Wednesday, November 07, 2012

OK Everybody, Back to Work

It was kind of amazing last night when the news anchors called the win for Obama. California came in blue, not surprisingly, and a couple other West Coast states, and then they said they were confident that Ohio had voted Democratic, and that was it. If you were pacing yourself to stay up late, you got an early bedtime. Ohio's vote was close at first, but as they explained, the areas that were not counted yet were so blue that there was almost no chance they would come up Republican in the end. Pop the cork.

I didn't wait up for Romney to concede his loss. He was holding out for more votes to be counted when I went to bed. I did see Karl Rove whining on Fox that it wasn't fair. The Republicans in federal government devoted the last four years to ensuring that Obama served only one term, they failed to introduce legislation the country needed and opposed bills that they would have supported under a different President. The government now faces a "fiscal cliff" that could have globally disastrous consequences, as a result of refusal by legislators to negotiate on important budget matters. All they were thinking about was making the President look bad, and now they will have to deal with the reality of what they have created.

And of course we were watching four states that voted on marriage equality. At this point two of them have decisively voted to allow same-sex couples to marry, one is still being counted but marriage equality is likely to pass, and one state voted not to rule it out. For the first time after thirty-two failures, Maine and Maryland voted to accept marriage between same-sex couples, Washington state probably will but numbers won't be in until tomorrow, and Minnesota voters refused to write anti-gay bigotry into their constitution.

That's it, that issue is toast now. The deal is done, the Nutty Ones will have to find some other thing to complain about, the tide is not going to go back the other way.

We are especially proud to live in a state that has endured the bitterness and risen above it. The truth is, it doesn't make sense to tell people who love each other that they can't marry. We saw some ugly ads on television and there was a gigantic campaign in the churches, with thousands of ministers preaching against marriage rights for all, but in the end people voted with their hearts. When gay and lesbian people fall in love in our state they will be able to marry and start a home and fight over the remote control just like everybody else.

High five -- okay, you guys, get back to work.

28 Comments:

Blogger Priya Lynn said...

I'm thrilled to be able to congratulate all my American friends to the south on a win for B-Rock Obama. The stakes couldn't have been higher in this election with the winner nominating between one and three supreme court justices who will determine the fate of Roe V Wade and a variety of issues related to rights equality for gays and lesbians. Republicans can't delay the economic recovery forever so by 2016 the American economy should be humming along nicely and a Democrat president will likely be elected again.

And of course an Obama election win wouldn't be complete without a review of all the things Bad anonymous assured us were as certain to come true as the sun rising in the morning. We remember in 2008 when he told us in detail all the things "President Huckabee" would do in his first and second terms. This year he told us all about the "16 years of the Romney and Ryan presidencies". During the past month and a half he repeatedly and gleefully assured us the Democrat campaign was in freefall everytime there was a normal fluctuation in the polls showing the Republicans doing less badly than they had. He ignored the majority of polls showing Obama in the lead and instead insisted the Republican biased Rasmussen poll told the real story. He hung his hat on the claim that Rasmussen was the closest poll on election day in 2008 while ignoring that since 2010 the Rasmussen poll had shown an average bias to Republicans of 3.9% and in fact Rasmussens last poll before yesterdays election had Romney winning by one percentage point.and bad anonymous smugly told us two days ago "popular vote: Romney 52, Obama 48 you heard at TTF first, people". Yes, we heard it and we won't let you forget it. Bad anonymous also assured us marriage equality votes were going down in flames, he told us gays can't win because they don't really care about marriage deep in their hearts but marriage won the vote in all four states. The ironic thing is that bad anonymous actually voted against his own best interests just like the vast majority of Republican voters. They are not amongst the top 1% of income earners so it took Democrat voters to force Republicans like bad anonymous to accept what is good for them.

November 07, 2012 1:51 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

There were in fact two winners in yesterday's election, B-Rock Obama and the truth. Never before had there been an election campaign with such total disregard for the truth as the Romney/Ryan campaign. Never before was there a sleazier pair promising the world and that it wouldn't cost anything. Romney pollster Neil Newhouse set the tone for the campaign when he was asked about a lie in their campaign and he responded "We're not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers.". And they certainly didn't, lying about how their five trillion in tax cuts and 2 trillion in new defense spending wouldn't raise the deficit or make the middle class pay more in taxes. Romney lied about abortion saying he had no interest in restricting abortion rights when he'd previously said he wanted to see Roe v Wade overturned and that he'd sign a person hood amendment that would make all abortion a criminal offence and some types of birth control illegal. He lied about Obama cutting 716 billion from medicare when it was not a cut in benefits but a savings in expenditures and Ryan's budget made the same cuts. He lied about the auto bailout claiming he supported it after he had vigoursly opposed it at the time. He lied in Ohio claiming chrysler was moving Jeep production to China, he lied about welfare saying Obama had cut the work requirement from welfare.

But Romney's and Ryan's campaign of outrageous lies didn't work. The American public was far smarter than they thought and stood up and said "NO, we will NOT reward you for your dishonesty". The American public voted the truth and if they had voted for Romney that would have been the end of any resemblance of truth in future presidential campaigns as Romney and Ryan would have proven the truth doesn't matter, that one can make up whatever outrageous B.S. they want and no one will call them on it. Well Mr. Romney, the American public called you on it. They stood up for the truth and elected Barrack Obama.

