Will there ever be a Democratic landslide again?

[A18]

You said there'd be a Democratic landslide when you ran for reelection. I naturally assumed that meant you'd run as a Republican.

[BobOMac2k2]

No, I will be a popular President, but Ill only be 38 when I run in 2024.. thats why there wont be a landslide until 2028.

[ian]

Zell Miller is NOT a Democrat

I'd challenge you to debate him on that.  I think you're confusing Democrat and Liberal.  In that case, Zell Miller is not a liberal, but he most certainly is a Democrat.

Zell Miller is not a Democrat (even if he claims to be one); if one looks at his voting record, one can see that he is a far right-wing conservative, socially, economically, and foreign policy wise.  He once said that if he wasn't so old that he would have switched parties.  I just thank goodness that he retired this past year.

[??????????]

Zell Miller is NOT a Democrat

I'd challenge you to debate him on that.  I think you're confusing Democrat and Liberal.  In that case, Zell Miller is not a liberal, but he most certainly is a Democrat.

Zell Miller is not a Democrat (even if he claims to be one); if one looks at his voting record, one can see that he is a far right-wing conservative, socially, economically, and foreign policy wise.  He once said that if he wasn't so old that he would have switched parties.  I just thank goodness that he retired this past year.

Actually he is a true southern conservative. Something that is sadly missing from your party.

[BobOMac2k2]

We really don't like to look at our party members as Southern or Northern.... we are just fine as Americans.

[The Vorlon]

There is an old saying in politics...

Friends come and go.... but enemies accumulate

In a few more election cycyles the GOP will become old, and corupt and out of ideas, while during that time the Dems will find new faces and new ideas.

Out with the old, and in with the new

This is neither praise for the dems nor criticism of the GOP. it's just the way it is...

In 1994 the Dems got punted from the House because after 40 years they were just, well, old and tired and corrupt and the GOP had new Ideas and new faces...

Today the GOP is still rising towards the top of the wheel, but the wheel keps turning... and soon it goes the other way...

It's just the way it is..

[muon2]

There is an old saying in politics...

Friends come and go.... but enemies accumulate

In a few more election cycyles the GOP will become old, and corupt and out of ideas, while during that time the Dems will find new faces and new ideas.

Out with the old, and in with the new

This is neither praise for the dems nor criticism of the GOP. it's just the way it is...

In 1994 the Dems got punted from the House because after 40 years they were just, well, old and tired and corrupt and the GOP had new Ideas and new faces...

Today the GOP is still rising towards the top of the wheel, but the wheel keps turning... and soon it goes the other way...

It's just the way it is..

In IL that process only took 8 years - from 1994 to 2002. Sometimes the wheel spins pretty fast.

[BobOMac2k2]

And it looks like it's still spinning rather fast.

[A18]

In a few more election cycyles the GOP will become old, and corupt and out of ideas, while during that time the Dems will find new faces and new ideas.

In 1994 the Dems got punted from the House because after 40 years they were just, well, old and tired and corrupt and the GOP had new Ideas and new faces...

Running out of ideas? You kidding me? We haven't even struck down the whole New Deal yet!

The biggest threat to the new Republican majority is ourselves. If we forget who got us where we are, or tie ourselves to the status quo, will will lose Congress, and we will have no one but ourselves to blame.

I don't see any signs of yet, but it's something to look out for.

[??????????]

In a few more election cycyles the GOP will become old, and corupt and out of ideas, while during that time the Dems will find new faces and new ideas.

In 1994 the Dems got punted from the House because after 40 years they were just, well, old and tired and corrupt and the GOP had new Ideas and new faces...

Running out of ideas? You kidding me? We haven't even struck down the whole New Deal yet!

The biggest threat to the new Republican majority is ourselves. If we forget who got us where we are, or tie ourselves to the status quo, will will lose Congress, and we will have no one but ourselves to blame.

I don't see any signs of yet, but it's something to look out for.

I agree with all of this Philip. Striking down the New Deal and "Great" Society should be key goals of a Republican Congress and Whitehouse.

[A18]

You're about to see the most crushing defeat of an incumbent since 1980.

Republicans are gonna be speechless.

Priceless...priceless...

