Well, it seems that the Mayans may have been wrong, so here are my political predictions for 2013. Some are about elections, some are about DC, some are about the economy, and some are just wild guesses.
1. There are 2 big elections already scheduled for 2013. In New Jersey, Christie will win in a walkover. However, the race in Virginia will be pretty exciting, with Ken Cuccinelli, the state’s Attorney General and a Tea Party favorite, facing off against Terry McAuliffe, a Bill Clinton favorite and fundraiser. Cuccinelli will win a close race, keeping the hopes of Tea Party members alive for one more year.
2. In the Senate, Scott Brown will win the special election to replace John Kerry in Massachusetts. This will bring the Democrats’ majority down to 54, setting up the GOP taking over the majority in 2014.
3. Hillary Clinton will miraculously recover from her ‘concussion’ and will announce her candidacy for President. Most other big name Democrats will decide not to run then. However, Maryland’s Governor, Martin O’Malley will challenge her, and will probably announce that he is considering a run.
4. On the GOP side, a number of big guns will spend most of next year in Iowa and New Hampshire, including Marco Rubio. To the dismay of the media, however, Jeb Bush will choose not to run as a Republican.
5. If Boehner manages to hold on as Speaker of the House, it will merely be an ornamental position, much like Hastert. Cantor will more openly be the real decision-maker; Paul Ryan will be promoted to Chair of Ways and Means, giving him ultimate authority on taxation. He will use the post to run for President.
6. The federal government will kick the can on the fiscal cliff. They will opt to raise taxes on people earning above $500,000 and continue the estate tax on high income individuals. Only cosmetic cuts in spending will occur. Both sides will claim victory. It gets through the House although most of the Tea Party members vote against it.
7. Republicans will try to impeach Obama because of Benghazi. It will be nearly a party line vote, but will not pass the House.
8. A major immigration law will be passed; nothing will happen on gun control.
9. The Supreme Court will give states the right to allow gay marriage, or reject it.
10. On the economic front, GDP will increase by about 2.5%, unemployment will drop to below 7% sometime in the summer, and inflation jitters will begin. Gas prices will begin climbing again, with the price rising to about $110 per barrel.
11. Bobby Jindal will realize that he doesn’t have a natural constituency in the Republican Presidential race. He will be appointed as Ambassador to India.
12. War drums will continue to beat for us to engage in a number of foreign countries. We will leave Afghanistan after a number of American casualties from friendly fire.
13. Mark Sanford will face his ex-wife, Jenny, for the GOP nomination to replace Tim Scott in the House. The media will not be able to turn away from this internecine battle.
Anyway, those are my guesses. If you’d like to, add your own. After all, everyone here is a Pundit, and as Dick Morris can attest, pundits never have to say they’re wrong.
December 28th, 2012 at 6:00 am
Looks like 2013 will be a fun year for us pundits!
December 28th, 2012 at 4:17 pm
I predict that Obama will still be stupid, all Americans will become poorer, and liberals will start a farming community on Antarctica
December 28th, 2012 at 5:16 pm
I agree with most of your thoughts, Arriba.
I don’t think anyone will overtly position themselves for a Presidential run just yet. Announcing or even intimating a run in 2013 may allow for fundraising, but will cause them to peak way too early.
I don’t know about Cantor; he found he had a lot less sway than he thought last week in the aborted “Plan B” attempt. He claimed to have the votes, but was again reminded that the Tea Party faction doesn’t compromise, on anything. What a group.
Impeach Obama on Benghazi? I don’t think so and it would also be unwise politically. Read this interesting take on the Clinton impeachment by outgoing Republican Representative Rep. Steven LaTourette,
“The Clinton impeachment was one of those things—and both parties do this—where we overplayed our hand. Public opinion was not treating President Clinton well, but it seemed like we had to go and make sure that people knew what he did. That’s always our tendency on these things—you want to jump in. But the American people love an underdog. It turns when they think you’re turning on President Clinton, they turn to him. It just had to go the way it went. People were too invested. When it left here, and it went to the Senate, there was no way the United States Senate would remove the president from office. So America got treated to this horrible display, and it wasn’t one of our better moments. President Clinton would have suffered, I think, in terms of popularity and his agenda, if we’d just left him alone.”
Read the rest of his observations here, they are interesting:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/12/outgoing_congressmen_steven_latourette_brad_miller_and_hansen_clarke_explain.html
Gun control? The din has already disappeared, so everyone can keep their 30 round magazines.
As I said last week, anyone that wants to be President probably shouldn’t hold the office and the people that think they need thirty round magazines are probably the last people that should have them.
December 28th, 2012 at 9:32 pm
OK, here are my predictions:
1) The polarization of America will reach new highs, as it becomes increasingly apparent that the unemployment numbers are fudged and that the reality is that there are nowhere near new jobs out there as reported.
