Official 2013 Budget/Debt Limit/Obamacare Crisis Thread

Sorry - bad math on my part. But that makes the point more clear. With 50% GOP, you can do it even more effectively:

25% districts with 70% GOPs
25% districts with 90% Dems
50% districts with 60% GOPs

You split 25/25 safe districts for each party to get a 60-40 advantage in all the others. The 25% are where your Tea Partiers come from - they are extremely safe. You leave 50% vulnerable, but only in a significant wave election. If you have a reasonably competitive election (like 2012), you basically are guaranteed to control the House.

 

Yes, it's about the pandering to their base. It's not about actually effectively changing or repealing the ACA, which they know can't be done at this point. It's about the minority of far-right House members showing their base that they are 'standing by their principles.'

Do the republicans really have a chance to make gains in the senate in 2014? Which blue seats are vulnerable? It's harder for a senator to pander, because they have to be elected by a broader electorate than a member of the House.

A lot of the reason we have so many elected Tea Party wackos in the House is because they can pander to a smaller district populated by their base. Harder for a senator to do that.

Have to look up turnout in the 2010 off year elections.

 

Here's a perfect example of the right win distortion bubble.

http://nypost.com/2013/09/30/the-obamacare-fight-is-just-beginning/

The level of reality denial is both hilarious and disturbing. The GOP (and their shills) know they lost and Obamacare is here to stay, but they want to use this to generate rage, because that is all the GOP has, rage. Not hope, not peace, not fairness, not logic, just rage, sputtering mob rage, fueled by fear.

 

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p>I like closing the Lincoln Memorial in the shutdown. &quot;Due to lack of funds, you can't walk around this part of outside.&quot;</p>&mdash; David Angelo (@dwangelo) <a href="https://twitter.com/dwangelo/statuses/385221029947125760">October 2, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

Boehner could end all of this right now by bringing a clean bill to the floor.

 

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Obama's America... <a href="http://t.co/P38BDsne5d" title="http://twitter.com/morgenr/status/385244217011761152/photo/1" org_href="http://twitter.com/morgenr/status/385244217011761152/photo/1">pic.twitter.com/P38BDsne5d</a></p>&mdash; Morgen (@morgenr) <a href="https://twitter.com/morgenr/status/385244217011761152" data-datetime="2013-10-01T22:25:53+00:00">October 1, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

FIFY Oh wait doubt Fox News ever mentioned the last conservative healthcare initiative and it's unfunded cost.

 

So whats everyone's bet on how long this lasts? A week? Longer?

 

I'm hearing they are looking at the end of the week or the weekend, and then a clean or close-enough-to-clean CR will pass. Each day, we're seeing more GOPers revolt. Once they get to about 20, the whole thing will fall apart because then the GOP can't pass anything anymore without Dems.

Any longer than that and you're going to have major panic with the debt ceiling approaching.

 

So it looks like the shutdown costs the govt about $300 million a day.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...t-u-s-economy-300-million-a-day-ihs-says.html

 

I don't like to nitpick but here it's important: the article says the shutdown is costing the US economy (not the US government) $300M/day.

 

I just picked the first headline I saw and went with it.

But yeah you are right

 

That is an awesome picture.

 

So can anyone explain to me why the house refuses to even vote on a "clean" budget? Boehner worries it will get passed, so instead of letting our government work, he refuses to even bring it up for a vote. Is this real life? Republicans are such a f'n joke.

 

There's been 17 government shutdowns since the 80s. Hardly unprecedented. Obama and Reid could have simply delayed Obamacare, which Obama has already delayed pieces of. There was a simple compromise but the left decided to take a hardline stance of no negotiation. Well, this is what you get.

 

A democratic house majority in 2014?

 

Republicans are moving over to the democrats side on this argument. They are able to realize this is not the way to go about things. Boehner will not even bring a clean CR to the floor because he knows it will pass the House.

 

What would the GOP be giving up in this "compromise"?

 

Texxxx will either not answer, or answer with another question. Which will it be this time, hmmmm.