# So let's say the Democrats win the House in 2014 **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 13, 2013, 10:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131 "2013-10-13T10:32:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/41 "2013-10-14T03:46:05Z")
> [@Onomatopoeia](#): > > I am actually encouraged by this thread. Now, I could simply have blinders on, but **adaher’s** OP and subsequent posts and queries in this thread do seem to me to be genuine. > > Color me Naive, but I think even **adaher** is beginning to see the Republican horror show for what it is. Right now. I’ll forget it as soon as they do something worthwhile. Hopefully I won’t have to wait too long. ---
**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:** [October 14, 2013, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/42 "2013-10-14T04:28:17Z")
> [@curlcoat](#): > > I didn’t say we were going communist, I said that forcing those who earn to give part of their income to those who don’t is going communist on wages. That isn’t the case either. > [@](#): > > I couldn’t care less what the tax rates are elsewhere or were in the past. Those as facts all by themselves are worse than nothing because it doesn’t say anything about those societies, what was done with the money, what the results were. It’s like saying that gas prices are far higher in Europe, without talking about their transit system. We would generally be spending tax revenue on the same things: infrastructure, energy, social welfare, and the like. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/43 "2013-10-14T04:37:29Z")
Given the results of past spending on those things, why would Americans trust the government to do any better this time around? “Tax and spend” is still toxic in campaigns. ---
**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:** [October 14, 2013, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/44 "2013-10-14T06:05:25Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Given the results of past spending on those things, why would Americans trust the government to do any better this time around? > > “Tax and spend” is still toxic in campaigns. People are willing to support taxing and spending if they think the taxes are fair and if the spending is beneficial to themselves and the country. Hence why for example funding for education is popular. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/45 "2013-10-14T06:36:52Z")
Message board troll tax. 110%, and we sell one of their kidneys. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 6:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/46 "2013-10-14T06:55:09Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > People are willing to support taxing and spending if they think the taxes are fair and if the spending is beneficial to themselves and the country. Hence why for example funding for education is popular. If the taxes are on someone else and the spending is worthwhile. Spending on education has gone up and up without a commensurate increase in results. That’s why another poster didn’t like the comparison to other countries. We spend more on education than most Western countries already. What makes anyone think more would do the trick? [http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu\_edu\_spe-education-spending-of-gdp](http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu_edu_spe-education-spending-of-gdp) ---
**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:** [October 14, 2013, 8:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/47 "2013-10-14T08:28:37Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If the taxes are on someone else and the spending is worthwhile. Spending on education has gone up and up without a commensurate increase in results. > > That’s why another poster didn’t like the comparison to other countries. We spend more on education than most Western countries already. What makes anyone think more would do the trick? > > [http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu\_edu\_spe-education-spending-of-gdp](http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu_edu_spe-education-spending-of-gdp) I was just giving an example on what sort of spending would be popular. And in the United States its probably the inequality of spending on education that is a problem rather. ---
**Author:** ![Zakalwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zakalwe/32/270_2.png) [@Zakalwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zakalwe)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/48 "2013-10-14T15:26:28Z")
As for legalizing marijuana, I think we’re still a ways from that, but the Democrats could muddle the issue by doing an end-run using State’s rights - run on the platform of getting the Feds out of banning and enforcing it and turn it over to the States. That way, them that want it, can have it. Them that don’t, won’t. Might be a nice way to pick off a few libertarians as well as (longer term) keep more minorities in the electorate (since they will no longer be convicted felons). ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/49 "2013-10-14T17:10:27Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > As I above, I believe the Democrats failed to campaign hard enough against Bush’s legacy in 2010 and in addition the economy will be far more robust in 2016 then in 2010. We have no idea where the economy will be in 2016. Are you sure that you can’t imagine some congressional antics that might plunge the entire world into recession over the next few weeks? [quote[/quote] This would certainly be true if we were talking about an Assault Weapons Ban (which is silly and unconstitutional IMO) but universal background checks have support of roughly 90% of the population according to polls and swing state Democrats such as Joe Manchin who sponsered it haven’t been hurt in the polls by voting for it. [/quote] Policywise, I agree with those polls as well, I would go further and have licensing and registration, BUT, politically, we are not going to get any gun control until at least 2017. Obama won the election by 332 electoral votes to 206. A swing of 63 would have tied the election and it would have gone to the house and Obama would have lost. Any swing greater than 63 would have given Romney the win outright. Obama won the following states by less than 52% of the vote: Florida (29) Ohio (18)+29=47 Virginia (13)+47=60 Colorado (9)+60=69 (Obama Loses) Pennsylvania (20) New Hampshire (4) Iowa (6) Obama won the following states by less than 53% of the vote: Nevada (6) Minnesota (10) Wisconsin (10) New Mexico (5) Now to be fair the margin was under 4% (a 2% swing) only in Florida, Virginia and Ohio (for 60 electoral votes), but you only needed one more state, ANY state) to