Slashdot Mirror


Democrats Take House, Senate Undecided

Every news publication on earth is saying mostly the same thing. The Democrats have taken the house picking up a sizable number of seats. But the Senate remains a tossup with a few undecided seats holding the balance. Concerns of voter fraud have been heard from around the nation as well.

9 of 1,090 comments (clear)

  1. Re:In My Opinion This is Good for Everyone by LinuxGeek · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, the three branches of the US government are: Executive, Legislative and Judical.

    --

    Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
  2. Election fraud, not voter fraud by kherr · · Score: 4, Informative

    It should read, "Concerns of election fraud..."

    Voter fraud is people voting under false identities. It rarely happens. Election fraud is the kind of mass voter suppression and dubious vote counting we've been seeing in this country. Even the most celebrated examples of "voter fraud" are really election fraud, such as Chicago Mayor Daley allegedly engineered dead people voting for JFK.

  3. Re:Stock Market by Chapter80 · · Score: 4, Informative
    Tip #1: Don't take stock advice from Slashdot.

    Tip #2: My belief is that the end-of-year-rally will continue, and October 2006 to October 2007 will be a good year in the market (with most of the gains early). If I recall correctly, it almost always is, in years of the mid-term elections.

    Tip #3: One stock prediction you can rely on: "It will fluctuate."

  4. Re:Stock Market by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 4, Informative
    I really wouldn't read anything into that given a whole host of things:

    1) Lag between policies and stock performance

    2) Lack of adjustment for inflation

    3) Small sample size

    4) Lack of a mechanism (without which, correlation isn't causation)

    5) Many non-repeatable events that affect performance (9/11, oil embargo, etc)

    And so on. In particular, Clinton doesn't deserve credit for sitting on the run-up of the dot com bubble and happening to get out right before it crashed (the market was cresting and heading for descent right as he left). I don't blame him either, however, so this isn't a partisan thing.

    In short, I wouldn't say there's sufficient evidence either way, but as a statistically-minded scientist, I have a serious hatred of studies like the one you cite claiming statistically-unsupported conclusions.

  5. Re:Like Bush says about elections... by Snowhare · · Score: 5, Informative

    You don't understand: The election districts have been so gerrymandered (by both the Democrats and the Republicans) that the number of seats where it is thought to be even theoretically possible to defeat the incumbent of each party is generally considered to be less than 10% of the total seats. For the Democrats to take 4-6 Senate seats (out of only 33 up for election this year) and 28-30 House seats without losing a single seat of their own is an absolutely stunning thing.

    Pollsters had characterized this election as a irresistible force (the 'tsunami' of public opinion against the Bush and the Republicans) vs the immovable object (the incredibly rigged system of incumbent protecting districts plus the advantages of incumbency in getting re-elected in general). Apparently the immovable object wasn't quite as immovable as the Republicans had hoped.

  6. Re:Will they be able to make things better? by ArikTheRed · · Score: 5, Informative

    Really smart actually. The congress can pass laws to their heart content, but the executive branch cannot implement them because the president has forbidden them to (so much for Bush being a stumbling moronic cretin by the way).

    He didn't invent this practice, so don't give him so much credit. Also, it is incredibly un-democratic for a single ruler to be able to manipulate the law to the extent that Bush has. Here are some sample statements he added from the Boston Globe. If these don't make your blood boil, you truely are a moron - or really believe that Bush is the incarnation of Jesus.

    March 9: Justice Department officials must give reports to Congress by certain dates on how the FBI is using the USA Patriot Act to search homes and secretly seize papers.

    Bush's signing statement: The president can order Justice Department officials to withhold any information from Congress if he decides it could impair national security or executive branch operations.

    Dec. 30, 2005: US interrogators cannot torture prisoners or otherwise subject them to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.

    Bush's signing statement: The president, as commander in chief, can waive the torture ban if he decides that harsh interrogation techniques will assist in preventing terrorist attacks.

    Dec. 30: When requested, scientific information ''prepared by government researchers and scientists shall be transmitted [to Congress] uncensored and without delay."

    Bush's signing statement: The president can tell researchers to withhold any information from Congress if he decides its disclosure could impair foreign relations, national security, or the workings of the executive branch.

    Aug. 8: The Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and its contractors may not fire or otherwise punish an employee whistle-blower who tells Congress about possible wrongdoing.

    Bush's signing statement: The president or his appointees will determine whether employees of the Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission can give information to Congress.

    Dec. 23, 2004: Forbids US troops in Colombia from participating in any combat against rebels, except in cases of self-defense. Caps the number of US troops allowed in Colombia at 800.

    Bush's signing statement: Only the president, as commander in chief, can place restrictions on the use of US armed forces, so the executive branch will construe the law ''as advisory in nature."

