8 DAYS TO DECIDE: Both Parties Predict Control of House

[Gerald]

GOP chief Michael Steele forecasts a wave of anti-Democratic voting on Election Day while his Democratic counterpart, Tim Kaine, says a strong get-out-the-vote effort will hold back a Republican takeover of Congress

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...edict-victory/



Note:Published October 25, 2010

[TLAM Strike]

I predict that whomever wins both sides of congress accomplishes nothing in the next two years...

[Gerald]

It sounds like a very likely scenario....

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

I predict that whomever wins both sides of congress accomplishes nothing in the next two years...

Even that would be an improvement over the current spend like theres no tommorow policys.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Even that would be an improvement over the current spend like theres no tommorow policys.

I'm afraid that ending reckless spending would be an accomplishment and thus not something congress will do after the election.

[Bilge_Rat]

The GOP will win control of the House, the Dems will retain control of the senate, so gridlock ahead for the next 2 years.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Even that would be an improvement over the current spend like theres no tommorow policys.

I predict that the government will continue to spend like there's no tomorrow, regardless of who's in charge.

[tater]

Republican control of both, or just one as long as the Senate has a filibuster option (unlike the recent disaster of a supermajority democrat senate—remember that Bush did nothing without the consent of the dems, he had bare majorities, unlike Obama) is a good thing.

Downside is it will improve Obama's chances in 2012 since he'll be forced into the center by congress. Americans want a centrist (center-right, if anything), which is what Obama ran on (even though he was clearly lying given his record (the part he allowed us to see, unlike, say, his previous records which were "lost")).

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

I predict that the government will continue to spend like there's no tomorrow, regardless of who's in charge.

I predict that mookie is mostly correct. People don't seem to understand just how much political inertia is needed to change state institutions. Moreso, they often fail to understand that backing their own particularly justifiable cause, be it farms or green industry or military manufacturing potential or what have you, is exactly what makes mookie's statement true. You get a government like the one we have today by looking out for number one and going to Washington to make your case. Legislators who don't know any better will adopt your cause based on the number of votes it will garner and the advice of aides, which is why we continue to have subsidies and tariffs and trade protectionism in industries that are completely dead and without a world market. Other nations spend years trying to get an audience in Washington just trying to get limited permission to trade their wares in this country because of impossibly complex regulation and taxation. Is it any wonder that we have invoked the ire of much of the world with our message of free trade and free thought? Is it surprising that we have so much trouble convincing other nations that the free market is the way to go when we spend billions of dollars' worth of public and private funds at home to "guarantee" our own jobs and prosperity? A goal which, I might mention, is completely counterintuitive to the free-market model. We're basically saying that the rest of the world needs to play by rules that we are exempt from; abusing the wealth of our nation to take advantage of others.

This mindset has been backfiring for decades, as anyone who moans about the state of US exports and manufacturing can attest, and yet we do nothing to fix it. We are paying for failure based upon the judgements of people who largely know nothing about business, upon which, whatever the hardcore leftists may say, the economy is based.

Take it from me, I'm an expert in industries and endeavours that exploit the government. I'm not proud to say it, but I'm a pretty lazy guy. I'm a hard worker when I have motivation to work, but it is tough for me to find the motivation in the first place. In fact, I'm probably the worst libertarian in the world because I just don't want anything. I have no desire to get married or have kids or own a yacht or whatever because I just don't care about those things. There is very little that I want out of life. Adam Smith would be at a loss to describe my lack of self-interest.

Even so, I managed to gravitate towards a union railroad job that offered maximum pay for minimum effort and recently, a VA pension that pays over $2000 per month for service-connected disabilities, though I was never physically wounded. Anybody see anything wrong with that picture? I feel bad enough about it that I've submitted my request for a cessation of benefits, but how many people do that? Even with my request, I personally used nearly ten thousand dollars' worth of taxpayer money (mostly back-payed) for my own purposes before I realized what I was doing. In my defense, every one of my family and close friends said that I needed to get VA help because I wasn't "the same person", but I still owe every American here an apology for taking that money. Worse, it turns out that it isn't possible to return it, and I have compromised my integrity as a US Marine by accepting it.