lose after that and I can see a state like Pennsylvania swinging on the issue of guns. YMMV > [@](#): > > And most of these channels are either highly specialized or leave much to be desired. It sounds like you want to fix something thats not broken simply because you want it. > [@](#): > > In addition, none of them represent a unified American voice overseas much as BBC does for Britain pffft. A unified America? pfft again. We have ABC, NBC, CBS. These are America’s voice around the world, have been for decades. We have voice of America, if you’re looking for something more political. > [@](#): > > I personally support it not just because its right Considering that drivers between 18 and 21 constitutue so many of our drunk driving accidents, why is this “right”? > [@](#): > > its politically plausible as letting the states decide on their drinking age who appeal to many libertarian-leaning Republicans along with ending the War on Drugs while strengthening youth turnout in favour of the Democrats in future elections for whom this is a big issue. I just don’t see Democrats spending an OUNCE of political capital trying to lower the drinking age. Not an OUNCE. > [@curlcoat](#): > > …why is it that if someone has earned some magical limit of money, you all seem to think you have the right to tell him that he has to give it to people who haven’t earned it? You do realize that we have had tax brackets for over a century right? There are break points in income where you will pay a larger percentage of each marginal dollar of income. > [@](#): > > Where is the incentive to get an advanced education and work hard if the government is just going to go communist on your wages? Because going from 35% to 40% isn’t the same thing as going from 35% to 100%. Our taxes have only been lower once or twice since WWII. People STILL got advanced degrees and worked hard. Why do you think they wont? > [@](#): > > Yes, I get that we all need to pay for the roads and all that, but the answer to any budget shortfall seems to be “tax the rich!”. And “rich” is defined by a number, not by what debt might be there, who/what that person might be supporting or anything else that might end up putting that “rich” person in the middle class in reality. So you think we have been addressing our budget shortfall by taxing the rich over the last 12 years (since our surplus went to deficit)? This will be the first tax increase on the rich in almost 20 years (and that was following a period of ridiculous tax cuts. > [@curlcoat](#): > > I’d much rather see cuts made than taxes raised. Unless we gut medicare/medicaid and social security, we can’t cut our way out of this deficit. The math doesn’t work (its really simple math (mostly addition and subtraction)). > [@](#): > > You might be alone there. We can address things like debt and the people you are supporting by things like student loan deductions and dependent deductions. In fact, I’m sure that Democrats would be willing to eliminate the caps on these for an increase in top marginal rates. > [@adaher](#): > > Right now. I’ll forget it as soon as they do something worthwhile. Hopefully I won’t have to wait too long. Battered spouse syndrome ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/50 "2013-10-14T17:17:03Z")
Progress is hard, its easy to fight against, and most of the time its uncomfortable for most people, but that doesn’t mean its not the right thing to do or worth it. I was actually quite proud of Nancy Pelosi for making the Dems in the House take a tough vote on the ACA knowing they’d probably be punished by the voters. At that time, there had already been months of GOP led attacks, from death panels to other made up crap. She knew it would be a hard vote to take but she made them take it anyways because it was the right thing to do. Now we have health care reform for the first time in 60 years and its thanks in part to her leadership So let the voters punish the Dems. Principle is often tough. Especially when its the correct thing to do. Contrast that with the GOP, who have no principles and sway at every breeze in the wind. FYI, I don’t consider their faux purity tests to be principled at all, its very obvious that its simply to disagree with Obama. If the GOP had principles, they would stand up for health care, support the plan they wrote, and tell much of their voters that the Civil War is long over and they need to get over their loss ---
**Author:** ![Poto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7ab992/32.png) [@Poto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Poto)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/51 "2013-10-14T17:37:25Z")
30 years of overspending and borrowing by Reagan Bush and pals. Good luck with that. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/52 "2013-10-14T22:02:34Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > But is that new majority progressive? Parties that think they have a better coalition and think they will have the majority more often than not tend to overstep. We heard this same Democratic triumphalism in the wake of the 2008 election, yet the worm turned pretty quickly. > > And sure, the scale of the GOP victory was due to low turnout by reliable Democratic voters, but independents broke for the GOP so huge that if the GOP hadn’t alienated those new GOP voters, they’d be controlling everything right now. Likewise, if Obama had been able to hold onto all the new young voters he won in 2008, he would have by a much bigger margin in 2012 and maybe even won the House. Obama won 66% of millennials in 2008, and 60% in 2012 (Romney did 4 points better than McCain, winning 36% in 2012). That is still a pretty lopsided election, considering millennials will make up 40% of the electorate in the next decade. I’m hoping instead of just one election cycle, there could be a boon of progressivism in the coming decades due to demographics, income inequality and the loss of good jobs, the failure of social wars to distract younger voters from economic issues, environmentalism, etc. So it hopefully won’t be a 2 year cycle, followed by a movement back to the opposite direction, it will be a movement that pulls both parties to the left. Winning democratic seats is not really that great if all you get is a bunch of outclassed corporate democrats. According to Barney Frank, if the GOP hadn’t gerrymandered the house in various states the dems would’ve won in 2012. The dems won the popular vote in the house by 0.8%, but the seats were redistricted to not reflect that. > **[Now That’s What I Call Gerrymandering!](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/11/republicans-gerrymandering-house-representatives-election-chart/)** > > Americans didn't intend to elect a Republican majority to the House of