Jump to content

US Politics Episode 6 - Return of the Prez


Stubby

Recommended Posts

it's not my party's fault that we lost to prohibition. it's the fault of those fucking splitters in the SWP, the PSL, the greens, the Justice party, the PFJ, the JPF, and so on.

No one mentioned fault - this is an opportunity for you, the righteous man! Or am I using offensive terminology?

You, the glorious proletariat showing that voting rights granted to the working classes were not wasted on the landless ingrates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't Alaska elect a write-in senator?

That situation was more complicated than a simple write-in candidate, but yes, it's happened.

Lisa Murkowski had been appointed to the Senate by her father, a bigwig in Alaska politics who was the governor at the time. Sarah Palin backed a Tea Party candidate who defeated Murkowski in the primary, and rather than take it lying down, she ran a write-in campaign. It helped that the Democratic candidate never had a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You make it sound like Joe Miller disappeared, Trisk. He's planning to run for Ted Stevens' old seat in 2014. ;)

ETA: Ted Stevens is also known as the "Bridge to Nowhere" and "the Internet is a series of tubes" guy. I know there are people like Happy Ent who probably don't recognize the name alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, Paul Ryan is cute only by DC standards.

Hey!

Ouch. He'll probably win, won't he? It took an old-school establishment Republican like Murkowski to beat him.

Maybe, maybe not. Mark Begich is a fairly popular incumbent who managed to take down Ted Stevens (even if Stevens facing corruption charges made it much easier). Alaska is one of those states where if you can just get into Congress its awfully hard to get removed; there's just so much federal money that flows in that you can take some credit for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, just thinking about that alternate universe makes me shiver.

I know... OTOH the declaration that serious applicants for positions in his admin must disclose their "financial holdings and sources of income" in order to prevent conflicts of interest was hilarious, especially the "remedied by divestiture, special trusts, etc." part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One the most confusing board moments in history for me was when one prominent female boarder said that Ryan was really good-looking.

Yeah, by DC standards. At best. Really, it's best to not confuse my underlying desire to capitalize on the opportunity to objectify male political candidates with actual, you know, attraction. Honestly, he sort of looks like my ex-husband, if my ex-husband ever worked out and didn't put down a 6 pack/day.

But to turn back to the important stuff, way back in the last thread, Fez said:

That "bullshit" is what politics is all about, that's what a divided Washington working properly looks like.

Oh yes, please school me on the ways of government. Fuck that. We horse traded $500 billion in lost revenue for provisions that cost about half that much. Find me a time when one party had the presidency and the senate and got that screwed. And I don't want to hear all this garbage about it being the fault of House Republicans. It is the fault of House Republicans when a meaningful compromise bill is not passed because they wouldn't play ball, but it is not the fault of House Republicans when our solution to their intransigence is to give them everything they want.

It is possible that a payroll tax cut saved jobs and that extended unemployment insurance kept people viable in the labor market. But when you more than double the estate tax exemption, you are perpetuating class growing class separation across generations - with the spousal carry-over provisions, that's $10 million that's exempt from taxes. It doesn't help when you also tax people more for money they earn actually working than money earned on investments, be it capital gains or dividends.

I'm not pissed that Obama cut a deal with Republicans - that's how shit works. Ideally it works like welfare reform under Clinton, where he cut a successful deal with Gingrich and subsequently successfully took all credit for it. It is not working when we just give up on the core tenants of everything we stand for - and that's pretty much what happened there. When Obama extends all Bush tax cuts and expands a few more, how can he be anything other than responsible for more lost tax revenue than Bush?

In summary, the art of negotiation involves bargaining between two parties to reach a mutually agreed upon solution. Often (but not always) it involves compromise. However, that doesn't mean all parties who compromise negotiated successfully - far from it. So no, sucktastic negotiation where you gain half of what you gave is not how politics works, and damn it if our failure to expect a little more isn't at least half the problem.

Fortunately, it would appear that the President sees it differently and has been setting the stage for more successful positioning this time around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at this New York Times graphic, its interesting that the one area of the country that President Obama consistently did better in 2012 than in 2008 was actually in the deep south. He still lost most of those counties overwhelming of course (except the majority African American ones obviously), but its interesting that he did better. Romney did not "run up the score" in most of the ruby red states. Instead he made most of the swing states more competitive and shrank the margins a little bit in indigo blue states.

Yeah, what the hell is going in Mississippi and Alabama, and bits of Louisiana and what looks like the non-Atlanta bits of Georgia over there? I mean, Mississippi and Alabama. Demographic shifts? A stark lack of appeal from a millionaire candidate in poorer areas? The mormonism? Thats like the most interesting election map i've seen yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice to see that things are calming down and that republicans are reacting in a chill and relaxed fashion.

Goddamn sluts slutting everything up.

The other guy sounds like a real cultist

I strongly urge all other libertarians to do the same. Are you married to someone who voted for Obama, have a girlfriend who voted 'O'. Divorce them. Break up with them without haste. Vow not to attend family functions, Thanksgiving dinner or Christmas for example, if there will be any family members in attendance who are Democrats.

Do you work for someone who voted for Obama? Quit your job. Co-workers who voted for Obama. Simply don't talk to them in the workplace, unless your boss instructs you too for work-related only purposes. Have clients who voted Democrat? Call them up this morning and tell them to take their business elsewhere's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, now it suddenly makes sense: if men with conservative sexual mores are wusses, but any woman who's ever had sex, ever, is a slut, the only good sex is gay sex.

It's simpler than that, even. The common theme in both of those rants is the notion underlying them that 'only I have rights'. I have the right to sleep with whom I please, vote for whom I please, shop where I like, not be harassed, make reproductive choices, etc., etc., but if you want the same rights you can FOAD. Only I have rights, and only I can possibly be right.

It's the bewildered cry of the privileged asshole desperate to avoid unpleasant reality. You can dig it up anywhere on the internet, any day, if you look. But why would you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...