Rand alPaul posted:

I live in Oklahoma, my vote does not matter.

Best democracy in the world!

Fried Chicken posted:

There has been a very neglected point about the control of congress that I want to make. Everyone has been focused on the senate. But the house is going to be huge here no matter who takes the senate, and even worse if the GOP does take the senate.

Right now Boehner can barely keep the tea party in line. He has enough moderates that when he can't keep them sane he can grovel to Pelosi and get enough Democratic votes to not sink the ship. Pelosi can let about 1/6th of her caucus vote their way and still deliver the votes to make up for any tea party tantrum. But that's about to change. Between GOP retirements, primary wins and losses, and dems losing in off years, the tea party caucus in the house is looking to grow by 28. Most of those are GOP seats remaining in GOP control but the party isn't the issue so much as the sanity of the rear end in the chair is the issue. With those 28 flipping to the tea baggers that sharply changes the calculus of getting anything through the house. Because now Pelosi will only be able to release 4 democrats to vote against these bills instead of the usual 32. And of course, the ones who would be in a position to jam it up if they vote the way people want back home come from the most liberal states.

This isn't a cause for hope. Yes, one option is they try to work around the tea party and let 5 representatives from Vermont be the effective gatekeepers on what gets passed. Obamacare will be repealed and replaced with single payer; health care and maple syrup for all! But that'd not what is going to happen. What is going to happen is the tea party is going to have pretty much a lock on legislation. They may not play the game well enough to sit in the titled seats, but they will be running the show because, again, without them not even the sane poo poo like budget authorization will pass. A 90 seat caucus of nuts will be driving the legislative agenda. And to the extent they have been pacified these past 4 years its because they have been told "we can't do poo poo while the dems have the senate". Now that's gone.



In case my inane late night rambling has this far failed to make its point, let's look at an example of resolving the nuttiness. To end the shutdown the 2013 budget authorization act passed 332-94, with 62 Rs and 32 Ds voting against and 169 Rs and 163 Ds voting for. If that 62 becomes 90 then the only way to pass it is
A) make it liberal enough that only 4 or less Ds will vote no while simultaneously keeping it conservative enough that you don't lose any republicans (good luck there)
B) make it extreme enough to appeal to the 90 tea baggers

Tuesday is not the time to drink yourself to death. That comes later

nutranurse posted:

Harshing my pre-election buzz, man.

My Imaginary GF posted:

Here's some optimism for ya: Nobody is stupid enough to shut down the government during an Ebola epidemic with a 95% probability of 3 to 120 case importations in American cities between last week and 1 Jan 2014.

My Imaginary GF posted:

Nobody is stupid enough

ErIog posted:

The fact that you are naive enough to believe this is precious.

My Imaginary GF posted:

Ebola is a national security concern, and America takes national security concerns very seriously. Seriously enough to expose everything dirty gathered through extra-judicial means on those who propose to shut down security programs

Ditocoaf posted:

Nobody admits to wanting a shutdown, though. They blame the Dems and "RINOs" for not passing their budget, which cuts just about everything but doesn't cut national security.

My Imaginary GF posted:

Solution: make everything a national security issue

VanSandman posted:

It already is true though. Without a healthy, fit population, we'll be unprepared for the next total war. Solution? Socialized health care and fitness programs.

VanSandman posted:

I'm not quite seeing national passenger rail. How do you justify it?

My Imaginary GF posted:

Ebola is a national security concern, and America takes national security concerns very seriously. Seriously enough to expose everything dirty gathered through extra-judicial means on those who propose to shut down security programs

Fried Chicken posted:

There has been a very neglected point about the control of congress that I want to make. Everyone has been focused on the senate. But the house is going to be huge here no matter who takes the senate, and even worse if the GOP does take the senate.

Right now Boehner can barely keep the tea party in line. He has enough moderates that when he can't keep them sane he can grovel to Pelosi and get enough Democratic votes to not sink the ship. Pelosi can let about 1/6th of her caucus vote their way and still deliver the votes to make up for any tea party tantrum. But that's about to change. Between GOP retirements, primary wins and losses, and dems losing in off years, the tea party caucus in the house is looking to grow by 28. Most of those are GOP seats remaining in GOP control but the party isn't the issue so much as the sanity of the rear end in the chair is the issue. With those 28 flipping to the tea baggers that sharply changes the calculus of getting anything through the house. Because now Pelosi will only be able to release 4 democrats to vote against these bills instead of the usual 32. And of course, the ones who would be in a position to jam it up if they vote the way people want back home come from the most liberal states.