[opebo]

In a few more election cycyles the GOP will become old, and corupt and out of ideas, while during that time the Dems will find new faces and new ideas.

In 1994 the Dems got punted from the House because after 40 years they were just, well, old and tired and corrupt and the GOP had new Ideas and new faces...

Running out of ideas? You kidding me? We haven't even struck down the whole New Deal yet!

The biggest threat to the new Republican majority is ourselves. If we forget who got us where we are, or tie ourselves to the status quo, will will lose Congress, and we will have no one but ourselves to blame.

I don't see any signs of yet, but it's something to look out for.

I agree with all of this Philip. Striking down the New Deal and "Great" Society should be key goals of a Republican Congress and Whitehouse.

Don't you think there's just a slight possibility that impoverishing the bottom 80% of society to Depression-era levels could come back to haunt you?  After all, Americans voted Left once before - when they were desperate.

[A18]

So was the bottom 80% of society impoverished in the Roaring 20s?

[opebo]

So was the bottom 80% of society impoverished in the Roaring 20s?

Yes, certainly more so than they were in the 1945-1975 era.  So if your point is that people will put up with a shocking amount of poverty, I certainly agree - obvously they do now.  Of course that poverty reached a desperate level around 1930-31.  What makes you think it won't again?

[Notre Dame rules!]

The poverty rate was nowhere near 80%, even during the darkest depths of the Great Depression.  In his 1936 SOTU speech, FDR pegged the poverty rate at 1/3.  While that is shockingly high, especially by today's standards, it doesn't begin to approach 80%. 

[??????????]

The poverty rate was nowhere near 80%, even during the darkest depths of the Great Depression.  In his 1936 SOTU speech, FDR pegged the poverty rate at 1/3.  While that is shockingly high, especially by today's standards, it doesn't begin to approach 80%. 

Yes, the Great Depression has been way overblown by historians. The effects of the depression were very mild in the Pacific west, Northeast and parts of the midwest.

[opebo]

The poverty rate was nowhere near 80%, even during the darkest depths of the Great Depression.  In his 1936 SOTU speech, FDR pegged the poverty rate at 1/3.  While that is shockingly high, especially by today's standards, it doesn't begin to approach 80%. 

I never said that 80% of the population was poor, I said that 80% of the population was getting poorER due to Republican policies:
http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/ie1.html

Definitions of poverty differ, but there is no doubt that wages and incomes have been in decline for decades for all but the top 20%.  This has, as we all know, been masked by the move over the same time period from single-breadwinner households to two-breadwinner households.

[Frodo]

Yes, though not anytime soon. 

[DownWithTheLeft]

For a modern day election:

Warner/Bayh 518
Snowe/Chafee 20
Huckabee/Tancredo 0

[Joe Republic]

For a modern day election:

Warner/Bayh 518
Snowe/Chafee 20
Huckabee/Tancredo 0

The GOP ticket you have there would do far better than you give credit for, but only really in the Northeast.  Snowe would most definitely carry her own state, at the very least.

[minionofmidas]

As a Warner/Bayh vs Tancredo/Huckabee (not Huckabee/Tancredo) map, though, it's pretty accurate.
Although I'd give the Dems Alaska.

[DownWithTheLeft]

As a Warner/Bayh vs Tancredo/Huckabee (not Huckabee/Tancredo) map, though, it's pretty accurate.
Although I'd give the Dems Alaska.

Tancredo would not lose that badly, especially if the immigration debate heats up.  Against the right candidate he could win.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Well actually the unemployment rate was about about 25% at the height of the depression - and to call it overblown is kind of ridiculous - like all national issues it does affect different areas in differing ways.

Of course areas that relied on a mechanised workforce were hardest hit, or those that were at the mercy of the market - but some agricultural areas were not AS badly affected.

On the question.... It's a toughie as the population shift toward Republican areas has made it kind of difficult.

I would require a Bayh/Warner pres Candidate with someone from the South or SW as a STRONG VP.

That's when I lost respect for Reagan forever - when I heard him say "the continued integrity of our nation is the destruction of the great society".

Made me shudder. 

[Gustaf]

I doubt either side will land-slide in at least a while. I think the parties have become too professional to allow themselves to lose their touch with the people to such an extent in the future.

[Nym90]

Of course, although probably not any time soon.