2) There will be an anti-immigrant furor from both parties because of lack of jobs and abundance of crime.
3) Criminals and politicians salivating over disarming law-abiding citizens will do all within their power to make sure that happens. Killings will increase, and then explode -no pun intended- once the bans start to pop up.
4) As Christians are increasingly stripped of their rights, charities will suffer, precisely when they are needed the most. Church finances will be so severely affected by new IRS measures, that a lot will go bankrupt and movements will operate with skeleton crews.
5) The stock market will take a serious dive, and the 401k holders will be left with the bag. Again.
6) Unrest will start to pop up in different cities. Some will be people demanding to be relieved from their unpayable debts like student loands.
7) The big one will finally happen in California, bringing the perfect excuse to shift the blame of the economic disaster -the only possible outcome- that the leftist policies have caused there.
9) Romney will anounce he has not discarded running again, although he has never ever wanted the position.
10) China will go into war with Japan for the Senkoku islands.
10)
December 29th, 2012 at 7:58 am
Alright, I’ll give it a whirl.
1.
In the next 2 years the GOP will gain seats in the Senate and an attempt will be made on the CICs life depending on those gains.
2.
In the next two years radical Muslims will succeed in another catastrophic attack on us of either chemical, infrastructure or cyber nature.
3.
A democratic executive will do nothing about it while trying to look like they’re doing everything.
4.
Unemployment will go up at least another 5%,wages will stagnate, inflation will bring everything but street drugs and sex to quadrupled levels.
5.
After the 2014 elections Occupiers memberships will skyrocket but this time they’ll try to burn down DC instead of Wall St.
6.
Linsay Lohan will OD.
7.
PBS will buy MSNBC.
FOX will buy the Playboy channel.
8.
In 2014 Breitbart and Reagan will be resurrected from DNA and announce their candidacy for the White House.
9.
The Middle East will invade Europe.
Wait…never mind.
10.
America will no longer allow Russians to adopt Americans and we will stop buying their brides.
December 29th, 2012 at 10:23 am
Well, Micky and Rivera, those are pretty pictures. Might be time to do some “prepping”.
December 29th, 2012 at 10:25 am
Other than the trumped up Affordable Health Care caveats, exactly how are Christians losing their rights?
Their influence hasn’t waned as they were able to derail the GOP primaries quite effectively.
December 29th, 2012 at 1:50 pm
“Other than the trumped up Affordable Health Care caveats, exactly how are Christians losing their rights?”
Lets find a comparison.
Okay, the AHCA says certain Christian inclined institutions must carry contraception.
Christians feel such a mandate punishable by penalties/fines certain employees may have to choose between their jobs and violating their faith. Employers and owners of these institutions may loose clientele by conforming to sections of the healthcare act.
Now, suppose the right drew up a healthcare or homeowners insurance bill that only be offered to those with legal guns in the house(or offered at a discount) because guns are a deterrent/prevention to crime the same way contraception is a prevention to unwanted pregnancy.
Would there not be people who feel such an inserted requirement to a bill would be an infringement on a major liberty ?
December 29th, 2012 at 7:27 pm
I said other than the Affordable Health Care Act, but in the scenario you described I would buy a gun, file down the firing mechanism and lock it up somewhere.
Done and done.
December 29th, 2012 at 8:25 pm
As Yogi Berra said, “predictions are hard to make, especially about the future”.
Patrick, you may be correct in your guess that “all Americans will become poorer” in a strange sense. Wealth is much like heat. Heat is an energy that can never be destroyed but can only be transferred from one place to another. Even an ice cube contains some heat. Actually, anything above absolute zero (about 459 degrees below zero) contains some heat.
So in a mathematical sense, it defies logic to say everyone will become poorer as wealth is something that’s also transferred. What’s one man’s loss is another man’s gain. Most of the wealth of the middle class and American workers has been transferred to the top 1%. As a result, the 99% have become poorer and likewise, the 1% has become incredibly wealthier. Now in a business sense, when you don’t make as much in 1 year as you did the previous year or you didn’t reach your desired profit goal, it could be construed as a loss. Now considering that the top 1%, after pretty much fleecing the flock and transferring mass quantities of wealth their way, sees a slowdown in their gains as they’re pretty much hitting that absolute zero point. And when they do, they’ll be crying “we’re getting poorer”. So maybe in a strange way Patrick, maybe you’re right.
December 30th, 2012 at 3:12 am
Ronald, bravo for the lesson in classic Marxist theory. The problem with your theory is that in reality wealth can be created through the actions of entrepreneurs. The pie is not a fixed size.
My final prediction for 2013 is that Michelle Obama’s ginormous ass will be declared the 8th wonder of the world.
