<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 2010 &amp; 2012 Election Prologue</title>
	<atom:link href="http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/</link>
	<description>Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:24:43 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: John D. Froelich</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-438482</link>
		<dc:creator>John D. Froelich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:37:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-438482</guid>
		<description>I am puzzled by the claim that the House and Senate always move together since 1913.  Reagan had Republican Senates after 1980, 82, and 84, while the House remained with the Democrats thru these terms.

I strongly expect major Republican gains in 2010 and 2012.  Virginia, due in 2009, has elected a governor opposite to the President&#039;s Party since 1976.  Pennsylvania has elected against the President since 1934, except for 1982. 

For a truly awsome treatment, with many graphs, on American and foreign party turnovers, check out Yahoo group &quot;Politicometrics.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am puzzled by the claim that the House and Senate always move together since 1913.  Reagan had Republican Senates after 1980, 82, and 84, while the House remained with the Democrats thru these terms.</p>
<p>I strongly expect major Republican gains in 2010 and 2012.  Virginia, due in 2009, has elected a governor opposite to the President&#8217;s Party since 1976.  Pennsylvania has elected against the President since 1934, except for 1982. </p>
<p>For a truly awsome treatment, with many graphs, on American and foreign party turnovers, check out Yahoo group &#8220;Politicometrics.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Divided We Stand United We Fall</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-427212</link>
		<dc:creator>Divided We Stand United We Fall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:49:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-427212</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Carnival of Divided Government UndÃªtrÃ®gintÃ¢ (XXIX) Special Bad Attitude Edition ...&lt;/strong&gt;

?Indeed. For fear is the most reasonable response to the recognition of what politics is. GOP 2010!&quot;  Perfect. But I am afraid that a majority change in 2010 is very unlikely. We will be &quot;enjoying&quot; single party rule for at least four years....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Carnival of Divided Government UndÃªtrÃ®gintÃ¢ (XXIX) Special Bad Attitude Edition &#8230;</strong></p>
<p>?Indeed. For fear is the most reasonable response to the recognition of what politics is. GOP 2010!&#8221;  Perfect. But I am afraid that a majority change in 2010 is very unlikely. We will be &#8220;enjoying&#8221; single party rule for at least four years&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Avinash_Tyagi</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-425000</link>
		<dc:creator>Avinash_Tyagi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 04:36:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-425000</guid>
		<description>mw, if this were a normal period then you might be right, but this is not a normal period, did the pendulum swing back wildly after 1932?  nope, we had the Dems as the deominant party for decades, until the vietnam war and the civil rights movement tore into the party and swung the pendulum back to the GOP.  In the mid 1800&#039;s the Whig party collapsed and the Republicans arose, then after the victory in the Civil war the Democrats were marginalized in the north for decades, until the New Deal.  

I&#039;m not taking current data and just saying that it must fit my worldview, i&#039;m taking past events and seeing what issues occured back then and then seeing if today&#039;s events have similarities.  We have economic turmoil, we have a polairizing war, we have long run demographic shifts favoring the Democrats, we have the necessary ingredients for a long term shift.  No shift is permanent, because eventually the political landscape will shift, but these events can create changes which last decades.

