Quantcast
Utah

News analysis: GOP may get more seats in Congress

Utah 1 of 5 states that could add to delegation

Comments

Return To Article
  • Redistricting?
    April 20, 2009 6:12 a.m.

    Gerrymandering is the correct word, dear Man.

  • GOP
    April 20, 2009 6:37 a.m.

    GOP is to close to the word "GOD"... why not just use republican and refrain from this sillyness.

  • RockOn
    April 20, 2009 8:16 a.m.

    Call it what you want, but, it is redistricting. Screwy boundaries has always been part of the equation and all political parties participate. Until you have a solution that voids the democratic process, quit sounding like the perpetual Democratic whining machine... a machine now being well oiled by the Republicans.

  • Cats
    April 20, 2009 8:21 a.m.

    Every seat counts. We've got to fight out way back. Of course, Obama, Pelosi and Reid are doing everything they can to help us with these insane economic policies.

  • dectra
    April 20, 2009 8:32 a.m.

    Obama's insane policies????

    Where have YOU been for the last 8 years? Living under a rock?

    Bush initiated a foolish war that Cost us 4,000 GOOD MEN AND WOMEN - all to assuage bush's ego, so he and the neocons could 'remake' the middle east..

    But, hey what did bush accomplish? Bush spent 3 TRILLION when he was president just on the Iraq war.

    And what did we get for that 3 TRILLON: Bush couldn't even catch Bin Laden. (remember him? he's the one responsible for 9/11.)


    If continuing the Bush policies is the best the party can come up with, I'm still an EX-REPUBLICAN.

  • Re.: dectra @ 8:32am
    April 20, 2009 8:48 a.m.

    Hey dectra, don't stop at 8 years, continue going back, Pres. Clinton had the chance to get him but balked at that, Pres. Bush I also ignored him hoping he would go away, Pres. Reagan helped create him, Pres. Carter got him started ...

    Dectra, you are so caught-up in the stupid game of 'Democrats vs Republicans' that you can't look at the issues in the way of 'Right vs Wrong' or 'Logical vs Illogical' or ... well hopefully you get the idea.

    By the way, both parties are not worth the effort to stand behind, I will stand for what I believe is right or wrong.

  • Beowulf
    April 20, 2009 8:51 a.m.

    Dectra, nobody even mentioned Bush (except you). I personally thik Obama is doing the best he can. Unfortunately, that is not good enough, since he is getting pushed around by all those frustrated Democrat Congressmen who couldn't push their own pet projects during the Bush years. So we get stupid add-ons to the laws such as banning Mexican truckers, thereby annoying our neighbor to the South with no discernable benefit to ourselves (all it does is make the Teamster Union happier).

  • ...
    April 20, 2009 9:40 a.m.

    Call me crazy, but maybe they should give the seat to an independent rather than one of the power-hungry identical political parties that currently run our system.

    But sure, let's bicker over which of the two evils will get the seat, instead.

  • Re.: dectra @ 8:32am
    April 20, 2009 9:57 a.m.

    "Hey dectra, don't stop at 8 years, continue going back, Pres. Clinton had the chance to get him but balked at that, Pres. Bush I also ignored him hoping he would go away, Pres. Reagan helped create him, Pres. Carter got him started ..."


    Good points, this is all old news; let's forget the past and move on into the future for further alliances.


    Rather interesting news about Obama and Chavez, what kind of partnership is now being created? some change is in store for cuba by the Obama adminstration. How about Hillary's trip to Syria? Is there an allience now being created with Iran? And let's not forget Biden's words to Israel to not attack Iran.

  • Sally
    April 20, 2009 10:15 a.m.

    The last thing we need are more do nothing free loaders back in washington.

  • Pitiful
    April 20, 2009 10:43 a.m.

    Looks like we need some intelligent people to comment on these comment pages. Obviously, these people are really messed up between the ears. Since we have lost our freedom of speech to speak the truth, we have to read these pitiful comments. Oh Well!!!

  • On Gerrymandering...
    April 20, 2009 11:15 a.m.

    And these extraordinary efforts being made by Democrats to carve out a special seat for the small District of Columbia (as if it were a State) is NOT Gerrymandering?

    It's just a new and more extreme use of the age-old gerrymandering by politicians.

    Is ANYONE not 100% sure that the DC seat (if they can fenagle it) is going to be filled by a Democrat 100% of the time? And you don't think that's why the Democrats are pushing so hard for it? The answer is obvious.

  • Cats
    April 20, 2009 11:18 a.m.

    Dectra: You need to take a class in economics.

  • goforit
    April 20, 2009 2:13 p.m.

    yea Dectra, you need a class in economics.

    Lesson #1, pass a tax cut favoring the super rich

    Lesson #2, start an unprovoked war, don't budget the costs for that war in the normal budget, run to congress begging for "supplemential" funding, and oh yea, fire the guy who honestly said the war will cost at least $250 billion (I wish it would habe been that cheap!)

