter and gimonca. taps lightly on shoulder and whispers, 'theres no place like home'
posted by poopy at 8:38 AM on November 6, 2002


*shakes head in ugga wugga fashion*

What part of Illinois? :D
posted by UncleFes at 8:39 AM on November 6, 2002


"How will the Republicans fund their all-seeing police state if they follow through on cutting taxes??"

Gold teeth, stolen art...
posted by Pollomacho at 8:39 AM on November 6, 2002


I alluded to this in a post on the other thread, but how screwed is Vermont now that Republicans have the Senate back?
posted by boltman at 8:39 AM on November 6, 2002


Bush just pimp-slapped the democrats all the way up and down Pennsylvania Ave. Bucking historical trends, the republicans made gains in the house, won back the senate and his brother Jeb coasted to victory in Fla. Damn, those who continue to underestimate the GWB due so at their own peril.
posted by beatnik808 at 8:41 AM on November 6, 2002


Gold teeth, stolen art...

not funny.
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 8:41 AM on November 6, 2002


Gold teeth, stolen art...

niiice...and i have some pictures of aborted fetuses.
posted by poopy at 8:43 AM on November 6, 2002


why am i the only republican upset this morning. Because my state has another democratic governor. But, I see the republicans control the senate and the house AND the executive branch. this is correct? Me, I voted democrat in my states House and Senate races. I believe in these guys and they have done a good job.
I worried people would not vote for a guy named Posthumus.

And therein lies the problem of a "balanced" Congress. The Reps block the Dems, the Dems block the Reps, and we all sit back and enjoy more of the same old rubbish...

I fear this will happen in my state.
posted by clavdivs at 8:43 AM on November 6, 2002


I am not tracking you Bolt, why is Vermont in for the royal screw job? Because of Jeffords?
posted by thirteen at 8:43 AM on November 6, 2002


Gold teeth, stolen art...

Get a 1984 ref out and you've batted the circle!

*waits expectantly*
posted by UncleFes at 8:44 AM on November 6, 2002


I dropped some seeds in this thread two hours ago and I've already grown the biggest pumpkins this side of the Lompock County Fair.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 8:46 AM on November 6, 2002


Wow! Time for the Dems to celebrate!!! It was a victory for the Dems! Reps should be in tears from all the major gains of the Dems! /sarcasm

At least, that is what I'm getting watching McAuliffe speaking live this AM.
posted by Plunge at 8:46 AM on November 6, 2002


con·ser·va·tive Pronunciation Key (kn-sûrv-tv)
adj.
Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change. Traditional or restrained in style. Moderate; cautious: a conservative estimate.

pro·gres·sive Pronunciation Key (pr-grsv)
adj.
Moving forward; advancing. Proceeding in steps; continuing steadily by increments: progressive change.
Promoting or favoring progress new policies, ideas, or methods: a progressive politician;


Which definition seems to fit what party nowdays? And there is the reason for the election outcome. People prefer change, even if it's imaginary, even if the outcome is questionable.
posted by semmi at 8:46 AM on November 6, 2002


Maybe things will get done now. Enjoy Canada liberals!
posted by Macboy at 8:47 AM on November 6, 2002


Sorry to post on a post.

Southern Illinois UncleFes, the Wabash valley, and yes it is convenient to scream McCarthyism in a situation like this and dismiss it, but lets look at the parallels before my screams get muted: then, red scare and cold war; now, al Queda scare and war on terror; then, post WWII economic boom starting to dry up; now, Dot-com economic boom almost already dried up; then, troops in Asia fighting the red menace; now, troops in Asia fighting the terrorist menace; then cheap gas means BIG cars; now, new oil reserves (Iraq, Alaska, resumed pumping in Texas) mean cheap gas and BIG SUV's (mmm, that new H2 looks mighty spiffy)

Shall I go on?
posted by Pollomacho at 8:49 AM on November 6, 2002


moonbiter: Yeah, it sounds like pretty much every conservative talk radio program in existence.

I didn't cast a vote for a single Republican, either, and never have. Although, depending on how things go in 2004, I can see myself doing it then.

I've traditionally voted for Libertarians where they ran (which was every major office, and quite a few minor ones, this year), and Democrats in R vs D races because I felt they were the lesser evil. After the buffoonery coming from the left for the past two years, and especially after 9/11, I couldnt find my self in good faith voting the same way.

