The people have spoken!

My guess is you are one of the older, whiter electorate that favors Republicans that the article referenced.

Look folks were scared of ISIS, Ebola and God knows what else , Mexicans probably. Originally Posted by WTF

yes, I am white, I am mid 40s', yes I side more so with GOP Policies, but I vote for the person I think is best. Whether its a Moderate Dem or Left Wing Republican, Libertarian, or whomever. I have not voted Straight Party since 1996 when I hated Clinton/Dems for making me claim 1/2 of my Biz Expenses as income, fuckers! I am still pissed about that

The next 2 years will be VERY interesting in the political world in our country.

One possibility that I had not thought about in 2016 is a Bush-Clinton Presidential race. My wife has always been a Ryan fan.

Don't forget the homofagnits! people still real scared of them!

if you at stay at home and do not vote then you have no say..

I know many of my votes were 'wasted' but I got off my ass and VOTED!! Originally Posted by RALPHEY BOY

Absolutely true.

Yes, the people have spoken, but it is just as it was in 2008, they were not for the most part supporting the winners as much as saying they were fed up with Chaney and his puppet. This was a definite anti-Obama vote, not a pro-RWW vote. But as always the winners will ignore reality and say they have a "mandate" that does not really exist.

That is the kind of stupidity that led to some really stupid LWW decisions/laws in 2009, and will lead to some really stupid RWW decisions/rules in 2015.

So, we will see how well the REPs pass laws now. I find the most interesting one to be what they will do with Obamacare. I suspect they will vote to repeal it, sure, but then what will they replace it with? "They" have a great opportunity to actually pass something that might be a way forward, but I suspect they will do no such thing. They will repeal one bad process and replace it with the old equally bad (or worse) process.

The 2016 election starts now, and if the RWWs heading to DC in their overalls do as I suspect, we will see a lot of those 2014 non-voter show up in 2016. In 2014 many of them saw the choice between someone who they view as incompetent (Obama) and a slew of RWWs they would feel unclean to vote for. I disagree with them, but they viewed it as neither option was worth their energy. Sadly, the way the Wackos have controlled both parties I don't see a lot of hope for the next several years. One nut replaces they other nut. In that sense COG is right.

It is clearly not a mandate but an anti-Obama vote, and the Republicans would be smart to recognize that. My advice to them would be to be moderate in their agenda, and not inflame the elements of the electorate who would tend to get out and vote against them. They should gently apply their least controversial libertarian agenda items, ride an improving economy and take credit for it (hey, its politics, right?) and maybe pull of a shocking Presidential victory in 2016.
Then, they need to find another guy like Clarence Thomas, and two more like Antonin Scalia, put them on the Supreme Court, and America may yet survive.

Dayum, I almost wish Marshall were here to help celebrate. This is for you buddy:

Originally Posted by gnadfly

You never know where he is, do you?? I think it is Assup, hiding behind proxy servers.

Exit polls pointed to an electorate that strongly resembled that of 2010, when the older, whiter electorate that favors Republicans turned out enthusiastically, while the young, non-white electorate that favors Democrats largely stayed home. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...d?ocid=U221DHP Originally Posted by WTF

Yes, you are correct, WTF. Shame you can't get it right more often, but the narrative is the same. Demographics are running heavily against Republicans in the future, unfortunately.

Absolutely true.

Yes, the people have spoken, but it is just as it was in 2008, they were not for the most part supporting the winners as much as saying they were fed up with Chaney and his puppet. This was a definite anti-Obama vote, not a pro-RWW vote. But as always the winners will ignore reality and say they have a "mandate" that does not really exist.

That is the kind of stupidity that led to some really stupid LWW decisions/laws in 2009, and will lead to some really stupid RWW decisions/rules in 2015.

So, we will see how well the REPs pass laws now. I find the most interesting one to be what they will do with Obamacare. I suspect they will vote to repeal it, sure, but then what will they replace it with? "They" have a great opportunity to actually pass something that might be a way forward, but I suspect they will do no such thing. They will repeal one bad process and replace it with the old equally bad (or worse) process.

The 2016 election starts now, and if the RWWs heading to DC in their overalls do as I suspect, we will see a lot of those 2014 non-voter show up in 2016. In 2014 many of them saw the choice between someone who they view as incompetent (Obama) and a slew of RWWs they would feel unclean to vote for. I disagree with them, but they viewed it as neither option was worth their energy. Sadly, the way the Wackos have controlled both parties I don't see a lot of hope for the next several years. One nut replaces they other nut. In that sense COG is right. Originally Posted by Old-T

I agree with your very intelligent post.
I don't think it would be wise of Republicans politically to get rid of Obamacare at this point. They would be furiously attacked for it if they got rid of it, and the system in place is actually no more than a bunch of high deductible insurance policies that only seem to hurt hospitals, who get stuck with collecting the big deductible, which the poor folks blow off with little consequence. Everyone else is apparently getting paid. The Republican constituency of Doctors and insurance companies are surviving it. The best they can hope to do is bring more choice into the system, and claim that fixes the system. They get rid of Obamacare, and they won't win the Presidency. The party is too white to survive getting rid of entitlements.

