Tweety thinks we are going to lose the House and Senate

[CatWoman]

what say you?

He's hyping a poll that came out today which details the death sentence for our party :eyes:

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Tweety likes to stir up controversy

but he predicts the future about as accurately as Dick Morris and Bill Kristol.

[Sherman A1]

9. Precisely

[global1]

2. April Fool - And I Mean Tweety......nt

[gratuitous]

8. Tweety's a man for all season

So he doesn't confine his foolishness to one day in April.

[RainDog]

3. I won't be voting for the democrat in my state. he's anti-woman.

I don't want anti-woman candidates to win in the democratic party.

[stray cat]

25. I assume the GOP candidate is pro-woman - I know some are

[RainDog]

27. no, he's not. but I don't want democrats who are anti-woman to win.

I'd rather know my enemy pure and simple.

there's no fucking way I will EVER vote for an anti-choice candidate. that's an issue that I won't negotiate within the party and I don't want any anti-choice candidate to have any say in the democratic party.

[socialist_n_TN]

49. Which ones?....................

Even WOMEN Republicans now aren't pro woman.

[Atman]

57. Foolish, short-sighted and selfish.

You need Democrats in Congress to get SCOTUS appointments through, and it is in the courts where womens issues are decided, not at the desk of one legislator from one state. Your option is to help tea baggers, fundies and Republicans. Not voting is not a viable option. It might make you feel like you're making a statement, but it's not the statement you probably intend; you're just saying "I don't care about anyone else but ME!" In the end, you help erode the rights of all women by enabling the conservative right to regain power.

[RainDog]

59. thank you for your opinion

yes, the way to win votes is to call people foolish, selfish and short-sighted. that really makes a case for voting for a candidate who repulses you.

democrats do not get my vote because they demand it.

they get my vote when they field candidates worth voting for. you can say whatever you like to me, but there are plenty of other women who feel the same way. they, too, do not give a shit what you say if the candidate is too right wing for them to vote for.

you and the democratic party need to understand this. you will not automatically get someone's vote because there is a "d" after someone's name.

...and are gays are supposed to vote for homophobes who speak against them because... what, again, exactly? because it's somehow better to incorporate right wing hatred into the party?

until you and the fucktards who are trying to move the party further to the right figure this out, I guess people will choose not to vote rather than to vote for a candidate they find repulsive.

[Atman]

60. It isn't my "opinion," it is fact. Who else will you vote for? A Republican? To what end?

I don't disagres that some of these pseudo-Dems are Repulsive. But the majority of them still vote with Democrats MOST of the time. Republicans and tea-baggers will vote with the Dems NONE of the time.

You really underscored my point; you are thinking singularly, not big-picture. Solidify Democratic positions on a larger, national scale, then go after the DINOs later. In the short term, we might have to hold our noses and allow some of these people into office just to keep out WORSE candidates.

As the old song goes, "if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice." If Democrats stay away from the polls, they are casting de facto votes for Republicans and tea-baggers, who will most assuredly to MORE DAMAGE to the rights of women, gays, all of us. than one DINO in one state can do. That's just reality.

Your assertion that I am a fucktard trying to move the party further to the right is insulting, absurd and could not be further from the truth. I am trying to make sure the entire country is not allowed to slip back into the hands of the right-wing idiots who lead us to the precipice in the first place. They only need a little help from people who feel as you do to get back in power and push us over the edge.

[RainDog]

61. no. democrats have had a mandate since 2006

and they continue to act as tho they can't take a shit unless the right wing approves.

they continue to act as though liberals must vote for them no matter what.

you do know that people are pissed off with the legislative branch, right? --that feeling is not because democrats were too liberal, since the majority of Americans kept trying to vote out right wingers.

yet, Obama presented a republican bill for hcr and this is a great thing. while the majority of Americans wanted public option - he kept it off the table.

so the democrats pander to a minority because... I don't know why, still.

I will not vote for either candidate in my state. I'll write in a name. Or I'll stay home.

the point is, this is not a negotiable issue for me. I simply will not vote for an anti-choice candidate. If Obama came out and stated he was anti-choice, I would not vote for him. At that point, there would be no reason to give a fuck about politics in the U.S.

I don't care what your opinion is about this matter.

that's the bottom line for me. that's the line I will not cross. that's the line at which democrats will lose votes from people like me.

get it? I'm not going to vote for an anti-choice candidate.