Congrats, Democratic National Caucus! You've driven away another outlier!
posted by jammer at 8:49 AM on November 6, 2002


Well, back to rooting for the terrorists for me, then. We got the bomb, and our voters are too fucking stupid and cocksure to be trusted with that kind of awesome power (see: Linwood, Steve at). Take us down, we're overcooked as a nation. Snipe us, bomb us, anthrax us, hijack us, do whatever it fucking takes. Just destroy this country, for the love of God. Pax Canada, please...

I do wonder, for example, if the great American voting twittery will wonder what became of their Social Security in 10 years? I'd long-bet my entire life savings the average voter will never make the connection. Fuck. People get the government they deserve. But why do I gotta get the government they deserve as well?
posted by hincandenza at 8:51 AM on November 6, 2002


Quoting me: I trust that there will be a next time and that I don't have to join an armed rebellion

poopy wrote: walks slowly away from moonbiter and gimonca. taps lightly on shoulder and whispers, 'theres no place like home'

Are you saying that I am delusional in my trust that we will be able to vote again in the future? Or are you saying that I am delusional because I would be willing to fight if our rights to vote were revoked?
posted by moonbiter at 8:52 AM on November 6, 2002


Oh and sorry for the gold teeth troll! Bad taste, very extreme, not true sentiment.
posted by Pollomacho at 8:52 AM on November 6, 2002


Are you saying that I am delusional in my trust that we will be able to vote again in the future? Or are you saying that I am delusional because I would be willing to fight if our rights to vote were revoked?

Neither really; The comment just reeks of right-wing militia, that's all. Are you sure you're a liberal? ;)
posted by poopy at 8:56 AM on November 6, 2002


SOUTHERN Illinois?? I live there. You might want to take a look at the results from yesterday... or the results for the last couple decades or so :)

Your parallels compare a half-century of history to the past three years, and are rather debatable. Go on if you like, or email me, I'd be happy to continue. But otherwise, I think now (Just destroy this country, for the love of God...) is the perfect time to see what's doing over at Fark.
posted by UncleFes at 8:57 AM on November 6, 2002


Snipe us, bomb us, anthrax us, hijack us, do whatever it fucking takes

Yet another patriotic American...
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 8:57 AM on November 6, 2002


I've traditionally voted for Libertarians where they ran

That's how I vote as well. Irregardless, hooting and hollering is not the exclusive province of liberals or conservatives, and that was my (ill-described) point.
posted by moonbiter at 8:58 AM on November 6, 2002


Some interesting facts:

· One in 11 families, one in nine Americans, and one in six children are officially poor.

· The most affluent fifth of the population received half of all household income last year. The poorest fifth got 3.5 per cent.

· The official poverty line is an income of $18,104 pa (£11,570) for a family of four. A single parent of two working full-time for a minimum wage would make $10,712 (£6,846).

· 40 per cent of homeless men are veterans.

· Up to a fifth of America's food, worth $31bn, goes to waste each year, with 130lb of food per person ending up in landfills.
posted by johnnyboy at 9:01 AM on November 6, 2002


Well, back to rooting for the terrorists for me, then. We got the bomb, and our voters are too fucking stupid and cocksure to be trusted with that kind of awesome power (see: Linwood, Steve at). Take us down, we're overcooked as a nation. Snipe us, bomb us, anthrax us, hijack us, do whatever it fucking takes. Just destroy this country, for the love of God.

Wow. I thought I had been reading pure hatred earlier, but this tops it all. Congratulations on posting the most puss-filled bit of bile yet.
posted by Plunge at 9:02 AM on November 6, 2002


Take us down, we're overcooked as a nation. Snipe us, bomb us, anthrax us, hijack us, do whatever it fucking takes. Just destroy this country, for the love of God

my we have along way since 9/11. listen, before Steve@ rips you a new one, why dont you just go kill yourself. do not incite others to attack this country. You have a right to free speech, so why don't you use it in a responsible manner. Perhaps this is why, albeit an extreme example, of why people voted conservative. I've said some pretty vitriolic things but this takes the cake.
posted by clavdivs at 9:02 AM on November 6, 2002


Hey, I'm not saying that a possible majority of pro-union voters are democrats, just that there are MANY anti-union Democrats and MANY pro-union Republicans, check out the races in Michigan or Indiana for instance or ask my company man grandfather who he voted for in every election in the last 50 or so years, I can assure you he'd rather cut off his right arm than pull the lever for a Republican, yet get him in the room with my "communist" aunt (his term) the pro-union socialist or my uncle (by marriage) the cradle Republican card carrying UMW member and you're going to see some fur fly (holidays are fun at the homestead)
posted by Pollomacho at 9:06 AM on November 6, 2002


Do your worst, Republicans. We all know real change will only happen when the middle class finds things intolerable. We're almost there, and with the Republicans in the Senate, I think we'll finally get somewhere. Health care will go down the toilet, the environment, the war. Until things are miserable, things won't change. Democrats are just Republicans who take money from different special interests, and vote a little more to the left. You're ignorant if you think otherwise.

