I'm pissed off that the name of my beloved drink is being tarnished by far right knobends.
US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012
- Thread starter Team Brian GB
- Start date
- Status
good summation Bob.
tell me, which was the last president you voted for that actually lived up to your expectations? Or which President in history you could have said you agreed with fundementally.
tell me, which was the last president you voted for that actually lived up to your expectations? Or which President in history you could have said you agreed with fundementally.
I don't really thing having two radically opposed factions in the political system is a positive thing. With the traditional two parties, there was always distance between the two but they could normally work together and get something practical done. Now, with the Tea Party, we have one group that won't do anything that Democrats want and are willing to push the economy and state of the country to the brink to get what they want. Adding another group that drives the Democrats further left would only increase the gap between the two and make Congress more dysfunctional.
What we really need is for there to be a group that is pragmatic and centrist that can be a counter to wingnuts. The GOP should realize that it will quickly lose any power it has by pandering to the Tea Party and letting it grow. They are riding the bull now and holding on for dear life, but the Speaker is enslaved to Eric Cantor and his friends. That's not how party leadership is supposed to work. The fear is that by pushing away the Tea Party, they will lose a large part of their support, money, and give the Democrats the help in the next election because the conservatives will split between the two. The GOP, for its own good, should take the hit in 2012 by aborting the Tea Party and funding primary candidates to run against the Tea Party. Without the support of the party, it would be difficult on all but the most high profile congressmen to stay in office.
Unfortunately, the Teajadists are in the driver seat now because no one stood in their way. The answer isn't to create a larger gap between the two parties. It's to drive the crazy bastards in the Tea Party out of government to prevent them from getting their Randian, theocratic paradise. They all love Atlas Shrugged and think they're the John Gaults and Hank Reardens, while they're more "moochers" because of all the sweet deals they get from the government and the insane influence they have over it. No one ever accused them of being intelligent.
What we really need is for there to be a group that is pragmatic and centrist that can be a counter to wingnuts. The GOP should realize that it will quickly lose any power it has by pandering to the Tea Party and letting it grow. They are riding the bull now and holding on for dear life, but the Speaker is enslaved to Eric Cantor and his friends. That's not how party leadership is supposed to work. The fear is that by pushing away the Tea Party, they will lose a large part of their support, money, and give the Democrats the help in the next election because the conservatives will split between the two. The GOP, for its own good, should take the hit in 2012 by aborting the Tea Party and funding primary candidates to run against the Tea Party. Without the support of the party, it would be difficult on all but the most high profile congressmen to stay in office.
Unfortunately, the Teajadists are in the driver seat now because no one stood in their way. The answer isn't to create a larger gap between the two parties. It's to drive the crazy bastards in the Tea Party out of government to prevent them from getting their Randian, theocratic paradise. They all love Atlas Shrugged and think they're the John Gaults and Hank Reardens, while they're more "moochers" because of all the sweet deals they get from the government and the insane influence they have over it. No one ever accused them of being intelligent.
You have it, it's called the Democratic Party. It's roughly where the the Conservatives under Cameron are with regard to economics, and socially probably somewhat to the right. It's not like Bernie Sanders is running the show.
But with our primary system, most of the people who vote are to the extremes on both sides. So with Democrats, you tend to get candidates that are more to the left from what would be "centrist." The same goes for the GOP. The Democrats are notoriously spineless and have let the GOP dictate message and narrative for 3 years. Collectively, they are closer to the center than the GOP, but they still aren't "centrist" in the American political spectrum individually.
If both parties weren't so enslaved to those farthest left/right in their party, they would be much better at elections and governance. John McCain with someone other than Sarah Palin and without having to pander to the base would have had a good shot at beating Obama. Instead, we have Democrats who are beholden to Unions while the GOP is beholden to corporations. It's all about satisfying their donors rather than the people.
We need them to get on message and grab some control of the "debate" to fight the constant stream of lies and misinformation from Fox News and the Tea Party. They have somehow failed to do so, so I won't get my hopes up. They control the White House and Senate but are driven by the House. It's silly.
