The Election Was Not So Bad

The media is totally biased in favor of Republicans, especially the execrable AP, which has been driving this election. Compared to 1994, this is not so bad.
Executive Branch: Same as 1994, we have it. And Obama is more progressive than Bill Clinton.
US Senate: Apparently will be 53-47 Democrats. That’s a full 5-point advantage over the Republicans 52-48 Senate in 1994. The Senate races were not as bad as I thought. The two huge disappointments were in Illinois and Wisconsin.
In Wisconsin, super-progressive Russ Finegold lost to an insane person, gazillionaire Republican asshole Ron Johnson. Wisconsin has always been a progressive state, but now they’ve gone insane. On the other hand, they are all White, so maybe it makes sense. Maybe White people are going nuts. It’s also possible that Finegold is just too liberal.
In Illinois, Obama’s old seat went to a Republican who is not too extreme. Russ Kirk is just a typical Republican asshole, as my father used to say, but at least he’s not insane. Alexi Giannoulias lost in a close race.
In Pennsylvania, Pat Toomey, an escaped mental patient, won a tight race against Joe Sestak. The seat had long been held by liberal Republican Arlen Specter. This is disappointing in that a liberal Republican seat has gone to a Team Crazy seat.
In North Dakota, Democrat Bryan Dorgan retired, leaving an open seat picked up by a typical Republican, John Hoeven, who is not as rightwing as you think. This is not surprising, as North Dakota is a deeply reactionary state.
In Indiana, Democrat Bayh retired, and Dan Coats was brought back in by Republicans to fill his place. Coats is an asshole like the rest of them, but at least he’s mentally stable. Indiana has always been a rightwing state, so no surprises here.
In Arkansas, Blanche Lincoln lost to John Boozman. Obama lost by 20 points in White racist and deeply reactionary Arkansas in 2008, so it figures we lost this seat. Lincoln spent the last two years trying to be a Republican. That never works, and given the chance to pick between a real Republican and a fake one, voters tend to choose the real one. As we can see, conservative Democrats and more liberal Republicans tend to be losing, so we are getting hardline liberals in the Democratic Party and hardline conservatives in the Republican Party.
US House: True, Republicans took it by a huge number, more than in 1994 and the most since 1946. However, the Democrats still control 2/3 of the government. The Republicans control 1/3 of the state. Big deal. Since 1994, the House has periodically been in Republican control for the first time since 1954.
The reason for that is that Whites went progressive in 1954 with the expanding economy of the 1950’s, 1960’s and 1970’s. That started fading somewhat in the 1980’s as America became more multicultural. By the 1990’s, US Whites were in full revolt.
This whole Republican Revolution thing is about mostly older racist Whites trying to take our country back from the niggers, beaners and other muds* who are destroying it. It’s White angst on steroids. In multicultural societies, Whites go rightwing – often hard, fascist, Nazi, death squad, mass murderous rightwing. They will only share and create a decent society where they don’t have to share with muds. The CRT explanation for this would be that White people are racist assholes who only create decent societies in Valhallas where the demographics are like Idaho or Iceland. I hate to agree with CRT weenies, but they are right on this one.
*All racist words used sardonically.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

0 thoughts on “The Election Was Not So Bad”

  1. Robert, you write: “This whole Republican Revolution thing is about mostly older racist Whites trying to take our country back…” You hear this a lot, but I’m beginning to wonder. It’s like when the Soviets used to say that the only people in Soviet society who were religious were the “babushkas,” the old ladies. Except the old ladies kept getting younger and younger, until the category included people who had no experience or memory of pre Soviet society.
    In the same way, these older, more conservative whites are baby boomers or close. If you were born in 1940, you’re 70 now. If you were born in 1945, you’re 65. These people grew up in the emerging multiracial society. Maybe they even marched for civil rights or against the war. So their age is fast wearing out as an excuse. Or is the whole idea of the liberal baby boom a myth? Did these cultural changes pass without making much of an impact on most people, or did they in fact regard these changes as negative? In either case, it’s not old farts wanting to return to the “way it used to be.”
    This brings up something else that baffles me. Most of the tea partiers (can’t call ’em teabaggers anymore) are “older, more conservative whites” as well. Basically, people born between 1940 and 1950. Baby boomers! For them it never was “the way it used to be.” They grew up in a socially progressive country, and that’s why they were able to get educations (for all the good it seems to have done them), decent jobs, houses, and now hoverrounds. What is it that they think they’re “returning” to? They’d better get vaccinations first lol.
    And then we have the defeat of the marijuana initiative in California, also blamed on “older, conservative whites.” That’s right, people born between 1940-1950 who might have grooved on Country Joe and the Fish while smoking a big, fat doobie. I think we need another explanation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *