19 replies to this topic

[katinka]

So, what do you guys think?

At this time, i hear two republicans have been unseated for senate, which means 4 more and dems take over.

And everyone knows that Spitzer will win for Governor.

So, what do you guys think? I'm ready for a shift of power in washington.

[Charles]

Its up to 4 republicans unseated now

[djharkavy]

Charles, on Nov 7 2006, 10:16 PM, said:

Its up to 4 republicans unseated now

Webb appears to have won in VA, but I expect a recount after the absentee ballots are finished.

Tester is barely in the lead in MT, with about 25% still due in

IF both hold, the Democrats get control of the House and Senate. If one holds and the other goes, then it is 50-50, with ties broken by Mr. Cheney.

Either way, it looks like some checks and balances have been restored.

[tycoonboy388]

Along with a House in Democratic control, either a bipartisan Senate, or a slight democratic majority Senate would do enough in the way of checks and balances. I really wonder if the many caucuses now within the House Democrats will really select Nancy Pelosi as Speaker. I got a sense from the races that I was following (that Democrats won) the Democratic candidates would not support Pelosi, as they do not agree with most issues on her social agenda, especially when it comes to same-sex marriage, abortions or stem cell research (unlike Democrats fiscal agenda, which is pretty much uniform).

[randomania3]

well, democrats now have a senate majority by a little bit as well.

[esong27]

Thank you Virginia.

[anntan1989]

Well, we have yet to see how this shift in party power will affect American policies, in, say, Iraq. There've been theories going around that the Democrats won't get it together and will just split apart over the issues, but, of course, they're just theories. I'm extremely glad that there's been a party switch, because now is the time for change. I just hope something good happens during the next few years.

[djharkavy]

anntan1989, on Nov 9 2006, 01:26 AM, said:

Well, we have yet to see how this shift in party power will affect American policies, in, say, Iraq. There've been theories going around that the Democrats won't get it together and will just split apart over the issues, but, of course, they're just theories. I'm extremely glad that there's been a party switch, because now is the time for change. I just hope something good happens during the next few years.

I'm hoping, as I hoped that the Republicans would, that the Democrats in power in Congress remember their time as the minority party and instead of doing as the Republicans did in treating the opposition party as their enemy, instead learn that the opposition also can have good ideas.

The Democrats should set the agenda, but not shut out the Republicans or Independents. That way we can take the strengths of all parties, instead of the weaknesses of one.

[tycoonboy388]

I think it would be very tough for the Democratic Senate and House to completely neglect the Republicans. After all, a 51-49 majority is just barely existent in the Senate, and a projected 25 seat difference in the House is not much either. On top of that, the majority of the newly elected Democrats to both chambers do not agree with the liberal leaders of the Democrat caucus. Congressmen-elects and Senator-elects like Bob Casey Jr (PA), John Tester (MT), Jim Webb (VA), Heath Shuler (NC-11) and John Yarmuth (KY-3) are social moderates and conservatives, and will more than likely oppose actions to legalize same-sex marriages, protect abortion rights and promote stem cell research. On these issues, should the Democrats want to go forward along a more liberal agenda, they will probably be defeated by members of their own party. If anything would get done, it would probably occur as part of other deals between conservatives and liberals on both sides of the aisle. Along with the fact that we now have divided government, Congress cannot neglect Republicans, seeing as they still control the Presidency and the Judiciary. I think we can count on members of Congress on both sides of the aisle to build bipartisanship, especially since many '08 hopefuls for both parties are still in the Senate, and need to begin appealling to the rest of the country if they ever want to win the Presidency.

[katinka]

I know that Casey is Pro-life, but both him and Webb were endorsed by the Human Rights Campaign.

And besides, neither of them can be worse for liberals than Alan and Santorum.

[tycoonboy388]

Of course these new Senators are better for liberals than their predecessors. My point is that the 110th Congress will not be united on many social issues. Not everyone in the Democratic party embraces the "San Francisco liberal" ideology of allowing abortions, same sex marriages and stem cell research, and with the fact that most of the Republican Party is united against these issues, the Democrats will not be able to push those issues in Congress without alienating a large portion of the Representatives and Senators.

