Thursday, November 29, 2012

First Things First... No?

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
-vs- Tyranny

Going back to school at 60 is to say the very least, insane. However, education aimed at opening up new opportunities that are about as far removed from ones prior 40 + year experiences can be invigorating and exciting. It does come at a cost however. For me it is the cost of not having the amount of time to blog that I really desire. But then again there is something about priorities, right?

Anyway, my current focus is on educating myself in the field of heath and fitness so that I become qualified to help others who are desirous of improving their health and fitness achieve their goals and lead a longer and healthier life. At least that is my goal at 60, having achieved most of my goals set earlier in life.

With the preceding explanation aside I must say that I find it almost comical that within a month of the 2012 election the analysts an pundits are already concerning themselves with the 2014 mid term elections. I mean do we NOT have immediate and pressing problems that need to IMMEDIATELY be resolved? Maybe it's just me. I don't know, and maybe it has come to the point because of the political insanity of the two major parties I no longer care. The stress of caring is not worth the possible health expense of the obviously futile effort. But then again when the stress gets too great we will have ObamaCare, right?

The rEpublican party it seems is hell bent on insuring they remain the minority party. Perhaps even becoming extinct in the next 25 - 50 years. Focusing right now on why the party lost and strategy for the future, as the following article does, does not help solve the problems that exist today. Smart, and or wise people know the latter is more important than the former. For certain that is my never humble opinion anyway.

Sabato's Crystal Ball - As the 2012 election fades into the history books, we begin our first look at the 2014 contests for Senate, House and Governor. Let’s start with the Senate, which will be the site of an intense battle for control once again.

Before looking ahead at the Republicans’ prospects to gain the six seats they need to win control of the Senate, it is first important — though for Republicans, painful — to look back at the past two Senate cycles.

In 2010, Republicans probably threw away three seats when they nominated weak candidates in Colorado, Delaware and Nevada. Then, in the just-concluded election, they threw away, at a minimum, two more seats in Indiana and Missouri (thanks to the disastrous candidacies of Richard Mourdock and Todd Akin). And that’s not counting other Senate races where different Republican candidates might have performed better or even won in Florida, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio and Virginia.

So instead of having a tied Senate, or a tiny majority for one side or the other, Republicans are in the unenviable position of needing to levitate out of a deep hole they’ve dug for themselves. Only then can they end Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) six-year (and counting) leadership of the Senate.

The 113th Congress is slated to open in early January with Democrats holding a 55-45 edge in the U.S. Senate. (The number includes two independents, Sen.-elect Angus King of Maine and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who will caucus with the Democrats.) This assumes that the composition of the Senate does not change; it’s always possible that a senator will leave office prematurely, perhaps to take another position — for instance, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) might join the Obama administration as secretary of state or defense.


At first blush, the 2014 Senate map presents some promising opportunities for Republicans. Of the 33 seats that will be contested in November 2014, Republicans only have to defend 13 while Democrats have to defend 20. And the Republican seats — as is obvious from Map 1 — are almost entirely situated in deeply Republican states. In 12 of the 13 states currently represented by Republicans on this map, President Obama won 45.5% of the vote or less in all except Maine (which he won easily).

Meanwhile, Mitt Romney captured seven of the 20 states where Democrats will defend seats: Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana, Montana, North Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia. Of those seven, only North Carolina, where Romney won by about two points, was even close at the presidential level. In the other six states, Obama’s best performance was in Montana, where he secured just 41.7%. Given that midterm electorates are typically smaller, older and whiter than presidential electorates — which generally will make them more Republican — and given that Democrats are dangerously exposed in several Romney states, Republicans have a multitude of juicy targets, while Democrats have few.

That said, let’s recall that at this time two years ago, Republicans also had an attractive playing field: They had to defend only 10 seats, while Democrats had to defend 23. And yet Democrats actually ended up netting two seats. Not to be overly cruel, but the GOP had to try hard to blow the Senate in 2012 — and their efforts were amply rewarded.

In order to capitalize on the new opportunities presented by the 2014 Senate map, Republican voters are going to have to make wiser choices in primaries than they made in 2010 and 2012. But has the party base learned its lesson? It is not at all clear, and efforts by the Republican leadership in D.C. to impose preferred candidates likely won’t be met well in many states in the next go-round either. ... {Read More}

Okay, I get it. The party is licking it's (well earned) wounds. Understandable. But the important thing is to address the pressing issues of today, right now. By that I mean resolve, or at least partially resolve them before moving on to 2014. One thing is for certain, if the rEbublican party demonstrates an active willingness to reach across the aisle and resolve the very real and pressing problems that confront America today, and then present a viable and better alternative than the dEmocrats for tomorrow, they will succeed in remaining relevant and maybe even becoming the majority again. A new age demands a new approach to solving old problems.

On the other hand pundits and analysts have a job to do. Whether it helps resolve the problem or not. Or Maybe it's just me.

Now back to other priorities...

VIA: Memorandum


  1. Can you teach an OLD DOG new tricks?

    1. What do you think? That is what is relevant.

  2. Do you accept Medicare patients? How about Obamacare patients?

    1. Will if the facilities I might work for do, of course would require MD sript no doubt. No if working independent.


As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 3/4/18 Anonymous commenting has been disabled and this site has reverted to comment moderation. This unfortunate action is necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or irrelevant to the post subject.

While we appreciate and encourage all political viewpoints we feel no obligation to post comments that fail to rise to the standards of decency and decorum we have set for Rational Nation USA.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.