Obama spokesman (Gibbs) says Democrats could lose House

[Turborama]

Source: AP

President Barack Obama's party could lose its House majority in this fall's elections, his spokesman said Sunday, perhaps trying to jolt Democratic voters with the specter of GOP lawmakers rolling back White House policies. "I think there's no doubt there are enough seats in play that could cause Republicans to gain control. There's no doubt about that," press secretary Robert Gibbs told NBC's "Meet the Press."

Democrats now hold a 255-178 edge in the House, with two vacancies in the 435-member chamber. Anywhere from 40 to perhaps 60 House seats could be competitive by the fall. Republicans would need to take back about 40 seats to slip into the majority, placing the current GOP leader, Ohio Rep. John Boehner, in line to replace Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., as speaker.

Those House Democrats who won election for the first time in 2008 in conservative leaning districts as part of the Obama wave are particularly vulnerable this fall, given that the president is not on the ballot.

Gibbs said retaining House control would depend on strong campaigns by Democrats. "I think we have to take the issues to them," he said, adding that the primary argument would be how Republicans would govern as the majority party.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100711/ap_on_el_ge/us_white_house_fall_elections

---

The thought of John "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpOUctySD68">Hell No!" Boehner being speaker makes me shudder to the core...

[bluestateguy]

1. $20 says he does the old "walking it back" tomorrow afternoon

Just watch.

[pocoloco]

2. Not much time to grow a set of balls!

[No Elephants]

40. .....

:eyes:

[Wilms]

3. Then Obama needs to hit the campaign trail.

He can tell everyone why war, insurance and bank bailouts are good.

He can even say how restrained he's been and hasn't done anything rash like change torture policy.

Problem solved.

[wordpix]

4. O needs to pull something out so this won't happen---how about JOBS???

[bemildred]

5. Then again, Democrats could win an even greater majority.

I mean, you just never know.

[bobhuntsman]

22. that would be the ultimate F.U.

Dems gain one seat in the house and one in the Senate. That's all it'd take to drive home that "F.U." message.

[RBInMaine]

33. Could happen IF we get real, get out and campaign, and GOTV.

[Jackpine Radical]

6. A classic case of Use it or Lose it.

The Dems have had Congress since 2006, and whatever progressively-impelled legislation they have managed to pass has been badly marred by giving in to corporatist interests. To the extent they have actually used their power, they have not used it well.

[RBInMaine]

34. Two years with Bush as Prez, diverse caucus, and Senate rules. Learn the system before bitching.

[Jackpine Radical]

43. Yeah, President from the other party, small majorities in midterms--

Result--Contract with on America, courtesy Newt Gingrich 1994.

[Lorien]

62. Exactly. But apparently the rules are very different for the "We Can't Do It" Dems. nt

[unkachuck]

7. "...Democrats could lose House"

....yes we could....as long as you and the White House continue to believe that, '...the more we make the base suffer, the more they'll vote in November...', our loses could be staggering....

....and guess what? It'll be your fault, Mr. Progressive.

[bowens43]

8. How would we know?

not a whole lot of difference between having the house and not having the house.......

Our democratic Senators are worthless and the house is meaningless with out a strong presence in the senate.


I am disillusioned. I honestly see no reason to go to the polls in November.....I have never missed an election in the 34 years I have been voting....this may be a first.

[Monique1]

10. I will be at the polls in November

come hell or high water. No way will I not vote and let the republicans take control.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

21. Actually the House has been quite ambitious.

It's the Senate where everything has been held up.

[No Elephants]

41. Here's a reason to go to the polls:

If you stay home, Democrats and Republicans will spin your absence from the polls as either not caring what anyone in D.C. does, or, worse, dissatisfaction with the Democrats' "Socialist" policies. Either way, your absence will help corporations even more.

[Fearless]

9. If it happens it's because of THEIR POLICIES and it is their own damn fault.

We had this handed to us like no party in DECADES.