December 30th, 2012 at 4:44 am
Patrick, I really have no interest in your obsession, or perhaps infatuation with Michelle’s ass.
I didn’t actually present a theory but rather a state of the present economy brought to us by GOP Plutocratic and Social Darwinism policies that have now been proven to be a failure. It simply doesn’t work, cannot work, and is not working as I’ve repeatedly explained and you’ve failed to counter, perhaps because you were more focused on Michelle’s ass.
December 30th, 2012 at 5:54 am
Ronald,
It’s sort of refreshing, as another year winds down, to discover that there are still some people who believe in quasi-Malthusian economics. The rest of us understand that it is wrong to state that ‘one man’s loss is another man’s gain.’ If that were true, if the total wealth were static, then as population increases, most of us would steadily become poorer.
Instead, rather than shifting around who gets what out of a static-sized pie, the rest of us know that all that must be done is bake a bigger pie.
December 30th, 2012 at 7:39 am
Actually Arriba, my response contained some sarcasm and satire. If every word is to be taken totally serious, then Patrick honestly believes that Michelle’s butt will become the 8th wonder of the world. But I’ve always indicated that he lives in a fantasy world so there’s really no telling what fantasies he confuses with reality.
But from an economic standpoint, I do believe that when workers are paid higher living wages, that grows the economy as they can afford to purchase the products they make, which keeps that bakery open. And even if you don’t agree with that, there needs to be some form of meeting in the middle vrs what we have today.
December 30th, 2012 at 11:04 am
“I said other than the Affordable Health Care Act, but in the scenario you described I would buy a gun, file down the firing mechanism and lock it up somewhere.
Done and done.”
Good, at least we can agree that the healthcare act is unconstitutional.
As far as done and done goes, dont forget the ammo.
==================================================
“Heat is an energy that can never be destroyed but can only be transferred from one place to another.”
Wrong, energy itself cannot be destroyed,only transferred. Heat does not need to remain heat to be energy. You cannot just frame the parameters of physics to make bullsht analogy arguments. Sound waves, wind and kinetics can be results of heat with no thermal trace of their own.
You might want to contemplate the forces of freezing next time you talk economics.
Your argument with Patrick is flawed as you once again proved mine and Andys point that you conveniently always base your arguments on narratives that create false and inaccurate scenarios that make you look as if you know what you’re talking about.
How convenient, you make your leftist judgement based on the scenario that only the top 1% create any wealth and completely leave out the effects an overreaching economically incompetent government has on the middle class and the top one percents ability to sustain the market.
Any fool can leave out basic constructs of reality to make an unrealistic argument sound intelligent.
December 30th, 2012 at 3:48 pm
Micky, I worked in the electrical and HVAC field as a younger man and can tell you you’re simply out of your element here. Chew on this statement- an air conditioner does not cool your house or room or automobile. If you understand that, you understand the concept of air conditioning and heating.
When you can’t acknowledge or try to spin factual science, there’s really no need in me trying to talk politics with you.
December 30th, 2012 at 4:25 pm
Hey ass hole.
Chew on this.
Heat generates combustion which turns the fan.
The wind from that fan knocks you on your ass using no heat especially in sub zero climates.
Glaciers use no heat in creating the energy that moves them or the contractions they hold.
Why does a water bottle in the Antarctic explode when the water in it freezes ?
You think I dont know how refrigerants work ?
You imbecile.
You’re no better a physicist than you are a debater.
The results of heat can be transferred but do not always remain as holding thermal signatures
What would have in the total absence of heat ?
Now, tell me where the hell Andy ever sent me into any conversation with you, as you so bullshtingly claimed.
December 30th, 2012 at 5:08 pm
“Now, tell me where the hell Andy ever sent me into any conversation with you, as you so bullshtingly claimed.”
It was an obvious inference, I don’t think anyone took it literally.
December 30th, 2012 at 5:09 pm
I also think you are well aware of that fact.
December 30th, 2012 at 5:36 pm
Yeah, but thats how he frames all his arguments.
They’re based on false narratives and assumptions.
He leaves out the most obvious of elements that when they’re introduced his argument goes to sht.
Sets up selective and convenient parameters around his arguments to them relevance.
H
For example, with McCain,he presents a pseudo cognitive explanation of blame for the present economy based only the “wealthy oppressing the middle class” without once mentioning governments role.
He totally misses the point that those amassing/creating wealth own it no matter how much its earthly origins
Hes just a full o sht babbler who meant to say “energy cannot be destroyed, only transferred” but instead said “heat cannot be destroyed”.
And now hes tryin to weasel out of it by claiming his education made him smarter than even a high school chemist that knows hes full o sht.
