View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Vextor
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Post Count: 12086
Location: Hell
11331071 Potch
23689 Soldiers
160 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 4:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh my, only 4000 votes difference in Montana now. What's up with Yellowstone County?? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rune hunter
Joined: 02 May 2006
Post Count: 461
Location: Tenzan Pass
236548 Potch
0 Soldiers
0 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 4:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hehe well now that the dems have the house i wonder what they are going to do about Iraq. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Calvin
Legions of Zontar-Killers
Joined: 19 Jun 2004
Post Count: 2445
Location: Blight's Bay
817540 Potch
25 Soldiers
0 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 4:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, after looking it up, I suppose it could mean both. In regards to politics, it traditionally means what I mentioned earlier. However, it can also mean someone who is ineffective or helpless, which would be a president where the Senate and House are of the opposite party. So, both could be correct.
Dictionary.com wrote: |
lame duck
1. an elected official or group of officials, as a legislator, continuing in office during the period between an election defeat and a successor's assumption of office.
2. a president who is completing a term of office and chooses not to run or is ineligible to run for reelection.
3. a person finishing a term of employment after a replacement has been chosen.
4. anything soon to be supplanted by another that is more efficient, economical, etc.
5. a person or thing that is disabled, helpless, ineffective, or inefficient.
6. a person who has lost a great deal of money in speculations on the stock market. |
_________________
I changed the number on my phone so you can't call me up at home, and you can't say those
things to me, that make me fall down on my knees.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tullaryx
Custodiae Corvi
Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Post Count: 5577
Location: Apacheta
4092785 Potch
200 Soldiers
20 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rune hunter wrote: |
Hehe well now that the dems have the house i wonder what they are going to do about Iraq. |
There's really not much they can do about Iraq. If they force the issue in setting a timetable for the US forces to leave Iraq still in shambles then the Republicans label of the party as the "cut and run" party will be legitimized. The best the Democrats can do with the Iraq situation is to push an agenda of changing tactics in Iraq and that starts with them calling for Rumsfeld's dismissal as Secretary of Defense.
This is not a farfetched idea since some Republicans have also called for Rumsfeld's dismissal. Getting anyone new in that cabinet post may just open up discussion on how to adjust the strategy in the war in Iraq and at the same time point out to the Iraqi government that we will not be there forever. I wouldn't be surprised if American commanders on the ground finally open up about asking for more troops and equipment better suited for insurgency work once Rumsfeld is gone. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Leb
Pizza Toppings
Joined: 16 May 2004
Post Count: 4233
Location: Razril
497133 Potch
936 Soldiers
0 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
The counting is pretty much over (there are still occasional updates, but have been pretty minor since this morning), and both Tester and Webb are still sitting in their respective leada. Provided there wasn't some significant miscount in the favor of the Democrats, they should technically go on to take the states.
I think Allen might concede later today, and the election in Montana will most definitely be a hotly contested one. It's still a victory for the GOP if they can hold just one of those seats, so it seems to be the likely scenario. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ujitsuna
Red Shoes Dance
Joined: 24 May 2006
Post Count: 4823
Location: Pale Plains
936547 Potch
12000 Soldiers
675 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Looks like these results are reflective of a lot of American's unhappiness with the economy and Iraq. Sadly theres nothing at all mentioned about the environment in the slightest. A bit dissapointing for the rest of the world I suppose, especially if Global Warming "exists". I also managed to capture a bit of an interview where a Republican strategist says nothing at all will be done about the environment unless China and India do as well, because it would compromise America's position as the dominant power in the world... The Democrat being interviewed at the same time on the other hand said things will be done. I always see the republican outlining definite plans and the democrats grabbing up options between each election, I suppose thats why Republicans are popular. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Amyral
Windriders
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Post Count: 1355
Location: Sawgrass Landing
544907 Potch
4066 Soldiers
620 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, my state sent 4 republicans and 1 democrat to the House. We didn't have a senate election.
In my state, it was an overwhelming victory for the democrats on most fronts. They swept the statewide elections and took quite a few seats in the legislature. I don't know who has the majority in each house officially, though. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Vextor
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Post Count: 12086
Location: Hell
11331071 Potch
23689 Soldiers
160 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wes wrote: |
I always see the republican outlining definite plans and the democrats grabbing up options between each election, I suppose thats why Republicans are popular. |
I would hotly contest that opinion, but that's an entirely different discussion, not fit for this thread. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aesa
Those Who Slumber
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Post Count: 3238
Location: Barko Saywa
427118 Potch
250 Soldiers
5 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Vector Xthonic wrote: |
Wes wrote: |
I always see the republican outlining definite plans and the democrats grabbing up options between each election, I suppose thats why Republicans are popular. |
I would hotly contest that opinion, but that's an entirely different discussion, not fit for this thread. |
Indeed (to both comments)
Well, judging by what has been happening the Democrats will have the majority and a fair amount of republicans are supporting the democrats policies so... _________________
The setting sun means the rise of a new day...
...excepting for Ragnarok, of course
~Tinto~ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Yvl
Sanctus
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Post Count: 5979
Location: Senan
55224 Potch
1063 Soldiers
12421 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
A bit dissapointing for the rest of the world I suppose, especially if Global Warming "exists".
|
There is actually no longer any debate about that, it has been proven. The question is whether or not we need to do anything about it.
Quote: |
Looks like these results are reflective of a lot of American's unhappiness with the economy and Iraq.
|
According to exit polls, the rampant corruption in the republican party was just as, if not more imortant to voters. It certainly was to me, though our state (PA) did not have any corruption, I did not want those who were corrupt (which were primarily republican) to get their way. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Amyral
Windriders
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Post Count: 1355
Location: Sawgrass Landing
544907 Potch
4066 Soldiers
620 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think dissatisfaction with Bush was a more important factor (granted, by only slightly). Most of the coverage I saw put that as the biggest reason for this shift and, historically, the president's party usually loses seats in the legislature during mid-term elections. MOst of the state elections here were geared towards that, with the national issues permeating.
However, even the democrats couldn't mess up the October surprise that was given to them. The Foley issue was one of the biggest scale tippers in the election. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Vextor
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Post Count: 12086
Location: Hell
11331071 Potch
23689 Soldiers
160 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dems just won Montana, and now everything is up to Virginia.
On another note, Donald Rumsfeld has announced that he's stepping down as Secretary of Defense. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tullaryx
Custodiae Corvi
Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Post Count: 5577
Location: Apacheta
4092785 Potch
200 Soldiers
20 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, it didn't take them long to finally do what everyone in Washington has been wanting done. Donald Rumsfeld will be stepping down as Secretary of Defense and to be replaced by Texas A&M President Robert Gates. Gates used to be head of the CIA in 1991 through 1993 under elder Bush and had been with the intelligence community since 1966.
I can't say that this change in civilian leadership at the Pentagon will bear positive fruit right away, but anything is better than the snowblinders-on leadership Rumsfeld and his underlings have done since 2003. I expect that once Gates has been approved for the position more of the so-called neocon group that followed Rumsfeld and Cheney will either resign or gradually pushed aside for new faces.
If there was one thing Rumsfeld did right in his tenure as SecDef it was increasing the number of Special Operations Command to tackle asymetrical warfare that will probably become the norm in terms of warfare for this generation and the next. What I didn't like was his decision to further cut the regular military even more. Special Operations unit are fine and dandy, but there's still a need to have a strong and healthy standing, regular military, if and when, conventional warfare is needed. A scalpel would be preferred, but sometimes the US needs to keep a very big sledgehammer to make its point known and that sledgehammer under Rumsfeld has become quite small and old. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Yvl
Sanctus
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Post Count: 5979
Location: Senan
55224 Potch
1063 Soldiers
12421 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Vector Xthonic wrote: |
Dems just won Montana, and now everything is up to Virginia.
On another note, Donald Rumsfeld has announced that he's stepping down as Secretary of Defense. |
Gah! Time paradox! I just made a thread for that!
It's pretty disappointing that he had to wait until NOW to finally step down. Considering how poorly he has handled matters (not supplying necessary equipment to soldiers for one thing), if he had any sense, he would have stepped down long ago, or at least been removed by Bush. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tullaryx
Custodiae Corvi
Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Post Count: 5577
Location: Apacheta
4092785 Potch
200 Soldiers
20 Nation Points
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yvl wrote: |
It's pretty disappointing that he had to wait until NOW to finally step down. Considering how poorly he has handled matters (not supplying necessary equipment to soldiers for one thing), if he had any sense, he would have stepped down long ago, or at least been removed by Bush. |
That's easy to explain. George W. Bush has always been very loyal to those who work for him and who has earned his trust. Rumsfeld seems to have been one of them. Bush has always wanted to avoid being seen as someone who reacted to outside influences when it came to his way of doing things in the White House. I think the more people called for Rumsfeld to be fired by Bush the more he stuck to his guns and kept the man.
I think Rumsfeld would've been a better SecDef if the country wasn't at war in many areas. His corporate style of leading the military would've been well suited during peacetime. In peacetime a large standing military is usually considered an anachronism of the Cold War past which is why since the tail end of Elder Bush's first term as President the U.S. Military has been on the path of size reduction and becoming more streamlined.
Once the nation went into a warfooting Rumsfeld's style of being corporate and micromanaging has made the people whose opinion counts (the field commanders on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan) hesistant to disagree with Rumsfeld's agenda in how the military should be run. A very good example of a top-ranking general in the Pentagon running afoul with Rumsfeld after speaking truthfully about the Iraq situation (before the invasion even began) is one 4-Star General Eric Shinseki who was at the time of the planning stages to the invasion of Iraq the Army's Chief of Staff. Shinseki had commented to a congressional hearing that it would take several hundred thousand U.S. troops to depose and stabilize Iraq. Rumsfeld and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz called the remark as being far off base. I don't think it was coincidence that since that hearing Shinseki gradually disappeared from day-to-day operations of the U.S. Army until he retired months later.
Hopefully, Robert Gates will be more open-minded when it comes to listening to his generals and admirals when it comes to war-related issues confronting the Pentagon. I think if he has an advantage over Rumsfeld it's that his time in the intelligence community will have taught him to listen to all sides and opinions before making policy recommendations to the President.
One thing I wouldn't be surprised, in the coming two years before the next Presidential election, is the Pentagon recommending to the White House and Congress to bring the U.S. Military back to pre-Clinton days and start up a military build-up of personnel and equipment to allow the U.S. to conduct major military operations in more than one region. At the moment, the country can barely conduct a major war in Iraq and still maintain the minimum amount of forces in Afghanistan where the Taliban and al-Qaeda have become increasingly bold and active in attacking NATO forces. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|