November 07, 2012 1:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A few tidbits of data from Maryland's own State Senator Jamie Raskin:

" Just a quick note to share my elation about yesterday’s smashing and astounding election results in Maryland and across America. Almost everyone and everything I believe in triumphed at the polls, pushing the politics of change to a level of promise we have never seen before in our lifetimes.

In Maryland, we made history, becoming the first state in the Union to uphold marriage equality, by a healthy margin of 52%, at the polls. (In Montgomery County, which I traversed yesterday with the awesome Blair High School Young Democrats, we won a massive 65% of the vote.) We were quickly followed last night by Maine, Minnesota and Washington state, where voters again stood up for equal rights for all and the right of all people to love and have the legal recognition of their marriages, families and children. The tide of history has turned.

We made history again by passing the Dream Act--by a resounding 58% margin and a stunning 72% in Montgomery County, which has proven to be the progressive powerhouse in the state.

All across America people stood up for community--a nation where, as the Boss has been singing, “we take care of our own.” President Obama has the chance now to realize, “inch by inch, day by day,” as Springsteen said yesterday, the hopes and dreams of the people. Congratulations to President Obama and his family on an historic and breathtaking victory and a magnificently stirring speech last night."

November 07, 2012 2:28 PM  
Anonymous four worse years said...

nasty Priya, copying the same nasty posts in pretty pathetic

but you're probably happy to have anyone use 'pretty' as an adjective anywhere near you

maybe I'll give you the verbal abuse you deserve later

other TTFers:

while I don't agree with the vote on gay marriage, I guess you guys are due some kind of perverted congratulations

it's been a long time coming and you win four states in one night

hard to see any going back now

the Dream Act was the right thing to do and I voted for it myself

Obama is a disaster. I assumed his win last time was just exuberance over the historic nature of the campaign and that it wouldn't be repeated. I was wrong about one of those two things and I'm not sure which yet.

Obama's policies will create hardship and suffering across the land. Worse, he is incapable of negotiating with his opponents. Reagan did it with Tip O'Neill. Clinton did it with Newt Gingrich. And you're saying Boehner is a tougher nut to crack? C'mon. Obama can't because it is against his basic temperament.

Our best hope is that he will talk Bill Clinton into being a senior adviser and he will become the pseudo-President.

Obama's speech sucked last night. Long-winded, egocentric and bombastic. Romney was graceful and appropriately short.

November 07, 2012 3:20 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Yes, you're right bad anonymous, people like me deserve verbal abuse for being right about how the election would go and for supporting equal rights for all, including you. But then, that's all you've ever had is verbal abuse - the facts have never been on your side.

Its hilarious that you like so many republicans voted against your own best interests. Because you don't know what's good for you Democrat voters had to save you from yourself and vote in a candidate that will actually benefit you rather than hurting you.

Republicans now know they can't win by lying and appealing solely to rich, white, old men - the Republican party as we know it is dead. Republicans can't thwart the economic recovery forever, by 2016 the economy should be humming along and the Democrats will likely win again.

That's our bad anonymous, often wrong, but never in doubt. So tell us bad anonymous, before the election you said with absolute certainty "popular vote: Romney 52, Obama 48 you heard at TTF first, people", why were you so wrong?

November 07, 2012 3:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"people like me deserve verbal abuse for being right"

no, it's your nasty disposition that explains why everyone you meet wants to verbally abuse you

"Its hilarious that you, like so many republicans, voted against your own best interests."

you mean because Obama will steal the earnings of the successful and give it to the 99%?

possession of stolen goods used to be a crime in wholesome societies

even if you have no moral convictions, the Robin Hood world is counter-productive anyway

November 07, 2012 3:57 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Actually no one wants to verbally abuse me other than you, I'm well loved by most people which shows you're the nasty one, not me.

Asking the rich to pay the same tax rates as everyone else is not theft. Its the Republicans that wanted to steal from the poor and middle class and give it to the rich. The House budget plan Ryan put forth in 2010 eliminated taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends. Romney made more than $21 million in 2010, the only year he has released his full tax returns - and about 95 percent of it came from those sources. Under Ryan's plan, Romney would only have paid taxes on the less than $1 million he made from other sources.

This amounts to less than 1% income tax on Romney under Ryan's plan;


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57499092-503544/due-diligence-would-ryan-have-romney-pay-a-1-tax-rate/

The Republicans all loved Ryan's budget, they wanted to see the ultra rich like Romney pay a tax rate of less than 1% while the middle class paid 20-30%.

Once again, Democrat voters had to force you to accept what's good for you because you've bought the Republican con hook, line, and sinker.

November 07, 2012 4:47 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

So tell us bad anonymous, before the election you said with absolute certainty "popular vote: Romney 52, Obama 48 you heard at TTF first, people", why were you so wrong?

November 07, 2012 4:49 PM  
Anonymous David S. Fishback said...

Jim,

Can't let this time go by without noting that your posts over the last eight years have been an important part of the educational process that was so vital in helping people on their journeys to understanding the issues surrounding LGBT rights. On behalf of my family and so many others, I want to thank you.

David Fishback, Advocacy Chair
Metro DC Chapter of PFLAG

November 08, 2012 12:23 AM  
Anonymous Robert said...

I echo what David said.

November 08, 2012 4:36 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When Mitt Romney tried to make an issue of President Obama telling his supporters to vote in “revenge,” I thought of my father. He used to say, calmly, that “living well is the best revenge,” and he didn’t mean “living well” either in terms of luxury goods like car elevators, or head-on-a-pike retribution, but simply doing the right thing and being at peace with yourself. A Catholic kind of karma, if you will.

That’s what I heard in Obama’s message to his voters: Keep calm and vote, and things will turn out in the end. But it turned into one more chance for the GOP to demonize our calm, conciliatory president. They tried to make it sound like he was preaching retribution, or reparations, or some other kind of vengeful racial payback they fear.

But today I like the Old Testament implications of the term “revenge,” even if I don’t think that’s what Obama intended. I waited in a long line to vote for the president, even in a blue state, because I wanted a punitive kind of revenge, a rebuke to the hate-mongers and the dividers and the cynical political profiteers. And I know I had a lot of company.

Former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele called the election results a “spanking” for his party, and he seemed to think it was good for them. As a mother, I don’t believe in corporal punishment, but I agree with Steele: His party deserved an electoral spanking, and it’s going to take more of it to turn it around.

Here’s who needed a spanking badly, and why it’s good for the country that they got one:

Karl Rove: Mr. American Crossroads had a nervous breakdown live on Fox Tuesday night, but he’ll be OK: He bilked billionaires out of enough money in this election cycle to afford the best medical treatment out there. Rove deserved to be punished for his cynicism and cruelty. Back in 2004, he pushed gay marriage bans in order to bilk white evangelicals out of their votes and he won back the White House for George W. Bush. Last night marriage equality initiatives passed in four states as Obama rode to victory. One of Rove’s 2004 Ohio operatives, Secretary of State John Husted, tried to suppress the Democratic vote but he failed badly; Ohio put Obama over the top. Rove, who knows better, sold his party’s soul to the Christian right. He might have been a voice for moderation and a bridge to Latinos, who were a cornerstone of Bush’s victories; instead, they will turn Texas blue again within a generation. Boss Rove deserved a public humiliation, and he got one.

Bill O’Reilly: Papa Bear likewise came unglued Tuesday night, unleashing a racist rant for the ages and proving he’s a dinosaur colluding in his own extinction. But O’Reilly also deserves credit, or blame, for making abortion a winning issue for Democrats. The man who crusaded against Dr. George Tiller as “Tiller the baby killer” seemed to accept his murder, since Tiller had “blood on his hands.” O’Reilly emboldened the far right to overreach on abortion issues and helped pave the way for morons like Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock to keep the Senate in Democratic hands. Again, like Rush Limbaugh and so many other bloviators, he’s gotten rich on his hate-mongering and it’s not likely to stop now. But they have to live in a country they hate, and I’m enjoying that today.

November 08, 2012 7:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mitch McConnell: The Senate minority leader famously promised to make Barack Obama a one-term president and failed miserably. So he replied to Obama’s victory with a graceless and vengeful rant, calling it “a second chance to fix the problems that even he admits he failed to solve during his first four years in office.” In a state where Sen. Rand Paul is now ascendant, McConnell wants to prevent a Tea Party challenge from his right, but he’ll probably get one anyway. I’m looking forward to it. The only way to fight bullies is to stand up to them. The cowardly McConnell, and a lot of other Republicans, will find that out soon.

Mitt Romney: The Massachusetts moderate sold his soul to get his party’s nomination and lost badly. The man who was a godfather of Obamacare spurned his creation and instead palled around with the likes of Donald Trump and himself ventured into vicious birtherism. The man who supported cap and trade legislation as governor became a climate denialist. The fact that his campaign only gained momentum when he repudiated his far-right stands and started talking like a white Barack Obama ought to keep him awake for a long time. And I agree with Mary Elizabeth Williams: His concession speech wasn’t gracious, it was perfunctory and entitled. He will return home to one of his many houses, in one of his many home states that repudiated him, and live among the ruins of his legacy.

The anti-reality right-wing echo chamber [like our very own "Anonymous"r: Remember when a Bush adviser mocked the media for living in “the reality-based community”? Republicans have taken a 10-year holiday from reality only to find out the laws of gravity couldn’t be repealed. Now they’ve fallen hard, and it hurts. First they came for evolution. Then climate science. Then a woman’s reproductive system, which supposedly “shuts that whole thing down” during rape. Then, finally, they turned on math, attacking the polls as “skewed” and Nate Silver as a partisan. Math won. Maybe they’ll have to rediscover science, and reality generally, in the months to come.

November 08, 2012 7:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fordham Study: Public Policy Polling Deemed Most Accurate National Pollster In 2012

"Fordham University has published a ranking of the most accurate pollsters of the 2012 in terms of national trends, and (both) top spots were held by Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling, the North Carolina-based firm.

Director of Fordham's Center for Electoral Politics and Democracy, Dr. Costas Panagopoulos, based the study on pre-election polling and compared it against the results from election day.

"For all the ridicule directed towards pre-election polling, the final poll estimates were not far off from the actual nationwide vote shares for the two candidates," Panagopoulos said in a statement. Here's the whole list:

1. PPP (D)*

1. Daily Kos/SEIU/PPP*

3. YouGov*

4. Ipsos/Reuters*

5. Purple Strategies

6. NBC/WSJ

6. CBS/NYT

6. YouGov/Economist

9. UPI/CVOTER

10. IBD/TIPP

11. Angus-Reid*

12. ABC/WP*

13. Pew Research*

13. Hartford Courant/UConn*

15. CNN/ORC

15. Monmouth/SurveyUSA

15. Politico/GWU/Battleground

15. FOX News

15. Washington Times/JZ Analytics

15. Newsmax/JZ Analytics

15. American Research Group

15. Gravis Marketing

23. Democracy Corps (D)*

24. Rasmussen

24. Gallup

26. NPR

27. National Journal*

28. AP/GfK"

November 08, 2012 8:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow!

