# The Official 2010 (US) Erection Thread



## Kyuubi Whisker (Oct 28, 2010)

Four days to go.

The most accurate poll I know, the Iowa Electronic Market, shows 

At this time, the Republicans have an 88% chance of taking the House, and the Democrats have an 89% chance of retaining the Senate.

For specific margins,  (R) predicts a Republican pickup of 62 in the House, giving them 241 seats, and the Democrats with 191.  The Senate is projected to retain Democratic control 51-49 (Remember that the two independents caucus Democrat).

 (D) also shows the Democrats hanging onto the Senate 51-49. They predict the Republicans to take the house 213-203, with 19 races too close to call.

I'll give a rep to the person who gives the most accurate prediction for the House.


----------



## Xion (Oct 28, 2010)

We have a big one here in CT between McMahon and Blumenthal. I hate both of them though so I don't know what to do.  On the one hand you have an ultra-conservative businesswoman who made her fortune having grown men beat the shit out of each other for the amusement of (mainly) hillbillies. On the other hand you have the blue-blooded family-values Democrat who opposes violent videogames and wants to set the moral compass of the nation. We're fucked.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Oct 28, 2010)

Consider this unofficial thread Officialized. Please put election related news and comentary here from now on


----------



## dreams lie (Oct 28, 2010)

Well, looks like Reid is going all out in trying to rally his base.  He pulled some outside Senator in for a radio advertisement preaching about all the great things he has done for the African American community.  Sharron Angle ads are actually fairly quiet in comparison, and I am guessing she wants to just hold on to the small lead for as long as she can.  I could really care less who wins, but my prediction is that Angle will take the race with the smallest of margins.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Oct 28, 2010)

OBAMAGEDDON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1


----------



## hehey (Oct 28, 2010)

democrats are doomed, DOOOOOMMMEEEDD!!!!


----------



## EvanNJames (Oct 28, 2010)

I'm actually exited, and I haven't been exited for politics/to vote in years.


----------



## Santo (Oct 29, 2010)

WV's senate and District 3 races fucking suck, I can tell you that much.

For Senate we have our failure of a Governor Manchin who is a Statist

and

John Raese an idiot Neo-Con

District 3 is between the super statist Nick Rahall and A corrupt former Supreme Court Justice Elliot Maynard who switches parties for the convenience of an election.

Ew.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Oct 29, 2010)

Santo said:


> WV's senate and District 3 races fucking suck, I can tell you that much.
> 
> For Senate we have our failure of a Governor Manchin who is a Statist
> 
> ...



So 'statist' doesn't actually mean anything at all anymore, just is a general term of abuse for non-libertarians?


----------



## Santo (Oct 29, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> So 'statist' doesn't actually mean anything at all anymore, just is a general term of abuse for non-libertarians?



Sounds like an attempted troll from a mod.

gg


----------



## Jello Biafra (Oct 29, 2010)

I'll take that as a yes. Thanks for playing.


----------



## Santo (Oct 29, 2010)

Please tell me I won a prize or something.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Oct 29, 2010)

You learned that statists deserve your vote. Isn't that prize enough?


----------



## Santo (Oct 29, 2010)

Rob` said:


> You learned that statists deserve your vote. Isn't that prize enough?



They don't just deserve my vote.

They tell me they deserve it.

Thanks Statists for making my life easier. No longer do I have to worry about the burdens of an election. You did that shit for me.

=)


----------



## Mider T (Oct 29, 2010)

Was going to make this thread yesterday.

Southern Democrats selling out their constituency


----------



## dreams lie (Oct 29, 2010)

Mider T said:


> Was going to make this thread yesterday.
> 
> Southern Democrats selling out their constituency



Tea Party Republicans are so cute.  Torn before moderating their radical positions and hiding them altogether, they chose the latter option.  Here is Sharron Angle's meticulously detailed issues page.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 29, 2010)

^Woman almost reminds me of Jan Brewer, libertarian-version (if you could call it that)

So today we found out why Kendrick Meek was so hostile towards Charlie Crist in the Florida Senate debate...apparently Bill Clinton conspired with Crist to have Meek throw in the towel and launch his support to Crist (I too support Crist more than Meek, he seems like he has a better grasp on the issues and nowhere online can I find a report of Meek's stances only voting records) in exchange of Crist siding with the Democrats in Congress but Meek refused.  Last I checked the estimate was Rubio - 40% Crist - 32% Meek - 20%.

I don't mind the outcome of this race because Marco Rubio is a very intelligent man, and while he was Speaker of the House shown he can govern diverse amount of people effectively while managing foreign policy and his own heritage.  I have the sneaking suspicion that he isn't going to oppose Obama nearly as much he campaigns he is for a couple of reasons
-He's from Miami which of course encompassed a large part of Obama's votes that helped him win FL in 2008
-The next issue to tackle is Immigration Reform.  This might coincide with the U.S. heeding NATO's call to end the embargo on Cuba.  Rubio is not going to go with the GOP's "alternative" lol
-He thinks like a Governor.  When Rubio went on Wolf Blitzer, unlike other GOP senate hopefuls/newcomers he didn't mention races going on outside of his state.  His goals are indeed more aligned with Alex Sink's (who might be a DINO) than Rick Scott (who is a Bush crony), the candidates in the race for Governor

Very interesting race...


----------



## WT (Oct 30, 2010)

How come the UK election thread wasn't stickied


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Oct 30, 2010)

Because the imperialistic fascist regime wants to suppress us.


----------



## dreams lie (Oct 30, 2010)

Do I need to draw you guys a picture?  America pretty much owns the entire world.  You guys are insignificant.


----------



## Black Wraith (Oct 30, 2010)

This should be a very interesting election.

On another note, how come the Yanks get a sticky election thread when we (the better country) didn't get an election?


----------



## dreams lie (Oct 30, 2010)

It's considerate of you, but no really, we do not care who you guys elect to kiss our ass.


----------



## Coteaz (Oct 30, 2010)

Atta boy, dreams.

Atta boy.


----------



## Mider T (Oct 30, 2010)

People care about the UK elections?

This a serious question, if enough people care they need to make it known.


----------



## Black Wraith (Oct 30, 2010)

dreams lie said:


> It's considerate of you, but no really, we do not care who you guys elect to kiss our ass.







Mider T said:


> People care about the UK elections?
> 
> This a serious question, if enough people care they need to make it known.



Yes we care, dammit.


----------



## Petenshi (Oct 30, 2010)

Our election is more important to the fate of the world believe it or not.


----------



## Pilaf (Oct 30, 2010)

I voted for Democrats, because I'm a pinko commie liberal abortionist vegan ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".).


----------



## LouDAgreat (Oct 30, 2010)

Pilaf said:


> I voted for Democrats, because I'm a pinko commie liberal abortionist vegan ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".).



You left out atheist.

Anyways, I'll be voting Democrat down the line.


----------



## Pilaf (Oct 31, 2010)

LouDAgreat said:


> You left out atheist.
> 
> Anyways, I'll be voting Democrat down the line.



No I didn't. It's there. You're just not believing hard enough.


----------



## Grandia (Oct 31, 2010)

Poor dems,lol but most of them deserved the wipe out 

oh and when tim scott (black republican) wins his district SC01 watch the gop pimp him out at all their major rallys/events


----------



## Pilaf (Oct 31, 2010)

Grandia said:


> Poor dems,lol but most of them deserved the wipe out




The American people don't deserve to be robbed again by randian regressive religious right republican rodents, though.


----------



## Grandia (Nov 1, 2010)

its disgusting that rand paul is gonna win the senate seat, fuck KKKentucky


----------



## Mael (Nov 1, 2010)

Grandia said:


> Poor dems,lol but most of them deserved the wipe out
> 
> oh and when tim scott (black republican) wins his district SC01 watch the gop pimp him out at all their major rallys/events



Michael Steele I guess wasn't token enough? 

Registered Independent, but likely voting majorly Democrat.

Gotta vote NO on a couple questions too.


----------



## Stalin (Nov 1, 2010)

I'm also registered independent but I'll be mostly voting democrat or also I like ti call them, the lesser of two evils this election.


----------



## dreams lie (Nov 1, 2010)

It is such a damn shame that the Tea Party has stolen the independent label and tainted it with the cause of the extreme right.


----------



## Evil Ghost Ninja (Nov 1, 2010)

Those on both sides running in Pennsylvania look unsavry.


----------



## Mider T (Nov 1, 2010)

^Is that the guy who shot a shotgun into something in his ad? Democratic nominee I mean or am I thinking of somewhere else?


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 1, 2010)

Mider, since it's already been established that you're a banana, doesn't that mean your sets seem to glorifying vore, specifically of yourself?


----------



## LouDAgreat (Nov 1, 2010)

dreams lie said:
			
		

> It is such a damn shame that the Tea Party has stolen the independent label and tainted it with the cause of the extreme right.



What do you think of Sharon Angle's lead over Harry Reid dreams?


----------



## Talon. (Nov 1, 2010)

Im from Michigan, Its not pretty here for governor

heres vids:

Democrat:[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZzQw_VKcT8[/YOUTUBE]


Republican:[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LLccXFS9TY&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Razgriez (Nov 1, 2010)

Rick made sure to stick that black guy in at the very end of his video.

The democrat one was merely designed to be an attack ads. I really hate attack ads and they really make me lose interest in the one its in favor of because of them.

I do think its important to see the faults of the candidates but Im more interested in hearing about the person whos running for whatever position more then the shit they want to spout and spew about their opponent.


----------



## A. Waltz (Nov 1, 2010)

dude i hate our california elected pppl

like seriously, we got this ugly white bitch who's racist and use to own ebay

then this guy called mark brown or something who i just don't know

then we got mccain's wife


you know, i don't care anymore, id rather keep our hollywood celebirty governor then get those noobs <3

maybe mccain's wife.. she's a democrat, too ! 

eww megan is so, ew hell no, she's such a bitch

idk about mark brown, he a democrat and use to be CA governor along time ago but idkk.. >~<


----------



## Razgriez (Nov 1, 2010)

AznUchihaChick said:


> dude i hate our california elected pppl
> 
> like seriously, we got this ugly white bitch who's racist and use to own ebay
> 
> ...



What is this... I dont even...


----------



## Mider T (Nov 1, 2010)

AznUchihaChick said:


> dude i hate our california elected pppl
> 
> like seriously, we got this ugly white bitch who's racist and use to own ebay
> 
> ...



There's no need to convince you, vote democrat!


----------



## LouDAgreat (Nov 1, 2010)

Here's a video from New York Tea Party Candidate Carl Paladino. Won't be voting for him

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu59lXm7XTM[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## dreams lie (Nov 1, 2010)

LouDAgreat said:


> What do you think of Sharon Angle's lead over Harry Reid dreams?



Well, I think it is possible for Reid to win.  Obama has visited Las Vegas several times campaigning, and there is a big effort on behalf of the Democratic Party here to push their base to vote and vote early.  

That said, it is not at all distressing should he lose because Angle will be a junior senator with little influence.  Unless she decides to filibuster everything, she will just be a single vote for the extreme right;  she does not a stand a chance at delivering half of her promises, and I have confidence that she will not be re-elected in 2016.


----------



## Rawr Pirate (Nov 1, 2010)

Dem are more likely to lose this year, because they don't believe in their policies or even their landmark Health care bill. They are more likely just to attack their opposing candidate, then talk about the issues. To me that seems like the dems don't care about the public and are out of touch with the people. If you cannot go into details about the issues in your own tv or radio ads, you clearly don't care or even know about the people in your voting district. My prediction= Incumbents getting ass-fucked.
good college study below


----------



## Grandia (Nov 2, 2010)

^^^its that the best ads they could do? lolz


----------



## Kyuubi Whisker (Nov 2, 2010)

Worst ad of the campaign probably comes from the Illinois Gubenatorial race.  Incumbent Pat Quinn is literally accusing challenger Bill Brady of being a puppy killer.  Yes, it's actually come to that.

[YOUTUBE]7nvBtioirsg[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Grandia (Nov 2, 2010)

i call gop getting 61 house seats


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

Normally it'd surprise me, but it's the Illinois Gubernatorials after all.


----------



## Pilaf (Nov 2, 2010)

Kyuubi Whisker said:


> Worst ad of the campaign probably comes from the Illinois Gubenatorial race.  Incumbent Pat Quinn is literally accusing challenger Bill Brady of being a puppy killer.  Yes, it's actually come to that.
> 
> [YOUTUBE]7nvBtioirsg[/YOUTUBE]



That's actually true on some level. Republicans in several states are siding with animal agribusiness to oppose legislature which would impose stricter regulations on dog breeders to prevent things like puppy mills.


----------



## sadated_peon (Nov 2, 2010)

Just finished voting, voted for the republican for Governor and the democrat for congressman.

First time voting for a republican, I feel kind of dirty.


----------



## Grandia (Nov 2, 2010)

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPIP-i3sdVk&feature=player_embedded#![/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 2, 2010)

sadated_peon said:


> Just finished voting, voted for the republican for Governor and the democrat for congressman.
> 
> First time voting for a republican, I feel kind of dirty.



I did the reverse of that in 2008. Some weird non-Republican won the Senate nomination. and consequently, was further left than Max Baucus (including support for single-payer health care and, oddly, parliamentary reform). So I voted for him.


----------



## LouDAgreat (Nov 2, 2010)

sadated_peon said:


> Just finished voting, voted for the republican for Governor and the democrat for congressman.
> 
> First time voting for a republican, I feel kind of dirty.



What state sadated?

Gonna vote later today. I kinda feel bad i didn't vote with my parents this morning. We did it together in 2008.


----------



## sadated_peon (Nov 2, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> I did the reverse of that in 2008. Some weird non-Republican won the Senate nomination. and consequently, was further left than Max Baucus (including support for single-payer health care and, oddly, parliamentary reform). So I voted for him.


The republican had a lot more substance, he seems to be more moderate in his social issues(though still a conservative)

So that's how I justify it. 



LouDAgreat said:


> What state sadated?
> 
> Gonna vote later today. I kinda feel bad i didn't vote with my parents this morning. We did it together in 2008.


Michigan, 
I voted for the tough nerd. 
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ro5iGShcV4[/YOUTUBE]

I watched the debate the democrat was full of buzz words, and empty mud slinging. 
The republican on the other hand seemed to know what he was talking about and spoke as the audience had the mental capacity above a teapot. 
I actually agree with him on most of the economic polices that he put forward, and I feel he would do a better job.


----------



## -= Ziggy Stardust =- (Nov 2, 2010)

This is probably stupid but didn't Obama get elected in 2008-09 doesn't that mean the elections should be in 2012-13 ?


----------



## LouDAgreat (Nov 2, 2010)

-= Ziggy Stardust =- said:


> This is probably stupid but didn't Obama get elected in 2008-09 doesn't that mean the elections should be in 2012-13 ?



This is the _mid-term_ elections.  In midterms, House and Senate seats are up for election. They take place every 2 years.

Presidential elections take place every other 4 years, so yea Obama's going for re-election in 2012.


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

@Ziggy: In America, Presidential elections are every 4 years.  The House of Representatives are elected every 2 years.  And the Senate is elected every 6 years.  

Except not all of the Senate, about 2/3rds of it (the rest are elected two or four years after, they still go in 6 year cycles though).  

Governors go through 4 year cycles as well.  This is an important year because many states are going through elections that can change the balance of power.  Larger states are having their senate elections.

In 2012, all of the House of Representatives will be up for election again, as well as Obama.  But not the Senate (except for like 1 or 2 states)


----------



## LouDAgreat (Nov 2, 2010)

Mider made the clearer post.


----------



## -= Ziggy Stardust =- (Nov 2, 2010)

LouDAgreat said:


> This is the _mid-term_ elections.  In midterms, House and Senate seats are up for election. They take place every 2 years.
> 
> Presidential elections take place every other 4 years, so yea Obama's going for re-election in 2012.





Mider T said:


> @Ziggy: In America, Presidential elections are every 4 years.  The House of Representatives are elected every 2 years.  And the Senate is elected every 6 years.
> 
> Except not all of the Senate, about 2/3rds of it (the rest are elected two or four years after, they still go in 6 year cycles though).
> 
> ...



Oh that makes sense thanks guys.


----------



## iander (Nov 2, 2010)

I voted Hawkins for governor because I dislike political dynasties like the Cuomos and enough said about the GOP candidate.

Voted Gillibrand for Senate though.


----------



## LouDAgreat (Nov 2, 2010)

iander said:


> I voted Hawkins for governor because I dislike political dynasties like the Cuomos and enough said about the GOP candidate.
> 
> Voted Gillibrand for Senate though.



You reside in New York? I thought you lived in Jersey.


----------



## iander (Nov 2, 2010)

LouDAgreat said:


> You reside in New York? I thought you lived in Jersey.



Grew up in New Jersey but I now live in Yonkers .


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 2, 2010)

iander said:


> Grew up in New Jersey but I now live in Yonkers .



Hrm, How do you feel about Chris Christie?


----------



## iander (Nov 2, 2010)

amazingfunksta said:


> Hrm, How do you feel about Chris Christie?



As I have to go soon, I will say for now that I think that his election was one of the worst things to happen to NJ in a long time.  Considering how corrupt and horrible NJ politics is in general, that is saying something.  Not that I liked Corzine either (corporately owned) but Christie is far worse.


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

iander said:


> As I have to go soon, I will say for now that I think that his election was one of the worst things to happen to NJ in a long time.  Considering how corrupt and horrible NJ politics is in general, that is saying something.  Not that I liked Corzine either (corporately owned) but Christie is far worse.



The fact his last name is a girl's name is reason enough for me to NEVER elect him.


----------



## Xyloxi (Nov 2, 2010)

Mael said:


> The fact his last name is a girl's name is reason enough for me to NEVER elect him.



That and he obviously had cruel parents.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 2, 2010)

sadated_peon said:


> The republican had a lot more substance, he seems to be more moderate in his social issues(though still a conservative)
> 
> So that's how I justify it.
> 
> ...



My family's from Michigan. Most Michigan Republicans are RINOs, so don't feel bad about it at all.


----------



## Xion (Nov 2, 2010)

iander said:


> I voted Hawkins for governor because I dislike political dynasties like the Cuomos and enough said about the GOP candidate.
> 
> Voted Gillibrand for Senate though.





*FOR GOVERNOR*​


----------



## Sparrow (Nov 2, 2010)

FFFFFUUUUU- I can't seem to find my voter card. It was in my wallet, but it's now missing. . . not voting is not an option.


----------



## ninjaneko (Nov 2, 2010)

Well, I'm off to vote. : )

Though I do not like my choices... :/

EDIT: Done. I didn't even get a sticker! (And we all know that's what voting is all about. Shiny, patriotic stickers )

Also, heaven help my state. >_> At least I didn't help reelect one of my current Senators. Do not want again.


----------



## Shippingr4losers (Nov 2, 2010)

Where are my Cali brothers and sisters? Represent! 

I'll be watching as closely as I can.


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

Man, Kendrick Meek should have really thrown his support to Charlie Crist, seriously...


----------



## AlphabetSoup (Nov 2, 2010)

Rick Scott and Rubio are in the lead....god damn. At least I can tolerate Scott a little

Oh and Rand Paul won. Thrilling.....


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

^Nobody in this thread has voted Democrat or Republican down the line, read it.

How can anybody tolerate Scott?  What with his mishandling of Health management?  I'd say the only reason he's so popular is because he heavily campaigned in the GOP rich areas of the panhandle and North Florida


----------



## Nemesis (Nov 2, 2010)

Because most people remember the 8 years of Bush and the 6 years of Republican controlled Congress.  It was a nightmare that got most of the fucking world into the mess we are in now.

Nagato don't you think it is about time you got out of the basement and saw the world instead of bitching about "leftists" (When europe is a ton more left and half of it tops US in things like Health and Standard of living etc).  Not saying that it works in US but the "right" had its turn and it fucked up everyone except the super rich in the 2000s.


----------



## αce (Nov 2, 2010)

Following this on NY times.
This looks bad.

Obama is probably crying in Michelle's arms.


----------



## AlphabetSoup (Nov 2, 2010)

Mider T said:


> ^Nobody in this thread has voted Democrat or Republican down the line, read it.
> 
> How can anybody tolerate Scott?  What with his mishandling of Health management?  I'd say the only reason he's so popular is because he heavily campaigned in the GOP rich areas of the panhandle and North Florida



Personally, I hated Sink and Scott but they both seemed "okay" though none had the appeal of Christ who did a very underrated job after Jeb Bush's terms. I do want the democrat sink to win so I'm hoping my tricounty area will pull through somehow (come on Broward). 

As for the "toleration", I wasnt being that specific. Compared to people like O'Donnell and Paul, Scott is easily the lesser evil out of the bunch. Slightly


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

AlphabetSoup said:


> Personally, I hated Sink and Scott but they both seemed "okay" though none had the appeal of Christ who did a very underrated job after Jeb Bush's terms. I do want the democrat sink to win so I'm hoping my tricounty area will pull through somehow (come on Broward).



Preaching to the choir bro (I voted Farid Khavari for Gov and Charlie Crist for Senate).  I do wonder by which order the results come in through county.



> As for the "toleration", I wasnt being that specific. Compared to people like O'Donnell and Paul, Scott is easily the lesser evil out of the bunch. Slightly



Scott is running for Governor though, and he's an extremely right wing guy (as all Governors named Rick are).  Rubio on the other hand has shown himself as willing to be a moderate, at least of his party.  Possibly due to his status as a son of immigrants. 

One reason I'm excited that the next issue Obama is tackling is Immigration.  Should be interesting to see where GOP stands on this.


----------



## Stalin (Nov 2, 2010)

I voted for Joe manchin for WV senate. He reisgned as our governor to try to replace byrd. Byrd was our most beloved citizen.


----------



## AlphabetSoup (Nov 2, 2010)

Mider T said:


> One reason I'm excited that the next issue Obama is tackling is Immigration.  Should be interesting to see where GOP stands on this.



With the fact that the GOP will win many seats this midterm election and because they are inevitably going to be even further to the right, immigration is tricky. Either they appease the most vocal,energetic part of their base or potentially alienate the largest growing minority in the US. I wouldnt want to be in that situation. 

I doubt this is going to be like during the Clinton era where repubs and dems actually did a few things after the election. Boehner already claimed he wanted Obama to be a one term president; not seeing how any republicans would vote with the dems on any major issue. More political deadlocks while our country continues downward

@below: pretty sure its his 7th term


----------



## Sillay (Nov 2, 2010)

Patrick Leahy has the majority in the votes that have been counted in so far. Predictable. This is what, his seventh or eighth term?


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

In '94, Gingrich was just a retarded today but for the sake of (failed) Bob Dole as President (old school Repub) he wasn't going to make any dramatic moves.

lol Jim DeMint projected as winner with 1% of the vote in


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

Sillay said:


> Patrick Leahy has the majority in the votes that have been counted in so far. Predictable. This is what, his seventh or eighth term?



It's Vermont, so no surprise there.


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

^Same old same old as the last 10 years

But look at New Hampshire, who saw that coming?

Marco Rubio has won.  I'm fine with this.


----------



## Sillay (Nov 2, 2010)

Mider T said:


> It's Vermont, so no surprise there.



I know. Our governor is leaving office, so it's Shumlin vs. Dubie, which is kind of exciting, considering our state never amounts to anything in national politics.


----------



## Stalin (Nov 2, 2010)

Mider T said:


> ^Same old same old as the last 10 years
> 
> But look at New Hampshire, who saw that coming?
> 
> Marco Rubio has won.  I'm fine with this.


Political deadlock? The congress not barely doing anything due to the the two parties not wanting to compromise?


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

Democrats do compromise, hence the war, Patriot Act, and everything else.  When the Republicans were in the Minority there was no compromise, which is why everything took so long or didn't get done at all.
Historically speaking, deadlock ends after the mid-terms though.

Anyway, a black republican (Tim Scott) is beating Strom Thurmond's son in Georgia.  Oddest thing I've seen in awhile.


----------



## Stalin (Nov 2, 2010)

Lets hope another religious right winger doesn't enter office.


----------



## Raiden (Nov 2, 2010)

Machin, Blumenthal win! Huge gains.


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

CNN projecting Joe Manchin winning, replacing the late Robert Byrd.

Has to suck getting beat in a Conservative state by a Democrat with a shotgun


----------



## αce (Nov 2, 2010)

The Cheat said:


> Lets hope another religious right winger doesn't enter office.



Grasping for straws?


----------



## strongarm85 (Nov 2, 2010)

Republicans are projected to gain retake control of the House by 40 seats.


----------



## Black Wraith (Nov 2, 2010)

When will we get the prilim results?


----------



## Xion (Nov 2, 2010)

This is...depressing.

I say we euthanize all old people.

Save Social Security and America from moral fascism.


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

Xion said:


> This is...depressing.
> 
> I say we euthanize all old people.
> 
> Save Social Security and America from moral fascism.



And what...pray tell...spawns this?

Oh hey guys, thanks for fighting in WW2 and Korea and Vietnam, but you're all useless now so let's just kill you off. 

Frankly I'm not surprised the Reps are taking House.  If it wasn't for people like Pelosi and Reid, it'd be less worrisome over the Senate.


----------



## Xion (Nov 2, 2010)

Mael said:


> And what...pray tell...spawns this?
> 
> Oh hey guys, thanks for fighting in WW2 and Korea and Vietnam, but you're all useless now so let's just kill you off.



Pretty much.



			
				Mael said:
			
		

> Frankly I'm not surprised the Reps are taking House.  If it wasn't for people like Pelosi and Reid, it'd be less worrisome over the Senate.



I have nothing against Republicans taking the House, but most Republicans appeal to anti-intellectual morons and they sail on anti-intellectual sentiments. Otherwise, I'm usually for limited government, but Republican is now more the Jesus Party than the Limited Government Party.



Raiden said:


> Machin, Blumenthal win! Huge gains.



Blumenthal scares me with his think-of-the-children, videogames-are-violent mentality. It's a hallmark of ignorance, but I assume he's better than that other one.


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 2, 2010)

Mael said:


> And what...pray tell...spawns this?
> 
> Oh hey guys, thanks for fighting in WW2 and Korea and Vietnam, but you're all useless now so let's just kill you off.
> 
> Frankly I'm not surprised the Reps are taking House.  If it wasn't for people like Pelosi and Reid, it'd be less worrisome over the Senate.



I'm sure there are lots of young people and democrats would like to see old people die... They tend to vote conservative .


----------



## Dash (Nov 2, 2010)

Whoa Rubio


----------



## Sphyer (Nov 2, 2010)

It looks like O'Donnel is as good as done.

Thank God (Pun intended )


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

I can't wait to see the statistics of how many registered voters actually voted.


----------



## Xion (Nov 2, 2010)

Sphyer said:


> It looks like O'Donnel is as good as done.
> 
> Thank* the Goddess* (Pun intended )



Fixed. 

There's still hope in California with Prop 19. Though I also expect a horrible fate as the old people come out in droves to oppose it. Goddamn old people.


----------



## nagatopwnsall (Nov 2, 2010)

Xion said:


> Pretty much.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oh yes the democrat party is not elitist snobs who dont look down on 'white trash' or just people who dont go to college and dont believe in gay marriage or any other leftist idea or morality. 

Give me a friccken break man.


----------



## Xion (Nov 2, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> Oh yes the democrat party is not elitist snobs who dont look down on 'white trash' or just people who dont go to college and dont believe in gay marriage or any other leftist idea or morality.
> 
> Give me a friccken break man.



You have proven my point.


----------



## Stalin (Nov 2, 2010)

Both parties mostly suck ass . Most conservatives and liberals are douchbags. Fact.



> Grasping for straws?



I depise theocratic imbeciles.


----------



## nagatopwnsall (Nov 2, 2010)

Xion said:


> You have proven my point.



You have proven mine. You go off on 'anti-intellectuals' as you call them. I have a problem with intellectuals. My problem is you are nothing but elitist snobs who think you are sooooooo muuuuuuccchhhh smarter then the average person. My problem is you are arrogant. You look down on the people who actually keep this country working. The people that dont have a college education(although people WITH one can be these people i speak of). The construction workers. The small buisness people. The women who instead of working 40 hours a week actually decide to stay home and raise the next generation.

Its basically like all the people in the north east thinking anyone that lives in the south speaks with a huge overblown country twang,has a beer belly,hates blacks,is some hillbilly redneck,etc. You guys look down on the average person. The 'small people'.

I hate you intellectual snobs that think you are better then the average man. What makes being a 'intellectual' so great anyhow? What makes one a intellectual? College degree? Or can one only be a intellectual if you tow the liberal/progressive ideology.

Am i not a intellectual if i dont support liberal positions? What of the college professors that are conservative? What of religious scientists? are they idiots? 

Im guessing no they are not in your eyes.You hasve some sort of alpha pack mentality. You follow the ones that are supposedly the smartest,typically without question(which flies in 
the face of intellectualism)


----------



## Nemesis (Nov 2, 2010)

so it seems like by just saying no to EVERYTHING and threatening to filibuster the repubs get the house.

Wow just you know Wow.


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

John Vitter re-elected
John McCain re-elected
Chuck Grassley re-elected

SO MUCH FOR THAT ANTI-INCUMBENT SPIRIT AMIRITE


----------



## Xion (Nov 2, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> You have proven mine. You go off on 'anti-intellectuals' as you call them. I have a problem with intellectuals. My problem is you are nothing but elitist snobs who think you are sooooooo muuuuuuccchhhh smarter then the average person. My problem is you are arrogant. You look down on the people who actually keep this country working. The people that dont have a college education(although people WITH one can be these people i speak of). The construction workers. The small buisness people. The women who instead of working 40 hours a week actually decide to stay home and raise the next generation.
> 
> Its basically like all the people in the north east thinking anyone that lives in the south speaks with a huge overblown country twang,has a beer belly,hates blacks,is some hillbilly redneck,etc. You guys look down on the average person. The 'small people'.
> 
> I hate you intellectual snobs that think you are better then the average man. What makes being a 'intellectual' so great anyhow? What makes one a intellectual? College degree? Or can one only be a intellectual of you tow the liberal/progressive ideology.



The number of fallacies, generalizations, misunderstandings, and ignorant points in your post does not really even warrant further analysis. I'll leave it to someone else.



Nemesis said:


> so it seems like by just saying no to EVERYTHING and threatening to filibuster the repubs get the house.
> 
> Wow just you know Wow.



Being loud tends to work in people's favor. Drowns out logic rather nicely.


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> You have proven mine. You go off on 'anti-intellectuals' as you call them. I have a problem with intellectuals. My problem is you are nothing but elitist snobs who think you are sooooooo muuuuuuccchhhh smarter then the average person. My problem is you are arrogant. You look down on the people who actually keep this country working. The people that dont have a college education(although people WITH one can be these people i speak of). The construction workers. The small buisness people. The women who instead of working 40 hours a week actually decide to stay home and raise the next generation.
> 
> Its basically like all the people in the north east thinking anyone that lives in the south speaks with a huge overblown country twang,has a beer belly,hates blacks,is some hillbilly redneck,etc. You guys look down on the average person. The 'small people'.
> 
> I hate you intellectual snobs that think you are better then the average man. What makes being a 'intellectual' so great anyhow? What makes one a intellectual? College degree? Or can one only be a intellectual of you tow the liberal/progressive ideology.



Seeing how I'm from the Northeast and have been to the South multiple times, you can go fuck yourself because I never really thought this.  You are really this retarded, and may God have mercy on your soul.


----------



## Dash (Nov 2, 2010)

Lincoln loses Arizona Senate seat race, another blow to the Democrats.


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

Well we all saw that one coming, I mean come on


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

Let's thank people like Pelosi, fellas.

Thank you Nancy.  Hope that Botox can hide the disappointment in your face as your petty idelogies hindered a moderate president's chance of salvaging your party.


----------



## Xion (Nov 2, 2010)

I have no respect for people like Pelosi. I just vote for whoever doesn't espouse socially conservative ideologies and whoever is actually logical in their issues, points, and policies (if there is such a candidate). Usually the Democrats make more sense in that regard.


----------



## Nemesis (Nov 2, 2010)

may i ask.  What is it about pelosi that is bad?

I mean her policies and such.


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

Nemesis said:


> may i ask.  What is it about pelosi that is bad?
> 
> I mean her policies and such.



She pushes a purely left program, like something straight out of San Francisco.   It's progressivism that's almost forced and without regard to budget.  Basically, the obstinance towards Republican opposition to some aspects of health care came from she and her ilk.  IMO, Obama tried to give them a shot but she held his influence in check.  The POTUS can only do so much on the Senate floor...she was really calling the shots.


----------



## Nemesis (Nov 2, 2010)

So she tried to push a healthcare bill? Like what something purely socialized like over this side of the atlantic or something else type of things?


----------



## Sillay (Nov 2, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> You have proven mine. You go off on 'anti-intellectuals' as you call them. I have a problem with intellectuals. My problem is you are nothing but elitist snobs who think you are sooooooo muuuuuuccchhhh smarter then the average person. My problem is you are arrogant. You look down on the people who actually keep this country working. The people that dont have a college education(although people WITH one can be these people i speak of). The construction workers. The small buisness people. The women who instead of working 40 hours a week actually decide to stay home and raise the next generation.
> 
> Its basically like all the people in the north east thinking anyone that lives in the south speaks with a huge overblown country twang,has a beer belly,hates blacks,is some hillbilly redneck,etc. You guys look down on the average person. The 'small people'.
> 
> ...


I look down on those who don't take the initiative to help themselves. Those who whine and self-pity, blame the world while not even taking the time to take criticsm to heart with a grain of salt. Fuck you and your mismatched logic.


----------



## Sillay (Nov 2, 2010)

And really NH, I am ashamed.


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

Nemesis said:


> So she tried to push a healthcare bill? Like what something purely socialized like over this side of the atlantic or something else type of things?



As in she didn't completely bother to lend one ear to an opposite viewpoint and collaborate on a healthcare bill.

Believe it or not, this plan they pushed through isn't to the standard Europeans would hold ideal.  It's not perfect.


----------



## Nemesis (Nov 2, 2010)

Yeah I saw what came out with the healthcare bill and was like WTF.  I knew that was not going to please either side at all with that.


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 2, 2010)

i officially hate my fucking country


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

Nemesis said:


> Yeah I saw what came out with the healthcare bill and was like WTF.  I knew that was not going to please either side at all with that.





Zen-aku said:


> i officially hate my fucking country



Both sides felt the need to make that shit sandwich.  This is what happens when idealism mixed with corporatism takes over pragmatism and logic.


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

Nemesis said:


> Yeah I saw what came out with the healthcare bill and was like WTF.  I knew that was not going to please either side at all with that.



Which is the amending process will take even longer.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Nov 2, 2010)

americans' r so fucking stupid


----------



## Xion (Nov 2, 2010)

The problem is our youth doesn't vote nearly as much as the older people do.

Hence why we have 1950s-values politicians still running things.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Nov 2, 2010)

Xion said:


> The problem is our youth doesn't vote nearly as much as the older people do.
> 
> Hence why we have 1950s-values politicians still running things.



_the problem _is the old people are values idiots govt titty suckers while they deny it,

and the young people are morons too


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

Xion said:


> The problem is our youth doesn't vote nearly as much as the older people do.
> 
> Hence why we have 1950s-values politicians still running things.



Hate to say it, but the baby boomers don't give the youth much to vote for.

And I REALLY don't like Barney Frank.  His demeanor, ties to banks, everything.


----------



## Xion (Nov 2, 2010)

Mael said:


> Hate to say it, but the baby boomers don't give the youth much to vote for.
> 
> And I REALLY don't like Barney Frank.  His demeanor, ties to banks, everything.



Hell, I agree, but still if more young people actually thought like the old people did then maybe it wouldn't be half as bad as it is already.


----------



## Parallax (Nov 2, 2010)

The baby boomers will go down to become the worst thing to happen to this country.  Talk about a bunch of self felating narrow sighted old farts that perfected the system the once used to hate and fight.


----------



## Draffut (Nov 2, 2010)

Hope you guys enjoyed 2 years of almost nothing passing because of blatant obstructionism.  Time for absolutely nothing to pass!


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

Parallax said:


> The baby boomers will go down to become the worst thing to happen to this country.  Talk about a bunch of self felating narrow sighted old farts that perfected the system the once used to hate and fight.



These are the same fucks who spat on traumatized Vietnam vets.  I expect nothing from them even if most of them are our parents.


----------



## Grandia (Nov 2, 2010)

Looks like obamas old seat will be going GOP, still very tight race


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 2, 2010)

so were the Russians right?

Democracy is nothing but  trouble?


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 2, 2010)

Mael said:


> She pushes a purely left program, like something straight out of San Francisco.   It's progressivism that's almost forced and without regard to budget.  Basically, the obstinance towards Republican opposition to some aspects of health care came from she and her ilk.  IMO, Obama tried to give them a shot but she held his influence in check.  The POTUS can only do so much on the Senate floor...she was really calling the shots.



That's complete and utter bullshit, Mael.

Pelosi's not a progressive. She's a DLC moderate Dem just like Clinton was. She's no more liberal than Obama.


----------



## Stalin (Nov 2, 2010)

I don't think obama will win a second term.


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

Zen-aku said:


> so were the Russians right?
> 
> Democracy is nothing but  trouble?



Oh for God's sake...let's not be this maudlin about it.

The Dems just got what was coming after their complete liquidation of backbone against an obstinate opponent.



			
				Jello said:
			
		

> That's complete and utter bullshit, Mael.
> 
> Pelosi's not a progressive. She's a DLC moderate Dem just like Clinton was. She's no more liberal than Obama.



I'm really not convinced, especially given the area she used to supervise.  I'm more convinced as I was in 2006 that her reluctance to work with anything that involves that elephant is what helped foment the obstinance some Dems had towards the Republican party.  I never liked her nor will I ever.


----------



## Stalin (Nov 2, 2010)

IF obama loses, I hope we get a moderate conservative republican.


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 2, 2010)

Mael said:


> Oh for God's sake...let's not be this maudlin about it.
> 
> The Dems just got what was coming after their complete liquidation of backbone against an obstinate opponent.



but if this is gonna be what its like when ever the dems get power whats the fucking point


----------



## Grandia (Nov 2, 2010)

Not a republican but i like Marco Rubio, GOP should be pushing him hard for a presidential run in 2012 or 2016.

btw anyone here from Florida? Allen west is whipping the incumbant democrat congressmen Ron Klein in the polls


----------



## Xion (Nov 2, 2010)

Proposition 19 is not looking so good either with 57% against though only 2% of precincts are reporting in.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Nov 2, 2010)

So...lost the house, kept the senate then?  

Well, that's how it is...but the real battle will be in 2 years, whether or not the blues can get the house back and keep the Presidential seat is completely up to them 

Go with the values they say they support, or stick to the route they've been going for the past 2 years and attempt to split the difference, its their call.

But what i will say is that this should be a learning experience, one they should learn from, if none of the other learning experiences haven't sunken in of course


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

Zen-aku said:


> but if this is gonna be what its like when ever the dems get power whats the fucking point



Democrats aren't avatars of deities, FYI.

The fucking point is to elect Democrats who have a spine and don't have an overarching agenda that speaks more for their interests than the lot of America while keeping somewhat in line with SOME of their core beliefs.  Pragmatism is what I think should be looked for.  People like Harry Reid are defeatists and slaves to the party system they were sucked into decades ago.  Also, baby boomers dude.

Easy to say both sides let their stupidity get the best of them, but the Republican stupidity was just more opportunistic.


----------



## Grandia (Nov 2, 2010)

Just won FL22 , GOP 2nd elected black republican for tonight


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

Grandia said:


> Just won FL22 , GOP 2nd elected black republican for tonight



He reminds me oddly of a more squarely-cut Colin Powell.


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 2, 2010)

Mael said:


> Democrats aren't avatars of deities, FYI.
> 
> The fucking point is to elect Democrats who have a spine and don't have an overarching agenda that speaks more for their interests than the lot of America while keeping somewhat in line with SOME of their core beliefs.  Pragmatism is what I think should be looked for.  People like Harry Reid are defeatists and slaves to the party system they were sucked into decades ago.  Also, baby boomers dude.
> .




how would that  change every thing they do getting  opposed


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 2, 2010)

Mael said:


> I'm really not convinced, especially given the area she used to supervise.  I'm more convinced as I was in 2006 that her reluctance to work with anything that involves that elephant is what helped foment the obstinance some Dems had towards the Republican party.  I never liked her nor will I ever.


As the Speaker of the House, it's not her job to reach across the aisle. That's the job the floor leaders on both sides need to do. And the Republicans have proven time and time again that they have absolutely no interest in any sort of compromise with the Democrats.

Or are we going to forget that Obama's health care bill is the exact same Bill the House Republican leadership sponsored in 95? The Democrats may be spineless panderers to the lowest common denominator, but the Republicans have become something far worse.

They have no respect for civic virtue or the democratic ethos. Not anymore. They've turned this into a class and culture war. And right now, they're winning, and getting millions of Americans to sell themselves and their neighbors out to unbridled Junkerism.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Nov 2, 2010)

Fuck....that guy was the tea partier who said he had higher security contracts than the President   bugger, maybe this is worse then i thought


----------



## Stalin (Nov 2, 2010)

I wish we had a genuine large scale non partisan movement. The tea party only represents the interests of the right.


----------



## Santo (Nov 2, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> They have no respect for civic virtue or the democratic ethos. Not anymore. They've turned this into a class and culture war. And right now, they're winning, and getting millions of Americans to sell themselves and their neighbors out to unbridled Junkerism.




Liberals have been playing the class card way before Republicans did. They're just beating them at their own game. Remember blame Bush? Using Democratic tactics well!


----------



## Inuhanyou (Nov 2, 2010)

That's looking for a pipe dream  as much as the third party solution is a pipe dream


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

Zen-aku said:


> how would that  change every thing they do getting  opposed



I doubt that every single Republican was an obstinate prick.



Jello Biafra said:


> As the Speaker of the House, it's not her job to reach across the aisle. That's the job the floor leaders on both sides need to do. And the Republicans have proven time and time again that they have absolutely no interest in any sort of compromise with the Democrats.
> 
> Or are we going to forget that Obama's health care bill is the exact same Bill the House Republican leadership sponsored in 95? The Democrats may be spineless panderers to the lowest common denominator, but the Republicans have become something far worse.
> 
> They have no respect for civic virtue or the democratic ethos. Not anymore. They've turned this into a class and culture war. And right now, they're winning, and getting millions of Americans to sell themselves and their neighbors out to unbridled Junkerism.



Dems did try to push that bill cutting funding to the Iraq War and not only endangering troops already there but possessing absolutely no regard to second and third order effects in Iraq and likely Afghanistan.  Sorry if that gets me a little touchy.  Dems, instead of going into bullshit like that cutting bill, would've been wiser to try to cooperate on a war that was already going on instead of playing the Hindsight Game.

I'm not defending Republicans nor will I ever.  They're just as bad if not worse for subtly supporting the Tea Clusterfuck Party and awakening the satanically star personality of Sarah Palin.  They're hypocrite chickenhawks whom likely never put on a uniform yet will still harp about fighting.  However, this issue is of both parties to blame, so when I see people like Nancy Pelosi I feel reminded of why Democrats failed, people so ingrained with the Democratic pandering like her.


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 2, 2010)

Mael said:


> I doubt that every single Republican was an obstinate prick.



in 2008 the entire party agenda was pretty much stated to be "oppose Obama"


----------



## Mael (Nov 2, 2010)

Zen-aku said:


> in 2008 the entire party agenda was pretty much stated to be "oppose Obama"



Two sides to every coin.  There was likely something to either alienate moderate Republicans or get them all spurned like this.


----------



## Grandia (Nov 2, 2010)

Prop 19

*No 51,535 58%*
Yes 36,888 42%


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 2, 2010)

Santo said:


> Liberals have been playing the class card way before Republicans did. They're just beating them at their own game. Remember blame Bush? Using Democratic tactics well!



Class war existed in this country long before the Democrats ever paid any attention to the issue. And even at their furthest left, under Roosevelt and Truman, the Democratic Party has never been a working-class party. They allow organized labor a voice to _mitigate_ class conflict, not to promote it.

If they were actively partisan for the working class, then they'd be socialists, and they wouldn't be bailing out banks with working class tax dollars, or signing "free trade agreements" that curiously, don't allow any free trade except for what is beneficial to the corporate bottom line.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Nov 2, 2010)

And so the wim of the people is swayed once more


----------



## Stalin (Nov 2, 2010)

You know what I'm tired of politicial apathy and bitching about how the system sucks. We need a real movement not like a partisan movement like the tea partiers. I'd like to see a movement that would actually try to fix our shitty system instead of using the tired tactic of voting in the opposition.


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 2, 2010)

so is the next 2 years just gonna be the republicans calling the shots or can the democrats do any thing?


----------



## Grandia (Nov 2, 2010)

ohio gov goes gop, gop wins PA senate seat, oh dear....


----------



## Mider T (Nov 2, 2010)

I love how CNN uses the music from the John Adams mini series



Zen-aku said:


> so is the next 2 years just gonna be the republicans calling the shots or can the democrats do any thing?



At the end of the day, Obama's word is law.  Now that the Tea Party backed candidates are in power, will the alienate the more moderate Republicans or what?


----------



## Santo (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> If they were actively partisan for the working class, then they'd be socialists, and they wouldn't be bailing out banks with working class tax dollars, or signing "free trade agreements" that curiously, don't allow any free trade except for what is beneficial to the corporate bottom line.



I'm downwith no bailing out banks and "real" free trade agreements


----------



## iander (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> These are the same fucks who spat on traumatized Vietnam vets.  I expect nothing from them even if most of them are our parents.



You mean the myth that was never true? Read the Spitting Image.


----------



## dreams lie (Nov 3, 2010)

Harry Reid has a huge lead right now.  It is possible that it will start closing, but wow, did not expect that.



> You know what I'm tired of politicial apathy and bitching about how the system sucks. We need a real movement not like a partisan movement like the tea partiers. I'd like to see a movement that would actually try to fix our shitty system instead of using the tired tactic of voting in the opposition.



What are you looking for?  The "fix our shitting system" idea is being thrown around by everyone from Marxists to free market fundamentalists.


----------



## Shippingr4losers (Nov 3, 2010)

Brown defeats Whitman.
Boxer beats Fiorna.

Yep, Democrats control California. And I personally don't mind. Too bad I can't get ma' weed. Legally that is.

Well, my job here is done. 

See you next election!


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

iander said:


> You mean the myth that was never true? Read the Spitting Image.



The vets I've spoken with tend to disagree.  Lembecke researched some cases but not all.  They still got a shabby treatment, were unfairly called baby killers, and were subject to a wolfly inadequate veterans package.  Baby boomer ingrate hippies were still the worthless fucks they are now except they thought they were part of a solution only to transform into the problem.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> The vets I've spoken with tend to disagree.  Lembecke researched some cases but not all.  They still got a shabby treatment, were unfairly called baby killers, and were subject to a wolfly inadequate veterans package.  Baby boomer ingrate hippies were still the worthless fucks they are now except they thought they were part of a solution only to transform into the problem.



You can't deal with the 60s and 70s Counterculture as a monolith, because it simply wasn't. You do realize that at least a many of the war-protestors, particularly from the hard, socialist left, _volunteered_ to the join the military to build resistance to the war within the soldiers.

Why do you think so many veterans came home and ended up protesting the war? Why do you think the SDS and the Yippies never endorsed anti-draft protests.

Yeah, there were a lot of idiots, and as a whole, the New Left destroyed itself, and most people involved just burned out. These are the baby-boomer Tea Partiers you see making a ruckus right now. Chances are, they were involved tangentially to the Counterculture, and it's degeneration led to their reactionary stance.


----------



## Gallant (Nov 3, 2010)

I did my civic duty and prevented Christine O'Donnell from becoming a U.S. Senator. The rest of the party is taking the expected losses. Consequence of the incompetence of certain people in the Senate and the White House. 

Oh well, gridlock for two years and planning for 2012 it is.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> You can't deal with the 60s and 70s Counterculture as a monolith, because it simply wasn't. You do realize that at least a many of the war-protestors, particularly from the hard, socialist left, _volunteered_ to the join the military to build resistance to the war within the soldiers.
> 
> Why do you think so many veterans came home and ended up protesting the war? Why do you think the SDS and the Yippies never endorsed anti-draft protests.
> 
> Yeah, there were a lot of idiots, and as a whole, the New Left destroyed itself, and most people involved just burned out. These are the baby-boomer Tea Partiers you see making a ruckus right now. Chances are, they were involved tangentially to the Counterculture, and it's degeneration led to their reactionary stance.



There were many left movements in the 60s and 70s, many were essentially terrorists mind you.  I know it's not monolithic, but the people and culture behind the treatment of Vietnam veterans certainly makes a case of the wider civilian mentality, uninformed and intolerant.  Interesting of course to know about the socialists, because that would likely never happen now.

I know a lot of vets turn to protest the war, but maybe in my heart of hearts I feel they're more legit doing it because they actually experienced it.  I remember one particular teacher in my Catholic school fled to Canada or simply dodged the draft and then he trashes Vietnam vets and spurns the rage of the entire student body.  If that's one of my first examples to the Counterculture, then Jesus Christ...


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Nov 3, 2010)

At least the income tax is headed to defeat in my state. 

Not surprised at all that the incompetent Dems are taking it up the ass. So ironic from the party who once said "it's the economy, stupid."


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 3, 2010)

2012

Palin might be president.

Maybe the Mayans were right after all....


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Speaking of tax and questions:

1. Repeal sales tax on alcohol: YES
2. Repeal MA Affordable Housing Law: NO
3. Reduce MA sales tax from 6.25% to 3%: Hells the fuck no.



Zen-aku said:


> 2012
> 
> Palin might be president.
> 
> Maybe the Mayans were right after all....



Please tell me you're lulzing.


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> Please tell me you're lulzing.



Despairing would be more accurate...


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Zen-aku said:


> Despairing would be more accurate...



Oh b'awwwwwwwww.

You need to develop some realism.  Palin would be a GOP nightmare because the GOP actually knows she's too incompetent to hold such a high office.


----------



## Grandia (Nov 3, 2010)

Harry reid wins. Celebrate or not?


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Grandia said:


> Harry reid wins. Celebrate or not?



A rallying cry of "Meh."


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> Oh b'awwwwwwwww.
> 
> You need to develop some realism.  Palin would be a GOP nightmare because the GOP actually knows she's too incompetent to hold such a high office.



but the tea party is taking  over the gop


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

Montana is slow on returns, so I probably won't know how the state offices and ballot initiatives went until tomorrow morning. And, in all likelyhood, the good ol' boy Denny Rehberg won re-election.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Zen-aku said:


> but the tea party is taking  over the gop



No it's not.  Where did you pick up that horse shit?  Rand Paul and Christine O'Donnell, with the latter losing hard?


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> No it's not.  Where did you pick up that horse shit?  Rand Paul and Christine O'Donnell, with the latter losing hard?



its what  cnn is making it sound like


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Nov 3, 2010)

Grandia said:


> Harry reid wins. Celebrate or not?



Important to maintain the advantage in the senate. He should lose his senate leader seat, won't even be the minority leader. Probably Chuck Schumer, who is more competent and less of a pansy.


----------



## Gallant (Nov 3, 2010)

Of all the Dems to win a senate race, it had to be Harry Reid. If Angle wasn't so bat shit insane there would be nothing good about this. Two more years of weak leadership in the Senate.


----------



## Grandia (Nov 3, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Important to maintain the advantage in the senate. *He should lose his senate leader seat, won't even be the minority leader. Probably Chuck Schumer, who is more competent and less of a pansy*.



agreed, hes too weak


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Zen-aku said:


> its what  cnn is making it sound like



CNN...yeah that's the real source. 

Try reading something like the Economist or something a little less mainstream.


----------



## The Space Cowboy (Nov 3, 2010)

Palin's not gonna be in the 2012 Presidential.  She went the route of celebrity, rather than actually going back for elected office.  As such, I don't think she'd make it past the Republican primaries

Anyways...I really only paid too much attention to ballot initiatives this year.  We had a flock of really stupid ones, and our first female Governor.
I keep hoping that my Congressman gets ditched due to his shameful about-face during bailout season, but no such luck.  The Democrats didn't even bother running a challenger.
Courts May Not Consider International Law -- NO
State must NOT fund education based on formulas dependent on other states -- NO
State must raise per pupil average spending to the regional average -- NO\


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> CNN...yeah that's the real source.
> 
> Try reading something like the Economist or something a little less mainstream.



i only care hardcore like this during election time, the rest of the year i watch Stewart and Colbert


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Zen-aku said:


> i only care hardcore like this during election time, the rest of the year i watch Stewart and Colbert



Res ipsa loquitur.


----------



## Shasta McNasty (Nov 3, 2010)

Historic gains in the House.


Sorry for posting a new thread BTW. I'm completely blind and didn't notice it was a sticky.

Rick Scott is still in the lead in FL Gov. Race

Ken Buck is now in the lead in Colorado...likely leading to a 7 seat gain in the Senate for the GOP as I thought.


----------



## nagatopwnsall (Nov 3, 2010)

obama's former seat is lost...LMAO.


----------



## Shasta McNasty (Nov 3, 2010)

The next speaker of the House of Representatives:



Pelosi, YOU'RE FIRED.


----------



## Grandia (Nov 3, 2010)

Shasta McNasty said:


> Historic gains in the House.
> 
> 
> Sorry for posting a new thread BTW. I'm completely blind and didn't notice it was a sticky.
> ...



i only wanted scott to win so his lt governor running mate from trinidad made it too


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> Res ipsa loquitur.



just looked that up on Wikipedia but i dont know what u were getting at...

was it an insult


----------



## nagatopwnsall (Nov 3, 2010)

If im not mistaken did the democrat party not say in 2008 that the republican party would be a party only to the south? That the republican party was essentially extinct? 

Fuck you dem/libs were so high off obamas smugness(after victory) look what happened!

This is what happens when you oppose the will of the people. We did not want your bullshit. The majority think you are too left-wing/liberal.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

I'm fucking pissed and sad. My brother just lost in the 29th District of New York against someone who has no plans, steals my brother's good ideas, and is a debt collector so he wants to clearly repeal anything dealing with healthcare so he can make more money. He's bought and paid for by the companies up here like the oil companies and it's going to be terrible.

Good news though, for how little time my brother was running (only 7 months compared to Reed's 1 year to 1.5 years) and how little money and support her had (literally NO support from the Democratic party and his only support from the people of the district) and being entirely new to people as this was his first go at Politics, he did amazingly well. Something like 55% to 45% right now and there's a lot more areas still being counted (as Ontario County has to hand count their ballot) and some areas aren't reported yet that typically vote Democrats so ya.. it should be even close. Considering my brother had so little time, so little money, was new, and that this is a year for Republicans because of the short term memory of the American Voters (fucking morons) who forget who REALLY caused these problems? That's amazing and I hope the Democratic Party next time around realizes how strong a candidate he is for them and they should fund the hell outta him.

Fun fact too, Tom Reed's home town, Corning New York, voted for my brother. The very people who knew Tom Reed best voted for the guy they didn't know personally. Guess what that says about either Tom Reed, my brother, or both. It means Tom Reed is really not good for the job, my brother is a damn good speaker and has ideas they loved, or both. So ya, just some good shit from this whole process and I really hope my brother can find the ability (read: money) to run again.


Now, as for the whole, our country is fucked. You're about to see either nothing get passed in the government or shit that helps big businesses and fucks over the middle and lower class. I do hope 2012 we'll get REAL good candidates voted in instead of just running and losing (though many doing damn well considering things). Still, I'm worried we're going to have more problems going down and this is going to turn bad fast. I hope that the American people will finally wake up though and start following our French brothers and sisters who have started protesting over the unjust bullshit THEIR government is trying to do to them. It's sad that I have to say this, but the American people could really learn something from the French. That sometimes when voting isn't working and the government isn't listening, we need to turn to protesting on the streets just as we did when we had things like Civil Reform in the 1960s and other times we got REAL good change and things passed. I really hope the American people wake up and realize we need to start protesting in the streets and showing our government we're not going to let them fuck us over anymore.


----------



## Grandia (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> obama's former seat is lost...LMAO.



that is embarrassing though


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

> I hope that the American people will finally wake up though and start following our French brothers and sisters who have started protesting over the unjust bullshit THEIR government is trying to do to them. It's sad that I have to say this, but the American people could really learn something from the French.



Yes because fuckraging over a two-year change in pension is really something to get pissy over.  Listen to Le Male and other Frenchmen first before you make this asinine statement.

What is SO unjust by altering a pension age from 60 to 62?  Two years.  Two fucking years.  Europeans expect programs for them all the time.  Well ya know what? Eventually you're going to run out of money for all of them.  Sorry kid.


----------



## Shasta McNasty (Nov 3, 2010)

excellent speech by Carl Palladino


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> If im not mistaken did the democrat party not say in 2008 that the republican party would be a party only to the south? That the republican party was essentially extinct?
> 
> Fuck you dem/libs were so high off obamas smugness(after victory) look what happened!
> 
> This is what happens when you oppose the will of the people. We did not want your bullshit. The majority think you are too left-wing/liberal.



Here's a perfect example of a moron who has ignored the truth of what the Republicans have been doing and has such stupid short term memory they don't even remember how the Republicans were the ones who destroyed our economy and kept Democrats the last two years from doing ANYTHING with relentless filibustering...



Mael said:


> Yes because fuckraging over a two-year change in pension is really something to get pissy over.  Listen to Le Male and other Frenchmen first before you make this asinine statement.



God, the more I talk to you the more ignorant you prove to be. You think it's JUST about raising the retirement plan? No. At least when it comes to America, I'm saying. The rich demand the lower and middle class work more while they lounge around and get fat off us and continue to run the country in their favor. The rich are trying to privatize social security, they are trying to bring back the idea of surfs (they even have a meeting in January about it), they are trying to get more wealth disparity, this shit HAS to stop. There needs to be some god damn protesting going on. People need to wake the fuck up and see what they are doing to our country and to the very american people.


----------



## Xion (Nov 3, 2010)

This election year sucks. This country sucks. A whole lot of suck to go around and proof that Americans haven't gotten any smarter as a majority.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> God, the more I talk to you the more ignorant you prove to be. You think it's JUST about raising the retirement plan? No. At least when it comes to America, I'm saying. The rich demand the lower and middle class work more while they lounge around and get fat off us and continue to run the country in their favor. The rich are trying to privatize social security, they are trying to bring back the idea of surfs (they even have a meeting in January about it), they are trying to get more wealth disparity, this shit HAS to stop. There needs to be some god damn protesting going on. People need to wake the fuck up and see what they are doing to our country and to the very american people.



You know what?  Fuck you and this posturing soapbox you're on.  Just how old are you anyway?  What idealistic kool-aid have you been slurping?  Oh wait I forgot.  You're a fucking student.  YOU DON'T WORK.  You likely don't pay for all your expenses.  Come back to me when you actually have some responsibility.

I pay my taxes, serve my country, and try to inject a little sense of realism here and you go on these long-winded rants about how your brother amounts to jack shit in a race most people don't care about and how WE need to take lessons from the fucking French whom even Frenchmen like Le Male have criticized for going too far.  Don't feed me this bullshit.  And FYI, there are some rich people who work for their money.  My dad works as a pharmacist and lawyer and worked his ass off to get his nice house and car.  Fuck off if you don't like that.

Surfs?  What the fuck are surfs?  Do you mean "serfs?"  If so, get a fucking dictionary.  And you know what?  There has been protesting.  It just hasn't gone YOUR way so now you rage about it.  That's how it goes, kid.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> If im not mistaken did the democrat party not say in 2008 that the republican party would be a party only to the south? That the republican party was essentially extinct?
> 
> Fuck you dem/libs were so high off obamas smugness(after victory) look what happened!
> 
> This is what happens when you oppose the will of the people. We did not want your bullshit. The majority think you are too left-wing/liberal.



That's really not the case. The Democrats got a shellacing because they failed to live up to the expectations for broad based progressive reform that they won the 2008 election on.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

Cool your jets now.

That goes for you Mael, as well as you, Vicious-chan


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> You know what?  Fuck you and this posturing soapbox you're on.  Just how old are you anyway?  What idealistic kool-aid have you been slurping?  Oh wait I forgot.  You're a fucking student.  YOU DON'T WORK.  You likely don't pay for all your expenses.  Come back to me when you actually have some responsibility.
> 
> I pay my taxes, serve my country, and try to inject a little sense of realism here and you go on these long-winded rants about how your brother amounts to jack shit in a race most people don't care about and how WE need to take lessons from the fucking French whom even Frenchmen like Le Male have criticized for going too far.  Don't feed me this bullshit.  And FYI, there are some rich people who work for their money.  My dad works as a pharmacist and lawyer and worked his ass off to get his nice house and car.  Fuck off if you don't like that.
> 
> Surfs?  What the fuck are surfs?  Do you mean "serfs?"  If so, get a fucking dictionary.  And you know what?  There has been protesting.  It just hasn't gone YOUR way so now you rage about it.  That's how it goes, kid.



Actually I do work, I work 40 hours a week and I go to school taking 20 credits worth of classes. I have very little free time actually, I sleep maybe 3-4 hours a night at most. I'm probably a harder worker than you ever know. Stop making stupid assumptions. I just don't put my job as my primary occupation because it's not.

Serve your country? How? I honestly doubt you're in the military.

And yes, I meant serfs, again, I sleep very little and I'm typing damn fast. Minor slip up is nothing to get bitchy and stupid about. You're just fucking stupid. The country isn't protesting shit. A few might say something, but not enough. The majority of the people need to wake up. And your dad might be making money, but you think he's rich? Does he make tens of millions or hundreds of millions or even BILLIONS a year? Probably not, so he's not part of what is generally the "rich" that I refer to.

I'm done with you, you're an idiot and you clearly made a stupid assumption about me and what I do. I probably worked harder in one month of my life than you have your entire year. Sounds like you're just a spoiled brat of some lawyer father. Even if you're not, you're still ignorant and clearly seem to like to believe naively in a system that hasn't been working and with people who are bought and paid for by our top 20%. That goes for BOTH parties, Democrats and Republicans, the system sucks. My anger is because there were lots of good candidates who didn't win because they were merely running democrat who had real good ideas. One was my brother, but I mean Russ Feingold is another and the list is on. REAL progressives with REAL hopes to help people losing because the American People vote with no thought and no memory of who caused the real problems...

Anyways, done with you.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> Actually I do work, I work 40 hours a week and I go to school taking 20 credits worth of classes. I have very little free time actually, I sleep maybe 3-4 hours a night at most. I'm probably a harder worker than you ever know. Stop making stupid assumptions. I just don't put my job as my primary occupation because it's not.
> 
> Serve your country? How? I honestly doubt you're in the military.
> 
> ...



Oh wait, you're serious.  Let me laugh harder.  I honestly doubt you do all this.

And yes, I'm actually in the military, so yeah it is serving the country.  It's more than what you'll amount to.  Check the picture thread but no...that'll be too hard for you.

Done with you?  You mean you'll be finished with this whinefest because you're not getting your way?  Oh boo hoo...your side brought this upon yourselves.

Oh and thanks for not acknowledging that rich people work hard to get their money, and likely insulting the hard work my dad from Bradford Boondocks Pennsylvania had to put in to get his two degrees.  Yep, rich people cheat and steal for their fortunes.  God forbid they work which likely more than half of them have.  That's spoken like a true whiner and supplicant.

Rage on, call for revolution, and accomplish nothing.  The futility warms my heart so.


----------



## Xion (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious, your brother is Matt Zeller? 

Or are you just being endearing?


----------



## PewPewSoulEater (Nov 3, 2010)

I saw the word erection...I think I'm in the wrong place. Politics most certainly DO NOT cause erections.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

Xion said:


> Vicious, your brother is Matt Zeller?
> 
> Or are you just being endearing?



He is literally my blood brother. Same father, same mother.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

PewPewSoulEater said:


> I saw the word erection...I think I'm in the wrong place. Politics most certainly DO NOT cause erections.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

I was about to say...the yuri fic the Boston Phoenix provided of O'Donnell and Palin got me quite aroused.


----------



## The Space Cowboy (Nov 3, 2010)

I really understand why Vicious is disappointed in the outcome of his particular local election.  State Congressional District elections are mostly name recognition and party affiliation.  A good friend of mine ran for office for his district a few years ago too.  He didn't win--but did manage to put up a very respectable fight for a self-financed campaign, garnering around 45 percent of the vote.

If you are personally invested in a candidacy, then disappointment and anger are pretty much the norm if they don't win.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

> WHEN SARAH MET CHRISTINE
> 
> Two decades before they became Tea Party spokesmodels, Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell had a chance encounter, at a 1991 Republican fundraiser, that would change both their lives forever.
> 
> ...



Wowzers...

LOL Vicious...u mad.   Direct insult in a neg is also not a very good tactic, but preach on, oh sage.


----------



## Penance (Nov 3, 2010)

Ah, Michigan...


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

The Space Cowboy said:


> I really understand why Vicious is disappointed in the outcome of his particular local election.  State Congressional District elections are mostly name recognition and party affiliation.  A good friend of mine ran for office for his district a few years ago too.  He didn't win--but did manage to put up a very respectable fight for a self-financed campaign, garnering around 45 percent of the vote.
> 
> If you are personally invested in a candidacy, then disappointment and anger are pretty much the norm if they don't win.



My anger isn't just because of my brother's district, I know that district tends to vote pretty much political line Republican as it's a very conservative district. But it does greatly disappoint me. But, not just my brother. As I said, other people around the country who had real plans and really voted and proved they wanted to help the average american citizen lost, that just angers me. And they lost because, let's face it, the average American voter has such a short term memory they can never remember who really screwed up what... be they democrat or republican, they just vote party line or they don't vote at all and they vote out whoever is in power even if those in power didn't cause the problems or couldn't get shit passed BECAUSE the other party Filibustered everything.

Oh well... I'm gonna head to bed, work in a few hours and then school and then work. God damn I can't wait for my vacation during Thanksgiving.


----------



## makeoutparadise (Nov 3, 2010)

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35TbGjt-weA[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## LouDAgreat (Nov 3, 2010)

From the results of the elections, gridlock is either going to be at an all time high, or Republicans and Democrats will finally learn to work together on common solutions. So... 

I'm really uncertain of the future of American politics.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

One lost midterm House election, and you'd think that it was the Night of Long Knives...

Sheesh guys, it's not the end of the world.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Nov 3, 2010)

Xion said:


> This election year sucks. This country sucks. A whole lot of suck to go around and proof that Americans haven't gotten any smarter as a majority.



It's not like our leader was inspiring us to the polls.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

LouDAgreat said:


> From the results of the elections, gridlock is either going to be at an all time high, or Republicans and Democrats will finally learn to work together on common solutions.



How dare you speak such heresy!

The Republicans got seats!  THEY WILL OBSTRUCT EVERYTHING AND THE RICH SHALL REIGN ONCE MORE!   WARREN BUFFET IS THE NEW GOD-EMPEROR!  OH NOES!



Jello Biafra said:


> One lost midterm House election, and you'd think that it was the Night of Long Knives...
> 
> Sheesh guys, it's not the end of the world.



It's half of what I've been trying to fucking say.  Maybe I'm too cynical to really be appalled anymore.


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> It's half of what I've been trying to fucking say.  Maybe I'm too cynical to really be appaled anymore.



but this is the biggest mid term shift in a long time


----------



## Shinigami Perv (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> One lost midterm House election, and you'd think that it was the Night of Long Knives...
> 
> Sheesh guys, it's not the end of the world.



It is turning out to be a fairly miraculous debacle, though. Remember 2008? Being associated with Republicans was like being a known wife beater. Now they are winning the House. 

The Democrats have probably set a record for political incompetence in such a short time with this one.


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 3, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> The Democrats have probably set a record for political incompetence in such a short time with this one.



incompetence

or sabatoge


----------



## Xion (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> He is literally my blood brother. Same father, same mother.



Did they have a concession speech where you had to stand at the podium being filmed with him? 

I know they usually do that at least at the state-level, not so sure about district-level.


----------



## LouDAgreat (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:
			
		

> One lost midterm House election, and you'd think that it was the Night of Long Knives...
> 
> Sheesh guys, it's not the end of the world.



It's a horrible election cycle nonetheless. Republicans will be more right wing and obstinate than ever before. From the sound of their rhetoric, compromise doesn't seem to be on the agenda, even if the situation calls for it to get something productive through. 

I don't anticipate Republicans working with Dems. How can you be optimistic for the next 2 years? Or even the years after that? 

It's a really uncertain time right now.


----------



## Penance (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> One lost midterm House election, and you'd think that it was the Night of Long Knives...
> 
> *Sheesh guys, it's not the end of the world*.







Shinigami Perv said:


> It's not like our leader was inspiring us to the polls.



If people cared about those seats...then that should've been their inspiration...


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

LouDAgreat said:


> It's a horrible election cycle nonetheless. Republicans will be more right wing and obstinate than ever before. From the sound of their rhetoric, compromise doesn't seem to be on the agenda, even if the situation calls for it to get something productive through.
> 
> I don't anticipate Republicans working with Dems, how can you be optimistic for the next 2 years.
> 
> It's a really uncertain time right now.



I think it's a necessary dialectical shift in political consciousness in this country. Like it or not, the Democrats were on the same business as usual course as they've been as a ruling party since the 50s. And the Republicans had reduced themselves to being defined solely by their opposition to the Democrats.

The simple fact of the matter is that the political questions of the day can't be solved by business as usual. This back and forth between the two factions of the political class demonstrates that clearly. 

Regardless of what you think the solution is, you can't deny that something needs to cut the Gordian knot and begin a qualitatively new politics, or else it'll be the same thing repeated in an endless farce.


----------



## Deleted member 84471 (Nov 3, 2010)

So the Democrats did better than was expected then? And I imagine they have a ready-made excuse for not getting anything done in the next 2 years.


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 3, 2010)

LouDAgreat said:


> It's a horrible election cycle nonetheless. Republicans will be more right wing and obstinate than ever before. From the sound of their rhetoric, compromise doesn't seem to be on the agenda, even if the situation calls for it to get something productive through.



an agenda of absolute no compromise just seems inherently wrong 

why can the system allow some thing like that, a government is supposed to work for the good of the people

Republicans make it "there way or no way"


----------



## LouDAgreat (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> I think it's a necessary dialectical shift in political consciousness in this country. Like it or not, the Democrats were on the same business as usual course as they've been as a ruling party since the 50s. And the Republicans had reduced themselves to being defined solely by their opposition to the Democrats.
> 
> The simple fact of the matter is that the political questions of the day can't be solved by business as usual. This back and forth between the two factions of the political class demonstrates that clearly.
> 
> Regardless of what you think the solution is, you can't deny that something needs to cut the Gordian knot and begin a qualitatively new politics, or else it'll be the same thing repeated in an endless farce.



Kill the Senate, or limit it's power drastically, and enact Parliamentary rules in the House of Representatives. Let's begin there.



			
				Zen-aku said:
			
		

> an agenda of absolute no compromise just seems inherently wrong
> 
> why can the system allow some thing like that, a government is supposed to work for the good of the people
> 
> ...



Unfortunately, there's no universal agreement on what policies will work for the good of the people. Thus we have Republicans and Democrats.  it kinda boils down to an information war... having the competency to carry your solutions out.


----------



## hcheng02 (Nov 3, 2010)

Man, the Republicans gained Obama's seat in Illinois. Thats gotta be a slap on the face, although given how tainted by scandal the Democrats were I guess it was somewhat inevitable. 

Great, gridlock for the next two years. Its like having Newt Gingrich all over again. I wonder how long before the Tea Party overreaches?


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 3, 2010)

LouDAgreat said:


> Unfortunately, there's no universal agreement on what policies will work for the good of the people. Thus we have Republicans and Democrats.



but that's where  The compromises are supposed to happen, 

if in the next  presidential election the reverse of 2008 happens are the democrats entitled to put the Cabosh on every thing?


----------



## The Space Cowboy (Nov 3, 2010)

LouDAgreat said:


> It's a horrible election cycle nonetheless. Republicans will be more right wing and obstinate than ever before. From the sound of their rhetoric, compromise doesn't seem to be on the agenda, even if the situation calls for it to get something productive through.
> 
> I don't anticipate Republicans working with Dems. How can you be optimistic for the next 2 years? Or even the years after that?
> 
> It's a really uncertain time right now.



They were out of power--so they had a good reason to be obstinate and intractable.  The most dangerous sort of wild animal is the one who feels cornered and threatened.  

But now that they have the house, they're presented with an interesting strategic dilemma.  Do you try and shift things in a new direction--or do you try to roll back the gains of your opponents?

This was actually a really good year for the Republicans to take the House, from their point of view.  With the ongoing census we're in a Redistricting season for the House, and political battles on this front are going to be crucial on the Congressional & State level.

Republicans who grabbed formerly Democratic seats for reasons of dissatisfaction are probably going to want to carve up notable Democrat voting strong-holds in order to preserve their seats in the House.


----------



## LouDAgreat (Nov 3, 2010)

The Space Cowboy said:
			
		

> They were out of power--so they had a good reason to be obstinate and intractable. The most dangerous sort of wild animal is the one who feels cornered and threatened.
> 
> But now that they have the house, they're presented with an interesting strategic dilemma. Do you try and shift things in a new direction--or do you try to roll back the gains of your opponents?



I think they're prepared to do both; roll back Obama's policies while setting forth their own economic and social agenda.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

LouDAgreat said:


> Kill the Senate, or limit it's power drastically, and enact Parliamentary rules in the House of Representatives. Let's begin there.



I'm game for that. Time for the Congress to quit playing at it and actually start governing.


----------



## Santo (Nov 3, 2010)

Ironically, this is exactly how Republicans behaved 2 years ago...


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

Santo said:


> Ironically, this is exactly how Republicans behaved 2 years ago...



Well, as his Great Beardness, Karl Marx said, "history repeats itself...the first time as tragedy, the second as farce"


----------



## Shasta McNasty (Nov 3, 2010)

ITT:  My party lost so now let's abolish the Senate.


----------



## Zen-aku (Nov 3, 2010)

Shasta McNasty said:


> ITT:  My party lost so now let's abolish the Senate.



what if u feel that way all the time


----------



## Santo (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> Well, as his Great Beardness, Karl Marx said, "history repeats itself...the first time as tragedy, the second as farce"



So what you're saying is the Republicans are getting the last laugh?

We'll see what happens though. I'm actually very interested to see how Republican speaking heads react when/if nothing changes or government continues to do the same thing. Same for Democratic speaking heads.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

Shasta McNasty said:


> ITT:  My party lost so now let's abolish the Senate.



You do realize that the Dems are likely to retain the Senate? And further, you do realize that the kinds of parliamentary reforms that Lou and I are talking about as being necessary structural changes to the Constitution, if enacted now, would transfer the burden of governing to a Cabinet elected from the majority faction of the House of Representatives, in this case, the Republican Party?


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

Santo said:


> So what you're saying is the Republicans are getting the last laugh?
> 
> We'll see what happens though. I'm actually very interested to see how Republican speaking heads react when/if nothing changes or government continues to do the same thing. Same for Democratic speaking heads.



That could be the case. Or the Democrats could get the last laugh by 2012. Having a majority in the House means that the Republicans share part of the responsibility--and thus the blame--of governing.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Nov 3, 2010)

So uh was it Obamageddon like a certain lunatic site was predicting?


----------



## LouDAgreat (Nov 3, 2010)

Shasta McNasty said:


> ITT:  My party lost so now let's abolish the Senate.




  

My party still has control of the Senate. Way to fail there bud.



			
				Jello Biafra said:
			
		

> You do realize that the Dems are likely to retain the Senate? And further, you do realize that the kinds of parliamentary reforms that Lou and I are talking about as being necessary structural changes to the Constitution, if enacted now, would transfer the burden of governing to a Cabinet elected from the majority faction of the House of Representatives, in this case, the Republican Party?



It would also clear up the fucked up malapportionment the Senate creates.


----------



## Santo (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> That could be the case. Or the Democrats could get the last laugh by 2012. Having a majority in the House means that the Republicans share part of the responsibility--and thus the blame--of governing.



I'm actually interested to see if they stick to their mantra, especially if the economy turns for the worse ii they do.

Let's see how serious they are about cutting taxes and spending.


----------



## The Space Cowboy (Nov 3, 2010)

LouDAgreat said:


> I think they're prepared to do both; roll back Obama's policies while setting forth their own economic and social agenda.



Eh.  I'd think they'd *like* to do both.  However, they've got an extremely limited time frame to do it in, and focusing on one goal will take away from the other.

Most likely, I think they'll try and tear at at HCR with amendments--adding restrictions and exclusions (not to mention a tangled web of bureaucracy that health care professionals will need to navigate).

The Census has created a larger political goal for the Republicans.  Reapportionment and redistricting begin next year.  

I expect that many Republicans are going to be spending the next year focused on solidifying their gains in the House by rearranging Congressional districts that focus on urban centers.


----------



## LouDAgreat (Nov 3, 2010)

Space Cowboys said:
			
		

> Eh. I'd think they'd like to do both. However, they've got an extremely limited time frame to do it in, and focusing on one goal will take away from the other.



Yea, I was just reading a  article that pointed to the 2 year time frame Boehner has to deliver on his message. 

You think there's a possibility of in-fighting in the Republican Party with elected Tea Party officials trying to put in a piece of their own agenda? 



			
				The Space Cowbow said:
			
		

> The Census has created a larger political goal for the Republicans. Reapportionment and redistricting begin next year.
> 
> I expect that many Republicans are going to be spending the next year focused on solidifying their gains in the House by rearranging Congressional districts that focus on urban centers.



The worst aspect of the House of Representatives: Redistricting.


----------



## The Space Cowboy (Nov 3, 2010)

LouDAgreat said:


> Yea, I was just reading a  article that pointed to the 2 year time frame Boehner has to deliver on his message.
> 
> You think there's a possibility of in-fighting in the Republican Party with elected Tea Party officials trying to put in a piece of their own agenda?



The Tea Party, in my view, is insignificant from a policy standpoint.  I wouldn't count on them starting in-fighting with the existing parts of the Republican party.  They're the political shock troops of the Conservatives, and I think they know it well.

The chief problem with being a Conservative is that inevitably, you'll find things that you like about the current political situation and have no motivation to change them.  It's hard to show up at a rally if you aren't particularly passionate about changing the way -something- is done.

What the Tea Party -has- done is give conservatives a way to be activists, and excited about participatory politics.



> The worst aspect of the House of Representatives: Redistricting.



Redistricting itself makes sense in that the nation's demographics change and we have to respect that.  However the way it's traditionally been abused is a bit funny.  Have  some Congressional districts are?


----------



## nagatopwnsall (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> I'm game for that. Time for the Congress to quit playing at it and actually start governing.




Jello this is not communist USSR. We have a certain politicle system,if you dont like it GTFO. You lost now get the funk over it.

Why cant you guys just understand? the american people dont WANT what you have to offer. Its that fucking simple.


----------



## C-Moon (Nov 3, 2010)

> the american people dont WANT what you have to offer. Its that fucking simple.


What your party has to offer and has offered in the past got us into this mess


----------



## First Tsurugi (Nov 3, 2010)

Well, I wasn't able to submit an absentee ballot in time, but Blumenthal won and McMahon lost and that's all that matters to me.

So, all in all, Repubs get the House, Dems retain the Senate, Marijuana is still illegal, and everything plays out just as keikaku.



nagatopwnsall said:


> Why cant you guys just understand? the american people dont WANT what you have to offer. Its that fucking simple.



Quite the generalization you're making there. If that were true, wouldn't the percentages be all on one side for every election ever? Fact is a good amount of the American people _do_ want what "they" have to offer.


----------



## The Space Cowboy (Nov 3, 2010)

I am pretty sure that the Tea Party did change the political landscape in that they showed the Republican base that activism can be effective.  
*Spoiler*: __


----------



## Xyloxi (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> Jello this is not communist USSR. We have a certain politicle system,if you dont like it GTFO. You lost now get the funk over it.
> 
> Why cant you guys just understand? the american people dont WANT what you have to offer. Its that fucking simple.



Most of the time a population don't know what they want, they want all these nice government run services like education and whatnot, but they want lower taxation, that and both the two major American political parties are rather shit.


----------



## Garfield (Nov 3, 2010)

I was just looking through pics of the Rally to restore sanity (etc) and liked a partiularly funny one:


----------



## impersonal (Nov 3, 2010)

It amazes me that people would vote for republicans. I mean, the democrats are bad enough already. But the republicans? Come on. At a time of crisis, they're the ones who want to push further the things that Bush did and which led to this very crisis.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> Jello this is not communist USSR. We have a certain politicle system,if you dont like it GTFO. You lost now get the funk over it.
> 
> Why cant you guys just understand? the american people dont WANT what you have to offer. Its that fucking simple.



God...you're stupid.


----------



## Pilaf (Nov 3, 2010)

impersonal said:


> It amazes me that people would vote for republicans. I mean, the democrats are bad enough already. But the republicans? Come on. At a time of crisis, they're the ones who want to push further the things that Bush did and which led to this very crisis.



It's the whole mentality of "giving the guy in office the boot." 

What the average voter has failed to realize is that the reason the guys in office weren't getting things done were A - the huge fucking mess they inherited from Republicans and B - Obama is a pussy who won't strongly support progressive issues he made promises on. 

I'm willing to bet that if you actually sat down the average American and asked them a series of questions about what they actually believe and their vision for a happy life and a better country, most would rank center-left, not center-right.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Pilaf said:


> It's the whole mentality of "giving the guy in office the boot."
> 
> What the average voter has failed to realize is that the reason the guys in office weren't getting things done were A - the huge fucking mess they inherited from Republicans and B - Obama is a pussy who won't strongly support progressive issues he made promises on.
> 
> I'm willing to bet that if you actually sat down the average American and asked them a series of questions about what they actually believe and their vision for a happy life and a better country, most would rank center-left, not center-right.



You're right.  Obama didn't act harder with his legislation.  Guantanamo?  Unless there was some stark reality check for him that should've been taken care of.  Health Care Bill?  That was a complete disaster on both ends.  Iraq/Afghanistan?  Anyone faulting him for that is retarded.  I think that most people actually acknowledge that.  Bailouts?  Both sides.  The fact people would try to fault Obama with TARP is retarded in and of itself.

The fact the Dems still have the Senate is proof this isn't a complete disaster for the US government.  It just means that eventually some middle ground has to be reached.

But let's see how well they create jobs when they realize the private industries they championed outsourced all that shit.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

Xion said:


> Did they have a concession speech where you had to stand at the podium being filmed with him?
> 
> I know they usually do that at least at the state-level, not so sure about district-level.



Nah, the congress runners generally don't do that or get time to do that. It's usually just governors and presidents where they show concession speeches and victory speeches. Sometimes they'll show Senators or Congressmen (or their opponents), but that's rarer.