The origin of an energy may of been heat. That heat, be it a solar expansion of a boulder that in turn sets it on a downward role crashing into another boulder thereby launching many other rocks in different directions is kinetic and no longer energy dependent on heat signature of any kind.
The initiating boulder will cool releasing the stored solar energy back to the atmosphere.
And then theres gravity.
Even Wikipedia shoots his sht to pieces.
Energy cannot be created or destroyed according to the law of conservation of energy. However, (thermodynamic free energy can be destroyed). When matter (ordinary material particles) is changed into energy (such as energy of motion, or into radiation), the mass of the system does not change through the transformation process. However, there may be mechanistic limits as to how much of the matter in an object may be changed into other types of energy and thus into work, on other systems.
The man is nothing more than an idiot full of words
December 30th, 2012 at 7:11 pm
Micky, while you may or may not knowingly play the role of what I’ve called a rodeo clown, you serve that purpose well.
What is this, story time for Micky? What I said was that heat is an energy (which it is) that cannot be destroyed (which it can’t) but can only be moved from one place to another. And it doesn’t matter if this transfer is through conduction, convection, or radiation. Why are you even challenging that reality? You should know this as you claim you have vast knowledge of refrigeration which has a text book definition of taking heat from an area where it isn’t wanted (from a room of a house) and putting it in an area that doesn’t matter(outside of the house). This is why an air condition doesn’t cool a room. That’s not its purpose. The purpose is to remove heat.
To answer your question of “What would have in the total absence of heat?” that’s really a hypothetical situation where the temp falls to 459.67 degrees below zero where all heat has been removed and there’s no molecular movement. At that point, we’re done. Likewise, once the top has secured all assets and wealth of the commoners, there’s no one left to purchase their products or services, creating their very own demise. What’s painful is the slow and cold path of getting there.
December 30th, 2012 at 8:11 pm
“What is this, story time for Micky? What I said was that heat is an energy (which it is) that cannot be destroyed (which it can’t) but can only be moved from one place to another. And it doesn’t matter if this transfer is through conduction, convection, or radiation.”
You’re wrong.
” Why are you even challenging that reality? ”
Your realities are proven to be bullsht.
“You should know this as you claim you have vast knowledge of refrigeration ”
Point and case again.
You make up bullsht arguments based on narratives you create out thin air.
Example…
I never said I have vast knowledge of refrigeration,you did, I said only “as if” that you think I dont know how modern cold air is produced.
I also made it out of college before anyone my age had their high school diplomas.
But you dont see me acting like some snotty academic who knows it all.
““What would have in the total absence of heat?” that’s really a hypothetical situation where the temp falls to 459.67 degrees below zero where all heat has been removed and there’s no molecular movement. At that point, we’re done. ”
And yet answer this so called “hypothetical” with your head up your ass.
There are creatures on earth that freeze to unimaginable temperatures,have unknown chemicals that reanimate what would normally be destroyed tissue.
But I digress, I’ve supplied one very generic and plain source on energy that says you’re wrong.
You see, I have an 18 year old about ready to grad high school. I’ve helped him with his homework. And even he knows that heat is a product of energy, not the other way around in which you present it.
That is why you saying “heat cannot be destroyed, only transferred” is wrong.
In the proper context its spoken as… “energy cannot be destroyed, only transferred”
Temperature is not energy.
December 30th, 2012 at 8:37 pm
” Likewise, once the top has secured all assets and wealth of the commoners, there’s no one left to purchase their products or services, creating their very own demise. What’s painful is the slow and cold path of getting there.”
Wow, your ignorance leaves me speechless.
(but not for long)
You seriously believe that once the top “supposedly” has hoarded all the wealth there will be no market based on needs and demands ?
That people will not need food medicine and homes ?That some bank or evil rich person wont realize theres profit in loaning a commoner like one of us enough capital to start up as contractors?
Good grief man, wtf is wrong with you ?
Quite opposite actually.
Its the socialist countries that see the redistribution monster destroy motivation at both ends of the chain thereby robbing everyone of wealth until theres no more to go around.
Why should the wealthy prosper only to have it given to others who have no motivation to thrive on their own ?
Can you not see the double negative ? The economic candle being burned at both ends ?
(which will destroy your heat)
Sorry dude, you’re just not that bright, no matter how eloquent you try to sound
December 30th, 2012 at 8:57 pm
I agree that temperature is not energy nor is temperature heat. Temperature is a measurement of the intensity of heat, which is an energy, which cannot be destroyed as it can only be moved from one place to another.
You say “I said only “as if” that you think I dont know how modern cold air is produced”. There is no production of cold nor is there a measurement of cold. Cold is not transferred one way or the other. We do not “cool”, we remove heat, an energy which cannot be destroyed as it can only be moved from one place to another.
December 30th, 2012 at 9:33 pm
Please, for the benefit of all mankind, kill this thread.