Choice is the majority opinion. Choice is part of the democratic platform. If democrats want to put up a candidate that is against that position then they'll face the consequences from voters.

and all the arguments presented don't really mean much to me when I see a democrat abusing teachers, unions, refusing to begin with a liberal position on issues...

that's voter suppression - on the part of the democrats. they govern like republicans, they lose the support of people. THEY suppress the vote by their anti-democratic positions and actions.

so, as I said before, when democrats field a candidate worth voting for, I will.

otherwise, they don't get my vote.

you and others here apparently do not realize how betrayed many liberals feel at this time. the only voice that gets acknowledged is the one spoken in the voting booth.

in the meantime, democrats are leaning over backwards to pander to the religious right. so, let the religious right vote for them if that's who they want to please.

[Atman]

64. So again, why not just vote for a Republican or tea-bagger?

Same result. With NO CHANCE of making the situation better.

I understand your frustration, I understand what you're saying. I'm not too happy myself. But what are my choices? Allowing people like George Bush and John Boner and John McCain run things again? THAT is a better choice? I'd rather hold my nose and work from within than allow the destructive Republicans to regain control of our government.

[RainDog]

68. for the same reason I won't vote for an anti-choice democrat

you know, democrats are in power now. let them govern in such a way that people choose to vote for them rather than hold their nose and vote for the lesser of two evils.

it's the party's choice to make.

[RainDog]

62. and fwiw

I didn't call you a fucktard. I said "you and the fucktards who are trying to move the nation to the right."

you.

the fucktards trying to move the nation to the right.

two different nouns.

and, as I said, democrats can easily win the votes of the majority of the people in this nation by fielding candidates that people think they can vote for without vomiting. if they don't, they don't get votes.

Democrats won in 2000 and 2004. The reason republicans were in office was because of the Supreme Court and Blackwell and his voter fraud in Ohio.

the party apparently thinks this means that they should move further to the right... because the right cannot win an election honestly.

yet the party continues to pander to the religious right.

this is the point at which people simply don't give a shit because, even when they vote for democrats, they STILL do not get representation they think they voted for.

[Atman]

66. I don't disagree with your points. I am working in the present reality, suck as it does.

One of the reasons Republicans took control is because they had PATIENCE, which Democrats tend not to have. It's in our nature. We're the ADD party, they're obstructionist control freak party, and as such, they're happy to dig in their heels and wait us out, knowing full well that many who are as angered as you are (based largely, ironically enough, on the GOP's obstruction of anything the Dems try to do) will eventually cave and NOT VOTE.

Don't give up. Call their bluff. Keep voting for Democrats, demonstrating to Republicans that they're irrelevant. By giving in to their tactics, you only reinforce them and embolden them to do more of the same in the future, and make it LESS LIKELY that any Democrat will be able to act as a true Democrat, because they'll feel they have to give in to the "hold-my-breath-till-win" Republicans. It's a vicious cycle that CAN be broken, but us giving in them perpetuates it, not breaks it.

[RainDog]

73. it's not a republican tactic I object to. it's a democratic tactic.

I noted:

Democrats won in 2000 and 2004. The reason republicans were in office was because of the Supreme Court and Blackwell and his voter fraud in Ohio.

the party apparently thinks this means that they should move further to the right... because the right cannot win an election honestly.

yet the party continues to pander to the religious right.

however, you respond to me by blaming GOP obstruction on Democrats' failure to govern in a way that the democratic party constituency supports.

As of 2009 only 14% of people in this nation think that abortion should be illegal. yet the HCR bill made a specific point to shit on women with a provision that said that women's health care does not deserve the same respect that men's health care does.

Stupak? Nelson? who the fuck are they? Obama would have the FULL SUPPORT of the majority of the entire nation if he had used his leverage to tell these guys to put up and shut up or they would not be the party's candidate in the next election cycle.

this is the real way politics is done. admit it. you know it's true.

there are major assholes in this nation who think they have the right to enforce their religious beliefs on others.

but guess what? There are more voters who identify as nonbelievers (15%) than there are African-American voters (13%). That number of nonbelievers rises to 18% when labels like agnostic or atheist are not involved (i.e. asking about a specific belief rather than a label... this is from the ARIS survey of 2008, btw.)

This is a HUGE voting bloc that democrats are shitting on.

Nonbelievers make up the THIRD LARGEST group in this nation - when people are categorized by religious affiliation. The two larger groups are Catholic and Baptist. Nonbelievers, studies have shown, have higher levels of education and, thus, income, on average. They have higher levels of IQ on average and have an abhorrence of authoritarian systems - like religion. They do not accept authority merely because authority is claimed.

The number of nonbelievers is increasing in this nation, or, probably more to the point, more and more people have become vocal about their non belief because of the incessant and obnoxious insistence on inserting religion into others' lives by evangelical fundies - most especially in politics.

these stats are out there in study after study of religious belief in this nation.