Representatives. Thanks to GOP-engineered redistricting, they did. The US will likely never be as progressive as western europe, but in 20-30 years maybe on a federal level we will be near the point where some of those nations are today. Functioning health care systems, efforts to help the poor and working class, lower GINI coefficient, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2013, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/53 "2013-10-14T22:13:39Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > Obama won 66% of millennials in 2008, and 60% in 2012 (Romney did 4 points better than McCain, winning 36% in 2012). That is still a pretty lopsided election, considering millennials will make up 40% of the electorate in the next decade. It’s actually a bit more misleading than that. The overall turnout among 18-24 year olds was also down in 2012 compared to 2008 (about the same for 18-29 year olds, though). It’s not that more of them voted for Romney but that they didn’t show up to vote in the first place. So, I guess the GOP strategy could be to encourage them not to vote…for the next 20 years. The Democrats have a more favorable but still vexing problem - getting them excited enough to turn out at all. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2013, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/54 "2013-10-15T01:29:45Z")
> [@Great\_Antibob](#): > > It’s actually a bit more misleading than that. > > The overall turnout among 18-24 year olds was also down in 2012 compared to 2008 (about the same for 18-29 year olds, though). It’s not that more of them voted for Romney but that they didn’t show up to vote in the first place. > > So, I guess the GOP strategy could be to encourage them not to vote…for the next 20 years. The Democrats have a more favorable but still vexing problem - getting them excited enough to turn out at all. [http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83510.html](http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83510.html) > [@](#): > > Obama easily won the youth vote nationally, 67 percent to 30 percent, with young voters proving the decisive difference in Florida, Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio, according to an analysis by the Center for Research and Information on Civic Learning and Engagement at Tufts University. Obama won at least 61 percent of the youth vote in four of those states, and if Romney had achieved a 50-50 split, he could have flipped those states to his column, the study said. > > **About half of all eligible people ages 18-29 voted in Tuesday’s election, roughly the same level as 2008** , according to Peter Levine, the center’s director. The youth vote’s share of the electorate actually increased slightly from 18 percent to 19 percent. In total, 22 million-23 million young people voted, according to the analysis. So in both 2008 and 2012 the youth vote was decisive (in 2008 Obama won 9 million net votes, of those 7 million came from people under 29 despite them only being about 1/5 of the electorate). And that is just the start of the millennial’s generation (b.1978-2000) and their influence on politics since almost half of them can’t vote yet, and because voting habits get better with age and older people vote more. They will make up roughly 40% of the electorate for a few decades in the 2020s, 2030s and maybe 2040s. ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2013, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/55 "2013-10-15T01:56:20Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > So in both 2008 and 2012 the youth vote was decisive (in 2008 Obama won 9 million net votes, of those 7 million came from people under 29 despite them only being about 1/5 of the electorate). As I noted, this was reportedly true for 18-29 year olds. But for the 18-24 year old segment, the percentage voting [dropped from 48% to 41%](http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/08/six-take-aways-from-the-census-bureaus-voting-report/). This is based on Census Bureau reporting, which is unfortunately unavailable online at the moment due to the shutdown. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2013, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/56 "2013-10-15T02:01:59Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > The US will likely never be as progressive as western Europe . . . Don’t be a defeatist! Anything they can do, we can do better! ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2013, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/57 "2013-10-15T02:13:22Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Don’t be a defeatist! Anything they can do, we can do better! I don’t know. I think our culture and divisions (racial and class divisions) would prevent the kind of unity that leads to progressive advances along the lines of europe. I once read an article that talked about how secularism in the US is about 40 years behind secularism in western europe. So in 40 years maybe the US will be as secular as France or Germany are today, I’m guessing those nations will be more like Sweden by that point. Those nations also developed UHC several decades before we did also. I ‘think’ they had old age pensions about 30-40 years before the US too. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2013, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/58 "2013-10-15T02:14:56Z")
America has had a very positive overall effect on France in terms of political enlightenment that, sadly, are not reflected in matters of personal hygiene. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2013, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/59 "2013-10-15T02:18:40Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > I don’t know. I think our culture and divisions (racial and class divisions) would prevent the kind of unity that leads to progressive advances along the lines of europe. Oh, c’mon! Practically every country in Europe still has painful divisions from national/ethnic/religious conflicts that were over and done with centuries before American independence! That didn’t stop 'em from going social-democratic! It was the **class** divisions that **helped!** America’s besetting sin is to deny the existence of such. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2013, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131/60 "2013-10-15T02:21:03Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > America has had a very positive overall effect on France in terms of political enlightenment that, sadly, are not reflected in matters of personal hygiene. :dubious: And did ze Americans invent ze bidet, Monsieur?! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-lets-say-the-democrats-win-the-house-in-2014/671131.md?page=4)