President Carter just conceded that we will lose the House, but that it will be good for Obama.

[onehandle]

He was just on Hardball and said that President Obama can do as Harry Truman did and speak directly to the people and label the Republican House as a 'do-nothing Congress.'

[phantom power]

1. Obama will tack right to appease them.

[DJ13]

4. Yep, and I think he's more comfortable going right than going left

[villager]

6. Sadly true -- as the record now shows...

n/t

[vaberella]

46. What record? Point me to this illustrious record. n/t

[villager]

48. "What record?," indeed when it comes to systemic, progressive change. n/t

n/t

[vaberella]

52. I would say ditto for this anti-progressive right wing agenda.

I find it remarkable that one would say no record when it comes to systemic change---so the changes in LGBT rights, which has seen a high in this admin means nothing. The expansion on women's rights means nothing. Expansion on Native American rights, means nothing. You can sit there and type out that this admin has done nothing for progressive change. It seems crazy to say such a thing that when Feingold started pushing health reform in his state---he noticed a massive up tick in points. Ditto goes for so many other candidates. No progressive change for you---seems to be crazy amount of change for the regular votes. Thank God DU, nor you reflect, or the right wing media/crappers reflect the masses.

[villager]

54. so, your rationale on DADT, torture, spying, bank bailouts, pre-conceded negotiation points

...et al, would be...?

:shrug:

[awoke_in_2003]

34. Maybe in 2016...

we should get a nascar driver as our candidate :)

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

36. Probably because the left does what it always does; bitches, quits and then throws Nader at us.

[NV Whino]

12. That may be a good thing

If he tacks any farther right, he will be going left. ;)

[phantom power]

16. 2 wrongs don't make a right, but 3 rights make a left!

[Drunken Irishman]

20. Nope.

[polichick]

38. You must mean to appease them MORE. Unfortunately, that's my guess too...

...though not my hope.

[Kdillard]

2. Just what we don't need.

[ProSense]

5. Actually,

those wishing this to be the case need these messages.

[ProSense]

3. Tim Kaine and Howard Dean believe Democrats will keep the House.

We'll know who is right come November 3.

[BlueIris]

7. The (possible) loss isn't going to be good for anyone. nt

[blue sky at night]

8. fuck that jimmy ...

do NOTHING!!!???? they will begin impeachment proceedings the first day of the session....what a load of shit....

[onenote]

14. You get my standing offer:

If the repubs start impeachment proceedings against Obama on the first day of the session, I will donate $100 to DU. If they don't, you donate $10. I like to see whether those who make unequivocal statements really have the courage to back them up.

And by starting impeachment proceedings, I don't mean simply introducing an impeachment resolution (although I doubt that will happen on day one either). Unless of course you are prepared to say that the Democrats "began impeachment proceedings" against Bush, Cheney, Gonzales and Rumsfeld -- all of whom were the subject of impeachment resolutions that were introduced but never the subject of any hearings or other proceedings.

[ProSense]

17. Wow, how big of you. n/t

[onenote]

27. If you want the same offer, you can have it.

Either way its good for DU, so I'm not sure why you seem put out about it.

[ProSense]

29. "...I'm not sure why you seem put out about it." Actually,

I am amazed by your confidence in Republicans.

"If you want the same offer, you can have it."

No thanks, I'll just keep hoping that Republicans get their asses kicked on November 2.

[onenote]

42. its not confidence in repubs. its living in the real world

The repubs will do everything in their power to frustrate the Obama agenda. But they aren't going to start with launching an impeachment proceeding on day one. That's just reality. Plus, claiming that the repubs are going to do that just sets the bar so low that if they don't, it appears that they are being reasonable.

[blue sky at night]

40. so if they don't start on day one....

but go ahead and impeach him, it really won't matter....what really matters is that you are far superior in your posting and so right! Right?

Oh, and you are willing to put up some money just to prove how right you are...wow, now I guess I will get my ball and go home.

[onenote]

44. No, its just my way of making a point.

The point being that silly over the top posts claiming the repubs are going to impeach on day one only lower the bar for the repubs. If we claim they will and the don't, the effect is make them look reasonable and us paranoid. Why play into their hands that way?

[blue sky at night]

45. I think your worrying about it is just as bad as me saying it....

even?

[onenote]

9. Does that mean Jimmy Carter is shilling for the GOP?

Over and over I've seen posters here at DU attacked for having the temerity to state that we face a strong likelihood, if not a certainty, of losing the House. Personally, I think that is the case, although I haven't yet completely ruled out the possibility that we could narrowly hold on. In particular, I've heard it suggested that DUers (or media types or pollsters) that say the odds are that we will lose the House are promoting a meme whose purpose is to depress the vote.

So my question is: does Jimmy Carter get the same treatment for saying the same thing?

[DURHAM D]

23. No he won't - but this is so damn typical of Carter.

He always get a pass - even though he has shown over and over again that he is very small.

[JuniperLea]

10. I think you may have heard him wrong...

I bet there was an "if" in there somewhere. Are anti-Obama OPs your whole act?

[Moosepoop]

30. He got it ALL WRONG...

Carter predicted that we would keep "at least one" of the houses of Congress, he then clarified that he meant the House of Representatives, and added "and hopefully the Senate as well."

A bit later on he mentioned Obama using the "do-nothing" Congress idea to his advantage, but it was not based on any "concession" that the House (or Senate) was a lost cause.

[JuniperLea]

31. Thanks for that clarification...

I had suspected as much!