[djharkavy]

tycoonboy388, on Nov 9 2006, 08:35 PM, said:

Of course these new Senators are better for liberals than their predecessors. My point is that the 110th Congress will not be united on many social issues. Not everyone in the Democratic party embraces the "San Francisco liberal" ideology of allowing abortions, same sex marriages and stem cell research, and with the fact that most of the Republican Party is united against these issues, the Democrats will not be able to push those issues in Congress without alienating a large portion of the Representatives and Senators.

And what is wrong with that? The Senate is supposed to be a deliberative body, where ideas are discussed and tossed around, not rammed throught.

[tycoonboy388]

I never said there was anything wrong with that. I was only making a point that the new Democrats in the 110th are NOT the "San Francisco liberal" that has characterized the Democratic party for the better part of this administration. So if such issues, which are of great importance, were to come before the Senate, it would take time and great care before action.

That said, I am happy that the Democrats are now a wider party. There are certain things Democrats seem to agree on. Many of the policies that Congresswomen (and mostly likely Speaker-elect) Nancy Pelosi wants to legislate on in the first 100 hours (enact recommendations from the 9/11 commission, raise minimum wage, etc) seem to have full support from the Democratic caucus. On other matters, there is more debate, and debate will help strengthen the party and find a new niche other than opposition to Republicans. Embracing new positions that have been considered not "Democratic" will help the party work with the President and Republicans in Congress. In other matters, the party will help make Congress work as a check on Presidential power, something that has not occured in four years.

[Chiyeung DjChi Lau]

ahh man.. election night is one of the nights that ill never forget, coming from a strongly democratic family.. we were watching foxnews and cnn all night and celebrating as we saw how close were to taking the house, and when the democrats did and also take the senate.. we went crazy
SEND OUT THE CLOWNS NIGHT.. it was an awesome night

[katinka]

ThePokerKid, on Nov 9 2006, 09:12 PM, said:

ahh man.. election night is one of the nights that ill never forget, coming from a strongly democratic family.. we were watching foxnews and cnn all night and celebrating as we saw how close were to taking the house, and when the democrats did and also take the senate.. we went crazy
SEND OUT THE CLOWNS NIGHT.. it was an awesome night

"Strongly Democratic" and "Fox News"... I rarely hear that in the same sentence, lol.

I was sitting up alone. Family went to sleep.

[tycoonboy388]

I know exactly how you feel pokerkid. I had a great time on election night. We popped champagne when CNN projected the Democrats were taking control of the House. And a bunch of my friends went to Happy Hour to enjoy the concession speeches of Conrad Burns and George Allen. It has been quite nice, seeing as I haven't been to a victory party in a long time. And the last one I went to (1996), I wasn't really able to celebrate it.

[techkid]

I smell some change on the horizon in this country. Only time can tell if it is going to be beneficial.

[Chiyeung DjChi Lau]

katinka, on Nov 9 2006, 09:59 PM, said:

"Strongly Democratic" and "Fox News"... I rarely hear that in the same sentence, lol.

I was sitting up alone. Family went to sleep.

ha we only watched 4 updates

[Yakov]

You guys forgot about Lieberman. I feel he's going to be the bridge between republicans and democrats, because they are both trying to get him to join their side, the dems want to keep em, and the reps want to take em. And now that he is independent, he has more control because everyone wants his vote.

[tycoonboy388]

He's not the only independant in the Senate, he's just the only one that might vote against the Deomcrats. He insists he will caucus with the Democrats, and it seems more than likely that he will become a chairman for one committee in the Senate, so his voice will be heard. His only real split with the Democratic Party has just been over Iraq. Concerning the rest of Democrat agenda or plan, Lieberman has agreed with his party. Granted, he might try to stay more in the center now that he was elected by more Independants and Republicans than Democrats, but I think the Democrats have little to worry about, seeing as now they are mostly in step with Lieberman when it comes to the war. Just a change in strategy, not a complete withdrawal.