Could I be wrong, sure, the Dems could screw up big and the GOP could be seen as riding in and cleaning up the mess, but so far I don&#039;t see sings of that, Obama seemsto be playing it smart, learning from both the mistakes and successes of the past and surrounding himself with a smart and skilled team.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>mw, if this were a normal period then you might be right, but this is not a normal period, did the pendulum swing back wildly after 1932?  nope, we had the Dems as the deominant party for decades, until the vietnam war and the civil rights movement tore into the party and swung the pendulum back to the GOP.  In the mid 1800&#8217;s the Whig party collapsed and the Republicans arose, then after the victory in the Civil war the Democrats were marginalized in the north for decades, until the New Deal.  </p>
<p>I&#8217;m not taking current data and just saying that it must fit my worldview, i&#8217;m taking past events and seeing what issues occured back then and then seeing if today&#8217;s events have similarities.  We have economic turmoil, we have a polairizing war, we have long run demographic shifts favoring the Democrats, we have the necessary ingredients for a long term shift.  No shift is permanent, because eventually the political landscape will shift, but these events can create changes which last decades.</p>
<p>Could I be wrong, sure, the Dems could screw up big and the GOP could be seen as riding in and cleaning up the mess, but so far I don&#8217;t see sings of that, Obama seemsto be playing it smart, learning from both the mistakes and successes of the past and surrounding himself with a smart and skilled team.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mw</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-424961</link>
		<dc:creator>mw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Nov 2008 20:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-424961</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;&quot;...the smartest man alive&quot;&lt;/i&gt; - david&lt;/blockquote&gt;

@david
No...no... no... not at all [blushing]. I certainly do no see myself as the smartest man alive, but modestly see myself as one of the many grouped in that top one half of one percent.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><i>&#8220;&#8230;the smartest man alive&#8221;</i> &#8211; david</p></blockquote>
<p>@david<br />
No&#8230;no&#8230; no&#8230; not at all [blushing]. I certainly do no see myself as the smartest man alive, but modestly see myself as one of the many grouped in that top one half of one percent.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mw</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-424960</link>
		<dc:creator>mw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Nov 2008 19:49:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-424960</guid>
		<description>What I like about you Avinash, is that your views are informed by a very specific (some would say - dogmatic, perhaps even - fanciful) future world view, and you reassemble all currently available data into the frame of that imagined future picture.  Your current perspective is coherent and understandable in that context. I look at the same data as one painting in a series on US political history, admire the founder&#039;s constitutional brushstrokes and anticipate the next in the series based on that (some would say - dogmatic) historical context. 

Let&#039;s use your metaphor. Your premise:  We are riding an Obama/Democratic tsumami of changing cultural/political forces carrying US politics on a shift to the left that will permanently alter the US political landscape into great swaths of  new progressive/liberal/socialist (pick your label) beachfront property as it crashes ashore in 2010 and 2012.  My premise: We are seeing the ebb and flow of normal political tides in American politics.  You see a 52%  liberal &quot;glass half full&quot; tidal wave. I see a 48% &quot;glass half empty&quot; conservative low tide.  

I think you are really overreaching as you project the 2008 data into the future and ignore the recent past. You  ignore that part of your 52% &quot;tidal wave&quot; that was comprised of Obamacans and independents who were not really voting for Obama and his tired old liberal Democratic bromides, but voting against Bush and the Republicans big spending, big government, interventionist, government in your bedroom,  anti-conservative anti-freedom record.  We have one of them right here. If you don&#039;t believe me, Ask Obama voter ASC if he has a fire in his belly to  remove the last vestiges of conservatism from the Federal Government in 2010 and 2012. He is representative of at least 1-3% of the 52% Obama &quot;tidal wave&quot;.  The very same percentage I was hectoring to vote for divided government (alas - they did not listen to me). 

