Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Watching crazy Charlie Cook on Cspan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
montanacowboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-08-06 02:44 PM
Original message
Watching crazy Charlie Cook on Cspan
Saying that if the Dems think this was a mandate they are "CRAZY"

also, that no one voted FOR the Dems, only AGAINST THE GOP!

KNOW WHAT CHARLIE? I THINK YOU ARE CRAZY

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-08-06 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. I think it's a bigger insult to say someone lost because everyone
voted against them rather than for the other person/party. That must mean that they left a big stink where ever they went.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neverforget Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-08-06 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
2. In a battle, the side that controls the battlefield are the winners.
The House, Senate and governorships were the battlefield and the Democrats now have a majority while not losing a single seat. We control the battlefield. We won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnneD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-08-06 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
3. I'm glad the DEM's won....
I work hard for our locals....but Charlie is right. This is not a business as usual election and the DEM's had better be straight on that. We need serious action as soon as possible. The reforms we need to do are many and they need to start yesterday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lexingtonian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-08-06 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
4. well, 1994 was just like it

and no mandate ever came out of that election either, did it.

Yes, this is a mandate. To do the opposite of the Republican 'ideas', of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-08-06 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
5. We have a mandate and a lot of "political capital" to spend...
And...............

MONTANA ROCKS!:toast:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
featherman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-08-06 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
6. Charlie is correct... this was as anti-incumbent as 1994
I have no problem with that. The word mandate is thrown around by pundits without much meaning. Who has the POWER now is what it's all about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 03:10 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC