U.S. Politics I

[Annelise]

[quote name='The Czar' post='1583787' date='Nov 10 2008, 12.03']Why would the jobs have to parallel in order to have both posts in parallel?[/quote]

He chose a different emphasis, is what I'm saying. Legislation over statecraft, as it were. SoS is not the position for that. VP could take a role in statecraft, but it sounds like they're trying to avoid too many cooks in the kitchen.

[Maltaran]

[quote name='Annelise' post='1583752' date='Nov 10 2008, 16.28']Anyone know how many Republican Senators are considered centrists? And how many are considered hard-liners?[/quote]

Both Maine Senators (Snowe and Collins) are centrists, and IIRC so is Arlen Spector. If the Democrats can keep Lieberman on board, those three would be enough to break a filibuster.

[Teri]

[quote name='Nymeria Sand' post='1583669' date='Nov 10 2008, 07.52']Quite honestly, I think Putin has finally lost his marbles. :) His economy is going to be hit hard as oil revenues slow...why does he think picking a fight is a good idea? I'm having a hard time imagining why he would want to do such a thing.[/quote]

Perhaps because stirring up external conflicts helps to distract public attention from internal problems, and make citizens reluctant to criticize the administration for fear of appearing unpatriotic??

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Teri,

Well, why shouldn't he try that it sure worked for the Republican Party and their candidate this year, didn't it?

;)

[Nymeria Sand]

[quote name='Teri' post='1583882' date='Nov 10 2008, 13.53']Perhaps because stirring up external conflicts helps to distract public attention from internal problems, and make citizens reluctant to criticize the administration for fear of appearing unpatriotic??[/quote]


[quote name='Ser Scot A Ellison' post='1583888' date='Nov 10 2008, 13.58']Teri,

Well, why shouldn't he try that it sure worked for the Republican Party and their candidate this year, didn't it?

;)[/quote]
Good point, Scot, but I was thinking along the lines of what Teri said. After all, there's nothing better than a war to get the country off its economic problems. Most of the time. We didn't have that luxury because we're in the middle of two wars (and neither one seemed as important as the economy). But wars have been fought over resources. However, if the country is going to suffer economically from the drop in energy demand, why in the world would he threaten to cut off natural gas supplies to Europe? It doesn't make any sense.

[potsherds]

[quote name='Maltaran' post='1583861' date='Nov 10 2008, 18.37']Both Maine Senators (Snowe and Collins) are centrists, and IIRC so is Arlen Spector. If the Democrats can keep Lieberman on board, those three would be enough to break a filibuster.[/quote]
Arlen Spector is as well, yes.

To mention another that may or may not be, Voinovich from OH. I remember thinking some years ago looking at his record that he was moderate on some issues, although that might have been compared to Mike DeWine :ack: (the other senator from OH at the time), so I could be incorrect about that, or his voting pattern may have changed.

[Fez]

Dunno if this has been posted in one of the other threads, sorry if it has, but as per the [url="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/dean-steps-down-as-dnc-chair/"]NY Times[/url], Dean is done as DNC chairman.

[quote]Howard Dean will not seek a second term as chairman of the Democratic National Committee, ending a tenure marked by an aggressive attempt to reshape the mission of the committee – and to court support by the so-called Netroots - but also marked by frequent quarrels with Democratic leaders over his abilities and the direction he was taking the party.

Mr. Dean’s decision not to seek a second-term was expected after the victory of a Democrat, Barack Obama, in the presidential election last week. New presidents typically install their own leaders of their political party.

Beyond that, Mr. Dean’s advisers said he had little interest in being party chairman with a Democratic president in the White House, if only because, historically, the power and visibility of a party chairman is substantially diminished in such circumstances, when much of the political power goes to the White House political director.[/quote]

Too bad that, I thought Dean has done a damn good job as chair. I hope he has success in whatever he goes after next; the article goes on to mentions him as a possible Health and Human Services secretary. Or maybe he could run for Senator in Vermont if Leahy doesn't want another term, after all he will be 70 in 2010 and have served 6 full terms.

[The Progressive]

Health and Human Services sounds like a good place for Dr. Dean.

[EHK for Darwin]

[quote name='FezRock' post='1584142' date='Nov 10 2008, 16.17']Dunno if this has been posted in one of the other threads, sorry if it has, but as per the [url="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/dean-steps-down-as-dnc-chair/"]NY Times[/url], Dean is done as DNC chairman.



