Pointless argument #726 thread

[Boz]

Understandably lost in the hoopla over the Obama win last night, were several other interesting Election Day developments. Here are some of my observations (note in advance –- these will come from a conservative point of view):

1. Congress. I was happy to see the Republicans not fare quite as badly as predicted in the House and Senate last night. I am currently not enamored with too many in Congress right now, on either side, but I don’t think it’s a good thing when one party has effectively no representation in federal government.

2. Harry Reid’s speech. One of my least favorite in the body mentioned above, Reid talked about a mandate last night, but a mandate for change, not necessarily a mandate for Democrats. I think this will be important for him to remember. I’m not sure if I believe he can deliver on such a promise, but we’ll see how he approaches the 111th Congress. (I think it goes without saying that I have zero faith in Nancy Pelosi on this front).

3. Will Lieberman flip? If Reid tries to take takes Joe’s chairmanship from him, I think it’s only a matter of time before Lieberman is a Republican. (I also think he would have flipped if the Democrats got to 60). If Harry is smart, Lieberman will continue to be an Independent who caucuses with the Democrats.

4. Adios John Boehner and Roy Blunt. House Republicans need new leadership and need it badly. Both of these guys are out, I don’t think there’s any question. Who will step up and lead the Republicans? My money is on Mike Pence. (to a lesser extent, this might also apply to Mitch McConnell, but I think he is in a better position to maintain his leadership than the Republicans in the House).

5. What to do about Virginia? While I don’t think the Republicans are “lost” across the country, they sure are when it comes to my adopted home state. Virginia Republicans also need new blood and in a damn hurry. I had thought Eric Cantor would be a good candidate, but he has really disappointed lately, so I’m not sure where they will turn. [quick edit: if you want my guess, new blood in the Republican party in Virginia comes not necessarily from the State Senate/Assembly -- and there are some good people there -- but from the military.]

6. Minnesota. Looks like a recount between Coleman and Franken. Now, I’m not the biggest Norm Coleman fan in the world, but I think Al Franken is little more than a clown who will embarrass his party and state if elected. I am rooting for the incumbent in that one in a big way.

7. Proposition 8. Many people, including myself, warned that this would happen when the California courts allowed gay marriage last year. You just can’t force that kind of thing on people, it is an open invitation to huge backlash. And when California passes a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, I think it’s a pretty safe bet to say that the country is not ready for that. (Two other states also passed bans).

8. How in God’s name did Ted Stevens win last night? I would like to be the first to nominate Sarah Palin to take his seat. That dude is bad news and the sooner the Republicans get rid of him, the better. (Yeah, that goes for you too Don Young).

9. WTF, New England?? Look, New England is not really a bastion of the conservative movement, but as of now -- unless Lieberman does flip -- there is not a single Republican representative in the federal government from all of the New England states. Um, I don't think I’ll be going to New England anytime soon.

10. Finally, a quick note to conservatives everywhere: do not concede the younger voting groups. I’m not necessarily talking only about the 18-30s, they will always skew liberal, that’s absolutely true, but there is no reason you need to keep taking the thumping you did last night in that group. And the 30-44 group should be much more balanced than it was this year. I have talked to many, many people in both of those groups in this election who can and will embrace conservative principles. Maybe not on traditional social issues, but certainly on the economy and foreign policy. If Republicans can reach out to younger voters in a way that they absolutely did not this year (probably an impossible task with a candidate like McCain though), they can win back the 30-44s and even win some more of the 18-30s. Come to think of it, now that there is an African-American in the White House, it’s probably time Republicans made some effort to break up that voting bloc a little bit.

Yes, I consider people who are 30 to be "young." F - you. Get off of my lawn!

[AustinHoya03]

Also of note:

Proposition K failed by 16 percentage points in San Francisco.

Washington State approved Initiative 1000 allowing assisted suicide.

[Boz]

Shows how much I know. Eric Cantor is officially running for whip.

Hopefully he will do better than he's done the last few months.