    Lesson #3, turn a budgent surplus in 2000 into the largest deficit in record by January 20th 2009

    Lesson 4, give $750 billion (yes 9 zeros billion) to your "government isn't the solution, government is the problem" buddies on wall street after they blew the place to smithereens with greed

    Lesson #5, when things get ugly tell everybody to go shopping, maybe max out your credit card for the benefit of our country

    Now that's economics, you silly person, anything else is just voodoo

  • Cats
    April 20, 2009 2:44 p.m.

    to Goforit: You need to take a class in economic, too.

  • If you dont like obama you are r
    April 20, 2009 2:55 p.m.

    Ya lets forget about how rahm emanuel toke over the census. So now he has power to control the census. I think that is funny how its ok for obama to double the bush deficit. "Lesson #3, turn a budgent surplus in 2000 into the largest deficit in record by January 20th 2009" Now obama will double that! Were suppose to be ok with that because bush caused a deficit? Man that makes perfect sense to me! Lets just give all our of enemies are secrets! SO they will be friends with us. Cause you know thos epeople hate us because of bush. They didnt hate us before that. Lets forget how they treated the american prisoners hmm i think they chopped there heads off.

  • Jimmy Carter Daze
    April 20, 2009 3:12 p.m.

    At least Bush wasn't Jimmy Carter. Those of us actually old enough to remember what a close call and disaster that was -- 22% inflation, interest rates, gas shortages, broken military, milaise, 55-mph speed limits, wearing sweaters, projecting weakness abroad. Now it seems Obama is Carter-lite. To the Bush haters, get over it. You can get help for your Bush-mania. It's Obama and Democrats' government now. They control every part of federal government now. May heaven help us all.

  • Herb Gravy
    April 20, 2009 3:13 p.m.

    This is ridiculous! They should start with cutting the number of representatives and senators in half. (They don't represent US anyway. Only their OWN interests). Sure, those that remained would waste just as much of our money that the current complement does, but we wouldn't have to pay for half of the salaries, staff expenses, ridiculous health care benefits and retirement income, ad inifitum. Undoubtedly, some will say this runs counter to the Constitution but it is being ignored by the incumbent and the courts, anyway. So, why not?

  • Anonymous
    April 20, 2009 3:37 p.m.

    Thanks you for voting for Bush. You elected Obama and democrats in the senate and congress. No democrat has done as much as you that voted for Bush to bring democrats to power since you elected Hoover and Nixon.

  • Re 2:55 pm
    April 20, 2009 4:50 p.m.

    There is a very important distinction between Obama's spending and Bush's spending, however. Obama is spending money on America and Americans. Bush spent money on his ego and a personal vendetta to please his father.

    I'm not saying deficit spending is good, but at least Obama's spending benefits those who are taxed. And don't give me that tried national security line. Bin Laden and WMD aren't even in Iraq, though a bunch of oil and a washed up dictator were.

  • Benefits Those Who are Taxed?
    April 20, 2009 6:50 p.m.

    What? Re 2:55 pm... you say that Obama's spending benefits "those who are taxed?" Umm, where did you get that? So all of the ACORN dependents and welfare recipients who got a Stimulus check .... and Tax Credits when they didn't even file tax returns.... did they earn it? Were they taxed? No. This is pure income redistribution by Obama as the erstwhile Robin Hood. It's socialism. WHere did Bush spend money for his ego? Like keeping the nation free from terrorist attacks for 7:1/2 years after 9-11? That's no small feat. But don't get on this forum and assert that Obama's spending spree benefits "those who are taxed..." That's just flat wrong. IT's income redistribution, and throwing my hard earned tax money at political cronies, patrons like ACORN, the Unions, Radical Environmentalists, welfare groups and other traditional Democratic constituencies.

  • I would blame Carter
    April 20, 2009 7:42 p.m.

    for much of what was described above except for the 55 MPH speed limit. That was Nixon...

  • Your right on the 55!
    April 20, 2009 9:41 p.m.

    I thought it was later than Nixon but it was 1974. You know, we did save gave driving at 55 even though it was painful to go to St. George / Vegas.

    "The uniform speed limit was signed into law by President Nixon on January 2, 1974 and became effective 60 days later, by requiring the limit as a condition of each state receiving highway funds, a use of the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution."

  • Utah and the Deep South
    April 20, 2009 10:58 p.m.

    What's with Utah voters that they align themselves with southern bigots politically? The reddest of the Red states? A little ahead of Mississippi, Alabama, and South Carolina and way out of touch with the rest of the Western U.S.

  • Proud Buckeye
    April 21, 2009 7:53 a.m.

    One thing you didn't mention though is that the majority of state legislatures that had party turnover went Democratic, so even states that lose seats may gain Democrats because it will now be the Dems who get to draw the lines. Ohio is one of these.