Reading some of the stuff here, you'd think liberalism won a resounding landslide of a victory.

Instead, a President who didn't campaign on his accomplishments but demonized his opponent and lied himself silly was given a second chance but with a less full deck than he got the first time around. He never mentioned Obamacare, his stimulus program or his Wall Street bailout so they weren't validated by voters and polls show both are unpopular. He claimed that Congress had prevented him from creating jobs but America disagreed and returned the same Congress, with a House controlled by Republicans and a Senate where Dems can't stop a filibuster. Significantly, America didn't give him the control of Congress he had four years ago when he got everything he wanted.

Obama became the first President since Andrew Jackson to be re-elected with fewer votes than he won orginally. Close to half the country wanted him to leave.

America didn't say 'jolly good show, let's have four more years of that'

they said, 'OK, we'll leave things as is for now and give you the benefit of the doubt. Put up or shut up.'

if Obama can't bring himself to negotiate with Republicans in Congress, he'll be a very lonely Dem in Washington come January 2015.

btw, TTF clearly made an advance in the gay marriage arena. once a state goes there, I doubt it can ever be rolled back. eventually, we'll probably have this on the NE and Western coasts and traditional marriage in the South and Heartland. won't be the end of the world. if you don't like it where you are, and it's that important to you, move.

November 08, 2012 9:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Spoken like another angry white man spewing hateful dreams of a conservative take-over of the land of the free, one of the last of a dying breed.

In fact, Boehner's house majority is smaller now than it was last week, and the Democratic majority in the Senate has grown. And of course, Romney is "unemployed" again.

Boehner has said "If there is a mandate, it is a mandate for both parties to find common ground and take steps together to help our economy grow and create jobs, which is critical to solving our debt." Voting in lockstep AGAINST bipartisan proposals does not meet that mandate Boehner is referring to.

Karl Rove is the laughing stock of FOX News and his architecture has been reduced to rubble.

It's obvious you are a card carrying member of the anti-reality right-wing echo chamber so you will continue to stick your head in the sand trying to deny reality, however, the rest of the world now knows Tea Party Election Results: Conservative Movement Of 2010 Takes Pounding In 2012

November 08, 2012 11:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"There was a quick move to embrace the need for change, from the ranks of the party's next generation of elected leaders, as well as from its online flame-throwers.

"The conservative movement should have particular appeal to people in minority and immigrant communities who are trying to make it, and Republicans need to work harder than ever to communicate our beliefs to them," said Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla).

Erick Erickson, founder of RedState.com, a conservative blog, said Republican candidate Mitt Romney's approach to Hispanic voters was "atrocious."

"Frankly, the fastest-growing demographic in America isn’t going to vote for a party that sounds like that party hates brown people," Erickson said.

However, the day after was not all self-reflection for those on the right. Some struck a far more combative tone.

"We are in a war. We're in a war to save this nation," said Michael Needham, chief executive of Heritage Action, an arm of the conservative Washington think tank, The Heritage Foundation.

Needham spoke in a direct-to-camera video as martial-sounding music swelled in the background. Persuasion as a political strategy did not appear to be on his mind.

Similarly, an assortment of conservative groups sent representatives to the National Press Club to vent their anger at the Republican Party "establishment."

"The battle to retake the Republican Party begins today," railed Richard Viguerie, a veteran of the conservative movement, who called on "the failed Republican leadership" to resign, and then named the leaders of the GOP in the House and Senate, as well as the head of the Republican National Convention.

However, figures like Viguerie have limited influence within the GOP these days. The real lightning bolts being thrown on Wednesday were by the party's super donors, who played a historic role in this election after a 2010 Supreme Court decision allowed them to give unlimited amounts to outside groups.

Many of the lightning bolts were aimed at none other than Karl Rove, the former Bush administration political genius who oversaw the deployment of nearly $400 million in campaign spending through outside groups American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS toward the presidential race and toward numerous Senate and House races.

"The billionaire donors I hear are livid," one Republican operative told The Huffington Post. "There is some holy hell to pay. Karl Rove has a lot of explaining to do … I don't know how you tell your donors that we spent $390 million and got nothing."

Rove even suffered the indignity of being insulted on Twitter by the blustery Donald Trump, who had attended Romney's election night party here on Tuesday night, but left early after it was clear that Obama had won a second term.

"Congrats to @KarlRove on blowing $400 million this cycle. Every race @CrossroadsGPS ran ads in, the Republicans lost. What a waste of money," Trump tweeted, inaccurately.

There were plenty of attacks on Romney himself, as well, with Erickson saying that he "stood for nothing and everything at the same time," and that his advisers were " outside charlatans, many of whom will now go work for Republican Super PACs making six-figure salaries, further draining the pockets of rich Republicans when not on television explaining how awesome and expert they are."

Ben Domenech, a conservative author, described Romney's candidacy as having "a message without music, delivered by a candidate with little or no personality, saddled with enormous advantages in life which become disadvantages in the world of politics."

There was also talk of a new conservative populism, an explicit admission that the GOP has lost all connection to working-class and lower-income voters, as well as minorities."