This isn't a cause for hope. Yes, one option is they try to work around the tea party and let 5 representatives from Vermont be the effective gatekeepers on what gets passed. Obamacare will be repealed and replaced with single payer; health care and maple syrup for all! But that'd not what is going to happen. What is going to happen is the tea party is going to have pretty much a lock on legislation. They may not play the game well enough to sit in the titled seats, but they will be running the show because, again, without them not even the sane poo poo like budget authorization will pass. A 90 seat caucus of nuts will be driving the legislative agenda. And to the extent they have been pacified these past 4 years its because they have been told "we can't do poo poo while the dems have the senate". Now that's gone.



In case my inane late night rambling has this far failed to make its point, let's look at an example of resolving the nuttiness. To end the shutdown the 2013 budget authorization act passed 332-94, with 62 Rs and 32 Ds voting against and 169 Rs and 163 Ds voting for. If that 62 becomes 90 then the only way to pass it is
A) make it liberal enough that only 4 or less Ds will vote no while simultaneously keeping it conservative enough that you don't lose any republicans (good luck there)
B) make it extreme enough to appeal to the 90 tea baggers

Tuesday is not the time to drink yourself to death. That comes later

ufarn posted:

Should the GOP get a Senate majority, can they successfully impeach Fried Chicken?

Dick Trauma posted:

I got robocalled five times today to hear John Legend ask me to vote "Tuck" for California's State Superintendent of Public Instruction. Thanks, John!

hobbesmaster posted:

Town Branch until the election is called for McConnell.

My Imaginary GF posted:

I've unironically used this argument before. I 100% agree with you on that. Also, national passenger rail is a national security priority. So is properly funded public transit operating 6 times per hour at minimum per fixed right-of-way route

My Imaginary GF posted:

You need high returns on imvestme t in GMO foods so that you get some investment in GMO food that primarily aids small-holding least developed nation farmers.

Plus, do you really want paranoid hippies to win on any issue? I can't think of a single issue where paranoid hippies have been correct.

I regard this GMO issue like the vaccine issue among paranoid hippies. Head them off now before a future GMO food is made that primarily benefits children which parents will refuse because IT AINT NATURAL

tl;dr seriousquestion, what would it take to get you to vote against GMO labeling?

Fragmented posted:

Oh just let the hippies and crazys have the labels. Its Portland its going to happen eventually. I'm voting for it because who cares? If you're dumb enough to care gently caress you. We are facing food shortages in the next 50 years and we need GMO.

A label won't stop that.

Dick Trauma posted:

I got robocalled five times today to hear John Legend ask me to vote "Tuck" for California's State Superintendent of Public Instruction. Thanks, John!

Scott Lively posted:

AN APPEAL TO PROGRESSIVE VOTERS

Scott Lively posted:

CAN CONSERVATIVES AND PROGRESSIVES SHARE COMMON GROUND?
YES, IF OUR PARADIGM IS NATURAL VS. ARTIFICIAL RATHER THAN RIGHT VS. LEFT.

Lively on the Environment: “Concepts such as eco-systems and bio-diversity rest on
the same natural law presuppositions as Biblical Christianity: there is an order to
nature that works best when protected from artificial substances and disruptions that
disrespect the design.”

Scott Lively posted:

Natural Medicines: “Big Phama has enslaved an astonishing 70% of Americans to
prescription medications through its control of the medical industry. A lifestyle in
harmony with God’s creation avoids most ills and provides real cures for the rest.”

Scott Lively posted:

Natural Communities: “Our violence-plagued, ultra-dense city environments
designed by United Nations Agenda 21 social engineers are artificial
communities…Let’s bring back the era of light-manufacturing-supported New
England towns in symbiosis with surrounding agrarian farm communities.”

quote:

A Comment on the Ferguson, Missouri Events

Equal Justice Under Law is a bedrock principle of our society and must be color-blind. Ferguson is the latest incident where equal justice has surrendered to mob rule in deference to skin-color. This is reverse racism. Only due process of law can reveal the truth in this case, and both the White police officer and the Black teen deserve a clean slate on which to be judged -- untarnished by prejudice, prior similar incidents, or pressure by agitators. Those who exploit this incident as a pretext for violence or theft should be jailed and pay restitution to store owners.
Back to top of page

quote:

My Policy on Drugs
I was an alcoholic and drug addict for 16 years, from the age of 12 to 28, so this is very personal to me. I surrendered my life to Jesus Christ in 1986 and was miraculously healed and delivered, never to feel a desire for any drug or alcohol ever since.

The primary cause of drug addiction is family breakdown, but there are other sources of life trauma that create the same vulnerability.. Drugs are just a way to cope with the pain of life. The most important step to remedy the drug epidemic is to strengthen marriage and the natural family so that children grow up in stable homes with a Mom and Dad who love them.