It's gonna get real bad. But then it'll get better. (Just pray we're not nuked yet.)
posted by gramcracker at 9:06 AM on November 6, 2002


For all of you leaving: for the love of Jebus, take Alec Baldwin with you.

Thankies!
posted by Pancake Overlord at 9:06 AM on November 6, 2002


Neither really; The comment just reeks of right-wing militia, that's all. Are you sure you're a liberal? ;)

I see. You basically want to label me as either liberal or right-wing militia (both read as kook), so you can then simply ignore the statement. Okay.
posted by moonbiter at 9:06 AM on November 6, 2002


We got the bomb, and our voters are too fucking stupid and cocksure to be trusted with that kind of awesome power...

What an inspiring speech. Hincandenza for Pres 2004!
posted by poopy at 9:08 AM on November 6, 2002


(Psst. moonbiter: "irregardless" is not an accepted word.)
posted by leahzero at 9:09 AM on November 6, 2002


Uh, I guess I wasn't quite clear in tone when I said "Goodbye" to the Axis of Evil™. Pollomacho, I'm with you on this. It breaks my heart. I just haven't figured out how the sarcasm tags render in browsers.
posted by dilettanti at 9:09 AM on November 6, 2002


At the very least, I hope this means the end of the Daschle/Gephardt/McAuliffe axis of lameness.
posted by Ty Webb at 9:10 AM on November 6, 2002


Sorry dilettanti I thought the sarcasm was in reference to "its been nice knowing you" That is what I found harsh!
posted by Pollomacho at 9:12 AM on November 6, 2002


Psst. moonbiter: "irregardless" is not an accepted word.

I was too ignorant to know this. I apologize to anyone who was offended or confused by my misuse of a word "considered a blunder for decades."
posted by moonbiter at 9:14 AM on November 6, 2002


You basically want to label me as either liberal or right-wing militia (both read as kook), so you can then simply ignore the statement. Okay.

No, I was just playing. I apologize if I offended you. Actually, I lean liberal myself but I think people get carried away sometimes especially concerning anything political.
posted by poopy at 9:15 AM on November 6, 2002


On Preview: Wow, what a great thing! Everyone kisses and makes up.
posted by poopy at 9:17 AM on November 6, 2002


*hugs the room.
posted by poopy at 9:18 AM on November 6, 2002


[Congrats, Democratic National Caucus! You've driven away another outlier!]

Ten years ago I was a card carrying member of both Greenpeace and the ACLU. I wouldn't join either organization now on a bet. Honestly, I don't think the Republicans have so much charmed me as the Democrats (and left in general) have offended me. That didn't stop me for voting for a Dem yesterday, but the leadership of that party just turns me off completely.
posted by revbrian at 9:18 AM on November 6, 2002


Oh yeah, what I meant to say was screw you all! Democracy is for sissies!
posted by Pollomacho at 9:19 AM on November 6, 2002


I still want my oil, damn it!
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 9:21 AM on November 6, 2002


No, I was just playing. I apologize if I offended you. Actually, I lean liberal myself but I think people get carried away sometimes especially concerning anything political.

I wasn't offended, but thanks for the kind apology anyway.

I do trust that we will be able to vote in the future, and I don't believe that it will come to armed conflict in the US.

We would be foolish to think that the people of the US are somehow unique, however, and that something like the suspension of popular elections could never happen here.
posted by moonbiter at 9:26 AM on November 6, 2002


moonbiter: I was too ignorant to know this. I apologize to anyone who was offended or confused by my misuse of a word "considered a blunder for decades."

Everyone makes mistakes. The Anti-Irregardlessarian Party is here to welcome you with open arms.
posted by leahzero at 9:28 AM on November 6, 2002


Give it a few weeks Steve@Linwood, there'll be oil a plenty!
posted by trox at 9:30 AM on November 6, 2002


Serious question for those on the left here...

For the NEXT election, do yesterday's results make you more likely to support:

- Greens/other 3Ps with a harder left stance
- Democrats with a harder left stance
- Democrats with a more centrist stance
posted by nobody_knose at 9:34 AM on November 6, 2002


We would be foolish to think that the people of the US are somehow unique, however, and that something like the suspension of popular elections could never happen here.