November 08, 2012 11:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Spoken like another angry white man spewing hateful dreams of a conservative take-over of the land of the free, one of the last of a dying breed."

this is basically what hyper-liberals are best at

personal attacks

don't really feel any anger and don't think my post displayed any

exit polls show two out of three voters described themselves as "conservative"

capitalism is still preferred by Americans to Obommunism

"In fact, Boehner's house majority is smaller now than it was last week,"

not by much, and not to any practical effect

what's really smaller than it was last week is the number of people who voted for Obama in the most recent election

this is remarkable when you consider that the population has grown

the number of voters who voted for Obama in 2012 is about the number who voted for McCain in 2008

he hasn't exactly dazzled the rest of America as much as plutocrat Michael Bloomberg who got a big boost when Obama bailed out Wall Street and left Main Street twisting in the wind

might explain why any look at the map shows the Republicans captured more land, if slightly less people in this election

"and the Democratic majority in the Senate has grown."

won't help any

the House passed several bills during the last two years and Harry Reid has refused to move on anything

indeed, the House passed Obama's budget last year and Reid refused to even bring it up for a vote, saying it was a trick

"And of course, Romney is "unemployed" again."

he was never the choice of conservatives but he ran an honorable and classy campaign

probably the cleanest Presidential campaign since Mondale

Obama's campaign was a disgrace to the nation: it began with personal and petty attacks and continue with pretty detestable lies, interviews where he referred to Romney with obscenities, drop-bys on Dave and the View, and he even once told a female journalist that voting for him is like losing your virginity to a really cute guy

the dignity of the Presidential office clearly has taken a hit

"Voting in lockstep AGAINST bipartisan proposals does not meet that mandate Boehner is referring to."

Obama's contempt for bipartisan proposals has already been documented by jouralists and historians

"Karl Rove is the laughing stock of FOX News and his architecture has been reduced to rubble."

he had some theories that were proven not true but as Chris Matthews said "thank heaven for Hurricane Sandy" or Rove would look like a genius now

"It's obvious you are a card carrying member of the anti-reality right-wing echo chamber so you will continue to stick your head in the sand trying to deny reality,"

actually, the reality is that if some inroads can be made to minority voters, the Democrats will be lost

really shouldn't be that hard

Asians and Hispanics voted Repub in large numbers not long ago and blacks will soon realize that unemployment in inner city black neighborhhods reaches Depression levels and it's not George Bush's fault while Democrats oppose letting their kids choose a safe school with high quality education

November 08, 2012 12:58 PM  
Anonymous David S. Fishback said...

Talk about what "the American people want" based on the election results has been, in my view, rather shallow.

The presidential vote shows that a majority, albeit a small majority, of the electorate prefers the Democratic approach to the Republican approach. It also shows that a minority of the electorate, albeit a very signficant minority, prefers the Republican approach. No one can credibly argue that a significant number of conservatives abstained from voting because they thought Romney was too moderate or because of his religion.

Nor can one credibly argue that the results in the House of Representatives voting mean that voters decided they wanted divided government. Except in a few states like Montana, Indiana, Missouri, and West Virginia -- where the GOP senatorial candidates were so awful that a number of people voted for Romney and the Democratic senatorial candidate -- there is no evidence of ticket splitting. The GOP controls the House by a substantial margin simply because they were very good at drawing districts after the 2010 census to favor Republicans. What the Democrats did in Maryland to move a 6-2 advantage to a 7-1 advantage was replicated many times over in states controlled by Republican governors and legisatures in the wake of the low-turnout 2010 elections.

So the electorate is very divided -- a slight majority favors Obama's approach and a slight minority favors the Republican approach.

There needs to be a good-faith effort in Washington to find a middle ground not because a huge portion of the electorate is demanding it -- the evidence points towards more polarization than consensus seeking -- but because the welfare of the nation demands it. The deficit will not take care of itself, but the legitimate and important demands for spending cannot be disregarded. And "shared sacrifice" means just that: Shared. The wealthiest among us need to share in the sacrifice that we need to have. Striking the balance between short term and long term needs will not be easy.

If there is a deal on the budget that NO ONE likes, then that might be an indication that our politicians have made some progress.

November 08, 2012 2:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh sure, making inroads with minorities is not "that hard," it's a piece of cake!

Just ask a Democrat!

So why do you imagine the grand old party had such a hard time attracting minorities in 2012?

November 08, 2012 3:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The wealthiest among us need to share in the sacrifice that we need to have."

David, David...

you were doing so well

until this point

your implication here that the wealthy have not shared in contributing to our common interests is offensive

to begin with, average tax rates go up the higher your income regardless of whether a handful are induced to behave in some government-mandated way in exchange for lowering their taxes

additionally, almost all welathy individuals own corporate stock which is taxed before being distributed and then again when distributed

finally, virtually all wealthy people make substantial charitable contributions furthering the public good

when Romney and Obama both released their returns, it was shown that if you add the taxes and contributions of both, Romney made both a many-fold greater contribution to the public good on a real dollar basis and also a higher rate of contribution

we all make sacrifices already, rich and poor, to the common good

if you're saying we must all share in further sacrifice, you have to realize that Obama only wants the wealthy to have their taxes increased

to have a united country, general tax hikes or general tax cuts, if necessary, should be shared by everyone

there are six sources of sacrifice that could be made to further our common good:

poor, middle class or wealthy taxpayers

poor, middle class or wealthy entitlement recipients

Democrats believe only wealthy taxpayers should sacrifice

Romney suggested only wealthy entitlement recipients should sacrifice

we could also reduce our common goods and the opinions on that are many

"The presidential vote shows that a majority, albeit a small majority, of the electorate prefers the Democratic approach to the Republican approach."

no, it shows they want Obama to be President

the "approach" is authorized by Congress

Obama can't impose taxes or authorize spending

he can only impede progress by veto

beyond that, unless polls are on his side, he's just a figurehead

November 08, 2012 3:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The religious right movement, and social conservatives in general, hoped that 2012 would represent something of a comeback year. It really didn't turn out that way.

