Hatrack River
Home   |   About Orson Scott Card   |   News & Reviews   |   OSC Library   |   Forums   |   Contact   |   Links
Research Area   |   Writing Lessons   |   Writers Workshops   |   OSC at SVU   |   Calendar   |   Store
E-mail this page
Hatrack River Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » Anyone actually excited about Election Day? (Page 1)

  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: Anyone actually excited about Election Day?
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm just sick of voting defensively. I considered not voting but supposedly the governor's race is close (though I don't think it is).

Nothing will change at the national level. I'm in a safe state legislature district with little risk of those seats changing hands. There were no major ballot initiatives or props to vote on. It really felt like a waste of time this year.

I don't know how excited I'm supposed to be about voting for a guy I don't like because the other guy is even worse.

I really just wish we had ranked voting so I could actually be excited to vote for SOMEONE who reflects my views more accurately.

Posts: 21462 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Our ballot in Colorado was three pages long, and included ballot questions on both the local and state levels.

I'm curious to see how it pans out. The local news center comments section was grossly off from how people actually voted (i.e. no one was in favor of an energy initiative that actually passed with 77% of the vote.) and the senator who's been doing most of the advertising (Udall) is slated not to win. Hope that's not the case though.

Posts: 1386 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm sick of living in states that are overwhelmingly against the things I want as a voter.
Posts: 14278 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SenojRetep
Member
Member # 8614

 - posted      Profile for SenojRetep   Email SenojRetep         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Things have broken strongly for Republicans.

It looks like they will probably have a 54-46 majority in the Senate (assuming Alaska follows current polling), which is 1.5 more seats than the fivethirtyeight model had them at. And were it not for a Libertarian spoiler in VA, they likely would have taken another (and still might, although probably not).

Meanwhile, most of the close governor races have broken toward the Republicans, including blue state races they weren't favored in like IL and MD and states with controversial or unpopular Republican incumbents like WI and FL. Even Sam Brownback looks like he might hold his seat in KS. Greg Abbott is winning by historic margins in TX where Democrats had earlier hoped for a good showing from Wendy Davis (although her campaign had imploded more than a month ago).

All in all, a good night for the GOP.

[ November 05, 2014, 12:17 AM: Message edited by: SenojRetep ]

Posts: 2836 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We'll see. They have no agenda, and they think the people agree with some nebulous slop they refer to as a mandate. It's a pretty awful combination.

I fully expect them to continue to be idiotic, and come 2016 they'll hand over both houses.

Posts: 14278 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And, it goes without saying, a pretty terrible one for the country.
Posts: 36951 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SenojRetep
Member
Member # 8614

 - posted      Profile for SenojRetep   Email SenojRetep         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
For the Democrats to take the House in 2016 they'd need about a 60 seat swing. That happened in 2010, but in that election Democrats were defending a set of Reps voted in during their 2008 wave, and the GOP had their own 2010 wave at their backs. The last time prior to 2010 there was a swing that large was 1948. Given that 2014 is, at best, a minor Republican wave, I'd put the likelihood they win back the House as very low.

They have a better shot at the Senate, but a 54-46 split gives the GOP a bit of buffer. A priori, I expect Republicans will probably (but not necessarily) lose IL, WI, and probably PA. Second tier states held by Republicans that I expect would be very close are NH, NC, OH, FL and maybe AZ or GA. If all those break against the GOP, the Senate would flip back to a 55-45 Democratic majority, but I think that's pretty close to an upper limit on their gains. On the other hand, I think Bennet is possibly at risk in CO, especially given Gardner's strong showing tonight, and I also think it's unlikely that all those states flip. More likely (I think) is something like an even-ish split, resulting in roughly a 52-48 Democratic majority. And none of that accounts for the possibility of Obama reaching Bush-esque levels of unpopularity, which could result in 2016 looking like 2008 in reverse.

Posts: 2836 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It should be noted that Republican gerrymandering of Wisconsin has made it very unlikely that you'll see Democratic gains there in this generation.
Posts: 36951 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hahahaha oh my god how dumb is Kansas

they really re-elected Brownback, didn't they

Posts: 14196 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What, he only singlehandedly bankrupted the state. So it's not like that's a big deal.
Posts: 9624 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Brownback, bless his soul, is actually one of those things that history direly needs. A dyed in the wool conservative gets cart blanche to go in whole hog on THE conservative economic policy idea. With no liberals to get in his way (or blame later). Turn an entire American state into a testing ground on which conservative economics can be proven.

They dug in on the whole lazy faire tax-cuts-for-the-rich trickle down laffernomics thing. The tax structure imploded, kansas' economic growth stagnated, the schools are in dire condition, and the state has even had its credit rating downgraded. The whole thing was such a complete disaster! It's amazing! Brownback protested that he obviously just needs more time to make it work. And more cuts and regressive tax policies, of course!

And Kansas just gave him that time. Godspeed, you poor little mess of a state.

Posts: 14196 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GaalDornick
Member
Member # 8880

 - posted      Profile for GaalDornick           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Meanwhile in Florida, Rick Scott gets re-elected and medical marijuana rejected.

I don't really understand the argument against legalizing marijuana. Even if medical marijuana is just a cover for getting it fully legalized down the road, what's the argument against it? AFAIK, the gateway drug thing has been thoroughly debunked.

Posts: 1564 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Thesifer
Member
Member # 12890

 - posted      Profile for Thesifer           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GaalDornick:
Meanwhile in Florida, Rick Scott gets re-elected and medical marijuana rejected.

I don't really understand the argument against legalizing marijuana. Even if medical marijuana is just a cover for getting it fully legalized down the road, what's the argument against it? AFAIK, the gateway drug thing has been thoroughly debunked.

Technically it was "Accepted" by a majority of the people in Florida. But they passed a stupid law making all initiatives need 60%, it only got 58%...
Posts: 159 | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kwea
Member
Member # 2199

 - posted      Profile for Kwea   Email Kwea         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If you are going to legalize recreational use, then do it. But don't try and tell me that law with all it's loopholes was medical in nature...
Posts: 15016 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SenojRetep
Member
Member # 8614

 - posted      Profile for SenojRetep   Email SenojRetep         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Meanwhile in CA, if the current vote totals hold up the GOP will have elected its first openly gay Congressperson (Carl DeMaio) who also allegedly has a penchant for public masturbation and sexual harassment. So that's progress.
Posts: 2836 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We had "advisory questions" on the ballot in Illinois. Raising the minimum wage, raising the income tax on people making over a million dollars, requiring prescription birth control be covered by insurance. Two-thirds of the voters of Illinois voted "yes" on those questions. And we elected a governor who opposes those things. How stupid are we?
Posts: 10624 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
GaalDornick
Member
Member # 8880

 - posted      Profile for GaalDornick           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
We had "advisory questions" on the ballot in Illinois. Raising the minimum wage, raising the income tax on people making over a million dollars, requiring prescription birth control be covered by insurance. Two-thirds of the voters of Illinois voted "yes" on those questions. And we elected a governor who opposes those things. How stupid are we?

It's possible to disagree with a politician on some issues but still approve of his character and other factors enough that he still earns your vote.

Perhaps that's how many voters in your state felt.

Posts: 1564 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Geraine
Member
Member # 9913

 - posted      Profile for Geraine   Email Geraine         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Brownback, bless his soul, is actually one of those things that history direly needs. A dyed in the wool conservative gets cart blanche to go in whole hog on THE conservative economic policy idea. With no liberals to get in his way (or blame later). Turn an entire American state into a testing ground on which conservative economics can be proven.

They dug in on the whole lazy faire tax-cuts-for-the-rich trickle down laffernomics thing. The tax structure imploded, kansas' economic growth stagnated, the schools are in dire condition, and the state has even had its credit rating downgraded. The whole thing was such a complete disaster! It's amazing! Brownback protested that he obviously just needs more time to make it work. And more cuts and regressive tax policies, of course!

And Kansas just gave him that time. Godspeed, you poor little mess of a state.

Damn, that sounds a lot like the first two years of Obama's presidency.

Great night for republicans, though I don't think McConnell will be a good majority leader.

I'm curious to see if many of you "anti-obstructionist" types will still be complaining about obstruction now that the republicans have control. Will you say it is obstruction when democrats don't vote for bills on a partisan line, or will you come up with excuses?

Posts: 1888 | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well if you can get several top level democrats to say that the primary objective will be to ensure a one-term presidency as a goal in and of itself, you'll be getting somewhere.

The truth is you know this. You've copped to it before, but this isn't a very good climate for acknowledging problems with the team.

--------
Kwea,

The important thing is to make sure dangerous drugs like marijuana don't escape medical allowances. That might be a gateway to tobacco or alcohol or something!

Posts: 16423 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GaalDornick:
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
We had "advisory questions" on the ballot in Illinois. Raising the minimum wage, raising the income tax on people making over a million dollars, requiring prescription birth control be covered by insurance. Two-thirds of the voters of Illinois voted "yes" on those questions. And we elected a governor who opposes those things. How stupid are we?

It's possible to disagree with a politician on some issues but still approve of his character and other factors enough that he still earns your vote.

Perhaps that's how many voters in your state felt.

Even if the politician were a really great guy (and unless you consider making billions from price gouging heart medicine for premature infants, outsourcing US jobs, and putting elderly people at risk by running dangerous nursing homes to be the actions of a man of great character, he isn't) voting for people who will make policy that is contrary to your beliefs is just stupid.
Posts: 10624 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Geraine:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Brownback, bless his soul, is actually one of those things that history direly needs. A dyed in the wool conservative gets cart blanche to go in whole hog on THE conservative economic policy idea. With no liberals to get in his way (or blame later). Turn an entire American state into a testing ground on which conservative economics can be proven.

They dug in on the whole lazy faire tax-cuts-for-the-rich trickle down laffernomics thing. The tax structure imploded, kansas' economic growth stagnated, the schools are in dire condition, and the state has even had its credit rating downgraded. The whole thing was such a complete disaster! It's amazing! Brownback protested that he obviously just needs more time to make it work. And more cuts and regressive tax policies, of course!

And Kansas just gave him that time. Godspeed, you poor little mess of a state.

Damn, that sounds a lot like the first two years of Obama's presidency.

Great night for republicans, though I don't think McConnell will be a good majority leader.

I'm curious to see if many of you "anti-obstructionist" types will still be complaining about obstruction now that the republicans have control. Will you say it is obstruction when democrats don't vote for bills on a partisan line, or will you come up with excuses?

They don't have a fillibuster-proof majority, so what you asking is the filibuster fair when my side does it? I think statistics will tell which party is actually the problem with this one. Statistics show that yes, republicans have been being bigger legislative pains than any time in history, over all level things (except TV commericial volume, that was a by-partisan effort).

I suspect the best bet for Democratic obstruction is a presidential veto.

I'm curious to see how many times Obama's going to have to veto Obamacare repeals.

Posts: 1386 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DustinDopps
Member
Member # 12640

 - posted      Profile for DustinDopps           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I find it interesting to watch people on this message board reacting to politics. It is very telling, though not very surprising. The ones who are poor winners when their candidates win elections are also poor losers when their candidates lose. Surprise!

And to Samprimary in particular: I grew up in Kansas and most of my family lives there. Your comment "Hahahaha oh my god how dumb is Kansas" is offensive. If someone made the same comment about another group of people ("How dumb are Jewish people?" or "How dumb are gay people?" or "How dumb are evolutionists?") you would throw a hissy fit. You act as if you are smarter or more enlightened than all of those dumb hick Kansans.

How arrogant. How sad.

Posts: 267 | Registered: Sep 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Samp is smarter and more enlightened than every single Kansan who voted for Brownback, yes.
Posts: 36951 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, the problem here is that Samprimary's criticism was directed at a geographic group of people based on choices they made. So gays and Jews (depending on if you mean culturally Jewish, or religiously Jewish, etc.) don't really wash.

Also, a tip in general: if you're going to criticize someone for being a poor loser and arrogance at the same time, it's probably best not to be a poor winner yourself while doing so in a post dripping with arrogance and condescension yourself. Don't get me wrong, Samprimary will sometimes-often-drip with both himself, especially on politics, so I do get the impulse to gloat.

Just...maybe don't buff that hypocrisy finish to such a shine next time you're going to do it? You'll get the thing you apparently seek in political discussions, that is to say credibility.

Posts: 16423 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jake
Member
Member # 206

 - posted      Profile for Jake           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by DustinDopps:

And to Samprimary in particular: I grew up in Kansas and most of my family lives there. Your comment "Hahahaha oh my god how dumb is Kansas" is offensive.... You act as if you are smarter or more enlightened than all of those dumb hick Kansans.

How arrogant. How sad.

I grew up in Kansas, and most of my family lives there. I didn't find Sam's comment offensive. It's a slam on those Kansans who voted for Brownback. Those people voted for an ideologue who has done incalculable damage to the state. They have made a horrible choice, and one which the vast majority of them will be actively harmed by. I don't find Sam's response to that unreasonable.

I despair for the state at this point. I'm glad I'm not living there anymore, which is something I've never felt, and I wish that my friends and relatives weren't either.

Posts: 1011 | Registered: Jul 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
All the Kansans I know would agree with you, Jake. [Smile]
Posts: 10624 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DustinDopps
Member
Member # 12640

 - posted      Profile for DustinDopps           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rakeesh - You don't see any irony in telling me my post was dripping with arrogance and condescension? Really?

My post wasn't meant to be arrogant. I made a general observation, then spoke specifically to Samp to say his post was offensive to me. I admit there was condescension - mostly because I feel a line was crossed. It's fine to make fun of the stupid crazy creationists in fly-over country, because "Boy howdy! They're idiots!" That's what Samp's comment implied to me. And TomDavidson said it plainly.

There's a reason I rarely interact with many of the members here, and it isn't because I think I'm smarter or better than everyone else. It has to do with having common decency toward someone when you disagree with them. Some people here lack basic respect.

But whatever. I'll quiet down like all of the other conservatives here. I'm sorry I ruined the echo chamber.

(Oh, look! Here come the usual suspects to attack me now! Fun!)

Posts: 267 | Registered: Sep 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Some people here lack basic respect.
...
Here come the usual suspects...

Yeah.
In related news, DustinDopps is from Kansas. You can draw your own conclusions. [Wink]

Posts: 36951 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Dustin,

Well, I wasn't lecturing you on arrogance and condescension while being arrogant and condescending. I was talking about appearances. Though it is gracious of you to acknowledge your own hypocrisy-or else how would my criticism have any merit?

Anyway, you've got a valid point about an echo chamber here though lately even the echoes have quieted down due to a much slower posting frequency. Guys like Samprimary who will get smug at the drop of a hat (though this is more often than not a deliberate attempt to bait posters such as yourself) don't help. Some might say I don't help much either, but I hope I don't flatter myself that I'm at least a little more issues-oriented.

I remember you, Dustin. You've lost your cool more than once here, so please don't attempt to assume the moral high ground. That I will happily get snotty about. You could have had what you wanted-the moral high ground-and made Samprimary's bad-losing gloating look like sour grapes and childishness, but you let him bait you before you were even present in the conversation.

As for creationists, though, while believing in creationism does not make one stupid or crazy, creationism is a crazy and stupid belief. I would be less willing to be blunt about that, were it not for attempts to teach only creationism (when there were no challengers), criminalize teaching science in science classes (when creationism's many, many, many flaws began to be revealed by science), and then lie about things like 'teaching the controversy' and 'intelligent design' in an effort to subsidize lying to everyone's children in support of the foundering belief in creationism espoused by some parents.

Posts: 16423 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 7625

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am clearly the most arrogant and condescending person here. And when people don't happen to notice it happen, I feel smug as hell.
Posts: 4030 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kwea:
If you are going to legalize recreational use, then do it. But don't try and tell me that law with all its loopholes was medical in nature...

There's a lot of winking and nodding with the medical stuff. A lot of pro-legalization people (using the medical excuse) are trying to turn it into some sort of health thing. In reality, drugs are prescribed because their sides effects (which yes, marijuana has these) are outweighed by the benefits. It is generally not beneficial and to take drugs when you don't have the problem they are meant to treat (antibiotics, ADHD pills, painkillers and chemo).
Posts: 1386 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Geraine
Member
Member # 9913

 - posted      Profile for Geraine   Email Geraine         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by theamazeeaz:
quote:
Originally posted by Geraine:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Brownback, bless his soul, is actually one of those things that history direly needs. A dyed in the wool conservative gets cart blanche to go in whole hog on THE conservative economic policy idea. With no liberals to get in his way (or blame later). Turn an entire American state into a testing ground on which conservative economics can be proven.

They dug in on the whole lazy faire tax-cuts-for-the-rich trickle down laffernomics thing. The tax structure imploded, kansas' economic growth stagnated, the schools are in dire condition, and the state has even had its credit rating downgraded. The whole thing was such a complete disaster! It's amazing! Brownback protested that he obviously just needs more time to make it work. And more cuts and regressive tax policies, of course!

And Kansas just gave him that time. Godspeed, you poor little mess of a state.

Damn, that sounds a lot like the first two years of Obama's presidency.

Great night for republicans, though I don't think McConnell will be a good majority leader.

I'm curious to see if many of you "anti-obstructionist" types will still be complaining about obstruction now that the republicans have control. Will you say it is obstruction when democrats don't vote for bills on a partisan line, or will you come up with excuses?

They don't have a fillibuster-proof majority, so what you asking is the filibuster fair when my side does it? I think statistics will tell which party is actually the problem with this one. Statistics show that yes, republicans have been being bigger legislative pains than any time in history, over all level things (except TV commericial volume, that was a by-partisan effort).

I suspect the best bet for Democratic obstruction is a presidential veto.

I'm curious to see how many times Obama's going to have to veto Obamacare repeals.

Probably not many. Unless the Republicans change the threshold needed for overcoming a filibuster.

Obama will likely veto quite a bit, but he needs to be careful with it. If he were to veto, say, the Keystone Pipeline, it would likely cause his and other democrats approval ratings to drop even more.

Likewise if a bill to secure the border (actually secure it) went to his desk and was vetoed, he'd be in some trouble.

Both of those topics have majority support from Americans.

I'm hoping for a Clinton style final 2 years, unfortunately after the President's speech earlier today I don't have much hope for it.

Posts: 1888 | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Geraine:
quote:
Originally posted by theamazeeaz:
quote:
Originally posted by Geraine:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Brownback, bless his soul, is actually one of those things that history direly needs. A dyed in the wool conservative gets cart blanche to go in whole hog on THE conservative economic policy idea. With no liberals to get in his way (or blame later). Turn an entire American state into a testing ground on which conservative economics can be proven.

They dug in on the whole lazy faire tax-cuts-for-the-rich trickle down laffernomics thing. The tax structure imploded, kansas' economic growth stagnated, the schools are in dire condition, and the state has even had its credit rating downgraded. The whole thing was such a complete disaster! It's amazing! Brownback protested that he obviously just needs more time to make it work. And more cuts and regressive tax policies, of course!

And Kansas just gave him that time. Godspeed, you poor little mess of a state.

Damn, that sounds a lot like the first two years of Obama's presidency.

Great night for republicans, though I don't think McConnell will be a good majority leader.

I'm curious to see if many of you "anti-obstructionist" types will still be complaining about obstruction now that the republicans have control. Will you say it is obstruction when democrats don't vote for bills on a partisan line, or will you come up with excuses?

They don't have a fillibuster-proof majority, so what you asking is the filibuster fair when my side does it? I think statistics will tell which party is actually the problem with this one. Statistics show that yes, republicans have been being bigger legislative pains than any time in history, over all level things (except TV commericial volume, that was a by-partisan effort).

I suspect the best bet for Democratic obstruction is a presidential veto.

I'm curious to see how many times Obama's going to have to veto Obamacare repeals.

Probably not many. Unless the Republicans change the threshold needed for overcoming a filibuster.

Obama will likely veto quite a bit, but he needs to be careful with it. If he were to veto, say, the Keystone Pipeline, it would likely cause his and other democrats approval ratings to drop even more.

Likewise if a bill to secure the border (actually secure it) went to his desk and was vetoed, he'd be in some trouble.

Both of those topics have majority support from Americans.

I'm hoping for a Clinton style final 2 years, unfortunately after the President's speech earlier today I don't have much hope for it.

I was in middle school for Clinton's final years, all I remember is the impeachment trial and bombing Bagdad on the day before one of the votes. Is that what you want?
Posts: 1386 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Thesifer:
quote:
Originally posted by GaalDornick:
Meanwhile in Florida, Rick Scott gets re-elected and medical marijuana rejected.

I don't really understand the argument against legalizing marijuana. Even if medical marijuana is just a cover for getting it fully legalized down the road, what's the argument against it? AFAIK, the gateway drug thing has been thoroughly debunked.

Technically it was "Accepted" by a majority of the people in Florida. But they passed a stupid law making all initiatives need 60%, it only got 58%...
I've seen that reaction a lot, and I have to say, there is absolutely nothing "stupid" about such a law. In fact it was passed in 2010 in Florida, in the wake of California, which has a 50% constitutional ammendment law, passing prop 8. And California's constitutional process is a mess because of this: we can vote in changes to the constitution for virtually anything, as long as they're mildly popular at the time. That's not a smart way to treat your supreme law.
Posts: 9624 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Geraine:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Brownback, bless his soul, is actually one of those things that history direly needs. A dyed in the wool conservative gets cart blanche to go in whole hog on THE conservative economic policy idea. With no liberals to get in his way (or blame later). Turn an entire American state into a testing ground on which conservative economics can be proven.

They dug in on the whole lazy faire tax-cuts-for-the-rich trickle down laffernomics thing. The tax structure imploded, kansas' economic growth stagnated, the schools are in dire condition, and the state has even had its credit rating downgraded. The whole thing was such a complete disaster! It's amazing! Brownback protested that he obviously just needs more time to make it work. And more cuts and regressive tax policies, of course!

And Kansas just gave him that time. Godspeed, you poor little mess of a state.

Damn, that sounds a lot like the first two years of Obama's presidency.

Great night for republicans, though I don't think McConnell will be a good majority leader.

I'm curious to see if many of you "anti-obstructionist" types will still be complaining about obstruction now that the republicans have control. Will you say it is obstruction when democrats don't vote for bills on a partisan line, or will you come up with excuses?

You really are a silly person. I hope you know that.
Posts: 9624 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elison R. Salazar
Member
Member # 8565

 - posted      Profile for Elison R. Salazar   Email Elison R. Salazar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'll post a post from SA I agree with:

quote:

I tend to agree with the postmortem I'm hearing, which is that the Dems refusing to actually point out successes and support Obama's victories basically made it a choice between a Republican and a Democrat campaigning like a Republican, which of course means the Dems lose.

Not emphasizing the successes of Obamacare and the economy are just ridiculous, and those guys deserved to lose. Gary Peters in MI played it right and won pretty easily.

Once again the Dems played the game of the other side and lost.


Posts: 12505 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elison R. Salazar
Member
Member # 8565

 - posted      Profile for Elison R. Salazar   Email Elison R. Salazar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Geraine:
quote:
Originally posted by theamazeeaz:
quote:
Originally posted by Geraine:
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
Brownback, bless his soul, is actually one of those things that history direly needs. A dyed in the wool conservative gets cart blanche to go in whole hog on THE conservative economic policy idea. With no liberals to get in his way (or blame later). Turn an entire American state into a testing ground on which conservative economics can be proven.

They dug in on the whole lazy faire tax-cuts-for-the-rich trickle down laffernomics thing. The tax structure imploded, kansas' economic growth stagnated, the schools are in dire condition, and the state has even had its credit rating downgraded. The whole thing was such a complete disaster! It's amazing! Brownback protested that he obviously just needs more time to make it work. And more cuts and regressive tax policies, of course!

And Kansas just gave him that time. Godspeed, you poor little mess of a state.

Damn, that sounds a lot like the first two years of Obama's presidency.

Great night for republicans, though I don't think McConnell will be a good majority leader.

I'm curious to see if many of you "anti-obstructionist" types will still be complaining about obstruction now that the republicans have control. Will you say it is obstruction when democrats don't vote for bills on a partisan line, or will you come up with excuses?

They don't have a fillibuster-proof majority, so what you asking is the filibuster fair when my side does it? I think statistics will tell which party is actually the problem with this one. Statistics show that yes, republicans have been being bigger legislative pains than any time in history, over all level things (except TV commericial volume, that was a by-partisan effort).

I suspect the best bet for Democratic obstruction is a presidential veto.

I'm curious to see how many times Obama's going to have to veto Obamacare repeals.

Probably not many. Unless the Republicans change the threshold needed for overcoming a filibuster.

Obama will likely veto quite a bit, but he needs to be careful with it. If he were to veto, say, the Keystone Pipeline, it would likely cause his and other democrats approval ratings to drop even more.

Likewise if a bill to secure the border (actually secure it) went to his desk and was vetoed, he'd be in some trouble.

Both of those topics have majority support from Americans.

I'm hoping for a Clinton style final 2 years, unfortunately after the President's speech earlier today I don't have much hope for it.

This is just wrong and essentially one giant false equivalency.

How is the first two years of the Obama presidency at all similar or analogous to the complete disaster that is Kansas? (It is Kansas correct?)


Obamacare *works*, that's a fact, nothing Brownback did is working.

Posts: 12505 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Thesifer:
quote:
Originally posted by GaalDornick:
Meanwhile in Florida, Rick Scott gets re-elected and medical marijuana rejected.

I don't really understand the argument against legalizing marijuana. Even if medical marijuana is just a cover for getting it fully legalized down the road, what's the argument against it? AFAIK, the gateway drug thing has been thoroughly debunked.

Technically it was "Accepted" by a majority of the people in Florida. But they passed a stupid law making all initiatives need 60%, it only got 58%...
I've seen that reaction a lot, and I have to say, there is absolutely nothing "stupid" about such a law. In fact it was passed in 2010 in Florida, in the wake of California, which has a 50% constitutional ammendment law, passing prop 8. And California's constitutional process is a mess because of this: we can vote in changes to the constitution for virtually anything, as long as they're mildly popular at the time. That's not a smart way to treat your supreme law.
Posts: 9624 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by DustinDopps:
And to Samprimary in particular: I grew up in Kansas and most of my family lives there.

That's very tragic! My condolences to them and everyone who has to deal with the fallout of idiots re-electing Brownback. Perhaps if they're lucky, they can move to a less tragic state that isn't inflicting an economic implosion on itself.


quote:
Your comment "Hahahaha oh my god how dumb is Kansas" is offensive. If someone made the same comment about another group of people ("How dumb are Jewish people?" or "How dumb are gay people?" or "How dumb are evolutionists?") you would throw a hissy fit.
I'm really sorry that you can't tell the reasons why what I did is different from what you are comparing them to, and why there is subsequently a major difference in outrage between the two categories (or would be from me). Since you at least got to be educated in Kansas before the hundreds of millions of dollars in state funding shortfall that Kansas now has to grapple with, I will charitably presume you can at least see the error in your reasoning now that it has been described to you.