For the present generation we need to provide more treatment options with a more holistic approach. I would require all persons receiving any form of government assistance to be free from any form of substance abuse. Those who cannot sustain recovery on their own would be required to enroll in supervised residential recovery to continue to receive government assistance.

I would create a bounty system on drug dealers to incentivize citizen intervention in the drug culture. The higher the level of the dealer, the higher the bounty. I would fund the bounty system with money taken from drug traffickers. I would double the bounty for any police officer or public official caught participating in drug trafficking.

Fried Chicken posted:

There has been a very neglected point about the control of congress that I want to make. Everyone has been focused on the senate. But the house is going to be huge here no matter who takes the senate, and even worse if the GOP does take the senate.

Right now Boehner can barely keep the tea party in line. He has enough moderates that when he can't keep them sane he can grovel to Pelosi and get enough Democratic votes to not sink the ship. Pelosi can let about 1/6th of her caucus vote their way and still deliver the votes to make up for any tea party tantrum. But that's about to change. Between GOP retirements, primary wins and losses, and dems losing in off years, the tea party caucus in the house is looking to grow by 28. Most of those are GOP seats remaining in GOP control but the party isn't the issue so much as the sanity of the rear end in the chair is the issue. With those 28 flipping to the tea baggers that sharply changes the calculus of getting anything through the house. Because now Pelosi will only be able to release 4 democrats to vote against these bills instead of the usual 32. And of course, the ones who would be in a position to jam it up if they vote the way people want back home come from the most liberal states.

This isn't a cause for hope. Yes, one option is they try to work around the tea party and let 5 representatives from Vermont be the effective gatekeepers on what gets passed. Obamacare will be repealed and replaced with single payer; health care and maple syrup for all! But that'd not what is going to happen. What is going to happen is the tea party is going to have pretty much a lock on legislation. They may not play the game well enough to sit in the titled seats, but they will be running the show because, again, without them not even the sane poo poo like budget authorization will pass. A 90 seat caucus of nuts will be driving the legislative agenda. And to the extent they have been pacified these past 4 years its because they have been told "we can't do poo poo while the dems have the senate". Now that's gone.



In case my inane late night rambling has this far failed to make its point, let's look at an example of resolving the nuttiness. To end the shutdown the 2013 budget authorization act passed 332-94, with 62 Rs and 32 Ds voting against and 169 Rs and 163 Ds voting for. If that 62 becomes 90 then the only way to pass it is
A) make it liberal enough that only 4 or less Ds will vote no while simultaneously keeping it conservative enough that you don't lose any republicans (good luck there)
B) make it extreme enough to appeal to the 90 tea baggers

Tuesday is not the time to drink yourself to death. That comes later

FlamingLiberal posted:

So Romney is already pushing the idea that the GOP will push to pass immigration reform. Of course as Fried Chicken already pointed out, that probably won't happen if the Tea Party is running the show on legislation.

quote:

I would create a bounty system on drug dealers to incentivize citizen intervention in the drug culture. The higher the level of the dealer, the higher the bounty. I would fund the bounty system with money taken from drug traffickers. I would double the bounty for any police officer or public official caught participating in drug trafficking.

FlamingLiberal posted:

So Romney is already pushing the idea that the GOP will push to pass immigration reform. Of course as Fried Chicken already pointed out, that probably won't happen if the Tea Party is running the show on legislation.

Good Citizen posted:

They'll pass immigration reform. It will mostly consist of building more fences, work visas that don't allow a path to citizenship or voting rights, and maybe some stuff about fast tracking skilled (white or asian) immigrants or ending the focus on family reunification.

Obama will say he'll veto it, but it seems pretty clear he wont. The only reason he held strong on the shutdown was because Harry Reid was pushing him and giving him reassurances and his leverage is significantly diminished now. Obama is gonna cave over and over and over again.

Good Citizen posted:

They'll pass immigration reform. It will mostly consist of building more fences, work visas that don't allow a path to citizenship or voting rights, and maybe some stuff about fast tracking skilled (white or asian) immigrants or ending the focus on family reunification.

Obama will say he'll veto it, but it seems pretty clear he wont. The only reason he held strong on the shutdown was because Harry Reid was pushing him and giving him reassurances and his leverage is significantly diminished now. Obama is gonna cave over and over and over again.

computer parts posted:

lol no that's still too much for the Tea Party.

Fried Chicken posted:

Defenestration posted:

doot de doo looking up the ballot. Won't vote for freaking Martha Coakley; let me look at the independent contenders


why yes, that is me! What is your appeal, sir?

hm





http://www.livelyforgovernor.com/images/appealtoprogressivevoters.pdf

Bonus:

I'm thinking I'm gonna go with Falchuk

Chantilly Say posted:

Except, I totally do want to vote for the guy who's proposing putting bounties on the heads of dirty cops, holy poo poo.