Nonbelievers are more supportive of equal rights for gays. They are part of the "creative class" that Richard Florida wrote about - that group that creates dynamic places to live, that draws others to those places... the liberal strongholds in major cities - including southern ones - university towns all over the nation...

so now I ask you.

why doesn't the democratic party seek to appeal to this part of the population? As Judis noted, the future belongs to progressives - to the democratic majority. Why is the democratic party stuck in some mid-1990s time warp, unable to see that, after liberals saw what conservatives did to Clinton (not that he was any great progressive, economically) then what liberals saw Bush/Cheney and the Republican Congress do to this nation... they wanted a CORRECTION and a CHECK ON REPUBLICAN/CONSERVATIVE POWER.

WHY pander to the losers?!?!?!?!?

It is a stupid strategy, to me, to suppress the support of those who have things of value to bring to the nation and the democratic party by kowtowing to the vocal yokels that are part of the republican/conservadem noise machine.

It is stupid strategy to create a platform that articulates a set of beliefs and then pretend it doesn't matter when people look at candidates to support.

It is a stupid strategy because it is mired in the past, in the negative bullshit that is Republicanism.

So, if a party employs such a stupid strategy, why should anyone think they are worth voting for? I'm not saying this as a call out to not vote. I'm saying... why alienate those who can do the most for you?

Why give away 250 million to religious idiots whose ideas for sex education are worthless? We know they're worthless because people have examined the outcomes.

I understand that politicians are not really leaders. They are not part of the vanguard, for the most part. Some of them are. They're the ones who get pilloried - but they're still working on the right things. A few pols are, apparently, dumb as a box of bricks. But I thought they were smart about one thing, and that is getting their asses into office.

To this day, so many Americans detest Bush and Cheney and all that they stood for and did - and yet Democrats cannot or will not enact the mandate they were given when they achieved a majority in the legislature and the white house. What was that mandate? To enact Democratic Party platform changes. To turn away from Republican policies.

Those conservatives who run as democrats do not represent the major population bases in this nation. they do not represent the majority opinion on issue after issue - and yet THEY get to decide what the Democratic party may or may not do? Because of a religious belief?

fuck that shit. Obama needs to locate his inner LBJ.

and the democratic party needs to know that they cannot take votes for granted. those votes will not be there when democrats do stupid things like put up anti-choice candidates for office or give in to religious hatred of women. for some people, if those are the choices, then there are no choices.

If someone betrays you enough times, you no longer want to have anything to do with them.

The Democrats have to show themselves worthy of the votes they say they must have to govern. They've had the majority and the presidency and they don't need to waste time on those in this nation who have no desire to govern, who have no answers to problems, who have no desire to deal with the reality of issues like poverty, global warming, lack of health care, financial instability...

Let Fox News throw a fit. They're going to no matter what. They're on the wrong side of history.

Democrats need to get on the right side of history.

[LakeSamish706]

4. If the Democrats are dying, then the Repugs. are long dead! n/t

[PCIntern]

5. the F-word is not strong enough for what I feel about Tweety, that pr--k.

Horrible human being all the way around...spittle-flecked 'opinion', a know-nothing of the first order, always with that Tip O'Neill shit, and that pounding he gave Grayson a few weeks ago when the Congressman insisted that the Dems were talking about recociliation for the HCR!

hypocritical incompetent loudmouth who woudln't know his ass from a hole in the ground...

that's what say I.

[bluestateguy]

He made no sense

Mainly because he was--as usual--talking about a million miles an hour.

[Arkana]

6. Tweety's a controversy whore.

He flips from story to story, looking for the next big thing. Ignore him.

[maxsolomon]

7. no freaking way

the GOP is stomping about waving its arms in the air, shouting gibberish. tweety interprets that as momentum.

they won't get CLOSE to majorities in either house.

[Enola Gay]

10. He's just giving some poll results...are we supposed to hate him for doing that?

A lot of my Democrat friends back home aren't very happy with the way things have gone the last year.
I'm just relating what I hear, please don't yell at me.

[PCIntern]

11. Yes...and you don't have any "Democrat friends"...

you have Democratic Friends...

Oh yes, and welcome to DU... :hi:

[Enola Gay]

17. Sorry, I have friends who are Democrats. Is that better?

Thank you. ;)

[PCIntern]

20. somewhat...

you've started out on the wrong foot here...tell us how much you hate Republicans and why...just for fun!!!

It's a ball...let loose!!!!

