2014 Elections

[O Really]

2014 Elections - the best money can buy... http://finance.yahoo.com/news/republica ... 17693.html

[indago]

Jane Dempsey has been out of work since 2007, but she still has faith in the Colorado economy. What she has lost heart in, she said after casting her vote at the municipal building here Tuesday morning, are the public officials representing her in the nation’s capital. “There’s too much fighting in Washington,” said Ms. Dempsey, 59, after voting for the Democratic candidates for Senate and governor here...

article

A LoInfo voter voting for more of the same...

Shari Pizarro, 49, a Democrat who works as a waitress in St. Petersburg, Fla., said she voted Democratic but had few hopes for Washington — now or in the future. “ I have no clue what’s going on in D.C., but what I do know is that you can’t really trust anyone,” she said. “It’s all screwed up no matter who’s in the White House.”

So, she votes for more of the same...

And in Racine, Wis., Jeffrey Kowalczuk, a 56-year-old account representative for a trucking company, seemed no less disillusioned than Ms. Pizarro after voting for Republicans in that critical state. “I’m just tired of all the fighting and bickering,” he said. “We’re all Americans. It’s just getting old with all that stuff.”

So, he votes for more of the same...

Warren Sloan, 45, a mechanic, voted Democratic in the Georgia election and said that although he blamed both parties for the battling, he faulted Republicans more.

A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote for evil: so he votes for evil...

“The economy is terrible,” said John Madron, 61, who has been unemployed since 2009, after casting his vote in this community outside Denver. “Especially for manufacturing. I’ve been in manufacturing all my life, and right now, I’m unemployed. There’s no positions throughout this country because it’s all been outsourcing.” Mr. Madron said he voted for Mr. Obama when he first ran for president in 2008, but after that voted Republican.

Ha! Like that's going to change anything...

Now, here's a guy who makes some sense:

“They just don’t seem to get anything done anymore,” said John Miller, an independent in Iowa voting at the Red Oak Fire Department. “All they do is fight between each other and don’t get anything done. So we — and I — need something different in there. Everything needs to change.”

[O Really]

And are there any practical suggestions on how to get something different?

[Boatrocker]

. . . But seriously, it's kind of crazy a handful of states of legalized it. That's not something I would have expected to see happen . . .

I've been sayin since Tuesday night that, outside some of the expected wingnut-intensive southern and other rural areas, the tight margins and somewhat surprising passage of such local legislation and amendments and such are not indicative of some rising tide of teabagger "values." I believe it indicates a wider pattern of moderation in the electorate at large. The crowing and chest-thumping amongst our RWNJ bretheren is failing to take this into account, though the reaction and commentary from many of the newly elected/re-elected seems to indicate that they are aware of its meaning.

Still, it's technically illegal according to the federal government. I think Trey Gowdy was complaining about the executive selectively enforcing laws, so I wonder if we'll hear more of that. I can see where he's coming from even though I don't have a problem with weed. It seems states legalizing weed and the federal government letting them be is a victory for states rights though.

This will be interesting and thorny. I think the fed will begin to creep slowly toward legalization, but it will have to creep against the idiot resistance of the teanuts and the fierce opposition of a law enforcement industry that has profited enormously from THE WAR ON DRUGS.

[Boatrocker]

. . . A LoInfo voter voting for more of the same . . . So, she votes for more of the same . . . So, he votes for more of the same . . . A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote for evil: so he votes for evil . . . Ha! Like that's going to change anything . . . .

Is it your contention that voting for Dems is voting for "more of the same," but voting for Teapubs is voting for new and fresh ideas? If so, I'd like to see your math on that.

[rstrong]

Techdirt: Now In Charge Of Congress, GOP Plans To Give Up Its Own Constitutional Powers To The Obama Administration

The remedy, they have decided: Act quickly to send President Obama bills with bipartisan support to fast-track international trade agreements,...

[...]

The big agreements, like the TPP and TTIP/TAFTA are not about "free trade" for the most part. Most tariff barriers have been chipped away for years. These agreements are about regulations and locking in certain regulations to limit the sovereignty of various nations to pass their own regulations. It's just protectionism in a different colored coat, dressed up to look like free trade -- complete with a dollop of extra sovereignty for corporations. Thus, it seems very odd that a Republican controlled Congress -- one that insists it's all about the Constitution -- has decided that it's first order of business is to give up one of Congress' main constitutional powers to an administration controlled by the opposing party.

[Roland Deschain]

Oh, do show us what has been "proven false." I dare you.

OK...easy enough. Keeping in mind that most of your tripe was just partisan spin...you did make two statements that are easily disproven.

1.

Real people have begun to change their minds about ACA

RCP average...13.5% spread to OPPOSED to ACA http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -1130.html

2.

...understand that the economy is going alright....and that they are generally better off than they were in 2009

RCP average... obama job approval 10.8% spread to the NEGATIVE http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -1044.html

RCP average on direction of the country..28% right direction..66% WRONG direction..38% spread to the NEGATIVE http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... y-902.html

Gallup 3 day rolling average 24% economy good...28% economy poor http://www.gallup.com/poll/110821/Gallu ... tions.aspx

Not to mention the number of states soon to be lead by GOP governors. I'd like to say that your condition is called denial. However, in your individual case it is simply being a class 1, USDA certified, dumbass!

[Boatrocker]

Oh, do show us what has been "proven false." I dare you.

OK...easy enough. Keeping in mind that most of your tripe was just partisan spin...you did make two statements that are easily disproven.

1.

Real people have begun to change their minds about ACA

RCP average...13.5% spread to OPPOSED to ACA http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -1130.html

2.

...understand that the economy is going alright....and that they are generally better off than they were in 2009

RCP average... obama job approval 10.8% spread to the NEGATIVE http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -1044.html

RCP average on direction of the country..28% right direction..66% WRONG direction..38% spread to the NEGATIVE http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... y-902.html

Gallup 3 day rolling average 24% economy good...28% economy poor http://www.gallup.com/poll/110821/Gallu ... tions.aspx

Not to mention the number of states soon to be lead by GOP governors. I'd like to say that your condition is called denial. However, in your individual case it is simply being a class 1, USDA certified, dumbass!

Real Clear Politics, a teabagger organization. You're as big a liar as you are a racist dumbfuck.
Next.

[Roland Deschain]

Real Clear Politics, a teabagger organization. You're as big a liar as you are a racist dumbfuck.
Next.

LMAO.....guess you missed the part where RCP did nothing but compile the results from OTHER national polls and create the average...and top it off with the racist card I do hope you are sterilized...people with your IQ should not be allowed to pass on the fucktard gene. Anhd just to remind you what happened to your liberal elites DOWN IN FLAMES. Now, don't go away mad...just go away.

[O Really]

It is true - a lot of non-elite people did get elected. Some aspire to mediocrity.

[Mr.B]

"I can't decide what brings out the most wing-nuttery and moronic ranting......pre-election backbiting ads, or post-election back-biting, cussin', snarlin', sore losers."

"Any hooo.....let the games begin!" :violent: :violent: :violent: ........

The following article probably explains why 'Ol Boatrocker, who we haven't heard from in a while, came roaring back to life following the election......

"Liberals explode with racial hate after Tim Scott wins Senate race in S.C."


Tim Scott subject to racial slurs after election victory. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)


During the election, liberal Democrats used the race card in an attempt to label all Republicans as racist. But when Tim Scott won his Senate race in South Carolina, liberals on Twitter went ballistic, hurling racial slurs against Scott, even though he has the honor of being the first African-American elected to the Senate from that state and the first elected to a statewide office since Reconstruction.

"Tim Scott is a damn Uncle Tom," one sore loser said on Twitter. "Yeah Tim Scott is the biggest Uncle Tom", another person said.

"You are not the first Uncle Tom," added another Twitter user. "Clarence Thomas wins."

"Nikki Haley wins in South Carolina," said a very angry Twitter critic. "Tim Scott-Uncle (expletive deleted) Tom is back. Lindsey Graham too. UGH. I hate the world."

Scott was first appointed to the Senate by Gov. Nikki Haley in December 2012 when Jim DeMint retired to head up the conservative Heritage Foundation.
At the time, NBC played the race card while liberals online hurled racist epithets.

He served in the House from 2011-2013 and was part of the influential House Rules Committee. Prior to that, he served on the Charleston County Council for 13 years and spent two years in the South Carolina House of Representatives.

After defeating Democrat Joyce Dickerson on Tuesday, Scott became the first black senator to be elected by popular vote in the South, the Huffington Post said.
He is also the first to be elected to both the House and the Senate. The victory also comes on the heels of claims by Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., that southerners
are racist and sexist. No doubt, if Scott were a Democrat, the critics on Twitter would be singing a much different tune.

The hypocrisy shown by leftists is nothing new. As we have reported time and again, conservative blacks are often targeted with racial hate from those who claim Republicans are racist.

The pain....oh, the pain.....!

[Mr.B]

Starting with Wednesday morning and continuing on into the afternoon, it's easy to see one liberal who went ballistic after the election results.......

(not mentioning any names or nothin'....but.....)

[bannination]

"I can't decide what brings out the most wing-nuttery and moronic ranting......pre-election backbiting ads, or post-election back-biting, cussin', snarlin', sore losers."

"Any hooo.....let the games begin!" :violent: :violent: :violent: ........

The following article probably explains why 'Ol Boatrocker, who we haven't heard from in a while, came roaring back to life following the election......

"Liberals explode with racial hate after Tim Scott wins Senate race in S.C."


Tim Scott subject to racial slurs after election victory. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)


During the election, liberal Democrats used the race card in an attempt to label all Republicans as racist. But when Tim Scott won his Senate race in South Carolina, liberals on Twitter went ballistic, hurling racial slurs against Scott, even though he has the honor of being the first African-American elected to the Senate from that state and the first elected to a statewide office since Reconstruction.

"Tim Scott is a damn Uncle Tom," one sore loser said on Twitter. "Yeah Tim Scott is the biggest Uncle Tom", another person said.

"You are not the first Uncle Tom," added another Twitter user. "Clarence Thomas wins."

"Nikki Haley wins in South Carolina," said a very angry Twitter critic. "Tim Scott-Uncle (expletive deleted) Tom is back. Lindsey Graham too. UGH. I hate the world."

Scott was first appointed to the Senate by Gov. Nikki Haley in December 2012 when Jim DeMint retired to head up the conservative Heritage Foundation.
At the time, NBC played the race card while liberals online hurled racist epithets.

He served in the House from 2011-2013 and was part of the influential House Rules Committee. Prior to that, he served on the Charleston County Council for 13 years and spent two years in the South Carolina House of Representatives.

After defeating Democrat Joyce Dickerson on Tuesday, Scott became the first black senator to be elected by popular vote in the South, the Huffington Post said.
He is also the first to be elected to both the House and the Senate. The victory also comes on the heels of claims by Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., that southerners
are racist and sexist. No doubt, if Scott were a Democrat, the critics on Twitter would be singing a much different tune.

The hypocrisy shown by leftists is nothing new. As we have reported time and again, conservative blacks are often targeted with racial hate from those who claim Republicans are racist.

The pain....oh, the pain.....!

Wait, the resident homophobe is complaining about racism?

[Mr.B]

"Wait, the resident homophobe is complaining about racism?"

Speaking of <yawn>, did you not comprehend the article? Did you read where I was complaining about anything?

What has my being a "homophobe" got to do with liberals being pissed with election results?

To quote the late Michael Fain......"your eyes are turning brown".

[O Really]

Well, I'm not any unhappier about Scott getting elected than any of the other Republicans. But I don't think for a minute that a black guy would have made it through the Republican primaries if he'd had to run. But getting appointed, running as an incumbent Republican pretty much guarantees his spot. The good citizens of South Carolina had the choice of voting for a black guy or voting for a Democrat. Good play on Nikki Heat's part.

He can, however, be accurately referred to as "Uncle Tom" (OK, "Uncle Tim" whatever). The original Uncle Tom wasn't respected because he kowtowed to de Massa, but that wasn't the reason the character is despised. It is because "Uncle Tom" is also used to negatively describe a person who betrays their own group by participating in its oppression, whether or not they do so willingly. As a Republican, Scott is without doubt joining those who do not act in the best interest of most SC citizens, and especially not the black ones.

[O Really]

Preview of life under Republican rule... http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ira ... ar-BBdjrCn

Not necessarily dogs, but in principle it fits really well.

[bannination]

Preview of life under Republican rule... http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ira ... ar-BBdjrCn

Not necessarily dogs, but in principle it fits really well.

Pretty strong wall we have between church and state they'd have to break through. Not that the pubs aren't trying everyday. I agree that it is pretty accurate.

[Mr.B]

"Wait, the resident homophobe is complaining about racism?"

Speaking of <yawn>, did you not comprehend the article? Did you read where I was complaining about anything?

What has my being a "homophobe" got to do with liberals being pissed with election results?

Uhhh...Banni.....You didn't answer my questions.....or is your mouth full of your "afoot" ?

[bannination]

"Wait, the resident homophobe is complaining about racism?"

Speaking of <yawn>, did you not comprehend the article? Did you read where I was complaining about anything?

What has my being a "homophobe" got to do with liberals being pissed with election results?

Uhhh...Banni.....You didn't answer my questions.....or is your mouth full of your "afoot" ?

:?:

[indago]

. . . A LoInfo voter voting for more of the same . . . So, she votes for more of the same . . . So, he votes for more of the same . . . A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote for evil: so he votes for evil . . . Ha! Like that's going to change anything . . . .

Is it your contention that voting for Dems is voting for "more of the same," but voting for Teapubs is voting for new and fresh ideas? If so, I'd like to see your math on that.

Jeffrey Sachs wrote for HuffPo 6 November 2014:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Pity the American people for imagining that they have just elected the new Congress. ...This was the billionaires' election, billionaires of both parties. And while the Republican and Democratic Party billionaires have some differences, what unites them is much stronger than what divides them, a few exceptions aside. Indeed, many of the richest individual and corporate donors give to both parties. The much-discussed left-right polarization is not polarization at all. The political system is actually relatively united and working very effectively for the richest of the rich.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

article