If both parties weren't so enslaved to those farthest left/right in their party, they would be much better at elections and governance. John McCain with someone other than Sarah Palin and without having to pander to the base would have had a good shot at beating Obama. Instead, we have Democrats who are beholden to Unions while the GOP is beholden to corporations. It's all about satisfying their donors rather than the people.
We need them to get on message and grab some control of the "debate" to fight the constant stream of lies and misinformation from Fox News and the Tea Party. They have somehow failed to do so, so I won't get my hopes up. They control the White House and Senate but are driven by the House. It's silly.
We're now seeing this Teahadi type behaviour in Oz now. fecking Americans and your soft power. 
I don't see how that really applies to the Dems when you have the phenomenon of the Blue Dogs. How did those guys get through their primaries? I think as you say the US middle ground is quite a way to the right of most countries', and the result is that plenty of conservative Democrats get elected.
Also, the Democrats are beholden to corporations just as much as the GOP. Wall St and Pharma give more money to the Dems, Big Oil and some other multinationals to the GOP.
And Twinings?
The Blue Dogs were in conservative districts where Democrats didn't have much chance of winning as a "true" democrats. They almost all lost their seats last election because they weren't conservative enough. They were basically Republicans running under the Democrat name.
I realize that both parties love corporate money and are their personal legislators, but the conservatives are much more blatant about it. Their focus is on helping "job creators" while the Dems at least have the facade of working for the average people with entitlements and social programs. With the Citizens United ruling(conservative ruling), now corporate money can pour into elections. Since Dodd-Frank was passed, the GOP has done nothing but try to prevent any of the reasonable actions from being taken, like an evaluation of S&P, Mooody's, and Fitch over their roles in the recession. They're all indebted to different extents, but the GOP just baldly chases corporate interests.
I realize that both parties love corporate money and are their personal legislators, but the conservatives are much more blatant about it. Their focus is on helping "job creators" while the Dems at least have the facade of working for the average people with entitlements and social programs. With the Citizens United ruling(conservative ruling), now corporate money can pour into elections. Since Dodd-Frank was passed, the GOP has done nothing but try to prevent any of the reasonable actions from being taken, like an evaluation of S&P, Mooody's, and Fitch over their roles in the recession. They're all indebted to different extents, but the GOP just baldly chases corporate interests.
Fair enough
The real genius of the GOP is to somehow convince working-class voters that their interests are aligned with those of the the super-rich. I'm not saying there are no economic arguments at all for low-tax growth and trickle-down, but the GOP talks as if the entire discussion has been resolved, permanently. They've somehow folded the idea of an aristocracy into the meritocratic mythology of the American Dream. It's actual genius.
Has there ever been a constituency more persuaded to vote against its own interests?
The GOP merely appeal to the worst natures of people. Their bigotry.
They are excellent in scapgoating. Nothing new. Its always the balcks, hispanics, gays, non-Kristians.
They dont offer any real solutions. Just say that their problems are attributed to these 'other groups'
They are excellent in scapgoating. Nothing new. Its always the balcks, hispanics, gays, non-Kristians.
They dont offer any real solutions. Just say that their problems are attributed to these 'other groups'
Hopefully this hasn't already been posted
Some interesting numbers in that article...Buffet is giving Obama a ton of freebies here, it's up to him to use and disseminate this information, and make the republicans come up with counter arguments.
Some interesting numbers in that article...Buffet is giving Obama a ton of freebies here, it's up to him to use and disseminate this information, and make the republicans come up with counter arguments.
I'm voting for Dukakis.
It's insane. They're able to get enough religious people to vote solely on that and ignore the fact that they're getting screwed in the process financially. Most of my family has no business voting Republican but they do, and I can't explain to them why it's ridiculous that they keep voting for a party that constantly craps on them. One almost lost her job because the state Republicans wanted to eliminate most of the people in her job in the education budget(which put us down near Miss in terms of education spending). She still wasn't happy that I called the GOP out on the debt ceiling. They've always voted Republican for social reasons while the GOP doesn't actually care about any of that and uses it as a wedge to gain voters. No matter how much they preach against gay marriage or abortion, their real focus is on helping the rich stay rich and decreasing the burden on them. Along with destroying the voices of citizens by ensuring that companies/corporations are people and can dump millions of dollars into elections.