[Arkana]

12. Let me guess--you also have several black and gay friends too, right?

Go back to troll school and demand that they retract your diploma.

[Enola Gay]

19. I am gay. So, yes I have gay friends. Not many black friends though.

Boy this is a tough room...
Thanks for the kind welcome.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

13. Yell at you? We won't have time.

But I'm willing to bet your 11th post will be memorable.

[Liberal In Texas]

23. He didn't make to 11.

[PCIntern]

28. "FAST AND FURIOUS"

[WeDidIt]

18. OOPS, outted yourself on your 6th post

"Democrat friends" being posted on a DemocratIC board shows your true colors.

[Bryn]

44. But I've got crappy grammar

being a deaf person. I learned about the difference between "democrat" and "democratic" from here at DU. I could have been tombstoned wrongly.

[WeDidIt]

56. Meh

It takes more than a mere outting over the word to get a tombstone. The mods look for a pattern of behavior. The above poster bit it at 8 posts.

He disrupted poorly.

[Bryn]

71. I looked up "Enola Gay"

No wonder he got tombstoned presto!

on edit: ooops! it's pronto not presto, right?

[lonestarnot]

69. Enola Gay?

I'd say the first post.

[leftstreet]

'Democrat friends back home' - where are you, at camp? n/t

[PCIntern]

26. Funny...DUzy...!!!

...even I'm quick on the trigger lately...

[H2O Man]

39. AAAAAAAA - AAAAAAAHHHH - HHHHHHHHHHH!

Sorry. Couldn't help myself.

[Cosmocat]

58. About the polls ...

he, as with all MSMers, overhyped the polls ...

The poll had the public favoring a generic D 47 to a generic R at about 44 for the entire last year ... NEVER ONCE did we hear any of the apocolypic crape from him or anyone else about how the Rs were in BIG trouble ...

The poll has literally flipped, as of that day, to generic R 47 and generic D 43 ...

So, the numbers that never led to apocolyptic proclamations for the Ds now leads to massive losses for the Ds?

Seriously?

He did what all MSMs are under orders to do - Ds in trouble, Rs on the prowl ...

[stanwyck]

63. Your "tell" is showing.

it's a "tell" to say "Democrat" instead of Democratic. It's the Democratic Party. Not the Democrat Party. There is no Democrat Party. And it sounds just flat our ignorant to say "Democrat Party" or use an adjective improperly. It immediately lets us know who you are. Kinda like the "Get a clue, Morans" guy.

[bridgit]

14. Its for Dems to lose, Matthews is massaging his demographics...

For a guy that rode into Media Town on Clinton's zipper he's proven he'll toss the whole party under the bus to keep his numbers up there

[WeDidIt]

15. Tweety thought Sarah Palin being the veep meant John McCain would win

Tweety predicted 2008 would be Guiliani vs. Clinton and Guiliani would win.

Tweety's full of shit.

[CakeGrrl]

16. Are the elections next week?

:eyes:

[cali]

21. I'm with dem pollster Stan Greenberg who says that the pukes have peaked

too soon. I don't think it's going to nearly as bad for dems as the pundits are predicting.

[hlthe2b]

22. Well, Tweety's been wrong on quite a few things...

remember how he had Hillary Clinton as a "shoe-in" for the nomination? His denouncing of Alan Grayson's suggestion that reconciliation might be a path to health care reform passage? I'm sure there are many, but my feeble brain is on overload today.

At any rate, I think it would be hard to lose both House and Senate, but I'm just superstitious enough not to want to, tempt the "gods." :shrug:

[stray cat]

24. If dems keep insisting they won't vote for Obama Tweety is absolutely right

[RainDog]

29. If Obama wants votes he should stop pandering to the right n/t

[Political Heretic]

34. Yep. You can blame politicians for their failure, or you can blame voters.

The former is appropriate. The latter is easy.

[elocs]

30. So, in the Senate with each party having 18 seats in play,

the Republicans will win 10 of the Democrat's 18 and lose none of their own? Seems pretty far-fetched to me and some freeper wishful thinking.

[H2O Man]

31. There is a real possibility

of that happening. The majority of democrats in both houses of Congress will have difficulty in getting other than moderate to conservative grass roots support. They may get the votes of the majority of liberal democrats, but not the campaign season support of progressive and liberal democrats. That definitely decreases their chances of winning re-election. It is the consequence of taking the democratic left for granted.

[CatWoman]

35. hey

:hi:

hope you're feeling ok :hug:

[mitchum]

32. He's a big ol' drama queen

[abelenkpe]

33. Actually

I don't see democrats losing ground if we show up to vote. Honestly.