I won't go into depth on my experiences, but the point is that even a person who prides him or herself on integrity is not necessarily a saint, let alone those who seek to abuse the system, or those who don't think about such things. These people are not neccesarily bad, but they find it easy to convince themselves that their own interest is the best interest of everyone. Sometimes, they don't even bother with that, they're just selfish jerks. That being the case, it is easy to see how industries, lobbies, and PACs become immovable financial and legislative obstacles. I seriously doubt that there is even one of you who would make a derious case for why I shouldn't get VA benefits. After all, I put my life on the line to oppose enemies of freedom and fight terror and all that other BS. I don't need to make a case because the establishment has done it for me. Nevermind that a lot of our troops and officers are dickless cowards and/or worthless. Take that same situation and apply it to farmers, or aluminum manufacturers, or the textile industry, or the steelmakers, or whatever. It's the same damn thing. Everybody has a freaking sob story. Everybody has a legislator and/or a legislative aid that is tasked with relaying this crap to the masses and making a case for it. It's always about somebody's job or kids or whatever the hell else an entity with political connections can come up with. It is, after all, easy to justify one's own livliehood. You just have to put a little thought into it and let human nature do the rest.

This is why I maintain the stance that government should be severely restricted. We're all people, and we all more or less care for each other, but the state is a tool for the less agreeable elements of our nature. It's easy to convince ourselves that what is good for us (Even if it isn't. I call upon any parent who has children that enjoy sweeties) is good for everyone, that's just a result of natural selection, as is the ability to rationalize that which is most inclined to our own benefit. This is why established political institutions are so dang difficult to dislodge, even in a Republican system. A proponent of freedom is not fighting just one enemy, but rather an amalgamation of self-interested parties who have found a common cause around which to rally. Together, they naturally result in the Washington garbage heap we have now, with literally thousands of of lobbyists. In giving them a political mechanism with which to realize their own agenda, we are giving them unlimited power, and this is doubly so when we accept a liberal interpretation of the Constitution (excuse me, but it doesn't make a bit of damn sense that a document focussed solely upon restriction of government powers would include a commerce clause that lets the government do whatever it wants based upon the interpretation of the Supreme Court.) Only with a state that has virtually no power to exploit can we ever be free of the self-justified interests of people who are, should we be honest, just like us.

And yet, this is what we have. Everybody wants something, but nobody wants to earn or give up anything. Human nature in a handbasket. That simple truth is how we have ended up with a federal government nobody is happy with and all the pork-laden bills and defecit and everything else.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Frankly, though, I see a change happening in the GOP. It is being forced to accept Tea-Party, Independant, and Libertarian ideals in order to maintain its status, which is not at all unusual for a major political party. The Reps and Dems have changed places many times over the past couple of centuries, and it wouldn't surprise me to see the Republicans changing their platform in order to keep the vote. We're seeing this already, and the elections in November will give us an indication of how many people have grown disillusioned with the old system of state.

Again, however, I agree with mookie. The state is broken enough that hope for fiscal responsibility and any kind of immediate action has already been dashed by the hope of politicians for something, anything, that will secure their positon in 2012. When you build the political (two-party)machine in such a way, you shouldn't be surprised at the results.

[krashkart]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

...but I still owe every American here an apology for taking that money. Worse, it turns out that it isn't possible to return it, and I have compromised my integrity as a US Marine by accepting it.

Okay, but I will not accept your apology. You do know that they don't give those benefits out for just any ol' reason, right? Use it to get over the hump. That's what it's there for.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

I predict that whomever wins both sides of congress accomplishes nothing in the next two years...

God willing...

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

I predict that whomever wins both sides of congress accomplishes nothing in the next two years...

And further that if side-in-control wins, side-out-of-control will blame the other side plus the president for the sins of the world, and if side-out-of-control wins, side-in-control will blame the other side for gridlock and opposing their grand plans.

I also predict that whoever wins, WE lose.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I also predict that whoever wins, WE lose.

Agreed.

My prediction is that Team R wins the House and Team D retains control of the Senate. Regardless of who wins and loses, the game remains the same.

[AVGWarhawk]

I also predict that whoever wins, WE lose.

[SteamWake]

Anything that places a speed bump on the raceway to socialisim is a 'win' as far as I'm concerned.

Not so much team R vs team D but rather a re-establishment of common sense and accountability. In other words a move towards conservatisim.

I guess I'm a little more optimistic than you guys and hope for the best.