Too bad that, I thought Dean has done a damn good job as chair. I hope he has success in whatever he goes after next; the article goes on to mentions him as a possible Health and Human Services secretary. Or maybe he could run for Senator in Vermont if Leahy doesn't want another term, after all he will be 70 in 2010 and have served 6 full terms.[/quote]

Damn, I didn't realize Dean was that old. Thought he might have something of a future in the party, but I guess not. Whatever he may go on to (maybe even a well deserved appointment somewhere in the Administration), he can take solace in the fact that in the end, his strategy worked. 50 states. Net roots. Sure Obama added to it and without a candidate who inspired devotion as much as Obama its quite possible that a standard Dem wouldn't have the resources to compete everywhere as Obama did, but he still faced alot of critics in and out of the party, in the media and elsewhere who said that it couldn't be done and shouldn't be tried. They are to some extent proven wrong. The Democratic Party is in a MUCH better position now than when he took over and that wasn't all due to Republicans mutilating themselves (and the country). You don't pick up the seats they did in the places they did without a strategy to do so and working damned hard for it.

Will be curious to see where he goes from here.

[Arakasi]

Leahy is nearly 70. Howard Dean turns 60 later this month.

[Inigima]

[quote]... The veep in waiting is not a favorite with Republicans hard-liners, though, who still hold grudges over his tough questioning of former Bush Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. The conservative bloc in the Senate remains unified, and could still engineer a filibuster of Obama priorities.[/quote]
But it turns out Gonzales was a piece of shit after all :huh:

Sorry to hear Dean won't be continuing, but it makes sense. Much love, Doctor.

[Arakasi]

Like the article says, Dean is looking to have a role within the Obama presidency, likely as secretary of health, given his medical background. He would be a good fit.

[Shryke]

I guess that makes sense. I wasn't really expecting it. Obama has been a big Dean ally and basically took his strategy and did it even better then Dean did. I figured Obama would keep him around since his 50 State Strategy will be one of the biggest reasons for the Democrat's present and future gains.

But I guess it makes sense that his position when a Democrats in the office becomes not all that powerful, and he could probably do more workig in the Obama administration. Plus, considering Obama's win, his ideas are pretty much gurenteed to stay now, so he doesn't need to stick around to keep an eye on them.

[Arakasi]

When Dean took the job he only said he'd do it for one term. That was evident at the start of it. He has said that the 50 state strategy will continue. Which is good because the netroots are freaking out over it for no good reason. Actually right now the netroots (stuff like DailyKos, etc) are freaking out over everything. Which I guess is the point. People on the right didn't freak out over Bush even after 8 years of pouring the country down the drain. Progressives are freaking out over things that Obama hasn't even done yet. I do hope we can find a sane and healthy middle ground. :P

[Joanna vander Poele]

How do filibusters work?

[Arakasi]

A senator starts talking. And keeps talking til the session runs out unless there are 60 senators around to tell him/her to shut up. It's a sad carryover from the roman republic.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Arakasi,

In fairness there are many on the libertarian right who have been up in arms about Bush for years.

Out of curiosity what was your position on the "nuclear option" during the Democratic filibuster of Bush's Federal Court of Appeals nominees?

[Arakasi]

I like the libertarians. Well I like their attitude. I think that their idea of government size in this day and age is a pipe dream, but at least I like where they are coming from. What I'm talking about is the social conservative crowd, the people cheering on Palin as she went through her hate filled vitriol.

As for the Bush nominations, well I agree there are certain things that having more than a 50 majority are good for/necessary. I think supreme court justices are probably one of them. Considering who Bush was appointing, I think it was necessary for the dems to do what they did to not allow unqualified judges. My point is that its a silly method, and it should be done in a more sensical way. It just seems to be a massive time waster.

[Watcher]

After being too close to call for the past week Arizona Prop 101 has been very narrowly defeated. I guess my mailed in ballot was counted after all.

This was a bizarre prop that would've amended the state constitution to give everyone the "right to choose their health care" by not allowing "socialized" health care. The supporters claim was that our current healthcare is so much better then the socialized versions Arizonians needed a constitution amendment to ensure no one would be forced to buy health care against their will.

It seem like it was intended as preemptive strike against any changes health care program.

Maybe Ser Scot can understand the logic behind it because I don't. They seem to be working the state rights issue.

What I get is this measures ensures that everyone has health care the same way that Arizona is a "right to work" state, it doesn't. It would prevent the state from pooling its resources to ensure everyone is covered. Which isn't something Arizona is likely to do. It would actually weaken the current accidently designed health care coverage in America by preventing any laws that might affect how medical coverage is handled in the state.

Here is a link that explains it more clearly.

[url="http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Arizona_Proposition_101_(2008)"]http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Ariz...tion_101_(2008)[/url]

[Elrick]

Just curious havn't started a discussion for some time but I find that this is a pretty fascinating find and am hoping to see some more great things coming from the Obama team.

This will change the face of the nation and I hope to see some more of this. Anyone feel the same way?