Time for some real discourse on Bushland part 2
 

As the Jr. Bushie heads to the hills of Maryland for a nice long weekend, what per sae do the cellar dwellars think is going to go down these next four years. This includes commentary on deficeit spending, further escalation of current conflicts, new armed conflicts, new apointees, and the future of Social Security. And please some serious conjecture please.

-Walrus

This is what I expect:

Culture war. The Constitution Restoration Act (passing this time) signifying the turning point for creeping theocracy. The end of Roe vs. Wade, potshots taken at Lawrence vs. Texas and Griswold vs. Connecticut (possibly taking both down). Rehnquist and either Stevens, Ginsberg or both replaced by conservobots, Specter's bluster notwithstanding. Lots of fun conservobot judicial appointments in lesser courts. A variety of restrictive religion-themed morals laws, primarily in Southern states. An increased role for the FCC, clamping down on "indecency" on television and radio.

Massive, massive, massive increases in the deficit.

Increased tension between the US and the rest of the world, allies and enemies alike.

Christian doctrine creeping into public schools. "Intelligent design" and straight creationism inserted by many school boards across the heartland into curriculums. Relaxations of the wall between church and school mirroring what'll go on between church and state.

War in Iran.

New terrorist attacks in the US, on a smaller scale than 9/11 but still effective in keeping America fearful.

Blue flight; Democrats living in the south and midwest will start moving to more receptive states, once the repercussions of all of the above start sinking in.

Long knives being drawn and pointed at moderate Republicans who do not toe the party line.

Democrats, liberals, Hollywood, the media, homosexuals and atheists, of course, will be blamed for whatever goes wrong.

Book it. It will be a slow, incremental process, so as not to jar Joe America into waking up until the judicial framework has already been laid, but they have all the time in the world, as it would take an unbelievable turnaround for the Democrats to retake the House or Senate in 2006 no matter what happens.

All of the above are why I've basically been curled up into a ball for the last two days. I don't expect to uncurl any time soon.

Remember that time travel guy that there was a link to from the Cellar somewhere? He said that after the 2004 election in HIS timeline, there was a civil war within 2 years. I found it fascinating reading. Where is that link?

John Titor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Titor

Not that I believe his claims for a second

I think that article is very accurate.

Personally, I hope that Bush fires Ashcroft, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. The three of them have, to say the least, misused their power and authority. I think their "retirement" would go a long way towards putting some ugly things from the first term behind us. Depending, of course, on their replacements.

And I would hope that W reaches out to some of the alienated foreign governments. Maybe appoint Kerry ambassador to France (when his Senate term is up) and support Clinton's interest in a UN position.

And lastly, the Supreme Court needs some judges who don't think they know better than the authors of the Constitution.

And hopefully, get us the hell out of Iraq.

I see little good coming out of the next 4 years. I agree with the poster who predicted that the religous right will infiltrate both our schools and our courts. I see continued clashes with the Mid East and further terrorism - possibly even another attack on the scale of 9/11. The disparity between the wealthiest 1 or 2% in the US and those living in poverty will continue to grow. One million Americans will lose their housing and end up in institutions, homeless shelters, or on the streets. I think future historians will trace the beginning of the decline and fall of the American Empire to the regime of George Jr. A nation which does not take care of its own people can only fall. I think I'm going to go be sick now. :(

PS Just checked the spot gold prices - up $5.00/oz today with 27 minutes to go until market close! Gold now stands at $429.00/oz - up $45.00 from what it was just a few months ago. Historically, when people begin to loose faith in global and national stability and in times of economic downturn, they begin to buy gold. I've been following the gold prices for a while now and a $5.00/oz price jump in one day is pretty remarkable - even for the volatile gold spot market. It would seem that I am not alone in my pessimism.

It's funny Yelof brought up John Titor, because that's the first thing I thought of when I heard the results. This is exactly what he was talking about that might cause a civil war.

I don't see the next four years as being all that explosive (unless you live in the mid-east). The real problem lies with the office as much as with the obvious poor quality of candidates. The power of the office will expand the character flaws of whoever gets the Oval. Kerry would have been awful as well, but at least an opposition Congress would have occasionally restrained him. Every new Caesar will have his pathology, keeping socio-paths out of elected office is pretty hard work. We may as well get used to it and enjoy the slide. It will be amusing listening to Bush talk about restoring the Constitution while wiping his ass on it. The Romans had their leaders who spoke lovingly of the Republic while burying it, we deserve no less.

What I'm going to hate is watching the barrel of pork disguised as an energy bill slide its way through congress. The few honest congress members left are appalled by this monster. Unfortunately, it will provide an instant payback to Bush's contributors. I'm sure some Democrats got to hang their stockings in it also.

Deja Vue 1972.

Titor came to my mind too, with this kind of mandate there is a far chance america really will get the government it deserves, Shrubs comment to hacks along the lines of "we're gonna have some fun" gave me shivers. On the upside he'll be so busy giving US debt to friends and family the deficit should help slowly strangle the US and history will write off another little empire gone to seed.

That sounds something like McCarthy's [choice of colour] Scare (Part II)...

Why vsp is wrong (sorry dude): Andrew Coyne debunks the (lefty media) notion that Bush won with evangelicals

via Michael Totten who notes:

Yeah there is a good chance this is going to happen.. the only problem is that the world economy is totally tied to the US dollar because oil is priced and paid for in dollars that if the US were to hit another great depression, the world would go too. There is no escaping the coming collapse.

I am quite convinced by the Peak oil theory and think that the world is going soon to be faced with some difficult choices that will make the stupid "war on terror" seem irrelevent..Bush in office means few constructive things can happen in this area for at least the next 4 years and yet strangely enought I am more at peace now...why?

While there was hope I was more agitated, I would be checking endlessly to see if there was any possibility that news would break and what implication it could have on the US election etc..now I feel free of that. I don't hold any hope now of world leaders achieving anything regarding renewable energy AIDS or Poverty, as anyone who was encouraged by exit polls on Nov 2 can tell you, there is nothing worse then false hope and I am glad it is gone.
I now must put my hope into things local, my family my community..I find it odd that it took Bush's reelection to make me come to such an obvious conclusion.

I can't quite figure out Coyne's math, but whatever. According to what he says, one third of those who voted for Bush did so because of the "moral values" thing. Without the evangelical vote, Bush would not have won. I don't see how anyone can dispute this. Coyne treating one third of Bush's supporters as if they were merely some splinter group that is sheltered under the vast conservative umbrella is ludicrous, especially when the president shares the same values as that group.

Perhaps it is easy for people who live in the sophisticated metro areas in the eastern part of the US to write off the evangelicals as a minor voice - I don't know. I live too close for comfort to one of the country's religous right strongholds - Colorado Springs- home of Focus on the Family, etc., etc. The intolerance and prejudice evangelicals display toward members of different faiths is astonishing.

Some examples: I am friends with a man who runs a little Tibetan import shop in Colorado Springs. He carries a large stock of Buddhist related items. The last time I dropped over to see him, he related a story to me of how a woman had come into his shop in a rage and told him that his people and his religion did not belong in the US and that he should go to hell back home.

I took the daughter of a male friend of mine with me when I went to visit another shop in Colorado Springs. This one carried New Age books and items. When the girl's evangelical Christian mother found out about this, she went into hysterics and told her daughter that if she ever went to that place again, the girl was going straight to hell.

I was sitting in a coffee shop in Colorado Springs and fell into a conversation with a stranger who was sitting at the table next to mine. I mentioned the name of the town where I live, locally known as a Pagan hangout; and the man turned hostile at once. "I wouldn't keep staying up there if I were you," he said. "God is going to take care of all the witches up there, and the streets will run with blood!" I got up and walked away.

These are not isolated incidents. I could write down many, many more. Do not underestimate the religous right. They certainly are not cutting any slack to anyone else.

No, I'm not ... ;)

UT - considering how close the election way, a block of 22% is huge. It is public knowledge that Rove's strategy this election was to win by motivating the religious right, it worked.

Yelof - oil is traded in Euros as well. I'm not going to say any more, such events inhabit a relm of disasters where all bets are off, I don't expect something that drastic, the world simply wouldn't let it happen, but I do expect the necessary........readjustment of things ;)

A block of 22% is huge, but the point is that this is not the "story of the election". This is like, in American football, where the loss is blamed on the holding penalty that helped the final winning scoring drive, and the events of the previous drives are simply forgotten. Caring about that 22% means you're purposefully ignoring 78%.

Mari, there's no need for you to say something like "I can't quite figure out Coyne's math, but whatever." I actually assume a similar statement preceding every post you've ever written. "Whatever," indeed; no need to actually understand the world, full speed ahead with the blazing alarm bells you're hearing in your head today.

But if you go though the groups and numbers it's that group that got him over the line, by targeting one group you're not necessarily ignoring the rest, it was a core strategy to get those groups out to vote - in many cases by *cough* subtle suggestions in church itself that did it. By the time they're finished the Supreme Court is going to make the KKK look leftist.

I accepted Coyne's premise of 2/3 of Bush's support coming from people who considered other issues as or more important than the religous rights' agenda. That leaves 1/3 who considered "moral values" of primary importance. I didn't feel like going through the math to figure out how 78% of the vote over-all translated to 2/3 of Bush's support.

Coyne is a bit off.

1) Iraq and Terrorism ARE separate issues. Iraq has nothing to do with national security, other than how what we're doing there is increasing anti-American hatred.

There were indeed a lot of Bush voters motivated by terrorphobia and a belief that Bush would be a more competent war leader than Kerry, which is a sad indictment of much of the voting public.

2) Again, taxes and the economy are separate (if related) issues. When I think "economy" I think jobs, the stock market, layoffs, unemployment, etc., not 1040 forms. They're not unrelated, but they are distinct.

3) I'm not suggesting that EVERYBODY who voted for Bush was a raving bible-thumper, not by a long shot.

But what state was the turning point? Ohio. What drew a hell of a lot of religious folk to the polls, helping to counter the major turnout in Ohio's cities? Ohio's anti-gay-marriage proposition. If that's the two-minute drill that won the game, to use your analogy that popped up while I was posting, fine -- but this was a close game until that finish, not some 49-3 blowout where the Democrats are bitching about how the last touchdown scored. In a state that lived up to its billing as being crucial to this election, they made a significant difference.

And regardless of how pivotal a role the religious right truly played, they _are_ lining up to take credit and demand action. We may not feel it quite as much up here, but there are going to be a whooooooole lot of Roy Moore and Santorum sound-alikes making life very uncomfortable in a lot of places, particularly if the Constitution Restoration Act goes through this time. With the newly revised Senate, I wouldn't bet against it, and that scares the shit out of me.

All that and he only won by 100,000? Booga booga.

If you're scared, get a dog.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pag.../epolls.0.html

Taxes (5%): Bush 57%, Kerry 43%
Education (4%): Bush 26%, Kerry 73%
Iraq (15%): Bush 26%, Kerry 73%
Terrorism (19%): Bush 86%, Kerry 14%
Economy/Jobs (20%): Bush 18%, Kerry 80%
Moral Values (22%): Bush 80%, Kerry 18%
Health Care (8%): Bush 23%, Kerry 77%

Question #1. From this table, can you derive the "story of the election"?

Question #2. If "Moral Values" translates well to "evangelical", and these people were "targetted", why did 18% of them vote for Kerry?

Question #3. If some dude came up to you outside your polling place and wanted to ask you a long set of questions about why you voted the way you did, wouldn't you tell him to screw off? 3b. What kinds of people would NOT?

Question #4. If these results came from the same place as the now-infamously inaccurate "exit polls" which showed a decisive Kerry victory by mid-day, why would you want to take any lessons from them in the first place?

I believe that the only country to do that was pre-invasion Iraq!
There was some talk of Russia doing so (selling oil direct to Germany priced in €) around the time of the invasion, but I've heard nothing of it recently..I guess Putan has made his Peace with W, wonder what the price was.