Xyloxi said:


> Most of the time a population don't know what they want, they want all these nice government run services like education and whatnot, but they want lower taxation, that and both the two major American political parties are rather shit.



It still amazes me how stupid people are about that. There has to be taxes else we can't have the military, public education, firemen, policemen, hospitals, and others that are actually to serve EVERYONE and not a select few. People are so fucking stupid it pisses me off.

I still think that we need a real change to our electoral system, who has the right to run, and even who has the right to vote. I'm sick of morons who have no idea of the issues, have such short term memory they barely forget the fucked up shit people said or did only months ago, and have no real incentive to even think beyond their party or whatever bullshit is being thrown at them at the time.



impersonal said:


> It amazes me that people would vote for republicans. I mean, the democrats are bad enough already. But the republicans? Come on. At a time of crisis, they're the ones who want to push further the things that Bush did and which led to this very crisis.



Too many people in my country fails to either show up because they're so frustrated (who'd have gotten decent people elected) or they are too stupid and just vote party line or "vote out the bums" and ignore that the "bums" in power now have only been in power a short time and it was the previous REAL bums they just elected back in who caused these problems because of their short term memory.

You know what amazes me? 55% of Republican Voters polled said they want to end the Bush tax cuts for the people making over 250,000 dollars. Their politicians don't even listen to their voting base... and their voting base doesn't even seem to realize it...

I really think we need to do away with parties all together, force people to go "oh my god I don't know who to vote for, I actually have to *gasp* THINK!!"



Pilaf said:


> It's the whole mentality of "giving the guy in office the boot."
> 
> What the average voter has failed to realize is that the reason the guys in office weren't getting things done were A - the huge fucking mess they inherited from Republicans and B - Obama is a pussy who won't strongly support progressive issues he made promises on.
> 
> I'm willing to bet that if you actually sat down the average American and asked them a series of questions about what they actually believe and their vision for a happy life and a better country, most would rank center-left, not center-right.



You forgot C - The assholes they just elected are the party who were filibustering and blocking everything being passed and the few bad Democrats (the Corporate Democrats) are the ones who kept the Democrats' majority in the government from getting shit done.

I really doubt we'll see any progress. It's usually good when the government is split between the parties as there are usually compromises, but you've heard the Republican candidates, a great many of them have said "NO COMPROMISE!!" and basically we're pretty fucked it seems.


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

impersonal said:


> It amazes me that people would vote for republicans. I mean, the democrats are bad enough already. But the republicans? Come on. At a time of crisis, they're the ones who want to push further the things that Bush did and which led to this very crisis.



*Sigh*, Bush and Obama are very similar. If anything Obama has been expanding the things Bush did. 

Oh, and remember, people are not voting FOR republicans, they're simply voting AGAINST democrats.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

amazingfunksta said:


> *Sigh*, Bush and Obama are very similar. *If anything Obama has been expanding the things Bush did. *
> 
> Oh, and remember, people are not voting FOR republicans, they're simply voting AGAINST democrats.



The only thing that comes to mind so far that has been in writ large is Afghanistan, which any realist/pragmatist would understand.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

Obama is continuing to do unwarranted wiretapping that Bush started too -_- fucking shit's gotta stop. Patriot Act is like.. the most un-American bill passed in a long time... oye.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Nov 3, 2010)

Huh huh erection huh huh.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> Obama is continuing to do unwarranted wiretapping that Bush started too -_- fucking shit's gotta stop. Patriot Act is like.. the most un-American bill passed in a long time... oye.



With the whole Yemen/Chicago scare and all these other attempted attacks, that will end...tragically never.



Rob` said:


> Huh huh erection huh huh.


----------



## IBU (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> Oh for God's sake...let's not be this maudlin about it.
> 
> The Dems just got what was coming after their complete liquidation of backbone against an obstinate opponent.
> 
> ...



You are conflating political views with character. Somebody can be relatively moderate in their political view, and still be a stubborn, uncomprosiming, non-conciliatory agent in politics. The issue isn't where you sit on the political spectrum it is whether you are a zealot who thinks that you cannot learn anything from others, or whether you are willing to hear others out, and see if they have anything of value to say. I don't follow American politics closely enough to know if Pelosi is actually of this sort of character, but most certainly she is not a leftist in any meaningful sense. 

After watching election coverage last night, and reading through many pages of comments on yahoo news all I can say is that I hope for the best, because factionalism is a serious problem in the U.S, and in this context it is mainly been because of the Republican's unwillingness to compromise and choosing to be the party of "no."

Honestly, it makes me sad that in hindsight Obama should have not been so conciliatory and just tried to strong-arm policy through, rather than letting congress construct some very poorly designed bills, based around loose guidelines. Apparently, leadership in the US requires authoritarianism at this point in history.....

Also, I am really getting sick of certain American commentators who fail to see that big government and limited government are not mutually exclusive, because they conflate small government and limited government, as if they were the same thing.

All that limited government requires is the rule of law, and the separation of powers, and a constitution that limits the authority of certain governmental branches in certain ways by entrenching individual liberties. But this is perfectly combinable with relatively expansive state intervention in various areas, or "big government". So long as governmental authority is limited, such that government cannot do whatever it wants you have limited government.


----------



## sadated_peon (Nov 3, 2010)

I hope the republican keep hyping up how much they have won, hyping up how great their gains were, hyping up how they have taken control back. 

Because in reality they only have the house, the democrats still control the senate and the white house. 

So let the public consciousness be that the republicans have taken back the country, and when they can't get anything done it will be their fault, when their anti-establishment does nothing to change Washington it will be their fault, when a black president stays black for the next two year it will be their fault.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

I really wonder how so many Republicans spout the whole "smaller government" yet still go "WE MUST HAVE THE GOVERNMENT INTRUDING ON PEOPLE'S PRIVATE LIVES!!" I also really wonder how so many people ignore that little fact. Seriously, Republicans want smaller less invasive government, yet they still want government to deny homosexuals any rights, they want the government to make sure everyone isn't doing any drugs, they want to make sure the government can basically go where it shouldn't yet deny where they should be (i.e. regulating and controlling the businesses from going out of control).


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> I really wonder how so many Republicans spout the whole "smaller government" yet still go "WE MUST HAVE THE GOVERNMENT INTRUDING ON PEOPLE'S PRIVATE LIVES!!" I also really wonder how so many people ignore that little fact. Seriously, Republicans want smaller less invasive government, yet they still want government to deny homosexuals any rights, they want the government to make sure everyone isn't doing any drugs, they want to make sure the government can basically go where it shouldn't yet deny where they should be (i.e. regulating and controlling the businesses from going out of control).



For the record, both parties play off emotion.  It isn't just the US where this happens...just look at some parts of Europe.

Then again it could always be worse with intrusiveness.  We could be Iran.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

True enough.. I still think the party system needs to die. If we banned all parties from politics, people might actually *gasp* have to think about who they want to vote instead of "party line" and emotions might not play as big an impact...

Still, Democrats tend to have been about positive emotions (hope and the whatnot) to get elected, Republicans have basically resorted to the negative emotions (fear/anger/etc). Least that's how it was. we'll see how it turns out in the future. Bah...


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> The only thing that comes to mind so far that has been in writ large is Afghanistan, which any realist/pragmatist would understand.



TARP Bailout, Stimulus (You know he would have done it, Obama merely continued what was suggested), Pandering to various special interests.... Check

I wonder if Obama is in favor of Medicare D... Probably... check. 

Expanding war in Afghanistan when in all likelihood, Bin Laden is probably in Pakistan, Check. 

Check, Check, Check....

Oh, and the Patriot Act like Viscous mentioned... Check



Vicious-chan said:


> I really wonder how so many Republicans spout the whole "smaller government" yet still go "WE MUST HAVE THE GOVERNMENT INTRUDING ON PEOPLE'S PRIVATE LIVES!!" I also really wonder how so many people ignore that little fact. Seriously, Republicans want smaller less invasive government, yet they still want government to deny homosexuals any rights, they want the government to make sure everyone isn't doing any drugs, they want to make sure the government can basically go where it shouldn't yet deny where they should be (i.e. regulating and controlling the businesses from going out of control).



Well, to be fair... On the drugs issue, democrats don't seem to be that much better in our federal legislature. 

But I do agree that Republicans need to be the party of "absolutely less government, both fiscal and privately". If Democrats and Republicans had the same fiscal responsibility, then I would vote Democrat.


----------



## IBU (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> For the record, both parties play off emotion.  It isn't just the US where this happens...just look at some parts of Europe.
> 
> Then again it could always be worse with intrusiveness.  We could be Iran.



To use a French phrase "equality, liberty, and fraternity"

Many liberal democratic states have profound difficulty with the last of the three terms, and given the commentary by Americans on both sides they do not see the opposing party as anything more than an enemy that they must fight. There is no sense of solidarity or fraternity with opposition which leads to a politics of faction in which groups try to seize power, and use it unrepetently to further their agenda without consideration of the other, or compromise.

Politics than becomes a war by any other means, in which case there is something profoundly wrong with the state in question.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> True enough.. I still think the party system needs to die. If we banned all parties from politics, people might actually *gasp* have to think about who they want to vote instead of "party line" and emotions might not play as big an impact...
> 
> Still, Democrats tend to have been about positive emotions (hope and the whatnot) to get elected, Republicans have basically resorted to the negative emotions (fear/anger/etc). Least that's how it was. we'll see how it turns out in the future. Bah...



It's a cycle.  Abraham Lincoln was a Republican back when they stood for different things.  I envy George Washington, despite his rather overstated legacy.  He NEVER had to deal with party BS.

Problem is amongst politicians is that half the time their platforms are in a tl;dr format that even rationally intelligent people don't want to sift through.  PowerPoint bullets go a long way...that and shredding canned speeches.



AestheticizeAnalog said:


> To use a French phrase "equality, liberty, and fraternity"
> 
> Many liberal democratic states have profound difficulty with the last of the three terms, and given the commentary by Americans on both sides they do not see the opposing party as anything more than an enemy that they must fight. There is no sense of solidarity or fraternity with opposition which leads to a politics of faction in which groups try to seize power, and use it unrepetently to further their agenda without consideration of the other, or compromise.
> 
> Politics than becomes a war by any other means, in which case there is something profoundly wrong with the state in question.



The last time politics were ever TRULY unified, and I'm sure Canada was the same way, was for World War 2.  Korea should've been that too, but sadly it's the Forgotten War.  There we had two threats so incredible that it could've ripped the world asunder.  How tragic is it that we need something awful to actually get people to work together?


----------



## IBU (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> It's a cycle.  Abraham Lincoln was a Republican back when they stood for different things.  I envy George Washington, despite his rather overstated legacy.  He NEVER had to deal with party BS.
> 
> Problem is amongst politicians is that half the time their platforms are in a tl;dr format that even rationally intelligent people don't want to sift through.  PowerPoint bullets go a long way...that and shredding canned speeches.
> 
> ...



I agree, but I think that unity is distinct from solidarity or fraternity. All that solidarity requires is that citizens view fellow citizens as participants/members in a common project to be worked with rather than enemies who need to be eliminated. It takes a certain kind of concern and respect for opposition in politics which in all reality should not be that difficult to achieve.

I personally blame the media in part, as well as contemporary politicians for perpetuating the idea that politics is about beating the other guy and than ruling in a despotic way because you won the contest.


----------



## Draffut (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> God...you're stupid.



Stupid is such a harsh word, I prefer "Mentally Deficient".


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

AestheticizeAnalog said:


> I agree, but I think that unity is distinct from solidarity or fraternity. All that solidarity requires is that citizens view fellow citizens as participants/members in a common project to be worked with rather than enemies who need to be eliminated. *It takes a certain kind of concern and respect for opposition in politics which in all reality should not be that difficult to achieve*.



To get a little more primal, I feel that adversarial mentalities tend to fuel the competitiveness and activism in humanity more than common solidarity.  Of course incidents in the past have proven me wrong like Lech Walesa's Solidarity movement or the Million Man March, but deep down inside there's a hatred going on.

This respect is either a mentality hushed by opposing interests (both in and out of politics), never publicly spoken about, or a pipe dream.


----------



## sadated_peon (Nov 3, 2010)

amazingfunksta said:


> TARP Bailout, Stimulus (You know he would have done it, Obama merely continued what was suggested), Pandering to various special interests.... Check
> 
> I wonder if Obama is in favor of Medicare D... Probably... check.
> 
> ...


Tax cuts, different
Iraq war, different
stem cell, different
drone strikes into Pakistan(you know where bin laden probably is), different
euthanasia, different
gay marriage amendment, different
regulations, different
finical reform, different
health care reform, different
special interests, different (I have no idea HOW you think that obama support the special interests of Bush)
military spending, different
Torture, different
Guantanamo bay, different
abortion, different
social security, different

the list goes, on and on and on. 

Bush and Obama are not alike AT ALL!
Bush's failures do not in anyway reflect onto Obama, Bush was a conservative republican and enacted conservative republican policies and they fucked over the country! 
Bush was not a liberal, he did not enact liberal policies and it was not liberal policies that drove us into the worst recession since the great depression, THAT WAS CONSERVATIVE POLICES!


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

Washington and the other founding fathers never wanted a party system... and, at the very least, they never wanted a two party only system as we have. I like how people in politics claim shit about the founding fathers and yet they clearly don't even know what they would want.

Hell, the people who say it's unpatriotic to go against the government on certain issues are clearly un-American as our Founding Fathers wanted us to question everything that our government did and, yes, even rise up against our own government from time to time. Jefferson wanted a revolution every 20 years or so. Then again, Jefferson had some other issues.

Still, I agree we really need to get rid of parties and we need to change a lot of our system, yet no one seems to care yet. But they will when shit really hits the fan...

And amazingfunksta, I really wonder what you mean by less government fiscally.. I wonder what you think a good tax rate and a good spending limit or whatever the government should have. Because, I assure you, the way the Republicans are currently, they are fiscally irresponsible. They want to keep tax cuts which will increase the deficit, they want to cut or privatize social programs that will ultimately dick over the majority of America, and they want to do so many fiscally irresponsible things. You can't have a government with low spending and still expect them to support Roads (which the private industry needs to keep their products moving), Schools (which the private industry needs to have educated work force to keep making and inventing things to increase their profits), Police (that the private industry needs so they can have someone to deal with someone trying to steal from them or outright hurt them), Firemen (which the private industry needs so they can minimize any potential damages from a fire outbreak), etc... 

The people who keep spouting "LESS TAXES!!!" are going to eventually lead our country into a place where we're fucked... the tax rates are far too low, they need to be higher. Not ridiculously high, there is an ideal level, but this is too high.

Now if you mean government spending, well everyone sucks there too... they keep giving money to their big business buddies to create projects no one wants or needs (bridge to nowhere, new humvee for the army even though the army reports it doesn't meet their requirements, etc) because those big business buddies are the ones keeping them employed.

I'd like our system to do a few things


*Spoiler*: _Spoiler Tagged because of length and stuff_ 



1) All Federal Government Employee's salary is tied to the middle class. That is, Congress, Senate, Supreme Court, and White House government people all have a pay that is basically the average of the middle class pay check. Assume the lowest paycheck of a middle class worker is 30,000 and the highest is 150,000 then their pay check is now 90,000 instead of the 180,000 to 300,000 to whatever ridiculous payment they are getting now. The idea here is it cuts government spending a bit and it ties the very political leaders to the middle class as they should be. Also, it keeps them from being allowed to just vote themselves a higher salary as their salary is now automatically going to rise or fall based on the economy (as it should).

2) All Federal positions have a limited number of terms on them. Currently Presidency is only 2 terms 4 years each. I say fuck that, 1 term either 6 or 8 years for the term because, honestly those first 4 years they don't do much other than try and keep their numbers up so they can get re-elected. I'm leaning more toward 1 term of 6 years. Congress and Senate should be at most 2 terms of 3 years each. The idea here is that we keep people moving in and out of government and it no longer becomes a career, but a service that people engage in. 

Furthermore, they need to work year round, no more of this bullshit time off except for the few holidays (national and religious) that they get off. They get way too much time off. And, you can only ever serve in one area once ever, so you can't move to another state or district and run for congress or senate there if you've already been a congressman or senator. Now, there would be one caveat to my rule where I'd say if 75% or more of the country truly loves you and wants you to remain in power, than so be it, you can go beyond the max term (but the likelihood of that ever happening is pretty much nonexistent so meh, it's just a chance for the people who are truly good for us and that people recognize as being good for us can continue to serve).

3) Elections no longer privately funded, but public only. That is, the government pays the bills for radio, tv, and newspaper/magazine ads and assures everyone has equal time for debates and equal amount of ads. True, this is more government spending, but it's one I'm willing to accept. Better to spend millions of the tax payer's money to assure we have the chance to get real good candidates in who aren't just rich or backed by companies than to have the corrupt assholes who are bought and paid for by their supporters. And this is quite doable since the very people who create the real cost problem of running (the TV networks, radio stations, etc) only get to be because they buy out the rights to their station by the FCC since all the airwaves are of PUBLIC DOMAIN. So yes, it is an area the government has the right to regulate into.

4) No more retirement plans or health coverage for our government workers after they are out of their seat. There's no reason that this thing which was supposed to be a SERVICE to our country, not a career, should be treated as a career. It's ridiculous to me that our Presidents get health coverage on the American Dime even when they are no longer even working for the American People. And, again, it's the very mindset our forefathers had and I agree with where our government is a service the people do temporarily and then get back to their REAL jobs which can be the ones who actually have the health coverage and retirement plans. Or, we could create a general public option for both which all the people have equal opportunity to that they can take if they're politicians, but no more special coverage that they don't deserve.




There are more things I want to see happen, but I think these few things would bring REAL change and allow for other issues to finally be solved as well as really helping. I am curious, what are people's thoughts on it?

Also, I'm not Viscous


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Less taxes = "Gimme a quickie painkiller with worse side-effects down the road now because I can't deal with a longer-term recovery."

No sense of foresight, ladies and gents.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

That's generally my problem with people in general. They don't think long term, just short term and that leads to serious problems.


----------



## sadated_peon (Nov 3, 2010)

Exit polls I found interesting



*Anyone in Household Lost a Job in Last Two Years?*
Total
 Democrat
 Republican
 Other/No Answer 

Yes (31%)	
50%	
48%	
2%


No (69%)	
45%	
52%	
3%

_If you lost you job over the last couple of years, were more likely to vote democrat._


*Opinion of Democratic Party*
Total
 Democrat
 Republican
 Other/No Answer


Favorable (43%)	
91%	
8%	
1%	

Unfavorable (52%)	
10%	
87%	
3%


*Opinion of Republican Party*
Total
 Democrat
 Republican
 Other/No Answer 

Favorable (41%)	
11%	
88%	
1%

Unfavorable (53%)	
75%	
23%	
2%

_People voted for the republicans, but hated them just a little bit more than they hate the democrats. _


*Highest Priority for Next Congress*
Total
 Democrat
 Republican
 Other/No Answer 

Cutting Taxes (18%)	
26%	
72%	
2%


Reducing Deficit (39%)	
34%	
63%	
3%

Spending to Create Jobs (37%)	
69%	
29%	
2%

_The country wants Cut taxes, reduce the deficit and spend more
lol._


----------



## Mider T (Nov 3, 2010)

Sorry to hear about your brother Vicious, but congrats for him running a clean campaign.

Anyway congrats to all of those who won, hopefully they serve to the best of their abilities.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

The exit polls are interesting indeed. And lol @ the republicans not wanting to create jobs, good job. And even funnier how they want to have tax cuts yet some how lower the deficit. Just moronic...


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

> The country wants Cut taxes, reduce the deficit and spend more
> lol.



As I've said before.  Most people are too stupid be to be trusted with money or anything of vital importance.  We need to make education more forceful.  Pussyfooting around with it has gone nowhere.


----------



## Elim Rawne (Nov 3, 2010)

What did this prove ?

Americans are fucking retards. Autocracy is the way,people!


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Elim Rawne said:


> What did this prove ?
> 
> Americans are fucking retards. Autocracy is the way,people!



Forced education is a start.

Sorry kids.  Homeschooling is for weirdos and sometimes it takes a heavy hand to get shit done.  I've been starting to think people have TOO much choice in their matters, obesity rates e.g.


----------



## sadated_peon (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> You have proven mine. You go off on 'anti-intellectuals' as you call them. I have a problem with intellectuals. My problem is you are nothing but elitist snobs who think you are sooooooo muuuuuuccchhhh smarter then the average person. My problem is you are arrogant. You look down on the people who actually keep this country working. The people that dont have a college education(although people WITH one can be these people i speak of). The construction workers. The small buisness people. The women who instead of working 40 hours a week actually decide to stay home and raise the next generation.


intellectuals don't look down on people who didn't go to college or people who are construction workers, small business owners, or stay at home mothers. 

We look down on people who don't aspire to be intelligent, who don't want to continue learning, who don't want to increase their knowledge, who don't want to experience culture, who reject education.

