US Politics: we are all liberals, we are all conservatives

[Horza]

Also inaccurate: McCain was shot down over Hanoi and thus never in the hands of the PLAF.

[ThinkerX]

Strangely, all but one of these states are part of the 'South':

http://money.msn.com/taxes/10-states-where-taxpayers-get-the-worst-bang-for-their-buck

[1918me]

It looks like the debate's begun for a new amendment regarding campaign contributions

http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/06/03/4156022/democratic-senators-amend-constitution.html

WASHINGTON -- The Senate began debate Tuesday on a Democrat-proposed constitutional amendment that would allow the government to regulate campaign money again, a response to recent Supreme Court rulings that removed limits on certain election contributions.

Democrats argue that the Supreme Court’s decisions in two cases allowed billionaires _ most notably conservatives Charles and David Koch _ to influence politics at rates disproportionate to the rest of the populace.

Republicans fought back Tuesday, saying the amendment would inhibit citizens’ First Amendment rights.

Divided along partisan lines, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., spearheaded their parties’ opposing views as the Senate Judiciary Committee debated the proposed amendment.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/06/03/4156022/democratic-senators-amend-constitution.html#storylink=cpy

I don't know if this will go anywhere, but I certainly wouldn't be opposed to it.

[1918me]

That said, if one was hoping for these primaries to up the odds that the Dems would keep the Senate in November, this was the night you were looking for.

Yeah, it's certainly good news for Democrats, although their chances of actually coming out on top this election seem almost insurmountably slim. I want to remain optimistic, but it seems like they need to make a series of difficult wins, while Republicans basically just need to hold on to what they already have a good chance of winning.

[1918me]

It goes back to how you're judging it. It will be a good year for the Republicans in that there's virtual certainty that they keep the House and virtual certainty that they pick up Senate seats. But everyone knows it's a good year for them on paper and in the odds, but if they don't actually re-take the Senate, I argue that it still effectively becomes a Democratic victory. It would mean that six years of unprecedented obstruction still did not get the GOP full control of congress. It would mean that Obama would never face a Republican Senate. And it would mean that however many seats the Republicans close the margin by, they're heading into their own especially vulnerable situation in 2016.

I mentioned this before, but it's worth repeating: unless the Republican nominee for President hammers the Democrat, it's very likely to be a great comeback year for the Dems in the Senate both in that they have a natural electoral college and turnout advantage in Presidential years versus off cycle years and 2016 happens to be six years since the big Republican wave of 2010 meaning the Republicans are defending more seats than usual.

Hell, I'm not even sure it's that much of a GOP win other than in the media cycle if they do re-take the Senate as it's not clear exactly how much they'd do with it, but I'm not really sure what will happen there.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. The reactionary in me wants to despair against the outlook of this coming November, but I can see how 2016 starts to look a lot better.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Note also that the Republicans would need to make a net gain of six seats to regain the Senate (a 50-50 tie is broken by Biden).

On the other hand, the Democrats need to make massive gains in 2016, because the map in 2018 is the stuff of nightmares.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Also true as that will be six years from the 2012 election (where I was quite confident about Obama winning but was shocked and amazed at how well the Dem Senators did overall), but this sort of just highlights the pendulemic (sp) nature of the thing.

Not just six years from 2012, but twelve from 2006, and eighteen from 2000.

[Inigima]

It looks like the debate's begun for a new amendment regarding campaign contributions

http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/06/03/4156022/democratic-senators-amend-constitution.html

I don't know if this will go anywhere, but I certainly wouldn't be opposed to it.

The First Amendment argument doesn't make any sense. The whole point is that it wouldn't be subject to the First Amendment because it's on a Constitutional level.

edit: This is probably good politics for the Dems even if it doesn't go anywhere. Very few people outside the fringe right like the idea of money's influence in politics.

[mcbigski]

We did prisoner exchanges with LITERALLY THE NAZIS.

False equivalence. We didn't trade something like Rommel, Himmler, and a few SS Colonels (if there was such a thing), for a private, did we?

[TrackerNeil]

Note also that the Republicans would need to make a net gain of six seats to regain the Senate (a 50-50 tie is broken by Biden).

This is important to remember. In 2010, a Republican year if there ever was one, Republicans only took six seats. They'd have to do exactly that well this year to win the Senate, which can happen but it won't be a cakewalk.

[Inigima]

False equivalence. We didn't trade something like Rommel, Himmler, and a few SS Colonels (if there was such a thing), for a private, did we?

Did we do that here?

[awesome possum]

So this is fun: the Chiquita company is trying its damndest to block a 9/11 victims' bill. Has spent about $780,000 over the last year lobbying against it. Why? Because:

the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), (is) a bill conceived of and supported by a group of 9/11 victims and families to aid their claims against actors who supported the terrorist attacks.

That's right, it helps victims of terrorism sue those who financed terrorism. Why is Chiquita so scared of this? Because of their financing of terrorists:

The major fruit supplier is not in any way connected with 9/11, but in 2007 it pleaded guilty to making over 100 payments to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), a right-wing paramilitary group designated by the United States as a terrorist organization.