[spanone]

36. we all know that tweety is a jerk, some days he's our jerk

[Hansel]

37. Tweety needs to give it up. He is not good at this stuff at all. nt

[Stinky The Clown]

38. Tweety needs meds

When he is off them he is different than when he takes them. I'm not sure what his "normal" state is.

[Vinnie From Indy]

40. My dog has a better political insight than Tweety

Tweety is simply nuts and he routinely proves it on his bizarre show.

[The Backlash Cometh]

41. I think they are going to blast us with everything they've got.

You all better be prepared. If we're not working now to work on an offense, it will probably be too late. And the place to nip it in the bud, is with the local races. Wherever you can, clean it up.

[dgibby]

42. I say never use the words "Tweety" and "thinks" in the same sentence.

Oh, damn, I did it, too! My bad!:evilgrin:

[jtrockville]

43. By "lose", does he mean Dems will regain minority control?

[ShamelessHussy]

45. does it really matter?

the more things change, the more they remain the same, seems to me.

[laughingliberal]

46. Tweety's wishes that would happen. Then he could spend 2 weeks blathering endlessly about it. nt.

[Autonomy]

47. The repubs are factionalising

and are increasingly unable to create an electable coalition. The teabaggers are gaining power, and they will not nominate enough electable candidates to take back the House or Senate. Dems, meanwhile, are on a roll and coming back from a mild slump. As usual, Matthews is dead wrong.

[old mark]

48. His job is to get people to watch, create a stir, not to talk about facts.

MSNBC is mostly about sensationalism, not too much about news.


mark

[Lugnut]

50. Tweety is full of crap.

He stirs shit to make himself relevant. It's all about the ratings.

[WeekendWarrior]

51. Tweety's wrong. nt

[lonestarnot]

52. I don't call him hair in the wind for nutt'n.

[krispos42]

53. Tweety's taking too much allergy medicine.

:smoke:

[Iggo]

54. Last week Tweety was dressing down Republicans...

...laughing right in their faces for how inept they are.

It's his jobby-job.

[The Second Stone]

55. Tweety has no judgment

he just says one really bizarre thing after another. While even a stopped watch is right twice a day, you never know when he is going to be right, you just know that he is wrong far more often than not.

The election is for the people to decide which candidates will represent them, and in that sense, it is always a victory for democracy when people vote.

[Peacetrain]

65. Too early.. what is polling in April, will be different than what is polling in Nov. NT

[tjwash]

67. Didn't tweety say that Obama had no chance to be elected president?

Among other things:

"...that's the president looking very much like a jet, you know, a high-flying jet star. A guy who is a jet pilot. Has been in the past when he was younger, obviously."

"...the president deserves everything he's doing tonight in terms of his leadership. He won the war. He was an effective commander. Everybody recognizes that, I believe, except a few critics."

"...Here's a president who's really nonverbal. He's like Eisenhower. He looks great in a military uniform. He looks great in that cowboy costume he wears when he goes West. I remember him standing at that fence with Colin Powell. Was the best picture in the 2000 campaign?"

"It's stunning. It's amazing. I think it's huge. I mean, he's landing on a boat at 150 miles per hour. It's tremendous. It's hard to imagine any Democrat being able to do that. And it doesn't matter if Democrats try to ridicule it. It's stunning, and it speaks for itself."

[Hell Hath No Fury]

70. I think he may be right.

The midterms are ALWAYS about who gets their people to the polls.

Right now, the GOPers are making sure there are lots of "red meat" ballot issues in various States, and you better believe they are working the anti-Obama angle with the Baggers.

What are the Dems doing? What have they got?

I am here in CA where we have a Boxer election and pot proposition, which are good things to push the voters to the polls. Wer may be luckier than most States out there.

History shows the Party in power loses seats during the midterm.

The only question in 2012 is how many.

[Forkboy]

72. I think it's going to be tough days for almost any incumbant, regardless of party.

[TheKentuckian]

74. I lean toward his being high on that

I can't say it is impossible but it remains quite unlikely. The Senate is especially a stretch.

[caty]

75. First, I always vote.

Second, I always vote a straight Democratic ticket because I know we have to have the majority. Of course, I would like every Democrat who is elected to stand up for the Democratic party platform, but I have to be realistic and realize that some take issue with at least one item on that platform. I have to hope that there will always be enough Democratic votes to win the Democratic agenda.

Third, if I didn't vote for a Democratic, who would I vote for? I would leave the voting booth gagging if I ever voted for a repub and I couldn't just skip over one candidate.

If we are going to get this country straightened out, we have to vote and always keep our numbers higher in the Congress and the Senate.