[TC]

Nov 5, 2008 12:10:34 GMT -5 Boz said:

6. Minnesota. Looks like a recount between Coleman and Franken. Now, I’m not the biggest Norm Coleman fan in the world, but I think Al Franken is little more than a clown who will embarrass his party and state if elected. I am rooting for the incumbent in that one in a big way.

Minnesota is a joke - Bachmann should be out on her ass right now.

7. Proposition 8. Many people, including myself, warned that this would happen when the California courts allowed gay marriage last year. You just can’t force that kind of thing on people, it is an open invitation to huge backlash. And when California passes a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, I think it’s a pretty safe bet to say that the country is not ready for that. (Two other states also passed bans).

You can force that sort of thing on people, and in many cases that's the only way that society moves forward - look at Brown vs. the Board of Education. That was fought and fought and fought, and it's likely that this will be fought and fought and fought, but in the end society is going to fall on the side of equality. Progressives in California made sort of a Faustian bargain here without knowing it - the Obama win was something they are celebrating, but it came with a price - the increased participation and the margin of the Obama win in CA probably was the difference in Prop 8 passing or failing

8. How in God’s name did Ted Stevens win last night? I would like to be the first to nominate Sarah Palin to take his seat. That dude is bad news and the sooner the Republicans get rid of him, the better. (Yeah, that goes for you too Don Young).

The only thing I can think of is that he held votes as a placeholder for Palin. Surely the "Screw the Feds, Vote Ted" movement can't be that strong.

9. WTF, New England?? Look, New England is not really a bastion of the conservative movement, but as of now -- unless Lieberman does flip -- there is not a single Republican representative in the federal government from all of the New England states. Um, I don't think I’ll be going to New England anytime soon.

How does Lieberman work into this? He's a Senator, not a Representative - and New England certainly has Republican Senators (Snowe, Collins, and Gregg). Shays losing was strange, but I honestly think that had as much to do with discontent with what Lieberman has done as it did with Bush or any of the other issues out there (the economy, etc).

A little note on this point - the Republicans didn't bother to run anyone in my district (MA-09). It's hard to win a seat when you don't bother to try.

[Boz]

On point 9, sorry, it was a long post and I got mixed up toward the end.

On Proposition 8, we are just going to disagree on that one.

[Bando]

3. Will Lieberman flip? If Reid tries to take takes Joe’s chairmanship from him, I think it’s only a matter of time before Lieberman is a Republican. (I also think he would have flipped if the Democrats got to 60). If Harry is smart, Lieberman will continue to be an Independent who caucuses with the Democrats.

He's at least losing his chairmanship. You can't endorse the other party's guy, speak at the convention, and expect to come out unscathed. There's talk of Reid making some sort of deal where if Joe votes the right way for the next two years, he gets his chair back in 2010. But that might not sound good to him. I don't think Conn. will re-elect him, I think he was banking it all on being McCain's SecDef.

7. Proposition 8. Many people, including myself, warned that this would happen when the California courts allowed gay marriage last year. You just can’t force that kind of thing on people, it is an open invitation to huge backlash. And when California passes a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, I think it’s a pretty safe bet to say that the country is not ready for that. (Two other states also passed bans).

This will likely head back to court since prop. 8 wasn't retroactive (there are now two kinds of same-sex couples in CA, those who are married and those who can't get married). Although the telling statistic was that of voters aged 18-24, 66% voted no. It's going to happen eventually.

[hifigator]

New England, and the entire northeast edited.

Seeing that giant blue corner reminded me of a puzzle when I was like 2 or 3 years old. It was one piece of puzzle, covering all of 8 or 10 states. In any case, needless to say, conservatives and liberals are going to see things differently.

As for the prop 8 in California -- which was essentially Ammendment 2 here in Florida -- I think it again doesn't get to the source of the conflict. Sure there are still plenty of evangelical Christians who are simply "against" homosexuality as they believe it to be wrong. But that isn't the same principle as protecting the sanctity of marriage. If they could divorce those two issues, then it would be much easier to reach an acceptable policy for everyone.