Yeah, I totally agree, but I see this current election year as historic yet not something that signals the 'beginning of the end'.

At the same time, I also think it's utterly mindboggling when people like bill o'reilly et al say things like 'unamerican' or 'unpatriotic' regarding any sort of criticism of the current govt. that's the whole point of our system, right? it's like, 'wow'.
posted by poopy at 9:38 AM on November 6, 2002


(Psst. moonbiter: "irregardless" is not an accepted word.)

Ah, another defender of the language! I salute you!
posted by oissubke at 9:39 AM on November 6, 2002


nobody_knose: I still vote Republican
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 9:40 AM on November 6, 2002


: Oceania, Uber Alles!
posted by brooklyn at 9:46 AM on November 6, 2002


I still don't understand all the weeping, wailing and nashing of teeth here. The reps ONLY hold 51 seats in the Senate folks. That isn't control in full. A filibuster will work. There are also plenty of liberal reps that vote with the dems. The big difference is that now things will come to a vote instead of being tied up in committee. Now it will force senators to show what they really believe by actually VOTING instead of hiding and hoping things would be kept in committee. That part of gridlock is gone and good riddance to it.

This thinking that all of a sudden there will be a major change in the way the govt. functions is ridiculous.
posted by Plunge at 9:46 AM on November 6, 2002


Give it a few weeks Steve@Linwood, there'll be oil a plenty!

Except it'll be burning. It's a little harder to harvest that way, so I hear.
posted by gramcracker at 9:50 AM on November 6, 2002


For the NEXT election, do yesterday's results make you more likely to support:

- Greens/other 3Ps with a harder left stance
- Democrats with a harder left stance
- Democrats with a more centrist stance


I would support Democrats with a stance. The Democrats should have been hammering away at the corporate scandals and Bush's welfare for the wealthy program, but they don't have the vision or the spine or, most importantly, the leadership.

As i wrote before, the best that will come out of this will be the end of Daschle/Gephardt/McAuliffe and the whole GOP Lite experiment.
posted by Ty Webb at 9:52 AM on November 6, 2002


"Oh and sorry for the gold teeth troll! Bad taste, very extreme, not true sentiment."

The "gold teeth and stolen art" comment was, by far, the best thing in this thread.

I demand you retract your apology.

:)
posted by mr_crash_davis at 10:06 AM on November 6, 2002


do yesterday's results make you more likely to support:

I think it is a good idea for people to vote for candidates that mostly advocate ideas and policies that they think are good for the nation.

Speaking for me, this doesn't always follow party lines, though my leanings are 'liberal Libertarian'.

I also think it's utterly mindboggling when people like bill o'reilly et al say things like 'unamerican' or 'unpatriotic' regarding any sort of criticism of the current govt. that's the whole point of our system, right?

I agree. It worries me that there are influential people in our nation that think that questioning of authority is wrong.

It also worries me that there are individuals who think that the citizens of the US are somehow special and different than other peoples throughout history. Unfortunately, there is no reason to believe that we could not make the same mistakes others have made, or that we are immune to the same flaws of human nature that have plagued civilization for as long as it has been around.
posted by moonbiter at 10:10 AM on November 6, 2002


leahzero: That split you mentioned? Between foreign youth liking pop-cult stuff and loathing geopolitical pre-eminence? Over here.
posted by allaboutgeorge at 10:15 AM on November 6, 2002


nobody_knose:

See, I don't really vote 'centrist' or 'left' or 'right' blindly.

I support condidates that have a decision makeup as close to my own as possible, with certain topics ranked.

If you're not Pro-choice, for example, that would disqualify you off the bat.

Guns either way don't bother me. But active distain for simple background checks may turn me off.

Global policy can make or break you, too. I think I may ignore everything except for the choice question if a candidate said they'd force Israel to comply with UN resolutions and world treaties on human rights and settlements in occupied territories.

Intelligent tax reform, also, is important. Campaigning on 'tax breaks for everyone,' however does nothing to impress me.

Support of international business development and creation of infrastructure jobs at home also I think are important.

Oh yeah, environment is important, too. But depending on severity, may not make or break my voting decision.

See, it's just way to complex to just limit down to 'right' 'left' and 'center'.
posted by rich at 10:42 AM on November 6, 2002


« Older Go cannabis!   |   Tired of the same old Acapella? Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments