|
I didn't mean to infer that Democrats are going to gallop to victory everywhere in the South, but coupled with the report from Mary Landrieu's campaign that she's going to defend Obamacare and use the lack of a Medicaid expansion to attack her Republican opponents is a sign to me that her polling doesn't think it's a losing issue. Mark Pryor was down by a fairly large amount to that Neanderthal idiot Cotton a few months ago, too. Outlier or no, good polls can help morale in campaigns, and if Obamacare continues to poll better then it will be easier to run on, especially as more and more people realize that it's law and yet the sky hasn't fallen.
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 05:05 |
|
|
Obamacare is still a divisive issue so you can't go all-out in defending it yet. But I'd like to see some Senators and Congressmen in safer districts start to own it, and the ones in tighter fights do what Landreu is doing (if they are in an appropriate state): primarily fight over the Medicare gap and how hundreds of thousands of uninsured are entirely the Republicans' fault.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
Well Cotton did go to Harvard College and Harvard Law School. And he's white unlike Obummer so no special treatment. But then who goes in the military after that? And not like JAG or anything, a loving infantry officer during the height of the war. That's a shitload of biglaw cash to turn down in exchange for going to Iraq.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:Obamacare is still a divisive issue so you can't go all-out in defending it yet. But I'd like to see some Senators and Congressmen in safer districts start to own it, and the ones in tighter fights do what Landreu is doing (if they are in an appropriate state): primarily fight over the Medicare gap and how hundreds of thousands of uninsured are entirely the Republicans' fault. It's a big change from last year when all the Dem's were like "Obamacare? Never heard of it."
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
Amphion posted:Well Cotton did go to Harvard College and Harvard Law School. And he's white unlike Obummer so no special treatment. But then who goes in the military after that? And not like JAG or anything, a loving infantry officer during the height of the war. That's a shitload of biglaw cash to turn down in exchange for going to Iraq. It's almost like he always planned on running for office and knew that would look good on his campaign biography.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
IMJack posted:Find a wedge to drive between the Catholics and Evangelicals while we're at it. Already did, its the pope and/or indulgences.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:It means only taxing income up to $9k and ignoring anything over that so $9k and $90k are taxed the same but $8999 pays a little less than $9k. Same as federal brackets work only really loving stupid and regressive (which is Missouri's state motto, AFAICT) So...it's basically a flat tax for everyone except minimum wage seasonal/part time workers? ...except it's not even a flat RATE tax, but in fact a flat AMOUNT tax? Holy poo poo....
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Already did, its the pope and/or indulgences. Yeah this current pope is doing a great job of being a good Christian as opposed to an right-wing rear end in a top hat Christian.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Already did, its the pope and/or indulgences. Please. If it were that big of a deal, someone would run a public literature campaign against it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
Justus posted:So...it's basically a flat tax for everyone except minimum wage seasonal/part time workers? Yeah, seasonal and part timers would be affected by it more. Poor people really need to have more skin in the game, especially considering all of the Cadillacs they have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Phone posted:Yeah, seasonal and part timers would be affected by it more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Would you say that they are lucky duckies? What do you call people who jive? Jivers?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:11
|
|
|
Phone posted:Yeah, seasonal and part timers would be affected by it more. Yeah the republicans are right the poor just aren't motivated enough taxing them the same as the rich will give them that gumption to bootstrap themselves up the way their starving children never could.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:Didn't they try this last time in the 60s? "We're not advocates for hate, we just want to preserve the culture of whites in America." I don't know about the 60s klan, but during the 70s that is pretty much exactly the angle that David Duke took during his time as Grand Wizard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
Amphion posted:Well Cotton did go to Harvard College and Harvard Law School. And he's white unlike Obummer so no special treatment. But then who goes in the military after that? And not like JAG or anything, a loving infantry officer during the height of the war. That's a shitload of biglaw cash to turn down in exchange for going to Iraq. George W. Bush went to an Ivy too--didn't make him not a moron.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:George W. Bush went to an Ivy too. Two of them, even!
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:57
|
|
Alter Ego posted:George W. Bush went to an Ivy too--didn't make him not a moron. But GWB wasn't a moron? I'm impressed by both the supporters of both side being able to chalk up the failure of the executive branch to being "dumb", whether it's Obama or Bush in office. The only morons are the ones believing the rhetoric and not looking at the actions.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:But GWB wasn't a moron? I'm impressed by both the supporters of both side being able to chalk up the failure of the executive branch to being "dumb", whether it's Obama or Bush in office. The only morons are the ones believing the rhetoric and not looking at the actions. But he committed the nation to wars, in accordance with the goals of his faction! He must be dumb 
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
Can anyone explain to me what ActBlue is? Libertarian friend of mine went off about how the Koch brothers only gave $20 million to campaigns in the 2012 election and that groups like ActBlue was way worse because they gave $100 million. I assume he was neglecting money the Koch's gave to PACs or any of their think tanks. From looking at their website, ActBlue is just an online fundraising service for democrats. If I want to give money to a certain democratic candidate, I can look them up on ActBlue and send them money. ActBlue doesn't decide which candidates get the money and I think ActBlue has to be asked to set up a candidates fundraising page. It looks like my friend is comparing the total money of people using ActBlue to donate to their preferred candidates to the Koch's campaign spending. Is this correct?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
Deadulus posted:Can anyone explain to me what ActBlue is? Also, ask him if he's implicitly saying giving - and therefore speech - is bad? How is that libertarian? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
Deadulus posted:Can anyone explain to me what ActBlue is? You got it. Online bundling service. You can give to the DNC and its associated congressional arms through it too. He's comparing Charles Koch's political spending to the spending of hundreds of thousands of people. Act Blue handles your money and ostensibly verifies that you're allowed to give the money you're trying to, then passes it along. It's just an online bundling service.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
Googling around it looks like this is where he got his information. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/02/evil_koch_brothers_just_59th_on_top_political_donation_list.html How accurate is this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
Deadulus posted:Can anyone explain to me what ActBlue is? IIRC the last time I donated through ActBlue there was a thing at the end about kicking in an extra $5(3?) to keep their lights on or something. I think they operate as a nonprofit and eat the transaction fees on the donations, but I could be wrong about both of those things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:But he committed the nation to wars, in accordance with the goals of his faction! He must be dumb Bush was a dumb, selfish, otherwise relatively harmless frat boy--the kind of guy who would be cool to talk to at a barbecue as long as you kept the conversation to sports and the weather. The evil bastards around him--Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice--were the architects behind Iraq and every other disastrous foreign policy decision during the Bush years. I say he was dumb because when I judge whether a person is smart, I look for a curious mind--and no accounts of Bush at ANY point during his Presidency indicated that the job of President really interested him all that much. Hell, he told a reporter that his greatest triumph as President was catching a really big fish. Fritz Coldcockin fucked around with this message at 21:45 on Apr 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
Deadulus posted:Googling around it looks like this is where he got his information. They're getting their data from Opensecrets.com, meaning yes that's true. But some of those donors (looking at you, Wall St.) give to both parties. And as I said, ActBlue is a small donor bundling service, not an interest group. Again, even Goldman's spending represents more than 2 people. They're comparing two people to groups of varying size to make them look insignificant when they aren't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:42
|
|
|
oldswitcheroo posted:You got it. Online bundling service. You can give to the DNC and its associated congressional arms through it too. He's comparing Charles Koch's political spending to the spending of hundreds of thousands of people. Act Blue handles your money and ostensibly verifies that you're allowed to give the money you're trying to, then passes it along. It's just an online bundling service. Yeah but the Koch's are Captains of Industry so they clearly deserve more freedom of speech points than hundreds of thousands of people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:42
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:But he committed the nation to wars, in accordance with the goals of his faction! He must be dumb And yeah, like mentioned a few posts up, the real architects of US foreign policy during the Bush years were his handlers, not Bush himself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:42
|
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Yeah but the Koch's are Captains of Industry so they clearly deserve more freedom of speech points than hundreds of thousands of people. If that's the point a conservative wants to make then let them make it, but it's wrong for them to pretend that large groups of people spending more than lone wolf billionaires means that the billionaires are actually the small donors.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Speaking of Dubya, is Oliver Stone's W. Movie worth watching at all, or should I stay far, far away from it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
oldswitcheroo posted:They're getting their data from Opensecrets.com, meaning yes that's true. But some of those donors (looking at you, Wall St.) give to both parties. And as I said, ActBlue is a small donor bundling service, not an interest group. Again, even Goldman's spending represents more than 2 people. They're comparing two people to groups of varying size to make them look insignificant when they aren't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
cbservo posted:Speaking of Dubya, is Oliver Stone's W. Movie worth watching at all, or should I stay far, far away from it? I thought it was pretty good. It casts Dubya in a more sympathetic light, though--as a son spending his life desperately seeking his father's approval. Plus, James Cromwell is awesome as HW Bush.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
Guns! Guns everywhere! Guns in schools! Guns in bars!! Guns in churches!!!
