Leger's 3rd Law of Politics strikes again

[thatcrazycajun]

One of my long-standing three most certain political laws is: "Low election turnout always gives the advantage to the noisy minority." This was demonstrated in California last month with the victory of Proposition 8, whose proponents were better able to mobilize their vote. But here in Georgia tonight, low turnout (barely a quarter of those who voted on 4 November) actually worked for the majority—the overwhelming conservative majority in this reddest of the red states that finally put paid to Democrat Jim Martin's hopes of unseating Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R) and giving our party a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

The Associated Press and the local NBC TV station just called the election for Chambliss with 85% of precincts having reported. Right-wingers are posting by the bushel on one station's website, exulting that "the balance of power" has been maintained ("At least maybe we won't become a full fledged socialist country in the next 4 years now!"). Posts lamenting the outcome are few and far between. Loath though I am to admit it, local newspaper pundit Jim Wooten may well be right in his recent assertion that "Georgians do not knowingly elect liberals to statewide office." (Of course, all the money poured into the state by at least four right-leaning political groups to air "issue advocacy ads" slamming Martin sure as hell didn't help.)

I can't say I'm surprised, but I am still pissed off. Unless "Shameless" gets nailed for election fraud (see previous post—one may hope, however faintly), the GOP can spend the next two years mulishly obstructing any progress our new President and Dem leadership in Congress hope to make, at least on Senate-specific things like confirmation hearing for appointees (appropriations bills, thank God and the Founding Fathers, are still the purview of the House, where Dem domination is more assured). One more incentive to finally get my skinny white Cajun ass outta this state full of right-wing yahoos (not that my own home state is much better) and go live with the Songbird in Africa.

And for those who are wondering: Law #2 is "If neither side is completely happy, it must be the right law/policy" and Law #1 is "No matter the candidate or the issue, everybody votes their pocketbook."

Comments

[technoshaman.livejournal.com]

I honestly don't think it's good for either of'em to have that much power. If you can't convince *one* Elephant that it's a good idea, out of 40 of'em... then just maybe it's bad law? See your Law #2.

OTOH, if this gets Diebold thrown out of the federal election business forever? Worth it.

[thatcrazycajun.livejournal.com]

I respectfully disagree; I do think that the Dems should have the super-majority. Obama's already shown with his pre-election Senate votes and his Cabinet/admin picks (a bunch of Clinton-era retreads and DLC centrists, including Hillary herself) that he's not going to go as far left on the big issues as I'd like; and Pelosi & Reid have shown by their own pusillanimity on those issues we sent them there two years ago to handle (especially the war in Iraq) that nothing short of a filibuster/veto-proof majority is going to put any steel in their spines, should push come to shove with the Obama White House. And the GOP has shown by its outright criminal behavior that it can NOT be trusted with even a teensy bit of power.

Well crap!

[oldfolkieathome.livejournal.com]

We voted. We did. Even my Republican husband voted for Martin (he's pretty well repulsed by his entire party this go-round). Damn! I was afraid when I buzzed right on through the polls that this was going to be the case.

Guess it's a good thing we're lighting out for bluer parts at the end of the month.

Don't Worry

[osewalrus.livejournal.com]

Cloture votes are rarely by party-line vote. On most issues, you get a few defectors one way or another.

I suspect that a number of moderate Republicans, such as Collins and Snowe from Maine, are likely to break ranks on critical issues -- particularly where their constituents (who voted heavily for Obama) are at odds with the more conservative elements of the Republican party. Nor do I count Leiberman as a reliable vote for the Dems on cloture.

At the end of the day, the biggest problem is that Reid is a fairly weak leader who is not able to keep the big guns of his own party in line when it counts. I'm rather sorry to see Hilary go to SecState, as she would actually have made a damn good replacement for Reid.

[pocketnaomi.livejournal.com]

A caveat for law #2: if each side is unhappy for opposing reasons, it's probably a good law/policy. If everyone, no matter what side they are on, is unhappy for the SAME reason, it's probably got a really big gaping hole in that spot which needs to be plugged.

I Am Not Disappointed

[shelleybear.livejournal.com]

The south has, once again shown me how predictable they are.
Not only that, but by reelecting someone as scummy as Saxby Chambliss.
Oh, and for anyone who says:
"We're trying to make it better!"
Obviously not hard enough.

[hunterkirk.livejournal.com]

Sorry for your loss, it is indeed a shame that TOTAL DOMINATION of the Democrats and liberals has not been gained. Perhaps with some laws designed to end free speech of those evil republicans and conservative the Democrats can finally become a all powerful force of good.

[thatcrazycajun.livejournal.com]

For the record, I have never sought, nor do I seek, the elimination of rights for anyone, even conservatives and/or Republicans, save perhaps for the right to ruin the lives of me and mine and people they've never even met in most cases. And I have ALWAYS said the answer to speech you don't like is never, but NEVER censoring the speaker; it's answering him/her with better speech.

And besides, as for "total domination," why should only (what I assume is) your side get to have all the fun? :-)

[hunterkirk.livejournal.com]

For the record "my side" never had a 60 seat congress and thusly never had the total domination your side is seeking.

Also for the record my side isnt planning to creat laws targeting political foes free speech... seek UnFairnesss Doctrine which only targets conservative talk radio and ignores liberal media giants. So your side is for censorship... you should be proud.

[stevemb.livejournal.com]

For the record "my side" never had a 60 seat congress

If you expect people to pay any attention to you, you need to avoid making assertions of alleged fact that are contradicted by even cursory research:

Party divisions of United States Congresses

41st 1869–1871: Total 74, D 11, R 61
60th 1907–1909: Total 92, D 29, R 61

[thatcrazycajun.livejournal.com]

Thank you, Steve. As I've never seen this guy/gal before, I'm guessing it's a troll.

[hunterkirk.livejournal.com]

You have to be kidding... U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt?

Wow. Ok lets play that game, how many times did the Democrats control all branches of government with a 60 majority? 11 times.. how many times did the Republicans control all branches of government with a 60 majority? 2 times.

Gee you sure have it pegged!

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

My major problem with your Laws is that while we'd like to think #1 is so, too often it's not. As so-called social issues have been pushed to the forefront of electoral politics, many people have been brought to ignore their purses in favor of eliminating rights for others, thinking they know better than those others do what's good and right for them. (How many people vote for the Republican Party whose income is low and getting lower as a result of that party's policies?) This is even ignoring the too-frequent misconceptions, lies, and just plain deceit put out by politicians (of both parties, though more, I think, from the one which disdains reality than the other) with regard to economics. (See, for example, the bullshit currently in vogue on the Republican side about the New Deal prolonging, rather than shortening, the Great Depression.)

Aside from that, it's a shame that scumbag Chambliss is back in the Senate; maybe now the Dems can abandon their dreams of 60 and axe Holy Joe's chair.

The rest of the discussion aside...

[oldfolkieathome.livejournal.com]

If the opportunity presents itself, I think you *should* join Songbird in Africa.

I think every U.S. citizen should have the opportunity to live at least one year outside of our own political and governmental construct.

Distance really can bring perspective, and it stays with one long after the return "Stateside". "Visiting", on the other hand, even for weeks, is still "visiting" and doesn't lend quite the same experience that a long haul abroad will.