Anti-gay measures failed in several states; Florida voters defeated a measure on taxpayer-funded abortions; Wisconsin elected the nation's first openly-gay U.S. senator; key movement allies like Todd Akin failed miserably; and, of course, President Obama won a second term fairly easily.

Disgraced former lobbyist Ralph Reed had a very different outcome in mind, planning to "unleash a sophisticated, microtargeted get-out-the-evangelical-vote operation," backed up by at least $10 million in contributions from Republican donors.

Yesterday, Reed offered a defense for his efforts.

In a Wednesday morning press conference at the National Press Club, Ralph Reed's message was clear: don't look at me. Reed had made sweeping promises that the Faith and Freedom Coalition, his conservative voter ID and turnout operation, would stun pollsters and lead to a big conservative victory. "We did our job," he insisted, recounting the tens of millions of phone calls, mailings, and other voter contacts his group made. He said his group had run the most efficient, most technologically superior voter contact and GOVT operation the faith community has ever seen. He claimed credit for increasing both white evangelicals’ share of the electorate and the share of the vote they gave to the Republican nominee. But it wasn’t enough.

"We can't do the Republican Party's job for them. We can't do the candidates' job for them." In part, Reed blamed "candidate performance issues," his euphemism for the Akin-Mourdoch rape comments that led to their undoing.


Karl Rove may have some trouble raising money from wealthy far-right donors in the near future, but I don't think he's the only one.

November 08, 2012 4:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"WASHINGTON — The voters have a plan: Consider raising taxes on the wealthy, but not everybody else. Shrink the government. Work harder on creating jobs and holding the line on prices, because economic worries are more important than cutting the deficit right now.

Americans surveyed as they left polling places across the nation on Election Day expanded on the thinking behind their ballots. They embraced some Republican ideas and some Democratic ones, giving both sides something to work with if they can all just get along.


Their opinions might point the way out of gridlock, if President Barack Obama and a divided Congress take their advice. Will anybody listen?

Some of the electorate’s thoughts on taxes, spending and the deficit:

— Most voters aren’t that focused on taming the deficit. A strong majority say the economy is the most important issue. The deficit was picked by only 15 percent, coming in behind health care but ahead of foreign policy.

— Taxes don’t top the list of people’s financial troubles. The biggies are unemployment and rising prices. Only 14 percent of voters ranked taxes as the biggest economic problem for people like them.

— When the two go head to head, taxes trump the deficit. Sixty-three percent rejected the idea of raising taxes to help cut the nation’s budget deficits, even though they’ve been hitting about $1 trillion per year.

— Most, 55 percent, think the U.S. financial system favors the wealthy. Only 39 percent feel it’s fair to most Americans. And a majority believe Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romey’s policies would make that worse. Fifty-three percent felt his policies favor the rich. Voters were most likely to say Obama’s policies favor the middle class (44 percent) or the poor (31 percent).

— Nearly half, 47 percent of voters surveyed, said go ahead and raise taxes on incomes of $250,000 and up, as Obama proposes. Only 35 percent wanted no tax increases for anyone. A lonely 13 percent called for higher taxes all around.

— Voters embraced Romney’s message about government that’s grown too big. Just over half — 51 percent — said government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals. Only 43 percent wanted government to do more to solve problems. That’s a reversal from four years ago.

— There wasn’t a clear winner between Obama’s economic policies and Romney’s. Voters were split on which of them would better handle the economy. But Romney got a narrow advantage on handling the federal budget deficit, 49-47.

— A majority, 52 percent, thought Obama would do better on Medicare. The rising cost of Medicare as more baby boomers retire and health care prices go up is a giant problem within the out-of-control deficit dilemma.

— Voters gave a vote of no confidence to the Republican policies of Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush. A slim majority said he’s more to blame for the ongoing economic problems; only 38 percent blamed Obama more.

The survey of 26,565 voters was conducted for The Associated Press and the television networks by Edison Research. This includes preliminary results from interviews conducted as voters left a random sample of 350 precincts nationally Tuesday, as well as 4,408 who voted early or absentee and were interviewed by landline or cellular telephone from Oct. 29 through Nov. 4. Results for the full sample were subject to sampling error of plus or minus 2 percentage points; it is higher for subgroups."

November 08, 2012 5:12 PM  
Anonymous Outside spending said...

American Crossroads, the Karl Rove-led Super PAC, had an awful won-lost record in 2012. Only 1.29 percent of the $103,559,672 that that group spent resulted in American Crossroads’ expected outcome, and the group did not support a single winning candidate.

Rove’s “dark money” group, Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies, didn’t fare much better. It had a 14.4 percent batting average — but also didn’t support any election-night winners.

Rove’s terrible return on his donors’ investments may come back to haunt him. As one Republican operative told The Huffington Post’s Jon Ward, “There is some holy hell to pay. Karl Rove has a lot of explaining to do… I don’t know how you tell your donors that we spent $390 million and got nothing.”

