|
ACatch22 posted:Could someone that's better informed than me on Michael Bloomberg tell me why he isn't running for NYC mayor again? I was trying to find the reasoning with a quick google, but couldn't quickly. Is it a term limit thing? An age thing? Or is it possibly a presidential candidate thing? Current term limit for NYC mayor is 3 terms of 4 years each. That means he'll be out January 1, 2014
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2012 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 23:15 |
|
|
ACatch22 posted:Is there any chance at a presidential run? I know he's an independent at 70 (making him 74 in 2016), but has there been any indication of whether or not he is interested? He's probably more interested in Governor I'd think.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2012 03:48
|
|
|
If the GOP really wanted Christie to run, buying him some fuckin' lipo wouldn't make a dent in their cash reserves.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 22:36
|
|
|
Emden posted:Why is it so vital that Chris Christie not be fat? No one wants another Taft.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 23:05
|
|
|
greatn posted:My biggest issue with Christie is his lying about the cost of the high speed rail and killing it. He continues to lite about it now even with disputes showing it would cost WAY LESS than he said it would. I don't remember anything about high speed rail, only the ARC tunnel getting canceled, which was a lovely move from him.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2012 18:12
|
|
|
greatn posted:What did Kennedy have? "Years after Kennedy's death, it was revealed that in September 1947, at age 30, and while in his first term in Congress, he was diagnosed by Sir Daniel Davis at The London Clinic with Addison's disease, a rare endocrine disorder. In 1966, his White House doctor, Janet Travell, revealed that Kennedy also had hypothyroidism. The presence of two endocrine diseases raises the possibility that Kennedy had autoimmune polyendocrine syndrome type 2 (APS 2). He also suffered from chronic and severe back pain, for which he had surgery and was written up in the AMA's Archives of Surgery. Kennedy's condition may even have had diplomatic repercussions, as he appears to have been taking a combination of drugs to treat severe pain during the 1961 Vienna Summit with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev. The combination included hormones, animal organ cells, steroids, vitamins, enzymes, and amphetamines, and potential side effects included hyperactivity, hypertension, impaired judgment, nervousness, and significant mood swings."
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2012 19:53
|
|
|
Naet posted:Schweitzer is a really charismatic guy, though. His low name recognition in 2012 doesn't mean that much. If he enters the ring, he'll be noticed. Yeah who the hell really remembered the name Barack Obama in 2004/2005 either? He did one good speech and then back to being a senator. Low name recognition doesn't matter until the primary stuff actually gets rolling; instead if the super-low-grade talk that happens before inauguration day even.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2012 16:39
|
|
|
withak posted:I can't be bothered to read the constitution, can someone be elected VP for >2 terms? Yes. The amendment only applies to President.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2013 03:23
|
|
|
I think we should do them all at once around March or so because it's not like we're really getting benefit out of staggering them.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:The problem with that is that it would make it impossible for anything to shift. I guess depending on how you see it that could be a good thing, but if we had done all the primaries at once in 2008 Hillary Clinton would be president. They already get 3 and a half years before March of an election year to campaign. That's plenty of time for things to shift.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2013 03:27
|
|
|
Jonked posted:Nobody pays attention until there is a horse race. You can still have a campaign without the stupidity of randomly spread out primary elections.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2013 03:40
|
|
|
notthegoatseguy posted:The argument against that is that having big primary elections means small insurgent campaigns that don't have establishment backing wouldn't have a chance. Obama's victory in Iowa, and Clinton's 3rd place finish behind Edwards, pushed him ahead. Obama wasn't a candidate running just for the hell of it, but he certainly wasn't the guy anyone expected to actually win the nomination in late 2007. None of that actually required the binding primary elections. Iowa's caucuses for example do not determine pledged delegates - were you aware of that?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2013 05:04
|
|
|
We could have nonbinding events like the Iowa caucuses (well the way they were 2012 and before) all the time. We just shouldn't have the actual for real primary votes done until a single uniform day nationwide. Same effect on showing challengers' viability, but it makes it all simpler.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2013 05:41
|
|
|
ReindeerF posted:I don't think it's a huge deal for national leaders, but I'm curious if you'd send a female a commander into the depths of Afghanistan to interact with a local council? It is my understanding that some of the coalition forces with fully mixed gender militaries have done this.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2013 20:38
|
|
|
ATP_Power posted:If all states had allocated EC votes based on congressional districts, Romney would've won the EC vote in the past election. It's a pretty brazen attempt to gain as much power from House gerrymandering as possible and I'm glad it's getting lots of negative attention now. Actually, that article talks about if only 6 swing states had gone to by congressional district. Having all states do it would likely have ended up in an Obama win, due to things like breaking up Texas and other solidly red states that nevertheless have a lot of democrat voters.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2013 02:56
|
|
|
Joementum posted:If every state switched to awarding electoral votes by congressional district, Mitt Romney would have won 277 - 261. Ah, all the articles about this subject from just after it happened said the opposite, guess there's more accurate vote totals now.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2013 04:12
|
|
|
Dementia isn't a thing that happens to everyone who's old either. Ol Ronnie started to show signs a few years before his presidency. We'd likely see it already in Biden or Clinton if they were going to get it.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2013 08:24
|
|
|
Democrazy posted:So I've been reading about what's been happening in NJ and I keep hearing that he needs to not only consider a 2016 bid, but also his current 2013 governor race. Given how much legwork and fundraising is required to run for president these days, wouldn't holding a current office actually be a hindrance? And even if it wasn't I don't see why his governorship would be considered all that important to him, except as a fallback plan. The dude's already running his campaign for governor, it's way too late to back out now. Also Sarah Palin didn't quit the governorship of Alaska until about 9 months after she lost the vice presidential election.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2013 17:37
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:How familiar are you with Newark's public schools, out of curiosity? Charter schools don't fix public schools.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
It's actually pretty politically smart to get yourself a senate seat and stay there forever. Starting salary is $174,000 a year, you get a sweet Federal pension that no one's going to cut after you're in place for a term or two, you of course get all sorts of perks from lobbyists. And your re-election campaigns are probably going to be just easy coasts for the forseeable future - you're an incumbent after all!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2013 18:02
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:On the other hand, at the start of the whole shutdown issue, the Democrats immediately offered to go to a budget roughly analogous with the Ryan plan and were denied. Socially, on most issues, we're shifting left. Financially, I think we're shifting right. Yo buddy, when a proposal to the right is offered and is denied, that generally indicates it's outside of the acceptable window.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:Yes, because it wasn't far enough to the right. The Dems offered a Ryan-level budget and it wasn't conservative enough. I think that's indicative of a rightward financial shift, both in the offering and in the rejecting. Except the thing that actually got accepted in the end was not farther to the right , it was merely the status quo. What this indicates is that window of acceptability didn't move at all.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2013 16:10
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:I don't think they need to be from a swing state, I just expect them to want to vary where the ticket is from. The last one to do that was probably HW Bush and Quayle.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 00:11
|
|
|
Gygaxian posted:I think they actually can be from the same state, they just don't get their state's electors. Yes, and "being from the same state" just goes off where they declare their current residence to be. Apartment rental in a neighboring state suffices.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 00:43
|
|
|
I just want Joe Biden to be the country's first three-term Vice President. Is that really so much to ask?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
Just gotta say again, if Biden accepts the vice president position again and the ticket wins, he'd make history as the first three term vice president ever.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
Stormagetiton posted:I sort of worry that if Christie spends too much time at Iowa fairgrounds or dinners or whatever, someone will try various fat-shaming hits when he does the usual corn-dog photo op or whatever. He should be ashamed of being this fat.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2013 05:28
|
|
|
The Puppet Master posted:Can they're just be a honorary life-time position for Biden? I don't want him to run for the Dem. nomination, but I also never want him to go away. Vice Presidents don't have term limits. Just sayin.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
Insurance companies aren't going to go out of business, they'll switch to higher profit things like being able to not cover basic things and instead charge absurd premiums to get people access to luxury hospitals and crap like that. With the deadweight of the millions of people who need normal healthcare off their books, they'll do fine.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2014 02:02
|
|
|
I wonder what it would be like having Kim Guadagno take the governor's office. Honestly don't have the slightest idea what her views are on anything.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
It would have been way more relevant to his chances if it had been revealed before the gubernatorial election. The sheer commuter rage could have been enough to boot him out.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
axeil posted:Impeachment? Impeachment of the governor requires a majority vote in the Assembly to start the investigation, and then the conviction in the Senate requires a 60% majority. The Senate's currently 24-16 Democrats which is exactly 60% and the Assembly's 48-32 Democrats, again 60%.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
ReindeerF posted:I will take my job in the Android Royalties division then, thank you. Most of this stuff comes from creative accounting in the first place. For example the Xbox division also includes the business units for things like the RT tablets that sold horribly and various other things that aren't cash cows.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:I am not sure any iteration of the X-Box has ever made money. The Xbox 360 has been quite profitable by now. It broke even around late 2009 and has been quite profitable since then, especially due to charging for online. The residual costs from the original xbox were taken care of by 2010.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Yeah, balanced budget states tend to end up doing just ok during good years, and massively hosed over during bad years. While the non-balanced budget states have a lot more leeway both to react during bad years, and to stockpile improvements during good years.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
Swan Oat posted:Doesn't Colorado's balanced budget law totally gently caress their schools and infrastructure? Yep! Also the "taxpayer bill of rights" bullshit that further requires that you can't raise taxes or spending above the rate of inflation without passing a (possibly 2/3?) majority ballot referendum. Luckily for Colorado at least some of its road infrastructure gets more federal spending then usual like the major mountain pass roads and tunnels.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
The only way a balanced budget for a government can actually work, is if we open the balancing timescale to something on the order of 20-25 years. However, we have no way to meaningfully do that. Worse then balanced budget in itself though, is thing's like Oregon's "kicker" which makes building up long term surpluses impossible, since when there's a surplus over 2% the excess money must be immediately returned as tax refunds.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:Remember that Nader 2000 deliberately campaigned in swing states in the hopes of playing spoiler, stating explicitly that he wanted George W. Bush to be President because electing a Texas oilman would shock the public into appreciating the environment or some other accelerationist claptrap. I don't remember this at all.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2014 04:44
|
|
|
Well son of a bitch.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 23:15 |
|
|
GodlessCommie posted:Isn't there a rule about a pres and vp being from the same state that nullifies the electoral college votes from their state? I remember Cheney had to say he was from Wyoming so the GOP didn't lose Texas. That would rule out Cuomo for VP. All they have to do is have an apartment in another state and get ID from there to be "not from the same state". Obviously this doesn't work if both of the people on the ticket already have elected positions in the same state which they don't want to lose.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2014 21:39
|
|