Intellectuals don't look down on a career waitress who wishes she had been to Paris but has never been able to afford to go. We look down on the person who doesn't *WANT* to go more than 50 miles from their house and thinks that Paris is for ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".). 



nagatopwnsall said:


> Its basically like all the people in the north east thinking anyone that lives in the south speaks with a huge overblown country twang,has a beer belly,hates blacks,is some hillbilly redneck,etc. You guys look down on the average person. The 'small people'.


lol, your complaint about ALL of the north east is that they have a stereotype of the south. 

Funny how you stereotype when complaining about a stereotype. 



nagatopwnsall said:


> I hate you intellectual snobs that think you are better then the average man. What makes being a 'intellectual' so great anyhow? What makes one a intellectual? College degree? Or can one only be a intellectual if you tow the liberal/progressive ideology.
> 
> Am i not a intellectual if i dont support liberal positions? What of the college professors that are conservative? What of religious scientists? are they idiots?


Intellectualism doesn't mean that you're a liberal, nor does it mean that you have to have liberal positions. 

Christopher Hitchens an intellectual and has been a huge supporter of the Iraq war. Nor is intellectualism specific to atheists, many religious people are intellectuals. 

Intellectualism is the continued drive for expanding knowledge and cultural experience. But the aversion to these things, the belief that getting more knowledge is bad and remaining in your ignorant little rut is good is anti-intellectualism.


----------



## Coteaz (Nov 3, 2010)

Elim Rawne said:


> What did this prove ?
> 
> Americans are fucking retards. Autocracy is the way,people!


Yeah, but would you want a current American politician as an autocrat?

Spineless imbeciles, all of them.


----------



## iander (Nov 3, 2010)

I think one of the biggest disappointments was Feingold's loss.  One of the last supporters of campaign finance reform got trampled by a corporate backed millionaire.


----------



## Nodonn (Nov 3, 2010)

So have you guys fixed your voting system yet?
I remember Obama _raping_ McCain last election while only having a little more than 50% of the votes.
Fixed that yet?


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Nodonn said:


> So have you guys fixed your voting system yet?
> I remember Obama _raping_ McCain last election while only having a little more than 50% of the votes.
> Fixed that yet?



You say that like it's a bad thing.

And it's 52.9% over 45.7%.  How is that broken?  He won popular and electoral.  What the fuck are you talking about?


----------



## Mider T (Nov 3, 2010)

Watching Obama's speech but just walked in on it, how long has it gone on?


----------



## Nodonn (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> You say that like it's a bad thing.
> 
> And it's 52.9% over 45.7%.  How is that broken?  He won popular and electoral.  What the fuck are you talking about?



He won 365 - 173 with only a 7% difference in votes.
How is that not broken?


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

Nodonn said:


> He won 365 - 173 with only a 7% difference in votes.
> How is that not broken?





> by Marc Schulman
> 
> *The Electoral College was created for two reasons. The first purpose was to create a buffer between population and the selection of a President. The second as part of the structure of the government that gave extra power to the smaller states.
> 
> ...





If that makes you wince, take a look at this election:



The popular vote there was 58% reagan to 40% mondale. He won 48 of the 50 states.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

All I see is winning on both accounts.  No need to whine here.


----------



## ShadowReij (Nov 3, 2010)

Many people claim they want unity and cooperation between the two parties yet they elect the very people who said they will be the party of no in terms of cooperation every step of the way. That is moronic.

And one thing I will always find hilarious about this country, we fought to separate ourselves from Britain since we didn't want taxes in the end. Yet we still pay them. Just under our flag. If America ever realize that the way we pay for shit is via our taxes then I'll be happy. We can't always be lowering them, at least not on those who don't need them lowered. Aka the wealthy 1%.

Well let's see what'll happen now.


----------



## Nemesis (Nov 3, 2010)

No America broke from Britain because the merchant class didn't want to pay for wars in North America which they started themselves.  Also they hated the fact that they could not expand their land on Native Nations that Britain (and therefore themselves) were allied to.

The whole Taxation without Representation was a good rally cry to spur the populace and nothing more.

Basically the whole thing was split to like 1/3 Independence,  1/3 stay with Britain.  The other third didn't care or were opportunistic in siding with the side their neighbour was against to get extra land after the war ended.


----------



## Sillay (Nov 3, 2010)

Zen-aku said:


> so is the next 2 years just gonna be the republicans calling the shots or can the democrats do any thing?



It depends. A vengeful side of me hopes that the Democrats will fillibuster everything in sight, just because the general public doesn't read into political issues much besides "Bill passes." "Bill fails to pass." But I digress. Even though the Republicans have a majority in the house, we currently have a Democratic president who does not merely lean to the left, but _is_ a goddamned liberal. He'll most likely veto any bill that differs from his and the average Democrat's views too much. And also fortunately, the Republicans do _not_ hold a two thirds majority in the senate and the house [needed to override a veto]. The Democrats currently hold a slight majority, though just by a couple of senators, I believe. It's still enough though, if they decide to cooperate and work as a force, to stop conservative-aimed bills from passing. The balance of power has evened out.


----------



## nagatopwnsall (Nov 3, 2010)

sadated_peon said:


> Tax cuts, different
> Iraq war, different
> stem cell, different
> drone strikes into Pakistan(you know where bin laden probably is), different
> ...



neo-con policies you mean. There is a difference. We have not had a true conservative president in decades.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> neo-con policies you mean. There is a difference. We have not had a true conservative president in decades.



oh no way, don't bull shit me, those were real conservatives irishman.  real conservative twats


----------



## Stalin (Nov 3, 2010)

By the original philisohpical term of conservatism, there hasn't been a true conservative president in over a century.


----------



## nagatopwnsall (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> Forced education is a start.
> 
> Sorry kids.  Homeschooling is for weirdos and sometimes it takes a heavy hand to get shit done.  I've been starting to think people have TOO much choice in their matters, obesity rates e.g.



LMAO. Forced education? give me a fucking break mael. The public education system is horrible and you WANT kids to go through that? If im not mistaken homeschoolers do better then public schoolers.

You are fucking un-american,you lost so now you are talking about FORCING people to do shit that you believe in?


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> LMAO. Forced education? give me a fucking break mael. The public education system is horrible and you WANT kids to go through that? If im not mistaken homeschoolers do better then public schoolers.
> 
> You are fucking un-american,you lost so now you are talking about FORCING people to do shit that you believe in?



white people need to speak out against their extremists


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> LMAO. Forced education? give me a fucking break mael. The public education system is horrible and you WANT kids to go through that? If im not mistaken homeschoolers do better then public schoolers.
> 
> You are fucking un-american,you lost so now you are talking about FORCING people to do shit that you believe in?



Well look at all this free choice, mate.

Freer than rational choice has allowed for record obesity levels and for idiotic ideas like intelligent design to be brought in some schools.

Actually I'm registered Independent, so I didn't essentially lose.  So being American means being unrestricted in your choices, hurting yourself, your country's image, and the population writ large?  It's American to get yourself so fat you get diabetes?  It's American to flip off the rest of the world?  It's American to try to instill some overt evangelical nonsense in public and secular schools?

Fuck you dude.  Fuck your nativist and obscenely racist views.  Fuck your "America is for whites only" mantra you're subtly pushing.  Fuck your continuous insulting of everything and everyone that doesn't go along with your tight-assed viewpoint.  Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.  No one will ever take you seriously and I bet that's the case in real life which is why you have to advertise your pissy angry white boy conservative.  As a white man myself, I tell you to shut the fuck up.

You are dumber than what I could imagine.  Even conservatives here tell you to shut your fucking gob.


----------



## Stalin (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> LMAO. Forced education? give me a fucking break mael. The public education system is horrible and you WANT kids to go through that? If im not mistaken homeschoolers do better then public schoolers.
> 
> You are fucking un-american,you lost so now you are talking about FORCING people to do shit that you believe in?



Mael is registered independent, there is no such thing as unamerican except actually not being from america. You're actually pretty liberal.


----------



## nagatopwnsall (Nov 3, 2010)

The Cheat said:


> By the original philisohpical term of conservatism, there hasn't been a true conservative president in over a century.



Exactly. A neo-con can be a social conservative but grow the government more then any liberal,and spend more then a progressive on crack.

Conservatives today are actually classical liberals(which the founding fathers were),with a overlap of neo-liberalism(capatalism,free marketss,etc)

Social conservatism is only one part of being a conservative.

A true conservative does not want more government.....PERIOD. In fact TRUE conservatives try to keep the government as small and powerless as possible. Because eventually a large government turns tyrannical or oppresses the people,the founding fathers knew this. Thats why they made the constitution the way they did,to keep the government in check.

But they knew that eventually that failsafe would FAIL. Eventually the government would get too large and become tyrannical and violate the constitution(and biproduct your god given rights). Thats where the second ammendment comes in. It guarantees every other ammendment.

A TRUE conservative,conserves the constitution. 

Wonder why all the 'right-wing extremists' hate the government or are anti-government? Why all the right-wing 'nutjobs' tend to have lots and lots of guns or are survivalists? Its because they are conservatives and recognize the government is making us slaves. The government has already shat on the constitution multiple times in the last century.

George Bush- " Its just a goddamn piece of paper"

Thats not what a true conservative would say.


----------



## dreams lie (Nov 3, 2010)

You know what?  Today was a good day.  The Democrats are crying because they lost the house, but my more conservative friends are equally butthurt that Reid won again.


----------



## Elim Rawne (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> LMAO. Forced education? give me a fucking break mael. The public education system is horrible and you WANT kids to go through that? If im not mistaken homeschoolers do better then public schoolers.
> 
> You are fucking un-american,you lost so now you are talking about FORCING people to do shit that you believe in?



Being un-american == good.


Fuck American values


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

iander said:


> I think one of the biggest disappointments was Feingold's loss.  One of the last supporters of campaign finance reform got trampled by a corporate backed millionaire.



That's why I'm saying we need protests on the streets, people marching on Washington and their city halls. People refusing to work or do anything until real change happens. And, if need be, violence towards those who refuse to help the people.


----------



## nagatopwnsall (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> Well look at all this free choice, mate.
> 
> Freer than rational choice has allowed for record obesity levels and for idiotic ideas like intelligent design to be brought in some schools.
> 
> ...



Your damn right im nativist. If it means making sure illegals get kicked the fuck out of this country. If it means closing the border. If it means making sure the distinction of ILLEGAL,is known to all then yes im a nativist.

If you like to think of me as a 'racist' then go ahead. Nothing i will say will change what you think on that part.I have never said "america is for whites only" thats what you got wrong. America is for all those who come here LEGALLY. There is a difference you self-righteous shit.

You are un-american,if you try and force someones lifestyle on other people. If some fatty wants to go and eat mcdonalds everyday then you need to SHUT THE FUCK UP and let them die of a heart attack. If a american wants to flip off the rest of the world once again SHUT THE FUCK UP AND KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT,well you can criticize it...but you wont be making any laws making it illegal. 

Is it american to leave out its christian history in a 'secular' school? It it american to leave out many founding fathers were christian or theist/deist? Is it american to try and take religion out of everyday life? 

With all due respect mael,go fuck the horse i rode in on,i unfortunently dont have a condom that will fitt it. Maybe you can supply it?

I apologize mael,if i came off entirely to harsh.


----------



## Tekkenman11 (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> That's why I'm saying we need protests on the streets, people marching on Washington and their city halls. People refusing to work or do anything until real change happens. *And, if need be, violence towards those who refuse to help the people*.



You were good until that point. Violence solves nothing, no matter how promising it may seem. It is a short-term solution, in the long run it degrades the surrounding societies and all who are linked.

The citizens of this country don't realize the power they hold, if everyone were to join together and stand against the state then real change would happen. Unfortunately, the masses have become 'lazy' (notice quotes), and without them realizing it, fear has gripped them. True revolutionary ideology has been lost to time, but some day will return. When that is I don't know.


----------



## Coteaz (Nov 3, 2010)

Damn, it's getting hot in here.

Somebody open a window or something.


----------



## Xyloxi (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> Exactly. A neo-con can be a social conservative but grow the government more then any liberal,and spend more then a progressive on crack.
> 
> Conservatives today are actually classical liberals(which the founding fathers were),with a overlap of neo-liberalism(capatalism,free marketss,etc)
> 
> ...



Founding Fathers argument eh? Thomas Paine, Hamilton and Franklin say O RLY? As those three hardly seem like hard line classical liberals.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> Your damn right im nativist. If it means making sure illegals get kicked the fuck out of this country. If it means closing the border. If it means making sure the distinction of ILLEGAL,is known to all then yes im a nativist.
> 
> If you like to think of me as a 'racist' then go ahead. Nothing i will say will change what you think on that part.I have never said "america is for whites only" thats what you got wrong. America is for all those who come here LEGALLY. There is a difference you self-righteous shit.
> 
> ...



Bullshit.  You slammed immigration and immigrants of now when you fail to realize a century plus ago it was Europeans in droves who came.

You can teach American history without the overt religious tones, genius.  To really respect that whole separation of church and state, in public institution, you can teach without having to say that everything America was based on was for the greater glory of Jesus...because it completely wasn't.  Also, FYI, Founding Fathers were Deists, not evangelical.  Deism in the philosophy of religion is the standpoint that reason and observation of the natural world, without the need for organized religion, can determine that *a supreme being created the universe*.  It's not just Jesus, kiddo.

I would also, but I'd rather not get sloppy seconds from anything you touched.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

ShadowReij said:


> Many people claim they want unity and cooperation between the two parties yet they elect the very people who said they will be the party of no in terms of cooperation every step of the way. That is moronic.
> 
> And one thing I will always find hilarious about this country, we fought to separate ourselves from Britain since we didn't want taxes in the end. Yet we still pay them. Just under our flag. If America ever realize that the way we pay for shit is via our taxes then I'll be happy. We can't always be lowering them, at least not on those who don't need them lowered. Aka the wealthy 1%.
> 
> Well let's see what'll happen now.



It's not a problem with being taxed in itself that the founding fathers and everyone who fought in the revolutionary war had a problem with. It was a problem with being taxed and having no say in how they were run over in their homes. It was a problem with the English Tea Company basically trying to dick over the colonies for their own profit and having gained power in Britain's parliament and whatnot. Taxes alone weren't the problem. Anyone who loves their country should be willing to pay taxes to assure the good services the government offers continue. And, yes, Nemesis was right too, they wanted to expand, but were denied of it.




Sillay said:


> It depends. A vengeful side of me hopes that the Democrats will fillibuster everything in sight, just because the general public doesn't read into political issues much besides "Bill passes." "Bill fails to pass." But I digress. Even though the Republicans have a majority in the house, we currently have a Democratic president who does not merely lean to the left, but _is_ a goddamned liberal. He'll most likely veto any bill that differs from his and the average Democrat's views too much. And also fortunately, the Republicans do _not_ hold a two thirds majority in the senate and the house [needed to override a veto]. The Democrats currently hold a slight majority, though just by a couple of senators, I believe. It's still enough though, if they decide to cooperate and work as a force, to stop conservative-aimed bills from passing. The balance of power has evened out.



You mean filibuster like how the Republicans did CONSTANTLY? Wouldn't work in the long run. Here's why, the Republicans would just point that out and bitch about how they aren't getting anything passed being the fucking asshole hypocrites they are.




nagatopwnsall said:


> neo-con policies you mean. There is a difference. We have not had a true conservative president in decades.



Bush was ridiculously conservative and our worst president to date. You're a moron, we need a progressive president who isn't bought and paid for by the companies and will bring real change to our system and bring real liberties and uphold the constitution for REAL instead of what the current politicians do.



Tekkenman11 said:


> You were good until that point. Violence solves nothing, no matter how promising it may seem. It is a short-term solution, in the long run it degrades the surrounding societies and all who are linked.
> 
> The citizens of this country don't realize the power they hold, if everyone were to join together and stand against the state then real change would happen. Unfortunately, the masses have become 'lazy' (notice quotes), and without them realizing it, fear has gripped them. True revolutionary ideology has been lost to time, but some day will return. When that is I don't know.



Violence solves nothing.. eh? Except it's part of why our country exists today. Sometimes violence can solve things.

But yes, the masses have become lazy. They've become divided by the hate and fear mongering of certain news organizations. They've become fearful of losing their materials goods and other bullshit. The forefathers would be ashamed in the state of our nation currently.

But, mark my words, come the second crash which will be coming soon if things continue like this, there will be real anger in the people. That's when true revolutionary ideology will come.


----------



## dreams lie (Nov 3, 2010)

Nagato seems awfully impulsive in his writings, but I have to admire his passion.  It is ironic, or perhaps hypocritical, that he consistently denounces the elitists by putting the common man on a pedestal, but at the same time, it is the prevailing attitude among many of the Tea Party activists.  Just look at this line.



> You are un-american,if you try and force someones lifestyle on other people



It is masterful in a sense.  Really though, I have to wonder.  Nagato could be simply defending his own class privilege, but if he is actually part of the lower classes, then I would have to ask why.  Why would you support the positions that do everything for the billionaires and virtually nothing for yourself?  What do you expect from propositions like extending the Bush tax cuts?


----------



## Coteaz (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> But yes, the masses have become lazy. They've become divided by the hate and fear mongering of certain news organizations. *They've become fearful of losing their materials goods* and other bullshit. The forefathers would be ashamed in the state of our nation currently.


There's nothing shameful about wanting to keep the property you've worked your ass off to afford. 

Materialism is perfectly reasonable, considering that the material world is all we have.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

Coteaz said:


> There's nothing shameful about wanting to keep the property you've worked your ass off to afford.
> 
> Materialism is perfectly reasonable, considering that the material world is all we have.



Bullshit, in the end your materials are useless anyways. What matters more is how we leave our society when we die/retire/whatever.



Can't wait for the old fucks to all die off. I've said it for awhile now, Baby Boomers were the worst generation in the history of the US. They fucked everything up and they just fucked up our politics now. Greedy selfish fucks that is the Baby Boomers who want more tax cuts and more shit they feel they're entitled to for probably doing very little. And realize, my parents are Baby Boomers, I know not ALL of them are bad, but the majority of them are. Even my own parents and the rest of their family who are also Baby Boomers agree, they're ashamed in their generation.


----------



## MF NaruSimpson (Nov 3, 2010)

Coteaz said:


> There's nothing shameful about wanting to keep the property you've worked your ass off to afford.
> 
> Materialism is perfectly reasonable, considering that the material world is all we have.



there's a difference between owning property and owning a loan for property.  most americans think that if they took a loan to buy some object, they own that object, they don't!  big problem today..


----------



## Tekkenman11 (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> *
> Violence solves nothing.. eh? Except it's part of why our country exists today. Sometimes violence can solve things.*
> 
> But yes, the masses have become lazy. They've become divided by the hate and fear mongering of certain news organizations. They've become fearful of losing their materials goods and other bullshit. The forefathers would be ashamed in the state of our nation currently.
> ...



You're point? Our country is around 200 years old. That is nothing, actually that is minuscule compared to the history of fluctuating civilizations.

Ever hear of the Roman Empire? The Persian Empire? The Mongolian Empire? I wonder what happened to them? 

Also, our country has not actually benefited from the violence it's brought upon itself, or willingly got into. The veil of illusion that has been thrown across the eyes of those who inhabit this country has worked perfectly. However, it does not hide the truth because the truth never changes. It's funny how perceptions change when people find out that about less than 10% of the American population controls the majority of our economy.   Oh, and did I forget our debt to China, or the handful of super sized companies that run all the media and entertainment? Anyways, there is no point in arguing such things because in the end it does nothing. Violence is always the obvious answer for those who want "quick" solutions. So go ahead and raise arms. 

Sadly, I doubt even a second "crash" would arouse the masses. Our country has become immune to such stimulus's. It's going to take something bigger than that to change anyone, or anything.


----------



## Coteaz (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> Bullshit, in the end your materials are useless anyways. What matters more is how we leave our society when we die/retire/whatever.


In the "end", everything is meaningless because we're dead. Following that line of reasoning, we all should simply commit suicide because nothing we do matters. Right?


----------



## hcheng02 (Nov 3, 2010)

dreams lie said:


> You know what?  Today was a good day.  The Democrats are crying because they lost the house, but my more conservative friends are equally butthurt that Reid won again.



What do you think about Reid winning?


----------



## Petenshi (Nov 3, 2010)

Coteaz said:


> In the "end", everything is meaningless because we're dead. Following that line of reasoning, we all should simply commit suicide because nothing we do matters. Right?



No because it takes energy to kill ourselves .


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

Tekkenman11 said:


> You're point? Our country is around 200 years old. That is nothing, actually that is minuscule compared to the history of fluctuating civilizations.
> 
> Ever hear of the Roman Empire? The Persian Empire? The Mongolian Empire? I wonder what happened to them?
> 
> ...



I've been saying for awhile how the top 20% control 85-89% of the nation's wealth and the top 10% control the economy basically.

As for China, that is a problem, but won't be a problem for 30 years or more. China can't survive without our business. Even if they were to demand to be repaid, if we refused there's nothing they could do to make us. Our military is actually generations ahead of the rest of the world. I'm not saying we shouldn't pay them back, we should. But, I'm saying the fear of their debt is not going to be a problem until they can sustain themselves and, with their population size, it'll be decades until then. Hell, they need us for food iirc as their farms and farmers are losing productivity as their desert expands more because of over farming and grazing of animals.

As for violence, it can result in good things. It's not something that should EVER be the first go to move. But, if you're getting dicked over by the people consistently and there's no Justice, you think voting will keep working? No, not as our system is set up now. You think our system is going to change? No, because they don't want to risk losing their income and whatnot and that would do exactly that. Hell, you know why we got real civil changes back in the 60s? Because a lot of the politicians were scared of the anger of people who were protesting and rioting. They saw violence from both sides, but they saw the other side continuing. True, a few of the politicians really were trying to do the right thing, but it has generally been violence (internally) by the people as a whole that has brought real better change to our country.

Revolutionary War, Civil War, Civil Liberties in the 60s, etc. Ignoring that protesting/rioting/violence has brought change and, yes, positive change for our country? That's ignoring history and that's just foolish. It just shouldn't be our immediate go to tactic. But, at this rate, it seems like it might be our only tactic left. There are a few others we could try and I do hope those work too.


----------



## nagatopwnsall (Nov 3, 2010)

Xyloxi said:


> Founding Fathers argument eh? Thomas Paine, Hamilton and Franklin say O RLY? As those three hardly seem like hard line classical liberals.




The majority were classical liberals you cant deny this.


----------



## Mist Beauty (Nov 3, 2010)

This is very disappointing.


----------



## Sillay (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> You mean filibuster like how the Republicans did CONSTANTLY? Wouldn't work in the long run. Here's why, the Republicans would just point that out and bitch about how they aren't getting anything passed being the fucking asshole hypocrites they are.



It's frustrating. There are times when I wish the Democrats would sink down to an even playing field; cheaters against cheaters. Unfortunately, this doesn't work. Republicans appeal to those "genteel southerners with their refined, traditional family values" who suck up the headlines eagerly ? regardless of their truthfulness. Admittedly, like any political party though, Democratic politicans have their fair share of idiotic followers too.


Sidenote; it's strange how Shumlin's win still isn't showing up on the CNN map. It's already been declared in the news here and online that Dubie dropped out.


----------



## dreams lie (Nov 3, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> What do you think about Reid winning?



Everyone was fairly convinced that Angle would win, but really, I do not care.  I stayed home yesterday.  The only thing I could say in his favor is that the Senate Majority Leader seat puts Nevada on the map.


----------



## nagatopwnsall (Nov 3, 2010)

Mael said:


> Bullshit.  You slammed immigration and immigrants of now when you fail to realize a century plus ago it was Europeans in droves who came.
> 
> You can teach American history without the overt religious tones, genius.  To really respect that whole separation of church and state, in public institution, you can teach without having to say that everything America was based on was for the greater glory of Jesus...because it completely wasn't.  Also, FYI, Founding Fathers were Deists, not evangelical.  Deism in the philosophy of religion is the standpoint that reason and observation of the natural world, without the need for organized religion, can determine that *a supreme being created the universe*.  It's not just Jesus, kiddo.
> 
> I would also, but I'd rather not get sloppy seconds from anything you touched.



No bullshit here knobler. Those europeans a century ago came here legally(or as legally as possible if you are talking about the puritans). We have laws now mael,immigration laws that are being violated and it sounds to me like you are in support of law breakers. 

This is where you fail. Seperation of church and state is not what you make it out to be. It does not mean you cant teach of religion in schools,it just means you cant have a STATE religion. The whole point of 'seperation of church and state' was to protect the chruch and to keep another 'church of england' from happening. In fact no where in the constitution does the words 'seperation of church and state exist'. The whole thing is nothing but a MYTH perpetrated by people like you who have a hard on for atheism/secularism.

You are right though,america was not created for the glroy of jesus,but the majority in this country has always been christian.

Did i not state that they should teach that the founding fathers were deists/theists? No,i advocate to teach about ALL of the founding fathers and there beliefs. Not just the well known ones. Many of the 'lesser' known founding fathers was in fact christian. Thomas jefferson infact went to chruch every sunday.Of course you atheists like to make a revision of history and say,you HAD to go to chruch back then or you would not be respected...BULLSHIT.

Why? if i caught anything i caught it from your mom.


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

dreams lie said:


> You know what?  Today was a good day.  The Democrats are crying because they lost the house, but my more conservative friends are equally butthurt that Reid won again.



LOL! I was butthurt too . I was thinking... Wait, they voted for THAT bastard again?

And then... I remembered that he was up against Sharron Angle... Then, I reached enlightenment . 

If Republicans focused on fiscal issues, stayed away from the social issues and simply stated "That's a states rights issue, so it doesn't matter what I think... because I'm not going to touch it", then they would probably do MUCH better. Sharron Angle's problem was that she was ignorant and made stupid statements.

Did anybody here know that President Obama lost his old senate seat to a Republican? That's a symbolic win right there and nobody in the media is talking about it much. Probably because it would be embarassing for the President.



dreams lie said:


> Everyone was fairly convinced that Angle would win, but really, I do not care.  I stayed home yesterday.  The only thing I could say in his favor is that the Senate Majority Leader seat puts Nevada on the map.



A lot of people were speculating that, that was one of the reasons he won.



Tekkenman11 said:


> *Sadly, I doubt even a second "crash" would arouse the masses.* Our country has become immune to such stimulus's. It's going to take something bigger than that to change anyone, or anything.



They would have to attempt to take our guns away to "arouse the masses" .


----------



## Mist Beauty (Nov 3, 2010)

I am excited for Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsom. 

Still reading many comments/thoughts from articles online. Doesn't seem like much will be accomplished these next two years. 

I am frustrated that Obama allowed Republicans to water down his bill. This political system does not seem to be getting anywhere quickly on some of the same issues. But overall an interesting but melancholy day.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

Sillay said:


> It's frustrating. There are times when I wish the Democrats would sink down to an even playing field; cheaters against cheaters. Unfortunately, this doesn't work. Republicans appeal to those "genteel southerners with their refined, traditional family values" who suck up the headlines eagerly – regardless of their truthfulness. Admittedly, like any political party though, Democratic politicans have their fair share of idiotic followers too.
> 
> 
> Sidenote; it's strange how Shumlin's win still isn't showing up on the CNN map. It's already been declared in the news here and online that Dubie dropped out.



Honestly, the Republican Party will be dying. They have primarily focused only on white american voters. And, guess what, younger Americans (white and all) vote Democrat. Their highest voting base are the older generations (basically Baby Boomer dumbasses). They'll be dead in 10-20 years anyways. And white Americans are becoming less and less the majority. Soon they'll have no chance because they've caused so much hate toward the African Americans, Latin Americans, Asian Americans, and the young that they'll be dead.



amazingfunksta said:


> LOL! I was butthurt too . I was thinking... Wait, they voted for THAT bastard again?
> 
> And then... I remembered that he was up against Sharron Angle... Then, I reached enlightenment .
> 
> ...



I still think you ignore the truth about the Republican (and Democratic) Party. They don't care about cutting spending in most areas. Especially areas that help their corporate donators out (which tends to fuck the American people over). They don't have any real fiscal sense. If they did, they'd raise the taxes back up to what they were in the 90s, they'd reinstate a vast amount of regulations that were removed and add new ones on banks and wall street and then the deficit would become a little more manageable. But ya, they don't care... Democrats are just as bad. The Politicians in power are all greedy fuckwads and they don't care to really fix our financial problems.

And no one cares about that seat. You realize it had a lot of controversy over it because of Democrats right? That would be one reason it was lost. The other being this "throw out the bum" mentality. It's not that big of a deal as you seem to want to make it out to be.


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> Honestly, the Republican Party will be dying. They have primarily focused only on white american voters. And, guess what, younger Americans (white and all) vote Democrat. Their highest voting base are the older generations (basically Baby Boomer dumbasses). They'll be dead in 10-20 years anyways. And white Americans are becoming less and less the majority. Soon they'll have no chance because they've caused so much hate toward the African Americans, Latin Americans, Asian Americans, and the young that they'll be dead.



Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. - Winston Churchill

It has been widely established that younger people tend to be more liberal and then adopt conservativism as they age. 

You know, why am I even trying? 

And as far as the race issue, read this:


----------



## Inuhanyou (Nov 3, 2010)

Nancy did a great job, thank you for your service Nancy


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 3, 2010)

amazingfunksta said:


> Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. - Winston Churchill
> 
> It has been widely established that younger people tend to be more liberal and then adopt conservativism as they age.
> 
> ...



And Winston Churchill wasn't around during a time when people became so entrenched with their political party. You'll find the Republican's ridiculously far right these days, that won't fly with most people. And, no the white majority is thinning in the US, that will eventually change or be non-existent. My point wasn't that it's racism, my point is that typically most non-white people in our country vote Democrat. Go check the exit polls. Old white people are the only reason Republicans have remained in power, even if younger white become older white guys, their political mindset isn't likely to change THAT much just because of age, it'll require more than that. Still, the Republican party will be dying. Especially if they want to cut social security and medicare and all that. Being that their major voters are older people and, guess who benefits most from those? Older people.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> What do you think about Reid winning?



He owes the AFL-CIO big on that one. Union get-out-the-vote drives are probably the only reason he hung on.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

amazingfunksta said:


> Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. - Winston Churchill
> 
> It has been widely established that younger people tend to be more liberal and then adopt conservativism as they age.
> 
> ...



No, actually, that's not true. The perception is based on generation gaps in social mores. Longitudinal studies have shown that, at least for Americans, they actually tend to get more left-wing as they get older. There are some major exceptions--Baby Boomers, for example--but the general trend is that people get more left-wing, but at a rate slower than the rest of society.


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> *I still think you ignore the truth about the Republican (and Democratic) Party. They don't care about cutting spending in most areas. Especially areas that help their corporate donators out (which tends to fuck the American people over).*


*

Easy Answer: Establishment politicians playing favorites with their special interests. The current tax code we have, which is quite complex and paradoxical in its own right, allows for modification such that they can legislate tax breaks for their special interests.

A flat tax or a consumption based tax would largely fix this problem.


Spoiler:  




[Youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPDrqE2iX_Q[/Youtube]
[Youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53HlIOQWFDk&feature=related[/Youtube]






Vicious-chan said:



			They don't have any real fiscal sense. If they did, they'd raise the taxes back up to what they were in the 90s, they'd reinstate a vast amount of regulations that were removed and add new ones on banks and wall street and then the deficit would become a little more manageable. But ya, they don't care... Democrats are just as bad. The Politicians in power are all greedy fuckwads and they don't care to really fix our financial problems.
		
Click to expand...

*


How about, the government take us out of Iraq and Afghanistan (COMPLETELY), cut our defense spending to its absolute necessity, and focus on securing our borders? <-- BTW, the government is suppossed to levy taxes for things such as our police force, to pay for the judicial and legislative system, to post roads, for postal services, etc. etc. (Read the enumerated powers of the constitution). Oh, and don't give me the "General Welfare" clause bullshit.

[Youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuYBqkTs3RQ&feature=player_profilepage[/Youtube]

Oh, and how about reforming these large entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, whose institution is creating TRILLIONS in unfunded liabilities. 



Notice how the programs which cost the MOST are social security, the department of defense, and medicare. 9% of the amount we pay is interest on our debt... ouch. Medicaid (which Bush expanded), accounts for 7%. The global war on terror is only 5% of spending... So, in order to be effective, we need to reform social security AND streamline our military to be cheaper, yet still effective. 

Sadly, both sides will not compromise. Old people want social security so they won't let anybody touch it, and Republicans (as well as Democrats it seems) want military spending although Republicans seem to focus on it more. Democrats are more willing to cut military spending. Republicans are TRYING to talk about Social Security (but at their own peril). I think that if we had people like Ron Paul, who are willing to make cuts and reforms everywhere, we'd be in much better shape.



Vicious-chan said:


> And no one cares about that seat. You realize it had a lot of controversy over it because of Democrats right? That would be one reason it was lost. The other being this "throw out the bum" mentality. It's not that big of a deal as you seem to want to make it out to be.



Wait, are you talking about the Blago trial?


----------



## hcheng02 (Nov 3, 2010)

Inuhanyou said:


> Nancy did a great job, thank you for your service Nancy



To be honest, she really wasn't that bad. After all, she did manage to wring enough votes to pass Health care Reform, which isn't too shabby. 

I think the biggest reason why this GOP wave happened was because Obama didn't really do enough to explain to the public what his programs meant. Its like the whole administration took a weird pride in claiming that they were doing the "right thing" despite popular approval rather than trying to get people to see agree with their POV.


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> No, actually, that's not true. The perception is based on generation gaps in social mores. Longitudinal studies have shown that, at least for Americans, they actually tend to get more left-wing as they get older.



Do you have any such studies that I can read? Also, I'm not talking about "social mores", I'm talking about fiscal views. However, I'm sure that income probably has a stronger correlation to party affiliation than that of age... The two probably correlate to a small extent. 



Jello Biafra said:


> There are some major exceptions--Baby Boomers, for example--but the general trend is that people get more left-wing, but at a rate slower than the rest of society.



Now, are we talking about "social mores", or are we talking fiscal policies? For example: My parents favor marijuana legalization, allowing states to decide gay marriage (they're not opposed to it), etc. etc. However, they are fiscally conservative and vote Republican for those reasons. 

It all depends on your priorities. If you're a single issue pro-life voter, you're going to vote Republican more than likely (there's obviously some Democrat exceptions but as a whole).



Jello Biafra said:


> He owes the AFL-CIO big on that one. Union get-out-the-vote drives are probably the only reason he hung on.



Very astute assumption


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

amazingfunksta said:


> Do you have any such studies that I can read? Also, I'm not talking about "social mores", I'm talking about fiscal views. However, I'm sure that income probably has a stronger correlation to party affiliation than that of age... The two probably correlate to a small extent.


I'll try to dig them up. It might take a while. I remember reading it for my freshman sociology class, which was quite interesting.

I can't remember exactly what metrics they used, but the specific language it used was "left-wing" rather than just "liberal", and in sociology, that is a meaningful distinction, so it likely includes fiscal views as well as social mores.


amazingfunksta said:


> Now, are we talking about "social mores", or are we talking fiscal policies? For example: My parents favor marijuana legalization, allowing states to decide gay marriage (they're not opposed to it), etc. etc. However, they are fiscally conservative and vote Republican for those reasons.
> 
> It all depends on your priorities. If you're a single issue pro-life voter, you're going to vote Republican more than likely (there's obviously some Democrat exceptions but as a whole).
> 
> Very astute assumption



It's no doubt a complicated issue. I'm just talking about central tendency though. Even a central tendency move can hide a lot of other interesting things in the data, as I'm assure you are aware.

For example, already left-wing people might get more left-wing as they age, while right wing people might get more right-wing, but the left-wingers move further left than the right-wingers move right. That's one possibility that could occur. Then again, there might not be discernible trends within the group either.


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> And Winston Churchill wasn't around during a time when people became so entrenched with their political party.



Sooo... are you saying that no matter what stances a party takes, people are so affiliated with the name that they won't change? Could you expand upon the point you were trying to make there?  



Vicious-chan said:


> You'll find the Republican's ridiculously far right these days, that won't fly with most people. And, no the white majority is thinning in the US, that will eventually change or be non-existent. My point wasn't that it's racism, my point is that typically most non-white people in our country vote Democrat. Go check the exit polls.



I don't disagree with you about the nature of political climate in terms of which race votes which way. I'm just saying that if this is because of perceived racism... it's retarded. 



Vicious-chan said:


> Old white people are the only reason Republicans have remained in power, even if younger white become older white guys, their political mindset isn't likely to change THAT much just because of age, it'll require more than that. Still, the Republican party will be dying. Especially if they want to cut social security and medicare and all that. Being that their major voters are older people and, guess who benefits most from those? Older people.



Not disagreeing with you here... NOBODY wants to touch social security because of the selfish old people :-/. 

The best way to get votes? Ratify an entitlement program.


----------



## Shasta McNasty (Nov 3, 2010)

Excellent national election.  Yes, I know the GOP didn't take the Senate, but this was expected.  Karl Rove summed it it perfectly: the GOP needs to watch who they nominate in the primaries; we could have taken the senate if it wasn't for the nuts like O'Donnell and Angle.  The House race, on the other hand, was even better than expected for us.  We went well beyond they '94 threshold.

California elections were an utter disappointment. The old man who has alread served his purpose was re elected to the senate, and the guy who says he doesn't know what the lieutenant governor does was elected lieutenant governor.  Prop 25 passed, allowing for the GOP minorities to be hidden and have no say whatsoever.  With Brown as gov serving as a rubber stamp, tax hikes and bad policy is almost inevitable.


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> I'll try to dig them up. It might take a while. I remember reading it for my freshman sociology class, which was quite interesting.
> 
> I can't remember exactly what metrics they used, but the specific language it used was "left-wing" rather than just "liberal", and in sociology, that is a meaningful distinction, so it likely includes fiscal views as well as social mores.



I can agree with you on the social issues, I mean, just look at the stuff we have on tv . I'm not sure about fiscally. 



Jello Biafra said:


> It's no doubt a complicated issue. I'm just talking about central tendency though. Even a central tendency move can hide a lot of other interesting things in the data, as I'm assure you are aware.
> 
> For example, already left-wing people might get more left-wing as they age, while right wing people might get more right-wing, but the left-wingers move further left than the right-wingers move right. That's one possibility that could occur. Then again, there might not be discernible trends within the group either.



Of course ^_^.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

Shasta, it was the 2/3rds requirement for passing budgets and levying taxes that put the state into the fiscal and infrastructure crisis it's in today.

When the majority cannot constitutionally govern, and is left to appeal to the lowest common denominator in politics, the government can't do anything but defer responsibility to the future. That means deficits, crumbling infrastructure and terrible fiscal discipline.


----------



## Shasta McNasty (Nov 3, 2010)

The party of white men elected two African-Americans to the house, Macro Rubia and Susana Martinez as the Gov't of NM...


Edit: Also Nikki Haley of SC who is the first Indian-American woman.

But don't mind them they're just a bunch of Uncle Toms and race traitors.


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

Shasta McNasty said:


> California elections were an utter disappointment. The old man who has alread served his purpose was re elected to the senate, and the guy who says he doesn't know what the lieutenant governor does was elected lieutenant governor.  Prop 25 passed, allowing for the GOP minorities to be hidden and have no say whatsoever.  With Brown as gov serving as a rubber stamp, tax hikes and bad policy is almost inevitable.



California is one of those states I'm going to watch VERY closely. 

My fiancee worked at a company called Hudson Alpha for a year or so before starting Med School. Hudson Alpha is a biotech company that was originally a spinoff of Stanford, moved to Alabama because it was too costly to do business in California. I also talked to Sunil Saini, the Director of Research and Development of another biotech company called Integra OrthoBiologics when he gave a seminar here at UAB. He was a nice individual who originally came here from the UK. They moved much of their business outside of Princeton, NJ due to the high cost of doing business there.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

Sure, a party that still lauds men like Strom Thurmond is a place for a self-respecting black man to be. :ho


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

Byrd may have been a racist dick, but at least he admitted as such, and admitted his mistakes. The Republicans, unfortunately, have decided to just ignore and gloss over that part of their past.


----------



## Mist Beauty (Nov 3, 2010)

I cannot wait for 2012.

Did someone edit the title?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> Sure, a party that still lauds men like Strom Thurmond is a place for a self-respecting black man to be. :ho



Don't forget Jesse Helms.


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> Byrd may have been a racist dick, but at least he admitted as such, and admitted his mistakes. The Republicans, unfortunately, have decided to just ignore and gloss over that part of their past.



Well, I'm not sure how Democrats have excoriated their members in comparison to Republicans. 

You said Byrd admitted his mistakes, I would agree that Strom Thurmond should have done the same. But should whole parties apologize because they have one, or a couple of members who are racist dicks, when as a whole, the party is not racist?



Seto Kaiba said:


> Don't forget Jesse Helms.



Yeah, that guy was a dick.


----------



## Shasta McNasty (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> Sure, a party that still lauds men like Strom Thurmond is a place for a self-respecting black man to be. :ho



The beauty of these candidates is that they never ran identity campaigns; they ran on issues and won.

Of course I would expect the likes of you to only look at things through an archaic lens.


----------



## A. Waltz (Nov 3, 2010)

wow that nevada governor seems hot, well, the young guy who ran for nevada, idk if he won or not

well jerry brown won in CA. woot woot.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Nov 3, 2010)

amazingfunksta said:


> Well, I'm not sure how Democrats have excoriated their members in comparison to Republicans.
> 
> You said Byrd admitted his mistakes, I would agree that Strom Thurmond should have done the same. But should whole parties apologize because they have one, or a couple of members who are racist dicks, when as a whole, the party is not racist?