Charles and David Koch didn’t fare much better than Rove. The Koch brothers-linked Center to Protect Patient Rights backed several outside spending groups, few of which found much success in the election results. The American Future fund spent only 5.57 percent of its $23,613,532 successfully, opposing three losing candidates and supporting zero winners. Americans for Responsible Leadership was even worse, getting the desired result on only 1.96 percent of its $5,022,762 spent.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, another of the most prominent outside groups on the right, also found very little success — 6.9 percent of its spending ended with the intended result; the Chamber supported just four winning candidates, and opposed three election-night losers.

The Ending Spending Action Fund — a Super PAC backed by conservative billionaire Joe Ricketts, which memorably considered an ad campaign that would have painted President Barack Obama as a “metrosexual, black Abe Lincoln” — had a relatively low 15.34 percent ROI on its $13,238,296 of spending.

No outside spending group fared worse than the National Rifle Association. The National Rifle Association Of America Political Victory Fund spent $11,787,523 in 2012, only 0.81 percent of which delivered the group’s preferrd electoral outcome.

Adding insult to injury for these Republican spendthrifts, many of the most successful outside spending groups were backed by the very constituency that the right-wingers were trying to crush: the labor movement.

Workers’ Voice got its desired result with 76.14 percent of the $5,733,122 it spent in the 2012 elections, supporting 14 winners and opposing 15 losers. The Service Employees International Union fared even better, with an 84.65 percent success rate on its $15,202,306 spent. The American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees got its hoped-for result with 44.6 percent of its $12,694,301 spent.

The other big winner on the left was Planned Parenthood. An astounding 97.82 percent of The Planned Parenthood Action Fund Inc.’s $6,886,468 spent ended in the group’s favor.

Of course, percentage-wise, the most successful outside spending group was the Obama-supporting group Priorities USA Action — 100 percent of the group’s $66,482,084 spent achieved the intended outcome: the re-election of President Barack Obama.

See Sunlight Foundation's full list here

November 08, 2012 5:29 PM  
Blogger Patrick Fitzgerald said...

David S. Fishback: “So the electorate is very divided -- a slight majority favors Obama's approach and a slight minority favors the Republican approach.”

David, I have thought about this at length. The election results may seem that way on the surface, but there are many more variables to consider.

-How successful the voter suppression laws were in repressing the democratic vote? Intimidation, huge lines and shorter hours being just a few examples.

-How many conservatives were ignorant of the real truth of the issues, purposefully or like my sister, a single mother of two, who “doesn’t have time” to pay attention to political matters and just accepted Romney’s lies as truth.

-Racism, and the belief that voting for racist politicians are not the same thing.

I live in Naples, FL., a smaller and essentially segregated city. The only minorities we “know” have menial jobs who don’t live in the community.

There is great potential to reach many of these conservatives, not to become progressives, but to understand that being blanketly anti-democrat is anti-democratic, and by extension, anti-American.

Only about 25% of conservatives are theocratic, dominionist, 0% compromising tea-party types imbued with deeply ingrained sociopathic tendencies who would pass laws to have LGBT Americans, amongst other “sinners,” imprisoned and/or put to death.

The conservative party is split, reasonable Republicans who believe in facts would work with Democrats to get something rather than nothing -- an often times good thing as it gives we liberals valid perspectives that we would never conceive of on our own. The others would rather die or kill than change.

But don’t get me wrong. Though the Obama victory has alleviated my terror of a Romney administration, the closeness of this election makes me ashamed to be an American today. Or better put, disheartened to the core that so many Americans feed on ignorance, illogic and dishonesty, and that so many more do not consider the freedom to vote to be a powerful privilege to make your convictions known and hopefully matter.
---
David S. Fishback: Jim … your posts over the last eight years have been an important part of the educational process that was so vital in helping people on their journeys to understanding the issues surrounding LGBT rights. On behalf of my family and so many others, I want to thank you.

Robert: I echo what David said.

Me: ‘Third, motion passed.

November 08, 2012 9:43 PM  
Blogger Patrick Fitzgerald said...

Priya Lynn: Democrat voters had to save you from yourself and vote in a candidate that will actually benefit you rather than hurting you.

Here, here.

Anon: you mean because Obama will steal the earnings of the successful and give it to the 99%? possession of stolen goods used to be a crime in wholesome societies

One of, if not the most important values of America is equal opportunity for all. If you become wealthy on the backs of your workers like so many do, by paying them the lowest wages possible, offering pensions that go bust, shut down the business without notice, with no severance pay, and then take your millions and run, you are taking away equal opportunity from them. THAT is theft.

And when it came to suppressing the minority vote for the express purpose of stealing the election, nary a peep.

Democrats believe only wealthy taxpayers should sacrifice

Democrats believe that the wealthy should sacrifice at least as much as the rest of us. And yes, in certain circumstances, more. There are too many variables involved to make such a blanket statement about democrats.

Romney suggested…

Anything Romney or Republicans -- generally speaking -- say, means they intend just the opposite.

To the progressives among us, read the GOP platform.

unless polls are on his side, he's just a figurehead

As you well know it depends on the poll and the many ways it was conducted.

a President who didn't campaign on his accomplishments but demonized his opponent … Obama's campaign was a disgrace to the nation: it began with personal and petty attacks and continue with pretty detestable lies, interviews where he referred to Romney with obscenities…

As I’ve said many times before, republicans have made an art form out of projection.
--
Regarding his victory speech:

He never mentioned Obamacare

Obama: And I saw just the other day, in Mentor, Ohio, where a father told the story of his 8-year-old daughter, whose long battle with leukemia nearly cost their family everything had it not been for health care reform passing just a few months before the insurance company was about to stop paying for her care.

his stimulus program

His? Oh yes, his. The one he passed all by himself, on his own, without any corroding Republican influence.

