Comments on: For the Dems, What a Difference a Year Makes

By: Paul -Indiana

Paul -Indiana — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:54:13 +0000

#30. OZ, if you had really paid attention during the campaign you would not be surprised now, except for his thoroughness at being a total loser.

By: vivo

vivo — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:59:35 +0000

53. myth buster:

“50. Funny thing about demographics, you can’t draw political conclusions from them.”

You are correct to a point. But what happens when WASPs decrease, current minorities increase? Haves are thriving, but Havenots are suffering? Illegal immigrants become citizens? Baby Boomers retire? Millions become new voters?

By: Chuck

Chuck — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 04:43:15 +0000

#41 Eric: Blanche doesn’t need a payoff after she leaves; her husband is a doctor, earning probably north of $200K, and she’ll get a pension (at taxpayer expense, of course) for the rest of her life, + health insurance. She’ll have many options: lobbying, consulting, lobbyist/consultant, consultant/lobbyist, public speeches, possibly a book deal, etc.
Her sole interest is her political hide. Another thing is that she’s got what, $4 million+ in her war chest, which will presumably grow between now & May & November (assuming she makes it past May). And don’t candidates for federal office get to keep what’s left over? So she could spend $3M, and still have a cool mill left over, which should be plenty to send her twins to any Ivy League school.
#49 kimbr: You’re right, the .com boom did help Clinton, as he has got to be the luckiest pol ever. But it later went bust, including a few companies before his term ended. It wasn’t just the .com boom that helped him, though; there were other factors, including the fact that the Republican Congress cut off his credit cards, i.e. they limited his spending. Dems always say glowingly the Clinton years ended with a surplus, but that wasn’t him, it was the Republican Congress who did that.

By: Marc Malone

Marc Malone — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 21:20:11 +0000

#54 Real Deal – Maybe, or maybe not. I submit to you how poorly are fairing the MSM. They are getting crushed as people wake up. On cable, FoxNews gets more than half the market. They are even beginning to surpass the mainstream ABC, CBS, & NBC.

The MSM is becoming marginalized. People are going elsewhere to get their news. Without the MSM, the Liberal lies and whitewash cannot get propogated. They cannot provide cover. They cannot hide the truth. That’s death to the Far-Left.

By: Real Deal

Real Deal — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:28:24 +0000

There will be no democratic party by the time this fool is done

I have to disagree.

To quote P.T. Barnum – “There’s a sucker born every minute.”

That’s more than enough to keep the Dems in business.

By: myth buster

myth buster — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:32:27 +0000

50. Funny thing about demographics, you can’t draw political conclusions from them. Today’s young people have no loyalty to the Democratic party, nor to Barrack Obama. They voted for Obama because he appealed to them, but as they see the disaster that Obama is making worse, they’ll abandon ship for another who will galvanize them, like Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin or someone like Ron Paul.

By: jb

jb — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:58:06 +0000

vivo, after Obama is done there wont be any “producing business” to invest in.

By: loco36

loco36 — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:15:09 +0000

During previous administrations, I do not recall pollsters asking seperate questions regarding the presidents policies and his likeability. It appears our emotional involvement with the symbolic meaning of Obama’s half white half black ancestry causes us to be oh so careful in not appearing to dislike him.

By: vivo

vivo — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 10:39:09 +0000

14. Bohemond:
20. Knotacommie:
32. ConservativeWanderer:

“…..Just wait for the Census . . .”

The Census will show you the new demographics and how your country has changed. Just letting you know before you cry out of shock. You can waste your money in campaign funds or invest it in a producing business. Your choice.

By: kmbr

kmbr — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 08:57:24 +0000

chuck post 39:

You forgot the dot com boom. Without the dot com boom the Cliton years would never be as fondly remembered as they are. Anyone who could network two computers together was making 100k a year and getting rich on IPOs. I see no boom on the horizon for this lemon of a president. He is the anti-boom.