# Debate Newsweek's 2010 Politics Predictions **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 29, 2009, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947 "2009-12-29T19:58:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/41 "2009-12-30T16:25:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Of course. Liberals are reasoned and moderate. It’s only conservatives that even have ultras-. Yes, that is exactly what **Bosstone** said, except for the parts that were the exact opposite. There are many ultra-liberals. The difference between them and the ultra-conservatives is that the ultra-liberals get ignored, while the ultra-conservatives get talk shows (or elected). ---
**Author:** ![Icerigger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icerigger/32/432_2.png) [@Icerigger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icerigger)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/42 "2009-12-30T16:34:33Z")
I am still waiting for the Chomsky Show.😉 ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/43 "2009-12-30T17:16:30Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > It’s interesting that according to the OP and/or Newsweek, “ultraconservatives” will have an important say in which Republicans get elected/re-elected, but there are no “ultraliberals” mentioned as influencing any Democratic races. > > Guess there aren’t any. :dubious: If there are, the electoral dynamics are different. When was the last time you heard of a House race where a Blue Dog Dem gets challenged by somebody with Dennis Kucinich’s politics, and as a result, the Pub wins? You could make a case that was exactly what happened with Nader v. Gore in 2000, but it’s a very, very rare situation – even more so since then, and probably because liberals have learned from that experience. The conservative coalition, OTOH, has been showing signs of total systemic crackup between moderates and extremists (and between bizcons, neocons and paleocons) for at least two years now. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/44 "2009-12-30T19:28:49Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Yes, that is exactly what **Bosstone** said, except for the parts that were the exact opposite. > > There are many ultra-liberals. The difference between them and the ultra-conservatives is that the ultra-liberals get ignored, while the ultra-conservatives get talk shows (or elected). Ultra liberals don’t get on mainstream TV. Tv is so right wing that PBS which sits conservatives and liberals equally on discussions is seen as left wing. The left wing viewpoint gets short shrift on mainstream TV and none on right wing at all. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/45 "2009-12-30T20:45:40Z")
There is absolutely NO chance that Texas will elect a Democrat governor. Not for many years to come. IF and when the Mexican voters become more numerous and more energized, the Democrats will have a shot at winning statewide office again. I don’t see that happening for at LEAST another 10 years. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/46 "2009-12-30T20:46:45Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Ultra liberals don’t get on mainstream TV. Tv is so right wing that PBS which sits conservatives and liberals equally on discussions is seen as left wing. The left wing viewpoint gets short shrift on mainstream TV and none on right wing at all. PBS tries to pretend that David Brooks (Obama’s biggest fan) is a conservative. Try again. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/47 "2009-12-30T20:48:07Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > If there are, the electoral dynamics are different. When was the last time you heard of a House race where a Blue Dog Dem gets challenged by somebody with Dennis Kucinich’s politics, and as a result, the Pub wins? > > You could make a case that was exactly what happened with Nader v. Gore in 2000, but it’s a very, very rare situation – even more so since then, and probably because liberals have learned from that experience. The conservative coalition, OTOH, has been showing signs of total systemic crackup between moderates and extremists (and between bizcons, neocons and paleocons) for at least two years now. I know- I mean, you’d NEVER see the left-wingers try to oust a guy like Joe Lieberman, would you? And you’ll NEVER see a Kos-ite try to challenge Arlen Specter. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/48 "2009-12-30T21:04:41Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > I know- I mean, you’d NEVER see the left-wingers try to oust a guy like Joe Lieberman, would you? We haven’t so far, at any rate. (Ned Lamont is no LW.) > [@astorian](#): > > And you’ll NEVER see a Kos-ite try to challenge Arlen Specter. Not that either, at least not in 2004. Nor in 2010, unless you think [Joe Sestak](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Sestak) is a “Kos-ite.” (He’s certainly progressive enough but I don’t know if he has any connection toe DailyKos.) Specter would be a special case anyway, since he only declared himself a Dem this year; his seat is fair game by any partisan standard. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/49 "2009-12-30T21:08:15Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > PBS tries to pretend that David Brooks (Obama’s biggest fan) is a conservative. Try again. I think you’ll find practically everybody but you considers [David Brooks](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Brooks_(journalist)) a conservative, and nobody but you considers him “Obama’s biggest fan.” (Not that being an Obama fan would make one anything but conservative, based on his track record so far.) ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/50 "2009-12-30T21:55:10Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > The problem with that sort of argument is that for the vast majority of problems, “X isn’t the most important problem right now” is always going to be true. Waiting until there aren’t more important problems means waiting forever. And since when on a civil rights issue has waiting until the bigots see reason worked? Civil rights are something you have to demand, regardless of who is offended or you’ll never get them at all. The sad truth is that gay rights just isn’t seen in the same light as, say, women’s rights or racial minority rights. Because of that, those demanding rights are not going to be viewed in a similiar light than the civil rights leaders from a few generations ago. Until more people stand up and demand it, then it’s simply not going to happen; gay rights have to take a back seat to the economy, health care, or the environment. I agree with you that those who are against gay rights are bigots. The problem is, the bigots are more powerful than the non-bigots. ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2009, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/51 "2009-12-31T02:38:10Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > It’s interesting that according to the OP and/or Newsweek, “ultraconservatives” will have an important say in which Republicans get elected/re-elected, but there are no “ultraliberals” mentioned as influencing any Democratic races. > > Guess there aren’t any. :dubious: That’s because being a “conservative” is a good thing. Being a “liberal” is a bad one. You can thank 30 years of right-wing noise machine for that one. “Ultraconservatives” are patriots. “Ultraliberals” would be Communists or (gasp!) Socialists. -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2009, 10:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/52 "2009-12-31T10:46:13Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I think you’ll find practically everybody but you considers [David Brooks](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Brooks_(journalist)) a conservative, and nobody but you considers him “Obama’s biggest fan.” (Not that being an Obama fan would make one anything but conservative, based on his track record so far.) You know how it is: when you live in Hawaii, everyone else is an Easterner. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2009, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/53 "2009-12-31T23:04:47Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I think you’ll find practically everybody but you considers [David Brooks](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Brooks_(journalist)) a conservative, and nobody but you considers him “Obama’s biggest fan.” (Not that being an Obama fan would make one anything but conservative, based on his track record so far.) You don’t read Brooks’ column, do you? I’ve been reading him for years. I think he’s frequently a hilarious observer of social trends (I loved “Bobos in Paradise”). But he endorsed Obama for President, and has been writing about him in glowing terms from Day One. Only NPR would regard him as a conservative. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2009, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/54 "2009-12-31T23:24:30Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > But he endorsed Obama for President, and has been writing about him in glowing terms from Day One. And? Like **BrainGlutton** says, supporting Obama doesn’t make you not a conservative; Obama IS a conservative, if a relatively moderate one. ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2010, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/55 "2010-01-01T00:13:24Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > Only NPR would regard him as a conservative. I don’t bother reading his silly columns, but the reason NPR probably regards him as conservative is because he parrots GOP talking points every Friday. He just happens to do it with a little less froth than his brethren. Maybe that’s what makes him “not conservative”. -Joe ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2010, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/56 "2010-01-01T00:14:33Z")
So supporting Obama makes one not a conservative? As opposed to holding conservative values? ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2010, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/57 "2010-01-01T02:45:56Z")
\ > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [Here.](http://2010.newsweek.com/top-10/politics-predictions/democrats-steal-texas-governors-mansion.html) > > **10. Democrats Steal Texas Governor’s Mansion.** Ultraconservative Pub incumbent Rick Perry battles it out with moderate Kay Bailey Hutchinson for the nomination. It’s so bloody and vituperative that, while Perry wins the primary, he loses the general election to Houston Mayor Bill White. > > Sounds plausible to an outsider. Texas Dopers? Maybe although Hutchinson will probably concede graciously enough. I certainly hope a Republican wins. > [@](#): > > **9. Obama Does Nada on Gay Rights.** Because he doesn’t want to threaten the prospects of his own legislative agenda with socially divisive policies/rhetoric. > > Sounds very plausible indeed to me. In fact, sounds like the right call for him to make. (Sorry, gayguys.) That’s definately true. Gay marriage will generally be left to the states from now on with victories by the homosexuals in some states and the moralists in others. > [@](#): > > **8. Obama Gets Second Court Pick.** Cancer-ridden Ruth Bader Ginsburg resigns. Obama nominates Seventh Circuit Judge Diane Wood, who “would confidently sit on the court’s left side,” and dissented in decisions upholding late-term abortion bans. She is confirmed after a bitter partisan battle in the Senate. > > Sounds likely overall – but are there any possibilities other than Wood? Wait Ginsburg has cancer? If she does step down than Wood will not be the next Supreme Court Judge. She is too extreme (I mean, late-term abortions WTF?). Millions of American citizens will barrage and bombard their Congressmen and women with threats, complaints, pleas, and demands to vote against Wood and she will be if Obama nominates her be defeated. I expect a somewhat mildly liberal Judge like Anthony Kennedy > [@](#): > > **7. Dodd Loses Seat.** Long-serving Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) finds “his fancy credentials can no longer appease the twin personalities of Connecticut voters. For the socially liberal Yankees, Dodd has become an enabler of corporate excess: the man who accepted sweetheart mortgage loans from Countrywide Financial and who approved bonuses for AIG executives at the same time the firm was receiving government bailout money.Simultaneously, Dodd has alienated his other constituents: the fiscally conservative hedge-fund and financier donors. The last thing they want to hear about is increased financial regulation. And, Dodd in an effort to separate himself from the coziness between Wall Street and Washington, recently unveiled a proposal for much stricter rules on credit-card companies, banks, and mortgage lenders.” No comment on what Pub might unseat him. > > Waitaminnit, is it possible any **Dem** might unseat him? Is he facing any primary challenges? Connecticut for a New England liberal states is fairly moderate and has elected moderate Liberals like Lieberman. Dodd will be defeated and a Rockefeller Republican will replace him probably Rob Simmons or Linda McMahon. > [@](#): > > **6. Florida Elects Sen. Crist.** Moderate Pub Governor Charlie Crist edges out ultraright challenger Marco Rubio “by a whisker and, given the weakness of his likely Democratic opponent, U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek, he’ll go on to capture the seat.” > > I think it’s too soon to call. Frankly, Floridians don’t think much of Charlie Crist – that is, we don’t think of him much, for good or for ill. He has not been a very high-profile governor. The only thing everybody knows about him is that, despite his recent marriage to a supermodel, he is almost certainly gay (which, believe it or not, was not an issue at all, or much commented on, in the gubernatorial election). But I agree Meek is the most likely Dem nominee; the other candidates are nobodies. Probably true. > [@](#): > > **5. Palin Gets Her Talk Show.** > > Sure, why not? :rolleyes: Probably true. > [@](#): > > **4. Troubled California Stays Blue.** Pubs Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman lose their bids for senator and governor, respectively. “Both women are hoping populist anger will color the Golden State a redder hue, but they’ve already misstepped by staking their campaigns on an impending backlash to environmental concerns—unwise in the state that lays claim to both San Francisco and Hollywood. Whitman will lose to Golden Boy Jerry Brown. And Fiorina? Electing her would mean replacing high-ranking Barbara Boxer with a junior senator in the minority party.” > > Don’t know enough to comment. CaliDopers? Ha ha ha ha. San Francisco and Hollywood are not all of California! Most real Californians-Democrat or Republican have had enough of the ultra-restrictive environmentalism especially with respect to jobs. Boxer probably is reelected but Whitman wins by a hair. > [@](#): > > **3. GOP Blocks Immigration Reform.