[Octafish]

11. Here's an idea: RUN THE GOVERNMENT LIKE DEMOCRATS!

You know, End the Wars; Strengthen Social Security; Universal Health Care; Quality Public Education; a New Deal for the 21st Century. People will vote for us.

[wordpix]

14. People do not want Repug Lite, which is the Democ. "creed" in Congress

[pattmarty]

18. Yep. Sounds so easy, doesn't it? If they went out and actively..........

.......marketed those programs and defended the working class AGAIN I wouldn't think they would have a problem hanging onto power again like oh what was it, over 40 yrs with usually both Houses and most of the Presidencies up to LBJ and from the time of FDR. But they won't.

[corpseratemedia]

35. + 10,000,000

votes

[SammyWinstonJack]

39. +1. nt

[No Elephants]

42. those opportunities have already come and gone. No do overs. People are sick

of spending trillions for "better than nothing."

[SargeUNN]

12. I doubt they can gain enough for the house

that would be a big stretch.

[depakid]

13. Way to go ace! Enable and legitimize Republicans even more than you already have!

My thoughts on this are that Gibbs reckons that a Republican House increases Obama's chances of re-election- and that's the one and only thing he cares even a lick about.

[dflprincess]

17. It would give the administration a better excuse

for not accomplishing anything that really benefits us serfs as a lot of people don't get why 59 votes in the Senate is not a majority. People could understand not having a majority in the House.

And, that will give the DCCC a new script for the 2012 election. They can once again start claiming they need our money to regain a majority - because then things would really change. Hopefully, we won't be dumb enough to fall for that line again.

[rhett o rick]

15. People voted D for change. They dont see much change and may want to punish the liars.

To me the tipping point is the way the Obama admin is kowtowing to BP. That's not change. Many are disheartened. They, maybe foolishly, thought that the Democrats would end the Bush policies not embrace them. Both sides are owned by CorpAmerica. Expect ambivalence in November.

[TomCADem]

19. Much change? Here's a link to Rachel Maddow detailing the long list of changes. False meme

Amazing that "liberals" post absolute fraudulent broad brush statements suggesting that there has not been a change or, worse, suggesting that Bush was not really that bad or that Bush's policies were no different from Obama's. To review:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37974309/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/

Even before today‘s historic Wall Street reform agreement, President Obama, of course, did what politicians have been trying to do for more than 60 years. He passed health reform, which, for the first time, establishes government responsibility for the health care of American citizens.
Consider also the stimulus bill. It didn‘t just throw a lasso around our entire economy and yank and yank it back from the brink. It also pumped about $100 billion into the crumbling embarrassment of our national infrastructure and transportation system.
It was the largest investment in infrastructure since Ike. For solving our country‘s energy problems, something Obama has compared to man walking on the moon, it contained about $60 billion in spending and tax incentives for renewable and clean energy, also a historic investment.
It also included an unheralded but giant investment in science and tech, amping up the budgets at NASA, the National Science Foundation, and an experimental energy research agency that was created under President George W. Bush, but never funded until now.
President Obama also expanded state kids‘ health insurance to cover another four million kids. He signed the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act amending the 1964 civil rights act for equal pay for equal work.
He signed a nuclear arms deal with Russia that would reduce both countries‘ arsenals by a third. He created a new global nonproliferation initiative to keep nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists.

[Grinchie]

24. Hmm -- I thought he cut Nasa's budget..

In fact, I'm sure of it, so I tend to think this post is just so much Propaganda..

He bailed out the banks, who promptly farted in his face and they went to collect their bonuses.

He just sent 30,000 more troops to Afganistan, and our boys are still dying in Iraq as well.

Gitmo is still open, and it was only just recently that Obama learned the word "Solar Power", and then made himself look like an idiot for throwing billions at obsolete technology like Ion deposition on glass.

The administration is so stupid it would take a zombie to think otherwise.