:toast:

[PBS Poll-435]

11. FFS. A do-nothing Congress is just that. We actually need stuff done. nt

[Thrill]

13. Jimmy knows nothing about these races but what he hears

from the talking heads on TV.

[onenote]

15. and you know that how?

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hawkowl]

21. ROTFL!!!

Ha! Very true!

[nosmokes]

24. While you OTOH are as sharp as a bowling bowl politically.

talk all the shit ya want but no need to be dissing the best president of the last half century.

[PBS Poll-435]

26. So, in your opinion, Carter knows how to play the game of American politics?

I am not insulting the man or his achievements, but his lack of understanding of electoral strategy is what got us into this mess in the first place.


Thankfully, Bill Clinton was able to put us back on track if even for a little while.

[LiberalFighter]

18. Why the hell should I believe Carter about this?

Any Democrat putting it out that we are going to lose the House or the Senate are not working in the best interests of the Democratic Party or the country.

I just heard on the local news that Senator Bayh was saying the same thing. More and more voters in Indiana are not going to vote for him if he runs for Governor. He puts it out there that he is above partisanship. Which is bullshit. He was never for his constituents. It was always about himself. What a loser.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

22. I love Jimmy, but I'd be happier with his assessment if this were the Senate, not the House.

The House is not the problem, people. The problem lies squarely with the Senate!

The House passed over 400 pieces of legislation. The Senate just sat on the legislation via The Republicans.

Nancy Pelosi being punished for doing a good job is just beyond comprehension.

I'm sorry, but I'm sick and tired of this meme. The loss of the House would be catatrosphic for Obama and the Dems. Why? Because the House is where things actually got done. The Senate is the problem.

[DURHAM D]

25. I agree - the Senate is the problem.

Because a woman is in charge of the House it is just easier to report (lie) incorrectly using the sexiest misogynist perspective and no one bothers ot call it out. Hell, I don't think 75% of the country and 100% of the press even know that their minds are warped.

[mikekohr]

33. Very Astute Assesment

Speaker Pelosi has been the most effetice speaker since Tip O'Neil.

[Ikonoklast]

28. You are living up to your handle.

How many threads is this on Dems losing? Six? Seven?

onenote indeed.


Keep trying, you ain't foolin' anyone here.

[alcibiades_mystery]

32. j. carlos

Old game, this.

[dionysus]

35. ....

:o

[Ter]

50. Off topic but why the DTOM flag as your avatar?

Just askin'. :)

[Ikonoklast]

53. Research the symbolism behind the Gadsden Flag.

The Teabaggers haven't a clue, and I find it ironic that they think that supporting the corporations over people is what that flag is all about.

[Ter]

57. I understand they are misrepresenting that flag, but...

There's no denying it's still very anti-federal government, pro-states rights, and highly pro-10th Amendment, let alone 2nd. Not really our talking points here.

[wisteria]

37. I have two problems with this, first, I don't believe we will lose and 2nd, te Repubs are already do

nothings. If people reward the Repubs after two years of doing nothing after eight years of screw-ups than this country and some of its voters are crazy, ignorant or both.

[impik]

39. No wonder he was one term president. Why the f**** concede NOW???? Classic liberal loser.

[vaberella]

47. I'd have to agree. They claim they want progressives---but not one willing to fight for them.

They're ready to throw in the towel and say---I guess that's over. Fuck them. Democrats seem to be natural born losers since they're ready to concede everything. However, they bitch and moan about Obama for not fighting for them. Not one of them is willing to fight until the end.

[unkachuck]

41. "...Obama can do as Harry Truman did..."

....no more punting please, President Carter, I can't take it any more....

....isn't the take over of the House, regurgitated hourly by the corporate propaganda media machine, based upon districts mccain carried in 2008?

....and the projection is that the pukes will vote the same November 2nd as they did in 2008 but somehow Dems and Indies won't?

....if Dems and Indies take time to reflect and synthesis this years' election, they too will be voting the same as in 2008....and that could make 2010 a very good year....

[frogmarch]

43. Well, maybe Obama could do that, but

he won't. If the republicanz win the House, Obama will keep trying to appease them.

[akbacchus_BC]

49. Negativity does not cut it, the Dems will win. Go play that game at

another website!

[craigmatic]

51. President Carter is probably right. We have the same congressman and he's in a tough fight.

[polichick]

55. I agree with Kucinich on this (POTUS radio today):

"I'm not conceding anything."

[hedgehog]

56. Jimmy Carter should be honored for his work with Habitat for Humanity,

as a political pundit, not so much. In the same interview, he also complained about the Progressive Wing of the Democratic Party. He still bears a grudge against Ted Kennedy.

[pampango]

58. 1978: Democrats retained control of House and Senate, then Carter lost; 1994: Democrats lost both,

then Clinton won. Democrats lost 15 House seats in 1978 (resulting in 277 D, 158 R) and 3 Senate seats (resulting in 58 D, 42 R). Then in 1980 Carter got defeated soundly 50.7% to 41.0%.

In 1994 Democrats lost 54 House seats (resulting in 230 R, 204 D) and 8 Senate seats (resulting in 52 R, 48 D). Clinton got reelected 49.2% to 40.7% in 1996.

Obviously there are many variable in any comparison like this, but you could make the argument that retaining control of Congress in the mid-term election is not the best thing (nor losing control the worst thing) for a Democratic president's reelection chances. (Of course, it is hard for any normal Democrat to wish for a "Speaker Boehner". :) )