I think that some form of a recognized civil union is all that it would take. The angle that everyone focuses on is that evangelicals "don't want" or "won't let" gay couples get "married." So what. Look at it this way. Leave "marriage" alone as a legally recognized union between one man and one woman. Remember, we have bigomy laws for a reason. Now establish a recognized union for two men or for two women. That's really not that difficult. And if truth be told, why would the gay couples be so enamored with the term "marriage" anyway? That's all artificial.

The bottom line is that gay couples are seeking recognition and acknowledgement from society and are seeking some legal benefits which come with such a union. Fine. Let them have it.

In fairness, I have said all along that the legal issues related to homosexual couples don't make a lot of sense. Look at it this way:

If a man and a woman get married on a whim in Las Vegas and then 6 months later, an accident takes one of their lives, then unless there is a will of some sort, the surviving spouse will most likely inherit the "community" assets.

Now consider a gay couple that have lived together for 15 years. Everyone in the community, knows them as a "couple," regardless of their individual views on homosexuality. They were always together, at dinner, at the movies, in the yard, on vacation etc.... But if after 15 years, one of them dies in an accident, then unless there is a specific will, the assets don't revert to the survivor, as the survivor isn't recognized. Personally, even though it is my belief that homosexuality is morally wrong, I still think that such policy is incredibly unfair. There should be a recognized civil union of some sort. It's that simple, at least in my mind.

[TC]

Nov 5, 2008 12:42:42 GMT -5 Boz said:

On Proposition 8, we are just going to disagree on that one.

Two other points on Prop 8 :

- it will be tough to defend in a midterm election
- it seems weird that you can amend a constitution with 52% of the vote

[TC]

Nov 5, 2008 12:59:54 GMT -5 hifigator said:

As for the prop 8 in California -- which was essentially Ammendment 2 here in Florida -- I think it again doesn't get to the source of the conflict. Sure there are still plenty of evangelical Christians who are simply "against" homosexuality as they believe it to be wrong. But that isn't the same principle as protecting the sanctity of marriage. If they could divorce those two issues, then it would be much easier to reach an acceptable policy for everyone.

There's no attack on the "sanctity of marriage". The legal definition of marriage and the religious definition of marriage are separate things and should remain that way.

[vcjack]

Interesting note, this is the third straight Vietnam Vet to lose the presidency. Because Clinton and Bush were not veterans and the clear generational power shift in both parties, its highly unlikely that we will EVER see a president who fought in that war. Interesting that such a vital part of the Baby Boomer legacy will go unrepresented.



On other notes:
I guess Stevens winning means the beginning of Palin's senate career. Speaking of provisional senators who replaces Obama and Biden in the senate? I'd guess Jesse Jackson Jr. would get the Illinois nod but I don't know enough about Delaware politics to know who would be targeted there (Delaware does have a democratic governor right?)

[Filo]

I was going to start a new thread on this issue, but this seems like a fine place for it...

One major issue is whether this is the beginning of the end of the Republican party as a truly national party or whether most of this can be blamed on Bush and the theory that McCain just got hit with a perfect storm (association with Bush, stupid choice for running mate, economic crisis right in the middle of the campaign, etc.).

On the one hand, the only age group that McCain carried was over-65s. He got swamped in the youth vote and in Hispanic vote -- doesn't bode real well for the future of the party.

On the other, I think Republicans can thank Bush and his administration for having a pretty direct effect on the huge losses in Congress over the past two elections. If I were a Republican (I am an Independent), I would be pretty Editeded at him and what he has done to the party's standing right now.

[Jack]

Nov 5, 2008 12:10:34 GMT -5 Boz said:

9. WTF, New England?? Look, New England is not really a bastion of the conservative movement, but as of now -- unless Lieberman does flip -- there is not a single Republican representative in the federal government from all of the New England states. Um, I don't think I’ll be going to New England anytime soon.

New England is overwhelmingly college educated professionals and has very few Evangelical Christians. There are certainly still some fiscal conservatives, but they happen to also be member of the East Coast Elite, and their kind don't seem too welcome in Republican circles. The GOP moved away from New England conservatives, not the other way around. When the only Republicans in New England get bashed by their own party as RINOs (Snowe, Collins, Chaffee), no wonder they can't get elected.