Wall Street bailout

Ok, I agree with you on that, not his not mentioning it, but that it should have been loans, with interest, and legislation to break up the “too big to fail” part of it.

Anon: your implication here that the wealthy have not shared in contributing to our common interests is offensive … virtually all wealthy people make substantial charitable contributions furthering the public good ... virtually all wealthy people make substantial charitable contributions furthering the public good

My parents feel the same way. The problem is that that help is too often, if not mostly, selective. This is one place where government works, so that the help is non-biased, and available to all.

It’s perfectly valid to argue about the faults in the system, or the systems themselves, but to imply that individual contributions are the solution is like saying that rich people who help only those they want to, who were devastated by Hurricane Sandy, will solve all the damage wreaked by the storm.

Do you know that he’s deported more undocumented workers than Bush did, or that he’s been closing down medical marijuana shops in San Francisco? The drone strikes killing heads of al-queda, Bin laden, etc. I’m sure there’s plenty more, but Republicans couldn’t use these things against him because even though they may have helped to turn off his base, they would have made him look good in the eyes of those that lean conservative.

There are plenty of complaints to make about Obama, Democrats and progressives to go around, but good god, man, learn the meaning of accuracy.

November 09, 2012 2:11 AM  
Anonymous David S. Fishback said...

Anon,

There is no Platonic formula for what is a fair level of taxation. Rather, it is a judgment that needs to be made in light of existing conditions. We have to get out of a very deep hole, and it is certainly quite reasonable to have those who have benefitted the most from our society pay a little more to save that society. And if we are going to ask sacrifice from the "bottom" 95-99% of the population, how can we not, in good conscience, ask for sacrifice from the "top" 1-5%?

Patrick,

You make very good points.

Without voter suppression (not Karl Rove's fanciful self-serving definition of it), Obama would have gotten more votes. But I would not underestimate the impact of the dedication of people in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida who waited on long, long lines to trump the voter suppression efforts. In any event, even taking voter suppression into account, the country is still pretty evenly divided, and we have no choice but to deal with a gerrymandered House of Representatives. Just as, if they want to be responsible elected officials, the Republican members of Congress have no choice but to deal with a liberal Democratic President and a Democratic Senate that (I believe) is going to seriously reform the filibuster rules in January. After 2 years of obstruction followed by 2 more years of deadlock, it would be dangerous to remain paralyzed.

I agree that convincing Republican and non-voters that their choices have been misguided needs to be part of our long-term societal discussion. But, at the moment, we have to take the electorate -- and the Congress -- where it is.

November 09, 2012 6:33 AM  
Anonymous Celebrating diversity said...

-First openly gay person elected to the Senate: Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)

-First Buddhist elected to the Senate: Rep. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)

-First Asian-American woman elected to the Senate: Hirono

-First Japanese-born person elected to the Senate: Hirono

-First Hindu elected to Congress: Rep.-elect Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii)

-First openly bisexual person elected to Congress: Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.)
(Correction: Sinema leads by 1.6 percent with 100 percent of precincts reporting, but some ballots are still being counted, and the race has not officially been called.)

-Most women in the Senate: 20

-First major-party caucus that isn’t a majority of white men: House Democrats (expected to include 60 women, 43 African-Americans, 27 Latinos and 10 Asian-Americans)

-Highest number of members of the LGBT community elected to Congress: 7. They are: Baldwin, Sinema, Reps.-elect Mark Takano (D-Calif.), Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) and reelected Reps. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) and David Cicilline (D-R.I.).

-First state to elect an all-woman House and Senate delegation and governor: New Hampshire

-First state whose people voted to legalize gay marriage: Maryland and Maine (tie)

-First state to legalize the sale and use of recreational marijuana: Colorado and Washington state (tie)

-First woman elected to the Senate in state history: Massachusetts (Elizabeth Warren), Hawaii (Hirono), North Dakota (Heidi Heitkamp) and Wisconsin (Baldwin). And Nebraska elected its first female (Deb Fischer) to a full term.

-First time there have been no all-male state legislative chambers: South Carolina state Senate elected a woman.

November 09, 2012 8:31 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous is operating based on the wishful thinking that making some changes to Republican immigration policy is going to allow them to win the next election. Trouble for them is the electorate is a moving target and while a large increase in the percentage of Latino voters this election would have allowed them to win, a similar gain in future elections won't be enough. Not only are Republicans quickly losing their base of white voters (the percentage of the electorate that is white was 88% during Regan’s presidency, 74% in 2008 and 72% in 2012) they lost the female vote by 10% and lost the youth vote by 40%.

Gaining a few latino voters won't be enough when their base is going to be even smaller in 2016 because of growing minority demographics, not to mention that as more young voters enter the electorate and their old voters die off the electorate massively skews democratic as time goes on. Appealing to more older lation voters won't make up for the huge loss in women voters and the even bigger and growing loss amongst younger voters.

Many Republicans thought Obama had lost the election when he came out in favour of marriage equality but instead of that holding him back it resulted in a massive shift in favour of marriage equality amongst black voters. The table has turned and now opposing marriage equality costs Republicans more votes than it gains and that advantage for Democrats will accelerate as older voters are replaced by younger equality minded voters. Republicans not only have to change their immigration policies or die, they have to reject the anti-gay and anti-women policies they've clung to or die as well.

November 10, 2012 5:11 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home