Chiquita, which had operated in Colombia for over 100 years, began making payments to the terrorist organization after a 1997 meeting between an AUC leader and a senior executive of its Colombian subsidiary. Nearly every month, additional payments followed. The fruit company has maintained that it only made payments due to extortionary threats of violence, and reacted to protect the lives of its workers.

Anyone who has read up just a little bit on Chiquitas actions in South America know its an almost stereotypically mustchae-twirling type of evil and I fully expect them to walk away victors here. After all, when it was discovered they were financing terrorism they got a slap on the wrist with a $25 million dollar fine thanks in part to the due diligence of their legal representation: one Eric Holder.

It looks like the debate's begun for a new amendment regarding campaign contributions

http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/06/03/4156022/democratic-senators-amend-constitution.html

I don't know if this will go anywhere, but I certainly wouldn't be opposed to it.

Hey, the fact that it even got to the debate stage could be considered a win. Republicans usually filibuster the vote to start debate.

ETA: For our conservative friends who like to pretend racism doesn't exist, a video that will probably make several of them secretly giddy

This ignorant woman throws a venomous, racist tantrum at a guy for starting his car, which happened to I guess startle her kids? He handles it like a pro, much better than I would in that situation.

And another: a black worker at a cotton warehouse records his supervisor yelling at him for drinking from the water fountain and using the microwave, because they're for "whites only."

“What would they do when they catch me drinking your water?”

“That`s when we hang you,” said the supervisor.

[Shryke]

Did we do that here?

No. Not even close.

[awesome possum]

At least mcbigski was nice enough to project what the rest of his post would be in his first sentence.

[Sturn]

The senile fucker probably forgot what he previously believed. I really wish the Viet Cong had rid us of McCain when they had the chance

I'm not objecting he could be senile and hypocritical, but you probably shouldn't stoop to wishing those you disagree with would have been killed. How would you react to, "I wish Obama's classmates in Kenya would have beat his dumb ass to death".

Nice.

Oh nevermind you've got mod support? TP please tell us you were commenting sarcastically on what McCain did and not showing support of wishing those we disagree with had been killed.

[sologdin]

i read the nice as a stay classy.

[Sturn]

i read the nice as a stay classy.

unconvincing defensive leap requiring belief tp unwilling to precede 'be' before 'nice'.

[Fez]

Hell, I'm not even sure it's that much of a GOP win other than in the media cycle if they do re-take the Senate as it's not clear exactly how much they'd do with it, but I'm not really sure what will happen there.

Its still a big deal since it means Obama doesn't get any more judicial nominees approved. There's been a ton of progress, but there are still vacancies.

I maintain that Democrats will keep the senate though, and it looks like the playing field may be opening up more. If McDaniels wins the runoff in Mississippi, Childers has a shot at stealing that seat; he wouldn't have that if Cochran holds on.

That maths work. I'd be curious if that trend dissipates with time, though. Surely there's a PhD thesis on it somewhere.

For example, the Dems might have been lucky to get a Virginia Senate seat in 2000 just to use a random example. They wouldn't be considered too lucky in 2016. Demography does change.

I don't think it entirely dissipates. Senate Class II, which is what's up this year, is disproportionally smaller, more rural states; which means so long as Republicans do better in that environment, they should have a natural advantage.

False equivalence. We didn't trade something like Rommel, Himmler, and a few SS Colonels (if there was such a thing), for a private, did we?

Even if that's a bit of an exaggeration, there was only one US-Nazi Germany prisoner exchange and it was an even exchange of 149 for 149 enlisted men and low-level officers.

[DanteGabriel]

Did we do that here?

My most optimistic reading, and the reading that a few well-balanced commentators have taken, like the CSMonitor link I shared earlier, is that this is essentially the equivalent of freeing Edmure to make peace with Riverrun. Obama has misjudged the nihilism of his opponents in the past (domestically and internationally) so maybe it's a futile gesture, but I think that's the hope. Though I'm sure DebL66 just thinks this is so Obama wants to please his buddies in the Taliban.

I'm not objecting he could be senile and hypocritical, but you probably shouldn't stoop to wishing those you disagree with would have been killed. How would you react to, "I wish Obama's classmates in Kenya would have beat his dumb ass to death".

Oh nevermind you've got mod support? TP please tell us you were commenting sarcastically on what McCain did and not showing support of wishing those we disagree with had been killed.

Well, I think the fact that McCain was a captive in Vietnam is fairly established fact, while Obama being raised in Kenya is a dingbat smear from the deepest reaches of right wing xenophobia, so congratulations, you managed to top Ramsay's offensiveness!

[Inigima]

I think you guys are being a bit hard on DebL. Pretty clearly making an effort to debate on good faith. What say we hold off on this issue til we know a bit more? Virtually everyone on both sides agrees the facts aren't in yet.