What does the term "lame duck" refer to in politics?
823079
A politician that is out of power because his party is now in the minority or because he was replaced by someone of the opposite party is called a lame duck, because they are shot and unable to fly (metaphorically speaking).  The current Speaker of the House is a lame duck because a Democrat will be replacing him in January; any attempts at last minute legislation by him will be blocked and postponed until the next Congress.  The President may become a lame duck if the Democratic Congress choose to block any and all of his proposals and actions (which they are entitled to do, but probably won't--they will be satisfied just curtailing him a little bit).\n\nI hope that helps.
933319
The guys who didn't get re-elected. The term is also used for a president who cannot get re-elected. The point is, nobody's listening to them.
574457
Of course government is politics!  They sort of go hand in hand.  And the answer to the original question is hypocrisy, and it has to do with money and power.  Unfortunately for the US citizens, the current administration is more focused on a personal agenda than what's good for the country or the world for that matter.  My hope is that all this will inspire people to get off their lazy butts and do something, like VOTE!  All the complaining in the world won't do a good if everybody is too lazy to take an active role in their civic duties.
632761
In a legislature or other decision making body, a filibuster is an attempt to extend debate upon a proposal in order to delay or completely prevent a vote on its passage. The term first came into use in the United States Senate, where Senate rules permit a senator, or a series of senators, to speak for as long as they wish and on any topic they choose. The term comes from the early 17th century, where buccaneers were known in England as filibusters. This term had evolved from the Spanish filibustero which had come from the French word flibustier, which again evolved from the Dutch vrijbuiter (freebooter). In the United Kingdom Parliament, a bill defeated by this maneuver is said to have been talked out.\n\nA similar form of parliamentary obstruction practised in the United States and other countries is called "slow walking". It specifically refers to the extremely slow speed with which legislators walk to the podium to cast their ballots. For example, in Japan this tactic is known as a "cow walk". In general it refers to the intentional delay of the normal business of the legislature
739330
The midterm election is the two year dividing mark between the presidential elections. Generally speaking, the midterm election is a referendum on the president, particularly if there is a second midterm election (the president was re-elected) because the president has been in power for six years and people are either loving the president or are dissatisfied with the president. \n\nIt is not at all unusual for the president's party to fall out of favor in the second midterm.
248523
It refers to a situation in parliamentary systems where a party wins less than 50% of the vote, but more than half the seats in parliament. That would be something akin to winning the electoral college, but not winning the popular vote.
527964
.... liberal means you want a change... which means you want someone else in office and don't agree with him.. \n\nliberal = you want change...
810182
I think Justice Scalia said it last week, to Cheney.  They were gearing up to hunt some ducks.  Can you blame him for being skittish?
445747
The main problem is that these "WORDS" are tossed around and used incorrectly! \n\nLiberal (Left Wing) should mean a free thinker, open minded, ect...\n\nConservatives (Right Wing) are people who should save, protect, or carefully use assets or make choices that require unclouded thinking.\n\nIn the end it's all a bunch of bull shit! The so called conservatives are ignorant minions of the wealthy and powerful. The GOP (grand over-class party) is a great example of this. They spend our money on bull shit like there's no tommorrow and try and oppress those who oppose them. They suck at social justice. (We are a Christian Nation yet we treat our poor and powerless like shit by cutting funding to important social programs and education). And they are great at filling their own pockets and the pockets of their masters with our hard earned tax dollars. This all goes against the saying "they will know we are Christian by our love".\n\nThe left wingers don't want people telling them how to live or what kind of choices they can make. BUT there are some things that shouldn't happen like a federal recongized homosexual marriage. The people need to vote on stuff like that. There are so many more important social and legal issues that need to be fixed before jumping onto a sword like that! \n\nIt all comes down to money and power. Right wingers leaders lie just as well if not better than left wingers. Don't let the left or right wing control your mind. Don't use these "Words" to lable yourself or others because these words are not used for what they mean. \n\nEducate yourself on the issues not by Watching FOX NEWS or CNN but by opening up a book and your mind.
381861
I THINK it means go to the middle.  In other words, be a moderate and not a leftist or rightest.  Extremes are never good in politics.\n\nI would have this verified by other posts.\n\nIt can also mean get to the center of an issue.  It depends upon the content of your question.
971538
its a word to describe many ppl in the current republican party (usually) that have "conservative" values. BUT, if you look at the conservative values of Nixon, or even as recent as Reagan, their views on a lot of major issues are no longer the same as their party has historically been. \n\njust to give you an idea, Bush has brought up the "tax and spend" democrats in many of his interviews and addresses, but HIS cabinet has spent more money than anyone in history. i think he's only vetoed 1 or 2 bills to date.\n\nthats typically not considered to be a conservative way of behaving.
936882
While the Democrats control the House without question, the Senate is still undecided. Either way the president is now a lame duck. However, the label also applies to Democrats at this point. The reason is because the president can veto any legislation they attempt to pass. The conclusion here is don't count on anything substantive happening in government for the next 2 years unless the Democrats truly embrace bi-partisan legislation efforts.
157657
Sounds like your doing some finger pointing yourself.  Politicians are always blaming someone else.  Misdirection is the name of the game.
105983
It's just a way of describing two opposites sides, as in wings of a building.\n\nTraditionally, the "left wing" or the "left" describes those who are liberal in philosophy and politics.  The "right wing" or "right" refers to those of a conservative bent.\n\nDuring the time of the Vietnam War, the left and right were known by their views on our involvement--"doves", or anti-war for the left, and "hawks", or pro-war for the right.\n\nHopefully you understand the liberal/conservative difference.  If not, post another question and we'll tackle that for you.
754242
After thinking many years about my ideas about liberal and conservative politics. I have come to define liberal politics as those that liberate the many from a power structure that concentrates the wealth of the global culture into the hands of a mercenary, plutocratic, predatory few. I have come to define conservative politics as those that conserve a power structure that concentrates the wealth of the many of our global culture into the hands of a mercenary, plutocratic, predatory few.\n\nWhy should I expect to win a "war on terror" by creating terror in war? Why should I expect to win a war on terror by giving all my gold to a mercenary plutocratic predatory few when it is a mercenary plutocratic predatory few that profit from the demand for protection created by terrorist activity? Terrorist activity creates demand in the market place for the protection services offered by a mercenary plutocratic predatory few. I think, believe and expect a more rational approach to winning the war on terror would be to redistribute of the wealth of the global culture by taking wealth from a mercenary plutocratic predatory few and giving wealth to the many. This would have the dual effect of diminishing the profits derived by a mercenary plutocratic predatory few from operating a global shakedown of epic proportions that some call a war on terror; and enabling the many to protect themselves from terrorist attack as individuals by using wealth acquired through redistribution .
902482
Its usually more subtle than that. A candidate might choose their words cautiously to avoid being pinned down on specifics may make general comments that make them to appear in favor of or against a particular issue. Depending on their audience.\n\nFor example a candidate might say "I am for secure borders and against amnesty" in one breath and then say something like "I am in favor of a guest worker program" in the next. This appears contradictory but its all in the words.\n\nThey play the word game to quote an infamous politician "it depends on what the meaning of is, is". \n\nIts easy to see why politicians are not trusted.
536719
Right wing: A descriptive term for an individual or a political faction that advocates very conservative policies. Right-wing groups generally support free enterprise.\n\nLeft Wing: The people and groups who advocate liberal, often radical measures to effect change in the established order, especially in politics, usually to achieve the equality, freedom, and well-being of the common citizens of a state.\n\nThis is the meaning of the terms in almost all democratic countries. The terms come originally from the legislative seating arrangement during the French Revolution.