** The Dems propose immigration reform similar to that floated in 2007, cracking down on employers of undocumented workers while opening a path to citizenship for illegals already here. The backlash is even worse than in 2007, because of high unemployment. “\* in the House, where members will be just months away from midterm elections, things will fall apart, as moderate Democrats join a united GOP opposition. Republicans will emerge victorious. Yet in getting there, they’ll employ such strident rhetoric that, in the minds of many, they’ll seal their image as anti-immigrant and anti-Latino. Come November, Hispanics will respond with energetic turnout, helping keep some House seats blue and further ensconcing themselves in the Democratic fold.” > > Sounds depressingly predictable. Immigration is almost the only populist issue the GOP has got left. I doubt there will be significant immigration reform this time around. > [@](#): > > **2. GOP Ousts Reid.** Simply because Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s approval rating in Nevada is sinking. _Newsweek_ predicts his defeat even though no strong Pub candidate has yet emerged. > > I have no idea. NevaDopers? True! Reid is most likely going down. Sue Lowder or Danny Tarkanian will be the next Senator from Nevada. > [@](#): > > **1. Pelosi Keeps the House.** The Dems are going into the midterms with a lot of disadvantages, but “aren’t that popular either, and there are several contests like NY-23 where battles between ultraconservatives and moderate Republicans could hand the seat to a Dem. To the chagrin of the right, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will still own the House; she’ll just have a few less folks to kick around.” > > I say this one’s right on the money. Democrats will keep the House but only by a hair which will be dispersed in 2012. > [@](#): > > Your opinions? All in all a very biased article to try to avoid without outright lying shew the Republican victories of 2010. > [@mswas](#): > > Why would anyone take abortion into account when voting for Governor? I do which is why I am reluctant to support Meg Whitman for Governor. Usually abortion is the third most important issue (after the War on Terror/Afghanistan and economics). > [@Syntropy](#): > > Because in Texas, your stance on social issues is the yard stick by which you are judged for a large number of voters. At least two of my coworkers have loudly denounced Sen. Hutchison and said they won’t vote for her for precisely that reason. Never mind that Perry has mismanaged the state schools or made ridiculous noises about Texas seceding or that he proclaimed Texas ‘recession proof’ with an unemployment rate of 9%. Kay Bailey Hutchison favors abortion. That’s all they need to know. Oh yeah because some sarcastic comment said half in jest is more important than abortion. :rolleyes: Plus Texas’ unemployment rate compared to the rest of the nation is low. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > In other words, I point out the obvious and you don’t like it. > > Lots of Christians want homosexuals dead; the American Christians supporting Uganda’s anti-gay genocide plan for example. The fact that he refused to condemn Uganda’s plan until pushed into doing so shows where his sympathies are. > > And how many KKKers have done any of that these days? And bigotry that is Christian dogma is still bigotry. If you condemn homosexuality, then you are a bigot; your motive is irrelevant. If I condemn adulterers as sinners also does that mean I’m bigoted against them? I call homosexuality a sin so homosexuals can repent. ---
**Author:** ![flickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@flickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flickster)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2010, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/58 "2010-01-01T04:16:34Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > And? Like **BrainGlutton** says, supporting Obama doesn’t make you not a conservative; Obama IS a conservative, if a relatively moderate one. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2010, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/59 "2010-01-01T04:16:39Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > If I condemn adulterers as sinners also does that mean I’m bigoted against them? I call homosexuality a sin so homosexuals can repent. Which is like calling a woman evil because she is a woman and then saying you aren’t a bigot because she can repent. There is no moral justification for condemning homosexuality; no one is being harmed. And no, “God says so” is not sufficient reason; if God condemns homosexuality, then God is a bigot. > [@flickster](#): > > :rolleyes: Pretending he’s a liberal won’t make it so. He’s a moderate conservative. ---
**Author:** ![flickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7bcc69/32.png) [@flickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flickster)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2010, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947/60 "2010-01-01T04:25:17Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > He’s a moderate conservative. I guess that would depend on whom he’s being compared to…I can assure you however, he shares little in common with the typical conservative in the flyover region of the country. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debate-newsweeks-2010-politics-predictions/522947.md?page=4)