Obligatory post-election thread

Wednesday, November 3rd, 2010 · 12 Comments »

I really have nothing to say that other people haven’t already said. For example:

ETA: I take that back; I do have something to say. Even though I’m sure other people are saying it. It’s this: for the past two years, the Democrats had a 77-seat majority in the House of Representatives. They also had a Democratic-controlled Senate and a Democratic President. And yet they were unable to enact any genuinely progressive legislation because the Republican minority was just so powerful and had to be appeased.

The Republicans have now (at last count) picked up a 54-seat majority in the House; if they win all of the undecided races (which they won’t), that will give them at most a 65-seat majority. Notice that this is a smaller majority than the Democrats have enjoyed for the past two years. Notice, too, that the Senate is still in Democratic hands, as is the White House. And yet apparently the new Republican-controlled House will have vast powers to destroy everything the Democrats have done and to enact their own sweeping legislative agenda.

The only possible conclusion is that Republicans are magic.

ETA again: The Anglachel piece has a very sexist reference which, as I explained in the comments below, I totally forgot about by the time I was doing this post. Maybe my mind is now blocking things like that so I don’t go totally nuts.

Filed under: Various and Sundry · Tags:

12 Responses to “Obligatory post-election thread”

  1. tinfoil hattie says:

    The commenter quoted on achlangel’s post had this to say;

    To put it differently, if you’re going to act like an impolite word for female genitalia, you shouldn’t expect good outcomes, or even average outcomes.

    So … Obama, a MAN, elected by the Dudebro Faction of our country, is a … c-***?

    Wow. The mind boggles.

  2. scott says:

    It ain’t magic. It’s the power of genuine (if crazy and destructive) conviction. Dems truckle not because they have to but because they want to. Repuiblicans, for all their vices, have an admirable aversion to bending the knee to anyone, least of all people whose beliefs they despise. It’s quite rational, makes sense, and isn’t that complicated, which is why Smart, Reasonable Progressives have such a difficult time understanding it.

  3. Violet Socks says:

    tinfoil hattie, I totally forgot to mention that. I think I must be losing my mind. I read the Anglachel piece, and thought “good analysis” and “wow, that is amazingly sexist.” But then I totally forgot about the second thing when I came back around to do a post.

  4. Violet Socks says:

    Scott, I understand it perfectly. I was ridiculing the Democrats’ claims of powerlessness. There were invisible sarcasm tags in the post.

  5. myiq2xu says:

    To put it differently, if you’re going to act like an impolite word for female genitalia, you shouldn’t expect good outcomes, or even average outcomes.

    That’s 2% less evil sexism. We’re supposed to vote for them because they don’t use impolite words when they misogynate.

  6. Adrienne in CA says:

    Never more overjoyed to be living in California than today. As I mentioned elsewhere, our state preferred Hillary by ten points, and our Dem legislature passed single-payer health care twice, only to have it vetoed by the governator. Californians did nothing to deserve a backlash, and thankfully managed to dodge that bullet. Of course now the pressure will be on to set an example for what a Democratic majority can actually accomplish. And they’d better move fast, before redistricitng reshuffles the deck.


  7. scott says:

    I know you did; it was just one of those things that was pissing me off so much (and that you snarked about very well) that I had to say for myself or I’d bust a blood vessel. Call it medically necessary, and I was just seconding you in my own way. Cheers!

  8. tinfoil hattie says:

    HA! Well, hell, then – I’ll vote Dem next time!!

    Thanks for the post, Violet. Glum though I am, I do appreciate your work on our behalf.

  9. Not Your sweetie says:

    You remind me of R’s famous 41/59 majority after Scott Brown got elected. The Village Voice had something on THAT magic coup

  10. Kali says:

    I don’t fully agree with Krugman’s “it was the economy, stupid”. According to the polls the voters trust the republicans even less than democrats on the economy. Also, the majority of the voters blame Bush more than Obama for the economy. Also, the economy doesn’t explain why it was almost exclusively the blue dog democrats who lost. It also doesn’t explain why the gender gap practically disappeared, for the first time since 1982. I think the election results have much more to do with the progressive (i.e. true progressive) left and women being thrown under the bus.

  11. chaos says:

    random or not so random thought~~I wonder how many special interests back both D and R campaigns just in case. Maybe their should be a M designation as in Magic Money.

  12. mike says:

    Good post. But the Democrats have had solid control of Congress for four years, not two. True, Bush was the pres the first two years, but they could have easily blocked anything and everything they did. But I guess that’s true of the past 30 years. At no point have the Repubs have enough control to do anything with the liberals helping them along (and become very wealthy in the process).

    As far as Krugman goes, I think he’s the best asset the Repubs have. I find his ideas amateurish. I think he’s extremely corrupt and only concerned about protecting the assets of his corporate buddies. Really wish he’d stop practicing politics, a subject he has no experience or training in, and go back to economics. A refresher course on basic economics would probably help, beginning with some lessons on the dangers of debt and the importance of paying bills.