[Cambridge]

Nov 5, 2008 13:12:40 GMT -5 Jack said:

Nov 5, 2008 12:10:34 GMT -5 Boz said:

9. WTF, New England?? Look, New England is not really a bastion of the conservative movement, but as of now -- unless Lieberman does flip -- there is not a single Republican representative in the federal government from all of the New England states. Um, I don't think I’ll be going to New England anytime soon.

New England is overwhelmingly college educated professionals and has very few Evangelical Christians. There are certainly still some fiscal conservatives, but they happen to also be member of the East Coast Elite, and their kind don't seem too welcome in Republican circles. The GOP moved away from New England conservatives, not the other way around. When the only Republicans in New England get bashed by their own party as RINOs (Snowe, Collins, Chaffee), no wonder they can't get elected.

Amen.

[Jack]

Also, bra-vo to the fine folks of Arkansas who decided that it is preferable to have kids in orphanages and foster care than to allow them to be raised by two loving adoptive parents who happen to be unmarried (and perhaps gay). Family values, hard at work.

[hifigator]

Nov 5, 2008 13:05:41 GMT -5 TC said:

Nov 5, 2008 12:59:54 GMT -5 hifigator said:

As for the prop 8 in California -- which was essentially Ammendment 2 here in Florida -- I think it again doesn't get to the source of the conflict. Sure there are still plenty of evangelical Christians who are simply "against" homosexuality as they believe it to be wrong. But that isn't the same principle as protecting the sanctity of marriage. If they could divorce those two issues, then it would be much easier to reach an acceptable policy for everyone.

There's no attack on the "sanctity of marriage". The legal definition of marriage and the religious definition of marriage are separate things and should remain that way.

I disagree. I'm not coming at it from a religious angle at all. I just think the issue would be so much easier to solve if we could just drop the semantics. Leave "marriage" alone, as it has been essentially forever. Recognize legal unions of some sort. What's the big deal?

[TBird41]

Stevens and Young both benefited from a backlash against Outsiders and Nat'l Democrats. It's asking a lot of Alaskans to buy that a Dem has a chance to develop Alaska's resources. They also benefited b/c Alaskans like Stevens and Young when they're in Alaska. It's a weird dynamic--both of their negatives fall quickly when they're in state.

Stevens also benefited b/c his trial looked like it was unfair and b/c Alaskans realized that reelecting him meant they would either get to keep Ted if he was not guilty or get a real choice in a special election if he was forced out. The special election is called the "Murkowski Rule" after Frank appointed Lisa to take his place (though, Lisa was House Majority Leader at the time and has done a good job, imo)

[TBird41]

Nov 5, 2008 12:38:03 GMT -5 TC said:

Nov 5, 2008 12:10:34 GMT -5 Boz said:

6. Minnesota. Looks like a recount between Coleman and Franken. Now, I’m not the biggest Norm Coleman fan in the world, but I think Al Franken is little more than a clown who will embarrass his party and state if elected. I am rooting for the incumbent in that one in a big way.

Minnesota is a joke - Bachmann should be out on her ass right now.

You could say the same for Western Pennsylvania. John Murtha should be out on his ass right now.

(And Bachmann survived because there was an Independent Party Candidate that split the vote against her)

[Boz]

Your other points are well taken, Jack, but Chaffee deserves to be called a RINO by ANY formation/incarnation of the Republican party.

[vcjack]

So... I guess Minesota is going towards a recount and Georgia is going to have a runoff? I'd imagine that Republicans keep both eventually

[mchoya]

Nov 5, 2008 13:06:23 GMT -5 vcjack said:

On other notes:
I guess Stevens winning means the beginning of Palin's senate career. Speaking of provisional senators who replaces Obama and Biden in the senate? I'd guess Jesse Jackson Jr. would get the Illinois nod but I don't know enough about Delaware politics to know who would be targeted there (Delaware does have a democratic governor right?)

Beau Biden will be the next senator from Delaware. There's a complication because he will be deploying to Iraq for a tour of duty, but he will probably become the senator once his tour is over. See here: ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ikXdkhGpxM9rLnLYzrmagNZhJMIAD948GVN82