People also are convinced that cutting taxes = jobs, despite the evidence of the last decade that there were no net jobs created while taxes were slashed dramatically. They will claim that there is too much regulation when the complete lack of it got us into the mire we're in now. Had someone been doing something about the whole mortgage crisis and watching over companies and the credit ratings agencies, perhaps we wouldn't be sitting here in a stagnant economy. Instead, the blame is placed on too much regulation that didn't allow the free market to function properly. They don't seem to realize that despite production skyrocketing those responsible for it have seen basically no wage increases and more work because of lay-offs. Now, people get paid low salaries to do the work of multiple people while dividends soar and executives bank insane bonuses. They can lay off thousands of people and still get their multi-million dollar bonus because the company made a profit.
Idiocracy isn't so far off, is it?
tell me how many people...even those who go to college understand basic economics?
trickle down economics
piss down your backs is more accurate....
trickle down economics
piss down your backs is more accurate....
It's amazing. It seems most pronounced in the poor South where I've seen the same people weened off the Democrats and won over to the GOP. From what I can tell it really kicked in with all that moral majority claptrap.
You're right. It is genius.
Sir Matt, you talk a lot of sense.
It's always the easiest to convert the poor and disenfranchised to your way of thinking, and this is all across the world.
They tend to be more God fearing, and fear change, along with the big bad rich govt, taking what little they have...and you add in a dash of foreigner bashing, and it is a heady mix.
Excellent read. Couldn't agree more.
The primary will be very interesting (it is already). Right after McCain lost I had Palin running and winning the next nomination. Now I'm not so sure since Bachman got into the ring. She is a dangerous version of Palin - not much smarter but she can put words into a sentence that makes sense (in that it is correct English), Palin on the other hand seems to puke out words that don't really go together.
It began with the Southern Strategy and Nixon exploiting racism to change the voting patterns of the poor south from dixiecrats to repubs who trumpeted state's rights. Reagan really ran with it and added the christian nonsense that has mutated into what we see today.
The trouble is that the strategy can only be successful if the majority of the population in these states are white...current demographic changes mean that the repubs need to find new figures of hate...hence the rise in Islamophobia and all this shite about Shariah law taking over.
What they really need to find is something that scares Mexicans into voting for them...that's the holy grail. If there was a fatwa issued against tacos then it'd be a republican wet dream!
you hit it when you said, the demographics are changing. In 20 years or less even the Democrats will have a permanent majority. The GOP will not win the Presidency again.
The GOP stategy cannot work with non-white voters. its based on hatrad of the minority. If you are not white, you are not American.
That's a big call. Hispanics for instance are quite conservative on social issues in the main, I don't think it's clear they'll always vote Democrat. The Tea Party aside, Republicans are interested in power and will move with the wind to get it if necessary.
They will have to on social issues though, I reckon. Gay rights have moved an enormous distance towards acceptance in a very few years, marijuana decriminalisation too (though that will presumably need a massive super-majority if anything's to happen).
The good news for Dems is urbanisation and increasing numbers going into higher education. College educated city-dwellers vote Democratic until they get really fecking rich.
Hispanics will never go big for repubs as long as they are so closely aligned with the tea party feckwits.
Yeah I think long-term the Tea Party is bad news for them, and they will have to ditch it (if they can).
True that the GOP is only interested in power. But its base is the uneducated white voter.
They cannot stray too far from that. In the 2008 election, social issues was only a small factor. The majority of whites vote GOP. That majority was higher in the South and Appalacia. Mike Murphy a Repubican strategist explained the pattern of diminishing white majority margins since 1980. He has said it will become increasingly difficult for the GOP to win the Presidency. The simple fact is that with each election the non-white vote increases.
Black, Hispanisc and Asians vote primarily Democrat. In less than 20 years Texas will have a Hispanic majority population.
What I see is eventually the Democratic party will break along economic lines similar to say the Uk, while the GOP will become a strictly regional party.
I fecking hope so
If so, watch out for secessionist rhetoric hitting the roof
If so, watch out for secessionist rhetoric hitting the roof
Don't forget the age factor in GOP voters too. They are dying off rapidly. Recruitment to young republicans (a despicable group) is suffering from college fee increases and graduate unemployment rates too.
There's also the power of group solidarity though. If the GOP ran 2016 with Marco Rubio they'd probably get significantly more Hispanics.
I think that FL hispanics are different from the rest of the country. The Cuban emigre element means they trend right anyway. They are generally offset by the large black population and all the old jews of Boca Raton etc!
True. But with the continued 'normalisation' of relations with Cuba this will become less of a factor in teh future.
The Democratic Party is as left as you're gonna get on this side of the Atlantic.
I voted for Bill Clinton twice. The second time I knew he would be working against my best interest, as compared to Bob Dole. (Need I say more?)
Jimmy Carter would have been a President I would have been proud of voting for. Recently, I read a list of the good things he accomplished. He did a lot more good than people think. ~ He had his faults, but nothing like the 5 Presidents, since.
------
Sir Matt,
In your summary of the two parties, I would say you got the GOP correct. Although, you've gotten the Democrats completely wrong. The Democrats have not increased 'welfare programs' since ~ God knows when.
Bill Clinton is the king of cutting entitlement programs with his Balance Budget Act of 1996.
Truth is, the Democrats always make it look like they will fight for entitlement programs, but give up somewhere along the way because the corporations slip them a check to do so.
The best argument that would put the Dems as welfare program protectors would the the Affordable Care Act. ~ Most of which is bullshit because whatever benefit there is, there's still the loophole that allows insurance companies overcharge enough to push people out. ~ There are exceptions like healthcare for children, but I believe States can opt-out of the MCHIP. ~ I'm almost certain that there are several mid-western states that have opted-out.
My point is, Dems very much care about jobs. I am confident in saying that Dems care about corporations as well - just not to the extend that Republicans care about corporations.
Here... this is the greatest tangible example, the minimum wage is far below a living-wage. The Republicans want nothing to do with anything about a minimum wage, at all. It's a very Tea Party perspective, but it's what the GOP have been about for many many decades. The Democrats have had plenty of chances to raise it up closer to a living wage but have refused to move it much higher. Yes, they have raised it... but it's still nothing that a single person can live on. When you measure it up against many other civilized countries, it's a crime what the American corporations are getting away with paying their help.
Busy day... here... wish I could chat about this more.
If Jimmy Carter had got a second term things would have turned out a lot better. Just read his malaise speech to see how far ahead of his time he was.
its not permanant.
Demographics, education and economic conditions will determine how far left it goes.
If the Progressives are able to re-brand their style of ideology by not using the terms 'left' or 'liberal', there might be significant change.
The neo-con population numbers are deminishing so fast, people are bailing from the Tea Party in huge numbers, and the average person is suffering. This is a recipe for a shift, likely a major shift.
Agree that Carter was a very good President Bob. The Iran Hostage debacle weakened him a lot. The Malaise Speech, though honest, politically hurt him.
on the Affordable Care Act. the fact there is no annual or lifetime limit surely helps.
A lot of the benefits kick in later years. I was watching PBS when it was being passed and they were quite positive about it. We cannot move to a single payer overnight...and what we have in other countries is far from perfect.
I think we will eventually get there. But at least Obama did something after all these years.
on the Affordable Care Act. the fact there is no annual or lifetime limit surely helps.
A lot of the benefits kick in later years. I was watching PBS when it was being passed and they were quite positive about it. We cannot move to a single payer overnight...and what we have in other countries is far from perfect.
I think we will eventually get there. But at least Obama did something after all these years.
Just read the malaise speech. He came too soon unfortunately.
I can sympathise with that.
- Status