[Turborama]

25. He didn't throw billions at "obsolete technology like Ion deposition on glass"

1st of all, they are loan guarantees, as explained http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4452562&mesg_id=4453525">here.

Secondly, the vast majority of the $2billion loan guarantee ($1.45billion) is to assist with the funding for the construction of http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4452562&mesg_id=4453292">the world's largest Concentrated Solar Power plant, which is not an obsolete technology, as explained to you http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4452562&mesg_id=4453301">here.


You obviously hate Obama so much you're prepared to make up falsehoods to fuel that all consuming fire.

[Grinchie]

48. No, I hate the maintenance of Corporate Centralized control.

I know the joy of living off the grid, manufacturing all the electrical power I can use, and even producing surpluses, without wires, without ugly power poles, that have been shipped from forests, dipped in poison, and planted in the ground, to be forever maintained by the electric company, that somehow thinks that generating power thousands of miles away and building infrastructure to pipe it to your home is viable.

Your concentrated Solar Power Plant is nothing more than another variation of the Steam Kettle Boiler developed by James Watt centuries ago, and modified into using the Sun as a heat source. They tried this before, using Nucelar Power to do this.. Scaling up so they can maintain the obsolete grid distribution system. Unfortunately, when they scaled up the Nuclear furnace to Megawatts instead of Kilowatts, strange, unanticipated things happened, like Three Mile Island..

Oh, gosh, we built carbon copies of Three Mile Island all over the country, all with the same fundamental flaw...

Actually, you built them... With your tax dollars.

I don't hate Obama, I hate the stupidity that his administration represents. The Political tidbits thrown at an obviously uneducated populace such as yourself, that gobble up anything that mentions Solar as a Panacea, without regarding the current state of the art in the Photovoltaic realm. Have you ever asked yourself why on earth you would need to devote hundreds of acres of land, to create a solar furnace, when you can directly create electricity from photons?

Is it to store the latent heat overnight when the sun is down? If that's the case, why not develeop really efficient batteries that can take the 160 watts per meter immediately, instead of relying on battery technology that is over 200 years old?

Your shallow grasp of Photovoltaics becomes obvious when all you can do is call me names.. Do some research, give me a sound rebuttal, and make a valid conversation instead of relying on a strawman argument or Faux outrage.

All I need to do is ask you if you would be willing to spend all of your working hours watching over a Concentrating Solar Power Plant, in a hazardous environment for a nominal wage, while your kids grow up without you? Yeah, I guess it's not so glamorous when its framed that way.

[Turborama]

52. I rebutted two of your statements

Correcting your disinformation and exaggerations about the money and how it's being used and disproving that CSP is "obsolete".

Your living off the grid experience is laudable, I've been there done that too, but to say that it would work for America as a whole is ridiculous.

I kind of started losing interest when you came up with the "CSP plants will be the next Three Mile Islands" madness and when you threw in the ad hom about me being uneducated I totally lost interest in communicating with you and went off to see what else is going on in LBN.

[Grinchie]

64. Strawmen Soufle from Turborama

When the majority of America doesn't know which direction "North" is, or cannot read a map, perhaps giving them a pallet of Solar Panels would not help them much.

So I have to agree with you. However, profesionally installed panels on every roof would solve the energy crisis, and feel free to prove otherwise.. You will not be able to.

As for your losing interest, I don't think you have any interest in the subject at all, so why try to claim that you know anything aboutit at all?

Are you saying that the technology is not based on a steam kettle boiler? Nice try buddy.

[Turborama]

68. Reflection much?

You seem to forget that not everyone in America lives in a house. What about apartments? How could PV panels power an apartment block in Manhattan on a freezing cold cloudy day in the middle of the winter, for example? Or factories in the North

The solution is a mixture of solar, geothermal, tidal and wind and for that there needs to be a national grid, whether you like it or not.

