The Republicans get a A- for last night. A total review

Scruffy, lets ask that same question you want viking to ask on the 16th street mall, and have him ask it in Colorado Springs. I bet you 90% will say "hell yes." Whats your point?

Scruffy wrote: FINALLY!!!1!1! Progress! You finally admitted that BUSH takes the blames, too! Progress! Woooohoooo!

I guess you don't read my posts. I have always said Bush became too liberal in 2007. I hae said many times he screwed up big signing all those stupid Democratic bills. He gets the blame with the Democratic controlled congress for 2007 and 2008. But this is the first time that I have heard a Lib give the Dems some blame for those years. LJ will only talk about Bush in those 2 years, as though a congress never existed and as though Bush drafted all legistlation, added hundreds of pages of pork to each bill, sent it to his committee of one, voted on it himself and passed it himslef, and then sent it to his own desk to sign. The Dems were in charge of all of that other than the signing. They have been since Jan 2007 and since we were at 5% unemployment and still creating almost 2 million jobs in 2006.

The Deficit was less than $200 billion the year they took over in 2007 and the Dems were screaming bloody murder that was unheard of and ourtageous!!! Now since they took over, it has been approx, $400 billion in 2008, $1.1 trillion in 2009, $1.4 trillion in 2010, and to be $1.3 trillion in 2011, and over $1 trillion projected for the next few years after that. That is over $1 trillion dollar deficit per year of at least till 2014 projected. You cannot go back and blame those numbers on the Republican congress of 2006 or even Bush back in 2008. That is totally not true and just Obama and teh Democratic controlled congress for the last 4 years, looking for a scapegoat for all the out of control irresponsible spending, hoping Americans won't notice. Well thanks to the Tea Party, the Amrican voters noticed a lot quicker than they wanted us to.

outdoor338 wrote: Scruffy, lets ask that same question you want viking to ask on the 16th street mall, and have him ask it in Colorado Springs. I bet you 90% will say "hell yes." Whats your point?

Great point, Downtown Denver is like sending me to Boulder to ask that. Ask all Coloradan's and the majority will be yes. YOu can't just pick the Liberal cities to ask.

The Viking wrote:

outdoor338 wrote: Scruffy, lets ask that same question you want viking to ask on the 16th street mall, and have him ask it in Colorado Springs. I bet you 90% will say "hell yes." Whats your point?

Great point, Downtown Denver is like sending me to Boulder to ask that. Ask all Coloradan's and the majority will be yes. YOu can't just pick the Liberal cities to ask.

You may have a point. I'll bet you ask in downtown Colo Springs and the number may be reduced to 80% "Hell NO!" for Bush the Stupider returning.

sure, sprngs is republican and not dummies, like they are in Denver, way dumb!

outdoor338 wrote: sure, sprngs is republican and not dummies, like they are in Denver, way dumb!

My point is that I really doubt that anyone would want Bush to be back at the helm. Even Republicans.

He presided over the worst 8 years of Americas history. He was asleep at the wheel while we were attacked for the first time in over half a century. He was asleep at the wheel while a city drowned. He was asleep at the wheel as we were headed for an economic depression. He started two optional wars and didn't finish them. I sure don't want him back running things.

Scruffy wrote: He presided over the worst 8 years of Americas history.

Even if you leave out 2009 and 2010 (which have been phenomenally bad), I could still find a bunch that beat the tar outta the Bush administration for bad years.

Photo-fish wrote:

neptunechimney wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: This election was more about voting incumbents out rather than excitement for the Republicans.

rofllol How many incumbent r's lost, how many d's. You are half right about one thing, it was not excitement for r's it was disgust with d's.

Good question!
How many incuments from each party were voted out?

I just came across this. "At this writing, no sitting Republican senator and only two GOP House members have lost reelection. Meanwhile, two Senate and 49 House Democrats "

and this. "According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Republicans gained about 125 seats in state senates and 550 seats in state houses — 675 seats in total. That gives them more seats than they've won in any year since 1928."

neptunechimney wrote:

Photo-fish wrote:

neptunechimney wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: This election was more about voting incumbents out rather than excitement for the Republicans.

rofllol How many incumbent r's lost, how many d's. You are half right about one thing, it was not excitement for r's it was disgust with d's.

Good question!
How many incuments from each party were voted out?

I just came across this. "At this writing, no sitting Republican senator and only two GOP House members have lost reelection. Meanwhile, two Senate and 49 House Democrats "

and this. "According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Republicans gained about 125 seats in state senates and 550 seats in state houses — 675 seats in total. That gives them more seats than they've won in any year since 1928."

If you add them all up the Democrats los over 740 elections and seats they held across the country in one day!! I may have to move the grade up to a B+!

B+ ?

Come on! Compromise, A- ?

Opps! I said the word "compromise."

D- for me!