So, we will see how well the REPs pass laws now. I find the most interesting one to be what they will do with Obamacare. I suspect they will vote to repeal it, sure, but then what will they replace it with? "They" have a great opportunity to actually pass something that might be a way forward, but I suspect they will do no such thing. They will repeal one bad process and replace it with the old equally bad (or worse) process.
Originally Posted by Old-T

This election shows that the majority of this country doesn't like the direction we're going. The Rep's benefited from that. Now they need to do something with it. We'll see on that. They can try to repeal Obamacare but they better have something to replace it. With Obama's ability to veto I don't expect big changes with that.

I was pleased to see the Dem's "war on women" strategy blow up in their faces. Republican women did well. Democratic women not so much. Just about everyone Hillary campaigned for lost.

Exit polls pointed to an electorate that strongly resembled that of 2010, .... Originally Posted by WTF

.. yes, Obaminable Parrot.

Whenever I hear someone talking about "exit polls" I am reminded of John Kerry flying past Ohio to Boston so he could get ready for his victory party, because it was reported to him that the exit polls showed he would "Kerry" Ohio!!! I always need to know whose "poling"!!!

And of course, if one reads the shit he copies and pastes ...

"This shift isn’t new. Midterm elections have long attracted fewer voters than elections in presidential years have, with minorities and young people among the groups most likely to stay home. In the five presidential elections from 1992 through 2008, exit polls conducted for a consortium of media outlets found that voters under 30 cast, on average, 18 percent of the ballots; in the five midterms that immediately followed those elections, young people accounted for just 12 percent of the votes. Voters over 65, by contrast, increased their share of the vote from 15 percent to 19 percent. The decline among minorities hasn’t been as consistent or as severe, but their share of the vote dropped two percentage points from 2004 to 2006, and three from 2008 to 2010, which are big shifts as these things go."

It appears your illegal alien construction crew has dropped off a bit.

.. I always need to know whose "poling"!!!

. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Let us hope it is not you and your 'common sense'!

as the "ripple" effect expands the circles of exposed persons the numbers will "geometrically" increase. No one needs a "computer" ... all it takes is someone with personal knowledge of public schools during flu season.

It's fucking common sense. Which people "being obnoxious" lack.

. Originally Posted by LexusLover

LL, don't bother WTF with "science." He thinks Texas is turning BLUE!

Turns out with Illinois and Massachusetts Governor's elections, those states will be turning Red before it happens.

In other news, those supposed "Old Dixiecrats" elected a Republican African-American senator.

You never know where he is, do you?? I think it is Assup, hiding behind proxy servers. Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

Last time I looked, he was just another of your many handles, Bert!

How many times have you been banned for multiple handles, Uncle Han?

Why does Obamacare need to be replaced? It was a bad idea to begin with, and passed on a basis of lies and threats. There was no great outcry for Obamacare, and no poll exists that shows the majority even want it. It's not a sacred cow, it's an albatross. If the Republicans had the will to repeal it (which they don't), and could pull it off, they would be in the majority for years. Then if they removed the ridiculous insurance regulations, and let the market do what it does best, we'd all be much better off.

Why does Obamacare need to be replaced? It was a bad idea to begin with, and passed on a basis of lies and threats. There was no great outcry for Obamacare, and no poll exists that shows the majority even want it. It's not a sacred cow, it's an albatross. If the Republicans had the will to repeal it (which they don't), and could pull it off, they would be in the majority for years. Then if they removed the ridiculous insurance regulations, and let the market do what it does best, we'd all be much better off. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It needs to be replaced if it is repealed because 40 million people don't have health insurance. No outcry but McCain and Obama had health care reform in their campaigns. In the old system health insurance companies would not sell policies to people with pre-existing conditions in the individual market.

In the old system 80 percent of working people were covered. It is the 20 percent (40 million) Obamacare is helping via a private health insurance plan or expanded Medicaid over time.

If you just wrote a law that said health insurance companies must insure people with pre-existing conditions, the health insurance companies would never be able to have premiums and deductibles that are affordable and allow them to make a profit or at least break even on high risk clients. This is why health insurance companies excluded high risk people in the first place. (Remember JD's crude explanation of health insurance, sick people can't stay on the lifeboat)

Even if the new congress voted to repeal Obamacare, the republicans don't have enough votes to override a veto, which requires 66 percent in both the house and the senate. The new congress may try to get rid of the employer mandate or the individual mandate. I don't see them trying to repeal the whole thing. McConnell said he would focus on trade agreements and tax reform, common ground issues where a bill would be signed into law.