I talked the pricing in Euro thing to a economist friend of mine who works in Brussels and he says it would never happen as most world government forigen reserves are in $ and the necessary re-alignment would be catistrophic.
However I guess I could imagine a regime coming to power in Saudi Arabia hostile to the US who starts an economic war on the US in this maner

I'd be afraid that Santorum would accuse me of harboring unnatural desires.

1) More people bought into the "Bush will protect us from terrorism" meme and the vague concept of "morality" (which IS a code word for religion and the pro-life movement, generally speaking) than anything else. I feel sorry for those people.

2) Not everyone who is religious is a crackpot.

The one comfort I'm drawing is from reports that if you single out the 18-29 vote in each state, Kerry wins 375-163 and takes almost everything in the eastern half of the US (excepting South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, and (surprisingly) Maine). Maybe there's hope for the future.

Unfortunately, it's going to take a long time for the conservative geezers to die off.
Eh, Lincoln should have let the South go. We'd be better off.
- Pie, ashamed of my government.

Yelof, depends on the level of trading. While at the moment there is no need to re-align things and yes, it would be a touch messy but in a scenario where the US currency stability is under serious doubt (generally we're looking at a scenario where the deficit increases or remains and current levels for a significant period of time combined with the current buyers of US debt - mostly Asian central banks controlling their own currencies floating their currencies forcing a situation where yields have to raise from their artificially low levels putting more pressure on the federal bank) it is a solution, or part thereof of a very complex series of political and economic machinations designed to deflect some of the impact to avoid another depression.

1) Terrorism and moral values win the day with 20% of the reasons for voting not given.

2) Damn good targeting to pick up 82% of their vote. The other 18% didn't have the common sense brain washed out of them.

3) I might or might not tell him to screw off. Depends on how much time I had, the manner I was approached, the time of day, on and on. Without knowing the answers to these questions, I can't tell you what sort of people would be most co-operative.

4) The polls were within a 1% or 2% margin of error - enough to throw off predictions in a tight race, but still useful when analyzing over all voting trends. Also, the polls throughout the day were from an incomplete sample of voters. The final tabulations which show voting trends were finished after a complete sample was taken

Pretty ironic thing for someone who backed the Bush terrorism = Iraq storyline to say. Paranoia isn't limited to the left.

A lot of regular Republicans got out to vote for Bush but I wonder how many election cycles they'll be on board for huge deficits and gay bashing?

Gay bashing seems pretty popular.

As long as noone mentions Mary Cheyney. It does seem like they're getting ready to start handing out pink triangles.

Oh, no. When Alan Keyes called her a selfish hedonist, there was no problem. It was only Kerry who wasn't allowed to mention her.

Broken Promise?
 

Let's see, Bush's party, which pretty much votes in lockstep with him, won't let him fulfill the promise he made to Hispanic voters to help win the election? And he can't do anything about it? Riiiiiiiiiight. :rolleyes:

How well could you do if you were given control over your own Social Security money?
Only as well as the government says you can. What if you have lower returns instead of higher ones? Too bad, you chose to manage your own money.

Reliability on Social Security income is not enough to suffice an average two person retirement income....Anyone so naive who chooses to rely on something so obviously unstable deserves what they get! Why should the rest of us have to pay unilaterally for the mistakes of the few?

OH...I see how this is going to work!

Everyone invests their SS money in relatively safe accounts, like a 401k type fund. Then, the market goes South again in a big way, and all that SS money bleeds out of people's individual accounts and into the pockets of the already rich, right? Sweet.

I'm somewhat skeptical of this deal since I had $15,000.00 in a 401k, *very* conservatively invested, that got turned into $6,000.00 thanks to the dotcom bust.

Yeah, I'm sure Dubya's supporters are salivating at the thought of getting their hands on all that cash somehow.

But Els, how far away from retiring are you? Unless it's in the next few years, you shouldn't worry--the market will go up again (and down again, and up again...)

Sounds like unconsented, financial blood-letting.