The Republican party isn't racist in its entirety, but you can't deny the GOP today has a serious problem with this embrace of "light" xenophobia and clear homophobia, as well as appealing to minority voters. Especially with this so-called "purge" of moderates and its movement further to the right, it's not hard to see why, IMO.



> Yeah, that guy was a dick.



That's an understatement.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

Oh boy, Jerry Brown is governor of Cali again.

Maybe he'll try to springboard into the Presidency again.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

Jello Biafra said:


> Byrd may have been a racist dick, but at least he admitted as such, and admitted his mistakes. The Republicans, unfortunately, have decided to just ignore and gloss over that part of their past.



Reminds me of the Japanese with WW2 or South Koreans over North Korean aggression. 



			
				funk said:
			
		

> How about, the government take us out of Iraq and Afghanistan (COMPLETELY), cut our defense spending to its absolute necessity, and focus on securing our borders? <-- BTW, the government is suppossed to levy taxes for things such as our police force, to pay for the judicial and legislative system, to post roads, for postal services, etc. etc. (Read the enumerated powers of the constitution). Oh, and don't give me the "General Welfare" clause bullshit.



How about, no?

How about, we get out of there now and we open the door for Iranian interference and even further degradation?  Iraq and Afghanistan aren't like Vietnam, kid.  There's no big nationalistic movement going on, but rather a more dangerous religious extremism.  Pulling out now would be disastrous not only for our image but for security within the region.  We got ourselves in that mess and we gotta take a bite out of the shit sandwich, money or no money.

Also, let's not leave South Korea and Japan?  Why?  Because leaving would open the door to a more provocative China.  Like it or not, they need us there and we need to be there.  I hate this notion that Libertarians carry over military that it's necessary to fuck over our allies for the sake of a few bucks and that "they can take care of themselves."  No, not against nations like China.  A nuclear North Korea is also a good reason.  

Libertarian arguments on the defense budget are undoubtedly stupid.  You want to save money?  Stop all the KBR bullshit and stop the lucrative projects on techs that never go anywhere.  Don't endanger troops and allies.


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

Seto Kaiba said:


> The Republican party isn't racist in its entirety, but you can't deny the GOP today has a serious problem with this embrace of "light" xenophobia and clear homophobia, as well as appealing to minority voters.



I don't know if recognizing that a majority of terrorist attacks against the U.S. have been carried out by people following radical islam is necessarilly xenophobia. I have Muslim friends who denounce their actions and recognize this as well...

Now, I will agree that there are people in the GOP who are homophobic, and those who are not. GOP should take a constitional stance and say "it's up to the states to decide". Oh, and opposing gay marriage doesn't automatically make you "homophobic". 



Seto Kaiba said:


> Especially with this so-called "purge" of moderates and its movement further to the right, it's not hard to see why, IMO.



That "purge" has more to do with economic moderates. The TEA party is SUPPOSED to be a referendum on fiscal values, not social values.



Mael said:


> How about, no?
> 
> How about, we get out of there now and we open the door for Iranian interference and even further degradation?  Iraq and Afghanistan aren't like Vietnam, kid.  There's no big nationalistic movement going on, but rather a more dangerous religious extremism.  Pulling out now would be disastrous not only for our image but for security within the region.  We got ourselves in that mess and we gotta take a bite out of the shit sandwich, money or no money.
> 
> ...



See how hard it is Viscious? If you cut one thing, somebody's gonna get pissed... If you cut another thing, somebody's gonna get pissed. Either way, SOMEBODY is going to get pissed. 

Oh, and Mael, I definitely agree with you with the KBR and tech ventures that don't do anything practical. You raised practical concerns about a completely isolationist policy. I'm simply saying that it's going to be hard to balance our budget now that we're obligated to stay in the middle east in order to stabilize a region we de-stabilized.

We're half-assing this war, and when we went there... We should've gone in there with overwhelming force, captured who we wanted, and gotten the hell out of there. If we couldn't find who we wanted, we simply leave. 

If Japan and Korea benefit so much from us being there, they should assist us more financially instead of laying a majority of the burden on us. Oh, and China spends MUCH less money on its military than we do.


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 3, 2010)

I haven't sat down and read all 362 posts made in this thread, but no one sees anything wrong with the thread title?


----------



## amazingfunksta (Nov 3, 2010)

Hand Banana said:


> I haven't sat down and read all 362 posts made in this thread, but no one sees anything wrong with the thread title?



LOL! Already noticed that:

Tie's into Jello's other thread pretty nicely, doesn't it?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Nov 3, 2010)

amazingfunksta said:


> I don't know if recognizing that a majority of terrorist attacks against the U.S. have been carried out by people following radical islam is necessarilly xenophobia. I have Muslim friends who denounce their actions and recognize this as well...



Hispanics too. It's not just that though. The GOP has had problems appealing to minority voters for a long time now, and I say it's because they give off that vibe of not being as open and giving an atmosphere of xenophobia. Be it against Hispanics, Muslims, or blacks.



> Now, I will agree that there are people in the GOP who are homophobic, and those who are not. GOP should take a constitional stance and say "it's up to the states to decide". Oh, and opposing gay marriage doesn't automatically make you "homophobic".


 
Yes, some are some aren't, that's a little redundant to state...but the GOP mainstream *CLEARLY* embraces a platform of homophobia and contempt for homosexuals. I am not going to downplay that. That is too clear. 

No. It should not just be left up to the states. Gay marriage is an issue of civil rights. Some states will simply not give them their rights.

More often than not, they are. There'd have to be a pretty convincing argument to speak out against gay marriage without revealing one's homophobia at the same time. 



> That "purge" has more to do with economic moderates. The TEA party is SUPPOSED to be a referendum on fiscal values, not social values.



Social moderates too. The Tea Party's message is vague and broad if not outright incoherent and inconsistent when it comes to economics, but their social values are more than clear.


----------



## Jello Biafra (Nov 3, 2010)

It's like Kissinger said: "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac"

He should know. That ugly old Jewish man got more tail than any of us ever will.


----------



## Mael (Nov 3, 2010)

The US requires the GEoM...that's it. .



			
				Jello "Death is a preferable alternative to communism" Biafra said:
			
		

> He should know. That ugly old Jewish man got more tail than any of us ever will.



Ben Franklin was likely just as mediocre looking and he was a player.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 4, 2010)

amazingfunksta said:


> Easy Answer: Establishment politicians playing favorites with their special interests. The current tax code we have, which is quite complex and paradoxical in its own right, allows for modification such that they can legislate tax breaks for their special interests.
> 
> A flat tax or a consumption based tax would largely fix this problem.
> 
> ...



Flat tax doesn't work. It doesn't give nearly the amount of money for the services if it were to accommodate enough people paying taxes or it would basically exclude an amount of people it shouldn't. Besides, the richer you are, the more responsibility you have to the society and nation you live in. It's quite simply the Gospel of Wealth. You want to claim being fiscal responsible, yet a flat tax would be pretty damn for our country.

How about you stop being so naive about the wars. They were started and endorsed to continue by the Republican party. True, Democrats haven't done enough to get us out, but Republicans have no care to really get us out either. Even so, you're naive in thinking we can just up and leave like that. We still have equipment to move out (and no we can't leave it there) and we have a LOT of people to move out. Regardless, you're INCREDIBLY short sighted if you think we should just up and leave Afghanistan when it's not even up on its own feet and then be prey to the Taliban or any other surrounding nation (we know China wants those resources they have, but I doubt they'd really invade, but they might as they have in the past with other nations) and, if it were the Taliban to regain power, then subjected to propaganda against us and we'd have a whole new generation of terrorists coming from there to attack us and others of the free world.

Here, I'll show you my brother's bit on it


----------



## Xaosin (Nov 4, 2010)

Mael said:


> Forced education is a start.
> 
> Sorry kids.  Homeschooling is for weirdos and sometimes it takes a heavy hand to get shit done.  I've been starting to think people have TOO much choice in their matters, obesity rates e.g.



I was homeschooled.

I would usually finish my shitty lesson-plans my mom made for me in half an hour, then spend the rest of the day browsing the internet for forums,articles, and information. (Also a lot of anime )

Later when I entered school, I was considered mentally gifted, but socially estranged. Mainly because before I entered it, I thought the premise was on actual education. None of the 'friends' my teachers wanted me to make wanted to give 2 shits about learning, or talk about anything remotely intellectual. (Damn classmates and their pokemon cards/sports recollections. They didn't really like anime or anything else japanese either so...)

Later when I entered high-school, it breezed through it at first but got lazy because their was no real incentive. I couldn't stand my Junior American history 'honors' class, nothing but shitty vocab sheets and fact charts. I don't ever recall ever having to do a single essay in that class, it was a joke.

The teachers didn't really help me with my social problems either, they just put me with the rest of the inept kids where they hoped we would figure something out.

So I think that most people recommend home-schooling because they think our education system is failing, and while that's true it's not the best excuse not to try to fix it. (Or to homeschool your kid and have them all 'screwed' up like me who waste their time on an online forum thinking anybody will listen)

We need someone who's willing to bust these damn teachers and their shitty labor unions until they get their asses handed to them and actually teach. And when I say teach, I mean they should be assessed so they actually 'teach', not hand us their hand outs well they do cross-word puzzles and scoff at our incoherent questions. Tenor my ass. The parents also to need to give 2 shits. My parents never so much as bothered to check any of my assignments/grades as much as I wasn't failing, way to motivate me.

As for politics, I don't think I'm well educated enough to really have my opinion matter. I was disdained at the democrats losing their majority, but I immediately recognized it as my left-winged bias kicking in and thought I'd actually do a little research before jumping to preconceived conclusions. 
And thus, here I am.


----------



## Kyuubi Whisker (Nov 4, 2010)

Will process prediction contest, announce winner once all house races in.  So far, the GOP picked up at least 60.  My home district of Virginia 11 is one of the tossups.


----------



## Xaosin (Nov 4, 2010)

nagatopwnsall said:


> Your damn right im nativist. If it means making sure illegals get kicked the fuck out of this country. If it means closing the border. If it means making sure the distinction of ILLEGAL,is known to all then yes im a nativist.
> 
> If you like to think of me as a 'racist' then go ahead. Nothing i will say will change what you think on that part.I have never said "america is for whites only" thats what you got wrong. *America is for all those who come here LEGALLY.* There is a difference you self-righteous shit.
> 
> ...



None of the people you spoke of above.... came here 'legally' by definition. They came and just took land from other people, by they native americans or other nations. And most of the the time, they tried to force their beliefs on the natives/whoever lived their. The very concept of Puritanism that helped found American was both hypocritical in every way and tyrannical. 

The founding father were a mix of theist,deist,agnostics and atheist. They were also more secular then anyone else in the world at the time, considering they lead the American enlightenment. (Which helped bring about your so prized Constitution, as opposed to former charters based on draconian religious doctrine and the like.)

You act like you have some god-given right to live here rather than out of circumstance. Why are you so much worthy of this nations rights than any immigrant that's actually willing to risk coming here and take the jobs you're too high and mighty to do?



Vicious-chan said:


> But, mark my words, come the second crash which will be coming soon if things continue like this, there will be real anger in the people. *That's when true revolutionary ideology will come.*



Except this time,rather than bear fruit of revolution, it will bring further tyranny and oppression. 
When the status quo is challenged, those at the top will want to stay at the top, the government won't just let itself be overthrown. And well revolution may have worked 200+ years ago, the very idea that today's American populous can defeat a modern-day army in a rebellion, is inconceivable. The spirit of revolt would burn quickly, then be put out by scored a of bloodshed fueled by sickening ideologies, and once we realize how powerless we've become the true fist of bureaucracy will rein over us. 
Therefore a 'revolution' will occur. But think of it more like the rise of the Third Reich than the original American Revolution.


----------



## Mist Beauty (Nov 4, 2010)

California is sort of the only place where things weren't a complete disappointment. Thank God Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina, and that guy running against Gavin Newsom lost. 

Cannabis lost as well. (Apparently using the word marijuana demonizes Latinos for some reason. I think it was a time when they were really resented, and its latinoesque name made it easy for the otherization/hatred. I don't buy this yet, but have to look into it =3 )


----------



## Grandia (Nov 4, 2010)

Marco Rubio for VP candidate in 2012?


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 4, 2010)

♥TheBearjew♥ said:


> Except this time,rather than bear fruit of revolution, it will bring further tyranny and oppression.
> When the status quo is challenged, those at the top will want to stay at the top, the government won't just let itself be overthrown. And well revolution may have worked 200+ years ago, the very idea that today's American populous can defeat a modern-day army in a rebellion, is inconceivable. The spirit of revolt would burn quickly, then be put out by scored a of bloodshed fueled by sickening ideologies, and once we realize how powerless we've become the true fist of bureaucracy will rein over us.
> Therefore a 'revolution' will occur. But think of it more like the rise of the Third Reich than the original American Revolution.



You think the government has a choice when it comes to being overthrown? And you're really underestimating the power of an angry people. As I said before, it was the anger and protesting in the streets that lead to the 1960s and the civil rights act finally being passed. Leaders were out right shitting themselves with fear because they saw angry people on their doorsteps. And what are they gonna do anyways if people were to protest? Trying to counter with their own violence will just make people angrier. And, if you or they think that the majority of the army will listen to them at that point, they're very wrong. Considering the majority of those in the army are of the class they're trying to dick over? Ya...

The only thing I would worry about is after the anger from the people if our politicians do what I think they're going to do is who will retain power after that. That would be the problem and, if we're smart and a little lucky, we'll have someone good in power. Basically if anyone tries to claim rule over the country by themselves, that's bad. We shouldn't over throw our government style of Democracy, just the people in it who refuse to pass key things that we need and fix the shit that's broken in their favor, but causing serious problems for the US people.


----------



## olehoncho (Nov 4, 2010)

Oh hooray for Jerry Brown.

Looking forward to more clueless governance, union strikes, and police state policies.


----------



## Sunrider (Nov 4, 2010)

ol?honch? said:


> Oh hooray for Jerry Brown.
> 
> Looking forward to more clueless governance, union strikes, and police state policies.


----------



## Mael (Nov 4, 2010)

Would Meg Whitman have been any better?

I mean, no offense, this is California.


----------



## sadated_peon (Nov 4, 2010)

Jebus don't you people sleep, I woke up and this had an extra 5 pages on it. 



			
				nagtopwnsall said:
			
		

> neo-con policies you mean. There is a difference. We have not had a true conservative president in decades.


No True Scotsman fallacy. 

You guys voted for him TWICE, you supported his policy as a great return to conservative policies. Neo-Con came about not because of a change in conservative economic policy but an institution of the ?compassionate conservative?.

Bush was your golden boy, he had huge support from the republicans it wasn?t until all your policies enacted through Bush failed did you turn on him. Making him a scapegoat for the conservative policies he was enacting.


----------



## Shasta McNasty (Nov 4, 2010)

this is our lieutenant governor:

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXvYn3PFfvc[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Shasta McNasty (Nov 4, 2010)

Grandia said:


> Marco Rubio for VP candidate in 2012?



Thune/Rubio or Romney/Rubio would be the only tickets at the moment I think can beat Obama in '08.


----------



## Mael (Nov 4, 2010)

Not to nitpick, but how long have you been here and still double-post?


----------



## olehoncho (Nov 4, 2010)

Mael said:


> Would Meg Whitman have been any better?
> 
> I mean, no offense, this is California.


Didn't vote for Whitman.  Though Brown's aide was wrong to call her a whore, she is more tramp than lady.

Jerry is a very pro-police man, which is both good and bad.  I'm no cop hater, but in California we have a history of the law protecting cops when the cops are the ones at fault.  As Attorney General, Jerry has definitely shown that he's a friend to the cops; he was even endorsed by CA's most powerful union, the CCPOA.  Call me an old school fear monger, but the idea of a police state scares me.  I hope nothing happens, but with CA's high unemployment, if jobs don't come back soon I can imagine some bad stuff happening out here.

In other words, don't really like him, but with all politicians I'll give him a year's grace period.

But more than that, I'm afraid that Linda Ronstadt will release a Greatest-Hits album now.


----------



## Mist Beauty (Nov 4, 2010)

Shasta McNasty said:


> this is our lieutenant governor:
> 
> [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXvYn3PFfvc[/YOUTUBE]



If that's the best a conservative can find, then alright. I'm pretty sure he has a good idea about what the job entails. There isn't anything wrong with what happened. I laughed when friends told me I'd wind up selling pizzas and performing favors, but actually have been working at the local pizzaria until my next term starts for fun. I watched the debate between Brown and his opponent (too insignificant to be remembered) and he clearly was the better man, contender, and person. I'm very hopeful. Let's see what Brown and Gavin Newsom can accomplish in the coming years.

inb4 their plans take a long time to kick in due to the hole we're already in and California also succumbs to GOP in two years.


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 4, 2010)

Great news (imo at least for obvious reasons)! My brother got calls from the Democratic party. They want him to run again in 2012  they are shocked at how well he did and REALLY want him to run again since he did better with NO support from the Democratic party than the people they were supporting. In fact, they dumped 2 million dollars into someone who got DESTROYED, dumped no money into my brother and he did so much better (a really close race considering on things).

I mean, considering he was completely new to politics, had almost no money backing him so his name didn't get out as much in terms of commercials (just through his constant driving around the district talking to people and in the debates), and was running in a primarily conservative/republican district during a time of Democratic disdain. I really hope that other real good politicians like Russ Feingold get re-elected or elected in 2012. We could FINALLY get real progress then!

Btw: Shameless plugging, but ya 



and his Youtube



I'd really recommend anyone interested to check out the youtube stuff, check out the debates really.


----------



## Coteaz (Nov 4, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> Btw: Shameless plugging, but ya


Tell your brother he needs to tone down the rapist smile. 

Seriously, it's a little creepy.


----------



## The Space Cowboy (Nov 4, 2010)

These people seem to agree with me about the possibility of a redistricting/census threat




> Republicans gained a historic edge over Democrats in state legislature elections that will have national implications for years to come.
> 
> State legislatures in 44 states are responsible for one of the most important political processes: drawing district boundaries for the U.S. House of Representatives.
> 
> ...


----------



## AlphabetSoup (Nov 4, 2010)

Vicious-chan said:


> Great news (imo at least for obvious reasons)! My brother got calls from the Democratic party. They want him to run again in 2012  they are shocked at how well he did and REALLY want him to run again since he did better with NO support from the Democratic party than the people they were supporting. In fact, they dumped 2 million dollars into someone who got DESTROYED, dumped no money into my brother and he did so much better (a really close race considering on things).
> 
> I mean, considering he was completely new to politics, had almost no money backing him so his name didn't get out as much in terms of commercials (just through his constant driving around the district talking to people and in the debates), and was running in a primarily conservative/republican district during a time of Democratic disdain. I really hope that other real good politicians like Russ Feingold get re-elected or elected in 2012. We could FINALLY get real progress then!
> 
> ...



That awesome! Your brother's district is only not that far from where I live


----------



## Vicious-chan (Nov 4, 2010)

Coteaz said:


> Tell your brother he needs to tone down the rapist smile.
> 
> Seriously, it's a little creepy.



Ya, his smile is ridiculous in some of the pics. It's better in person lol. I wouldn't say it's "rapist smile" though.



AlphabetSoup said:


> That awesome! Your brother's district is only not that far from where I live



Really? neat. I don't actually live in the 29th, I guess I live in the.. 28th? Ya, I guess.. I dunno. Louise Slaughter is my congressman and she needs to gtfo. She's been there too damn long.


----------



## Kyuubi Whisker (Nov 9, 2010)

Update:


----------



## Mider T (Nov 10, 2010)




----------



## Captain America (Nov 11, 2010)

At least I voted though.


----------



## Raiden (Nov 11, 2010)

> Republicans gained a historic edge over Democrats in state legislature elections that will have *national implications for years to come.*



>implying all these guys might not be thrown out on their butts two years from now.


----------



## Hinako (Nov 15, 2010)

I for one was alright with the election results. Of course Massachusetts had to be stupid again and re-elect Barney Frank, Castro loving Mcgovern, the devil and the whole democratic she-bang.

voted yes in all 3 questions.

Hopefully Obama actually focuses on the deficit, took him two years to realize it. 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101024/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_how_will_he_govern


I feel so great now that Galvin is re-elected, we need more corrupt people like him that don't care about sending ballots overseas to the military because he knows most of them tend to vote republican.


----------



## sadated_peon (Nov 15, 2010)

When did the name of the thread change, lol.


----------



## Hinako (Nov 15, 2010)

Oh and I love how Jerry Brown's aide call the opponent Meg Whitman a whore, only to be back by the National organization for Women days later. Way to stand up for women's rights N.O.W. All this is mere prove that N.O.W. isn't for women's right, if it was a diverse opinion would be accepted by them but nope.


----------