This comment must have really pissed you off:

"I kind of started losing interest when you came up with the "CSP plants will be the next Three Mile Islands" madness and when you threw in the ad hom about me being uneducated I totally lost interest in communicating with you and went off to see what else is going on in LBN."

Because you came back with this strawmanerffic ad hom...

"As for your losing interest, I don't think you have any interest in the subject at all, so why try to claim that you know anything aboutit at all?"

I actually have a great deal of interest in this subject, seeing as I'm an environmental consultant. What I don't have any interest in is trying to have a debate with irate people who make up shit about me and the topic that's being discussed (aka strawman arguments) to try and prove a point.

"Are you saying that the technology is not based on a steam kettle boiler? Nice try buddy."

No, not at all... buddy.

If you read what I wrote again, you'll see that I said CSP is not obsolete. I think you must know what the word obsolete means and are just making shit up again (yet another strawman) to try and ridicule me.

Here, let me save you the trouble of looking for evidence showing how "obsolete" it actually is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_thermal_power_stations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrating_solar_power#Future_of_Concentrated_Solar_Power

Also, just in case you're still ignoring it, here's the link I gave you in post #25, again: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4452562&mesg_id=4453301

/conversation.


PS Repeatedly saying Obama "threw billions" at this is another enormous strawman. In fact it's a downright lie seeing as I have previously explained to you that he didn't "throw billions" at either of the two projects but you still insist on repeating it.

[Moosepoop]

28. No, he did not cut NASA's budget.

He increased it by $6 billion over the next 5 years.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63C5KV20100413

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama will outline a revamped space policy on Thursday that will use $6 billion in new funding over five years to create 2,500 new jobs in Florida with the ultimate goal of going to Mars.

Obama has been facing criticism from some members of the far-flung U.S. space community over the direction of space policy after NASA officials announced plans in March to kill the Constellation program that had been designed to launch astronauts into orbit and return Americans to the moon.

The Constellation program, developed under the Bush administration, was aimed at returning astronauts to the moon in the 2020s to clear the way for a Mars mission.

White House officials said on Tuesday that Obama wants NASA to begin work on building a new heavy lift rocket sooner than envisioned under the canceled Constellation program, with a commitment to decide in 2015 on the specific rocket that will take astronauts deeper into space.

"This is a rocket that is going to happen two years earlier than would've happened under the past program," a senior White House official said.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rhett o rick]

30. I agree he has made lots of changes. But those losing their homes, jobs and health are not impressed

Call me silly but I want out of the wars, I want a plan to get jobs back, I want immediate help for the millions losing homes, jobs and retirement. I want SS safe from the cutting block. I want the end of the Patriot Act, the MCA, rendition, Guantanamo, etc.

I know I am impatient, but the rich continue to get richer while children are hungry. Locally we just established a place for safe parking for single homeless women living in their cars. This is added to a list of other sites where families are allowed to live in their cars. I cant count the number of tent camps for homeless are around in our wooded areas. The food banks are stretched to the limit. And I personally know people going thru foreclosure.

The list of accomplishments doesnt impress those living in their cars or tents. We need immediate help.

[RBInMaine]

32. Spot on response. The naysayers are incessant purist non-reality complainers.

[fascisthunter]

66. "purists"....uhuh

[davidpdx]

23. I'm sick of the Obama=Bush meme

Even if you put it in a box and try to make your comments look like your not saying that.

[fascisthunter]

65. it won't get deleted because there is context

and it doesn't imply they are the same, it states that Obama has embraced Bush policies, which he has. It's a factual comment that is NOT against the rules.

[sendero]

16. Duh...

.. you fail to perform, you lose. Pretty simple.

[cstanleytech]

20. Not really a surprise to me.

No party can keep majority control forever in our country and its simply arrogance to think otherwise as the GOP recently learned themselves.