Future generations of Kansans may not be so lucky, I am afraid [Frown]

[Frown] [Frown] [Frown]

Posts: 14196 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
also

quote:
I made a general observation, then spoke specifically to Samp to say his post was offensive to me. I admit there was condescension - mostly because I feel a line was crossed. It's fine to make fun of the stupid crazy creationists in fly-over country, because "Boy howdy! They're idiots!"
creationists? when did that come in to play? what. is there some unrelated baggage coming in to play with your response to me i guess. Also is stuff like "how arrogant, how sad" included in your standard for having 'basic respect' because you are sometimes confusingly hypocritical


quote:
you let him bait you before you were even present in the conversation.
lastly i guess i should note: what baiting? there was no motivation to bait. I didn't know or care that there were kansans on this forum who were going to be offended that I think what kansas is doing is exactly as dumb and tragic as my language stresses.
Posts: 14196 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Not Dustin specifically, Samp. Cmon, are we going to pretend your language isn't to some extent calculated? I don't personally mind as much as I should, but seriously.
Posts: 16423 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
i don't have to pretend that my language was not intended to 'bait' anyone. if that was your assumption about my intent with my post that talks about kansas (and how I legitimately feel what's going on there is horrifically dumb), it's not correct. i just figured you would want to know.
Posts: 14196 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
At least here, the Republicans who won did it by pretending not to be very Republican at all. Mr. Rauner's best weapon (aside from being able to pretty much fund his own very expensive campaign from his own pocket) was his self-identified liberal wife reassuring us in ad after ad that her husband was okay. Mr. Dold did something similar using his sister and using the word "independent" a lot and "Republican" hardly at all. I had to google him to find out he was a Republican.
Posts: 10624 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
At least here, the Republicans who won did it by pretending not to be very Republican at all. Mr. Rauner's best weapon (aside from being able to pretty much fund his own very expensive campaign from his own pocket) was his self-identified liberal wife reassuring us in ad after ad that her husband was okay. Mr. Dold did something similar using his sister and using the word "independent" a lot and "Republican" hardly at all. I had to google him to find out he was a Republican.

I like these people though. They still vote in lockstep when their party wants them to, and I'd rather have seats go to Democrats, but quite frankly, we need more moderate Republicans in Congress. We don't have many right now at all.

http://xkcd.com/1127/

Posts: 1386 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Why? Assuming they actually are moderate, what does that mean when it comes to how they vote?
Posts: 10624 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
For everyone talking about how 2014 Democratic weaknesses will carry over to 2016 should consider turnout between elections. Democratic turnout in midterms is almost always bad. In 2016, with strong turnout for the General, Dems will recover a lot of their strength in states that went the other way this year. The GOP will only have the Senate for two years, and their lead in the House will be dramatically cut back in 2016.

I'm glad they took over. Now they have to put their money where their mouths are, and since they haven't really proposed much of anything in the last few years, that'll really be a sight to see.

Posts: 21462 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It means they are more likely to vote for bi-partisan efforts, or pass a liberal bill.

It also prevents parties from appealing too much to the extreme ends of their base.

Posts: 1386 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Unlikely. Moderates have been sidelined for years when they manage to make it into Congress at all. Structural forces make it unlikely for moderates of either party to command much more space in Congress for years to come.
Posts: 21462 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
theamazeeaz
Member
Member # 6970

 - posted      Profile for theamazeeaz   Email theamazeeaz         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Meh. Every little bit helps.
Posts: 1386 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Because I'm tired of working for candidates who make me think that I should be embarrassed to believe what I believe, Sam! I'm tired of getting them elected! We all need some therapy, because somebody came along and said, "'Liberal' means soft on crime, soft on drugs, soft on Communism, soft on defense, and we're gonna tax you back to the Stone Age because people shouldn't have to go to work if they don't want to!" And instead of saying, "Well, excuse me, you right-wing, reactionary, xenophobic, homophobic, anti-education, anti-choice, pro-gun, Leave It To Beaver trip back to the Fifties...!", we cowered in the corner, and said, "Please. Don't. Hurt. Me."
the west wing seems to have predicted the future
Posts: 14196 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2