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:10
|
|
Alter Ego posted:I say he was dumb because when I judge whether a person is smart, I look for a curious mind--and no accounts of Bush at ANY point during his Presidency indicated that the job of President really interested him all that much. Hell, he told a reporter that his greatest triumph as President was catching a really big fish. Yeah I don't know what to tell you, if you really believe this I've got some oceanfront real estate to sell you. It's just incredibly naive to believe well-educated men who have made it to the top of the political heap in America are in any way "dumb". Sorry their ideology isn't in line with yours and the way that they choose to get votes doesn't appeal to you, but that doesn't really make them dumb.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
cbservo posted:Speaking of Dubya, is Oliver Stone's W. Movie worth watching at all, or should I stay far, far away from it? It's OK. Not Stone's best work by any stretch. Dubya's presidency deserves a much more ruthless treatment, IMO. Does anyone here believe that if today's GOP were to somehow win control of the Senate, House and WH they would ever relinquish control? Call me crazy, but I can't see them, once having control, ever handing it over to who they see as the "enemies of America". I doubt they will win all three in the near future, at least, but it freaks me out that it seems plausible that they would try to seize permanent control of the gov't and start a big shitstorm. Am I nuts?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
Yes, that's kinda nuts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
down with slavery posted:Yeah I don't know what to tell you, if you really believe this I've got some oceanfront real estate to sell you. It's just incredibly naive to believe well-educated men who have made it to the top of the political heap in America are in any way "dumb". Sorry their ideology isn't in line with yours and the way that they choose to get votes doesn't appeal to you, but that doesn't really make them dumb. I don't really know why you think it's a stretch to say that George W. Bush isn't in possession of a naturally curious mind. Did you sleep through the Bush years or something? If a Democratic President spent 8 years mangling the English language, letting his subordinates destroy our international reputation, and botched a natural disaster as bad as Bush did, he'd be dumb too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
quote:"I don't give a poo poo if two guys, two gals, guy-gal, whatever it is, I believe that any human being in America, or any human being in the goddamn world, that wants to be married, and if it's same-sex, more power to 'em." And that's the bottom line because Stone Cold says so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:16
|
|
beatlegs posted:Call me crazy, but I can't see them, once having control, ever handing it over to who they see as the "enemies of America". Stop. eating. the. rhetoric. It's a game they play to drum up their base, nothing more and nothing less. Alter Ego posted:I don't really know why you think it's a stretch to say that George W. Bush isn't in possession of a naturally curious mind. Did you sleep through the Bush years or something? "isn't in possession of a naturally curious mind" are rarely the words used to describe GWB, but I hear "dumb" and "moron" a lot, kind of like how I hear that Obama was a "bad negotiator" despite you know, being a senator, successful politician, lawyer, etc.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
They're still not allowed in the statehouse! v  v
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 05:05 |
|
|
zoux posted:And that's the bottom line because Stone Cold says so. While Stone Cold is awesome in this his, co-host I guess, is pretty dumb. "Government can't tell me how many dogs I can own!" 
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:23
|
|