[No Elephants]

44. How long did Democrats control Congress after Hoover?

[cstanleytech]

46. Not forever evidently.

[Hubert Flottz]

26. They wanted "Bipartisanship"

They kissed the GOP's ass. They pissed the unions off. Don't blame me I voted for "CHANGE"

[FlyByNight]

27. THAT'S the spirit!

Ah, just more lowered expectations. I think there's nothing more the DLC would like than to put a brake on the pace of improvements/reform since Obama took office. There's corporate cash to sweep up after all (in the wake of the fascist Citizens United v. FEC decision).

The imperial occupations continue, the Gulf of Mexico is dying a slow death (that hack, Salazar remains employed), our rights continue to erode (the "Drug War", etc.) and now the "deficit hawks" are circling (Social Security - yes; Pentagon - not only no, but HELL NO) because austerity is for the rest of us, not the politically/financially well-connected.

A little less corporate obsequiousness would've gone a long way.

:eyes:

[on point]

29. There is no enthusiasm for Republican lite - Got it yet?

[saigon68]

31. Its Joementum Light

[hayu_lol]

36. Fire Arnie Duncan and all the fellow travelers...

that were appointed to other top positions. If Dems in office won't get the job done, then of course the people will try something else.

Are they just plain stupid in DC or are they ignorant?

Jobs, support families, support SS, single-payer National Health Plan. Geez, what happened to all those? Send Bush/Cheney to prison.

[saigon68]

53. Its Lights out in Nov for these Rham Bots

[wordpix]

56. fire Big Oil man Ken Salazar! Now giving lease to BP in AK for a new drill technology

in polar bear country. This guy has GOT to go

[No Elephants]

54. As though the original Joementum weren't light enough. (Great photoshop!)

[wordpix]

57. excellent!

[Lorien]

60. Actually I think that they're hoping to lose the House. It will give them more

political cover for their Right wing agenda. The worst thing that could happen for conservative Dems is for there to be an even GREATER Dem majority. Then how would they explain doing so little for the people and so much to profit the wealthy elite? If they do lose seats they'll just use it as an excuse to go to the hard right. The fix is in.

[cbdo2007]

37. Of course they could.....and we could get taken over by Iceland but it isn't very probable.

[w4rma]

38. Rahm is repeating his 1994 performance, spectacularly. This is what happens when the DLC is in

control. The DLC sabotages Democratic politicians. Fire Rahm and Duncan, then maybe we'll have a chance of keeping power.

[RBInMaine]

50. DLC DLC DLC yawn. Doesn't that meme get a little tiresome?

[w4rma]

59. If the DLC weren't so dangerous to society I'd never mention them again. (nt)

[Lorien]

61. "Meme"? Why would you call a very active, increasingly powerful political organization a

"Meme"?

meme
   /mim/ Show Spelled Show IPA
–noun
a cultural item that is transmitted by repetition in a manner analogous to the biological transmission of genes.
Use meme in a Sentence
See images of meme
Search meme on the Web
Origin:
1976; < Gk mīmeîsthai to imitate, copy; coined by R. Dawkins, Brit. biologist

The DLC is no meme: http://www.dlc.org/

[No Elephants]

45. Breaking. Gibbs banned.

[Jefferson23]

69. LOL, good one!

[armodem08]

47. Could be smart politics...

Getting the Republicans' expectations up, so when they only get a few seats, or none, they are severely disappointed. I mean, how well did it work when Bush and Rove expressed absolute certainty that they'd win in 2006 and 2008?

[RBInMaine]

51. Tie them to the TeaIdiots, campaign hard, attack them hard, and GOTV like hell, and we'll be ok.

[No Elephants]

55. Some pundit suggested Gibbs was trying to mobilize the Dem base by scaring them with the spectre of

a Republican House.

[wordpix]

58. the way to mobilize the base is to do what the O team was elected to do

scare tactics are not as effective as showing you can DO the change you said you'd do.

[Vidar]

63. Way to inspire confidence, Gibbs!

[fascisthunter]

67. move the party to the left, and there won't be a backlash

ignore ignore a great portion of your party and yes, you will lose the House.