    Dec. 17: The new national intelligence director shall recruit and train women and minorities to be spies, analysts, and translators in order to ensure diversity in the intelligence community.

    Bush's signing statement: The executive branch shall construe the law in a manner consistent with a constitutional clause guaranteeing ''equal protection" for all. (In 2003, the Bush administration argued against race-conscious affirmative-action programs in a Supreme Court case. The court rejected Bush's view.)

    Oct. 29: Defense Department personnel are prohibited from interfering with the ability of military lawyers to give independent legal advice to their commanders.

    Bush's signing statement: All military attorneys are bound to follow legal conclusions reached by the administration's lawyers in the Justice Department and the Pentagon when giving advice to their commanders.

    Aug. 5: The military cannot add to its files any illegally gathered intelligence, including information obtained about Americans in violation of the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches.

    Bush's signing statement: Only the president, as commander in chief, can tell the military whether or not it can use any specific piece of intelligence.

    Nov. 6, 2003: US officials in Iraq cannot prevent an inspector general for the Coalition Provisional Authority from carrying out any investigation. The inspector general must tell Congress if officials refuse to cooperate with his inquiries.

    Bush's signing

  7. Re:Will they be able to make things better? by jcrash · · Score: 5, Informative

    You obviously don't understand what he means by a signing statement. Essentially, with every bill he has signed during his two terms, Bush has been attaching a little letter that says, "I can ignore this law whenever it suits me." Seriously, I would wager less than 1 in 100 citizens in the U.S. even know about these letters.

    This is a president with absolutely no respect for anyone other than himself and what he thinks is right, either that or someone that has been totally manipulated by some unknown group or entity into a unilateral form of government.

    --
    I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them. Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
  8. 10 Step Process To Becoming a Congress Staffer by kthejoker · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just so we're clear: it is not hard in America to become an influential lobbyist *or* the staffer for a Congressperson, if you were so inclined.

    I've worked on a campaign for a state legislator - the people at the top (the consultants who end up on congressional staff, the directors, etc) are mostly just like me, but with two differences: they were a lot more involved in politics throughout college (running for Student Senate, joining groups, etc) and most of them were eager beaver, suit-wearing boring clods. (Not that I'm not boring or a clod, but they took the cake.)

    The people who get on national campaigns are only slightly more respectable. Add in a law degree and you can be a lobbyist, too.

    In fact, here's a simple 10 Step Process To Becoming a Congressional Staffer:

    1) In high school, be "politically" active. Run for student government, be a joiner, do the club thing (be President of at least one), join FBLA. Also, learn Spanish. And actually learn it, don't just sit in the classes.
    2) Become an Eagle Scout. It's ridiculously easy, and it's great for networking. For girls, do a lot of volunteer work.
    3) In college, repeat: join a lot of clubs, run for student government.
    4) Write for your college newspaper. Especially the political section. If the main newspaper won't take you, right for one of the student-run alternatives. Or start your own (even better!)
    5) Get a degree in political science with a minor in communications. Any liberal arts degree will do, but political science is as an easy way to ...
    6) Network within your university. Ask all of your teachers and advisors about internships and positions on campaigns and staff.
    7) Get involved in real politics around your college. Volunteer for the Democratic or Republican party headquarters in your area. Attend townhall meetings and generally get your name out there (business cards are great.) At actual elections, sign up to be a poll worker (you get paid $150 in Texas to do this.)
    8) Once you've graduated, head to your party headquarters with your hat in your hand, and ask for a job on a staff. They will hook you up (I worked on 3 campaigns before switching fields.)
    9) Focus on what you're really good at within the campaign. Good at math? Crunch poll numbers and offer strategies on how to be more efficient with your campaigning. Good at IT? Build websites, manage e-mail newsletters, keep track of donors, create systems to manage the campaign. Good with people? Be the PR flak, or coordinate the volunteers. Good with words? Be a speechwriter. Find your strength and hone in on it.
    10) Wait 10 years. By the time you're 30, you'll be in a Congressional office, as long as you don't totally screw up. And even then, all of that networking will probably get you something cushy.

    This strategy absolutely worked for me up to stage 8, when I decided I'd rather build websites for regular people and businesses than campaigns.

  9. Re:Will they be able to make things better? by NMerriam · · Score: 5, Informative
    Yeah - there was absolutely no public discussion of the Partriot Act, was there?


    You seem to be trying to be sarcastic, so I'm not sure you remember the Patriot Act was pushed through Congress in a matter of days. There are many statements from congressional staffers saying that basically nobody had time to even read the bill since it was so huge, but the Presdient wanted it passed, so everyone lined up and passed it. There was basically no discussion or debate whatsoever before the Patriot Act was passed, it was only after the fact that anyone could read the darn thing and see how much bad stuff had been put in by the Executive, some of which were allowed to expire when the act went up for renewal.
    --
    Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.