I expect your &quot;tidal wave&quot; will last about as long as Karl Rove and Tom Delay&#039;s &quot;permanent majority&quot;.  I don&#039;t know if you, me or even Donklephant will be around to check back in 2010 and 2012, but if so - we&#039;ll find out and compare notes then.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What I like about you Avinash, is that your views are informed by a very specific (some would say &#8211; dogmatic, perhaps even &#8211; fanciful) future world view, and you reassemble all currently available data into the frame of that imagined future picture.  Your current perspective is coherent and understandable in that context. I look at the same data as one painting in a series on US political history, admire the founder&#8217;s constitutional brushstrokes and anticipate the next in the series based on that (some would say &#8211; dogmatic) historical context. </p>
<p>Let&#8217;s use your metaphor. Your premise:  We are riding an Obama/Democratic tsumami of changing cultural/political forces carrying US politics on a shift to the left that will permanently alter the US political landscape into great swaths of  new progressive/liberal/socialist (pick your label) beachfront property as it crashes ashore in 2010 and 2012.  My premise: We are seeing the ebb and flow of normal political tides in American politics.  You see a 52%  liberal &#8220;glass half full&#8221; tidal wave. I see a 48% &#8220;glass half empty&#8221; conservative low tide.  </p>
<p>I think you are really overreaching as you project the 2008 data into the future and ignore the recent past. You  ignore that part of your 52% &#8220;tidal wave&#8221; that was comprised of Obamacans and independents who were not really voting for Obama and his tired old liberal Democratic bromides, but voting against Bush and the Republicans big spending, big government, interventionist, government in your bedroom,  anti-conservative anti-freedom record.  We have one of them right here. If you don&#8217;t believe me, Ask Obama voter ASC if he has a fire in his belly to  remove the last vestiges of conservatism from the Federal Government in 2010 and 2012. He is representative of at least 1-3% of the 52% Obama &#8220;tidal wave&#8221;.  The very same percentage I was hectoring to vote for divided government (alas &#8211; they did not listen to me). </p>
<p>I expect your &#8220;tidal wave&#8221; will last about as long as Karl Rove and Tom Delay&#8217;s &#8220;permanent majority&#8221;.  I don&#8217;t know if you, me or even Donklephant will be around to check back in 2010 and 2012, but if so &#8211; we&#8217;ll find out and compare notes then.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fake Cromwell</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-424946</link>
		<dc:creator>Fake Cromwell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Nov 2008 17:51:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-424946</guid>
		<description>@Avinash

Do you have a source to back your Lieberman claim?

Lieberman has consistently voted with the Democrats on various social and fiscal issues.

Your talk seems really familiar...who was the last person to talk about kicking the other party out of power and establishing a permanent majority? I think his name started with a K and ended with K and ends with arl Rove. And I think that was in 2004, when he talked about how the evangelicals were going to put Democrats across the country out of office.

Btw, if you didn&#039;t know the so called &quot;youngsters&quot; didn&#039;t turn out in the numbers Obama had hoped for</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Avinash</p>
<p>Do you have a source to back your Lieberman claim?</p>
<p>Lieberman has consistently voted with the Democrats on various social and fiscal issues.</p>
<p>Your talk seems really familiar&#8230;who was the last person to talk about kicking the other party out of power and establishing a permanent majority? I think his name started with a K and ended with K and ends with arl Rove. And I think that was in 2004, when he talked about how the evangelicals were going to put Democrats across the country out of office.</p>
<p>Btw, if you didn&#8217;t know the so called &#8220;youngsters&#8221; didn&#8217;t turn out in the numbers Obama had hoped for</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Avinash_Tyagi</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-424921</link>
		<dc:creator>Avinash_Tyagi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Nov 2008 06:55:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-424921</guid>
		<description>No mw, its not simple arithmetic, look at the states where the Dems are for 2010 and 2012, almost all of them are states that Obama carried or did far better in than Kerry did in 2004, excpet for Lieberman, who is more GOP then Dem these days, and Byrd who is too old, Most of those dems are safe in 2010 and 2012.

On the other hand many of the GOP cantidates are in blue states or states tredning Blue, where Obama did very well, so all those Obama supporters are going to be ready to push them out in 2010 and 2012, especially in 2012, when Obama is back on the ticket, all those African americans and youngsters will be a wave that slams the remaining GOP memebers out of office.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No mw, its not simple arithmetic, look at the states where the Dems are for 2010 and 2012, almost all of them are states that Obama carried or did far better in than Kerry did in 2004, excpet for Lieberman, who is more GOP then Dem these days, and Byrd who is too old, Most of those dems are safe in 2010 and 2012.</p>
<p>On the other hand many of the GOP cantidates are in blue states or states tredning Blue, where Obama did very well, so all those Obama supporters are going to be ready to push them out in 2010 and 2012, especially in 2012, when Obama is back on the ticket, all those African americans and youngsters will be a wave that slams the remaining GOP memebers out of office.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Will Ciccone</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-424880</link>
		<dc:creator>Will Ciccone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 18:19:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-424880</guid>
		<description>OMG thats alot of info to take in. I think 2010 and 2012 will be major Rep pick ups across the US along with the White House.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OMG thats alot of info to take in. I think 2010 and 2012 will be major Rep pick ups across the US along with the White House.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: david</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-424867</link>
		<dc:creator>david</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 14:20:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-424867</guid>
		<description>Folks, no use trying to discuss anything with mw, he knows everything ...if he was half as smart as he thinks he is he would still be the smartest man alive.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Folks, no use trying to discuss anything with mw, he knows everything &#8230;if he was half as smart as he thinks he is he would still be the smartest man alive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mw</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-424853</link>
		<dc:creator>mw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 10:40:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-424853</guid>
		<description>I can&#039;t make it any clearer than I did in the post. It&#039;s just arithmetic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#8217;t make it any clearer than I did in the post. It&#8217;s just arithmetic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Avinash_Tyagi</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-424825</link>
		<dc:creator>Avinash_Tyagi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 02:30:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-424825</guid>
		<description>Historical precendent, yeah right, historically we&#039;ve had periods where one party rule has continued unabated for years and years where its changed hands back and forth, also I read your argument, its not based on the structural makeup of the senate, its based on your belief that people will be tired of one party rule, you think that by 2012 that the majority in the senate will be lost and that the house it will be narrowed, but with nothing to support your ridiculous claims, just like there weren&#039;t any during the campaign.

Actually give me some reason why the country won&#039;t remain in favor of the dems, and actually back it up with evidence, not just that you think it won&#039;t work or that the dems will overreach I want some proof that it wont work and that it will be seen as overreach, otherwise its just predicition.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Historical precendent, yeah right, historically we&#8217;ve had periods where one party rule has continued unabated for years and years where its changed hands back and forth, also I read your argument, its not based on the structural makeup of the senate, its based on your belief that people will be tired of one party rule, you think that by 2012 that the majority in the senate will be lost and that the house it will be narrowed, but with nothing to support your ridiculous claims, just like there weren&#8217;t any during the campaign.</p>
<p>Actually give me some reason why the country won&#8217;t remain in favor of the dems, and actually back it up with evidence, not just that you think it won&#8217;t work or that the dems will overreach I want some proof that it wont work and that it will be seen as overreach, otherwise its just predicition.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mw</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-424805</link>
		<dc:creator>mw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 21:56:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-424805</guid>
		<description>@Avinash
No, basically my entire argument is based on the structural makeup of the Senate in each election and historical precedent. But I understand the confusion. You&#039;d have to read it to understand that. 

You are also confusing advocacy for predictions. There is a difference.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Avinash<br />
No, basically my entire argument is based on the structural makeup of the Senate in each election and historical precedent. But I understand the confusion. You&#8217;d have to read it to understand that. </p>
<p>You are also confusing advocacy for predictions. There is a difference.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Avinash_Tyagi</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/14/2010-2012-election-prologue/comment-page-1/#comment-424803</link>
		<dc:creator>Avinash_Tyagi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 21:43:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10958#comment-424803</guid>
		<description>So basically your entire argument is that people will be tired of one party rule by then,  yet if Obama and the Dems succeed in the next few years your argument will be wrecked once again.

Judging by how your 2008 predictions came out, I think it bodes well for the democrats having dominance well into the 2020&#039;s</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So basically your entire argument is that people will be tired of one party rule by then,  yet if Obama and the Dems succeed in the next few years your argument will be wrecked once again.</p>
<p>Judging by how your 2008 predictions came out, I think it bodes well for the democrats having dominance well into the 2020&#8217;s</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
