Well, this is hardly the place to really rock the vote, but I think you're way,
way off. As I see it, the Tea Party took a buggering on the order of the German
army at Stalingrad. The President won handily in an election a lot of people
were banking on him losing. If you were a multi-millionaire or billionaire
funder of Super Pacs, literally banking on him to lose, it was worse than
Stalingrad. I wonder if Karl Rove is wearing a fedora and sunglasses with his
cell turned off?
It's not the same Congress, either. More Dems in the Senate, 9 more Dems in the
House. All the rape guys lost, and lost big. Plus there's some fairly luminous
demographic handwriting on the wall. Don't know if the GOP has enough sense to
actually read it, as they seem to spend all their time over at Fox News, but
the handwriting's there. (If you want to really see some election night
entertainment, get hold of a clip of when the Fox News team sent one of their
own down to the boiler room to challenge the numbers guys on the early calling
of Ohio. It's a riot. Really. Unless you like Fox News. Then it's not so funny.)
Don't get me wrong. I'm happy it turned out the way it did. But I'm not happy
with the state of American politics. I believe the conservative movement has a
lot of offer, in fact I believe it's a necessary component of our two-party
system. IN a lot of ways, I'm more at home on the conservative side of things,
but it's been usurped by a bunch of raging lunatics who believe no compromise
is the only compromise. That element of the party really took a drubbing, and
the drubbing will continue in the coming years if sensible conservatives (such
as yourself) don't reassert control.
I'm probably a lost cause to conservatives because of Tea Party lunatics and
religious zealots. Can't abide either. Matter of taste. So I remain a
registered Independent, caucusing with the Democrats--for the time being.
That's all I have to say on the subject. Probably. Well, maybe. <wink>
--Bob
On Nov 7, 2012, at 6:10 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> Yup, for 2% on the popular vote and hardly a mandate... it was low and
> petty, but I just couldn't help myself. :-)
>
> Actually, I voted for Romney since I figured the congress would end up
> with exactly the same split that it's had for the past 4 years. And it
> has. That likely means that Obama wouldn't be able to work with the
> House next year any more than he has in prior years. Romney might not
> do any better with either the Senate or the House but I figured he had
> at least some chance of doing so. Happy financial cliffing.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|