• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2013 |OT2| Worth 77% of OT1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Democrats in California lost their super-majority in the state senate in a special race. The person who held the seat went to take a job with Chevron.

22% registered republicans, and the democrat lost.

2014 anyone?
They still have the supermajority don't they? It's 27-12 and there's another vacant Dem-held seat that's only 21% white.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
Democrats in California lost their super-majority in the state senate in a special race. The person who held the seat went to take a job with Chevron.

22% registered republicans, and the democrat lost.

2014 anyone?
32% registered republicans.
mostly Latino district, a special election for remainder of the term (ends next year), for a district that is evaporating in 2014 in redistricting. Less than 20% of registered voters participated, 2010 saw more like 30%. Not seeing how this is indicative of even non presidential election years, special elections are always wild cards. Scott Brown anyone?


Edit: besides this is basically morphing into the new 14th district which is even less republican and more Latino. Nice diablosing though.
 
32% registered republicans.
mostly Latino district, a special election for remainder of the term (ends next year), for a district that is evaporating in 2014 in redistricting. Less than 20% of registered voters participated, 2010 saw more like 30%. Not seeing how this is indicative of even non presidential election years, special elections are always wild cards. Scott Brown anyone?


Edit: besides this is basically morphing into the new 14th district which is even less republican and more Latino. Nice diablosing though.

Its just an indication that democrats can go to obscene lengths to lose even the easiest races
 
Its just an indication that democrats can go to obscene lengths to lose even the easiest races
Or maybe they just didn't think it was worth the fight. They'd still have to lose two more seats to lose the 2/3rds supemajority. The GOP can rent a seat for a year without much negative effect.
 
Do you guys believe that in 100 years the West will no longer be part of the leaders of the world? In other words do you feel that India, China, and Brazil will take our positions while we will fall into second tier nations?
 
Do you guys believe that in 100 years the West will no longer be part of the leaders of the world? In other words do you feel that India, China, and Brazil will take our positions while we will fall into second tier nations?

Not a chance in hell.

Unless you've been to these countries, you have no idea of how enormous the gap actually is.
 
Ecuador will rule us all.

correa.jpg


Not a chance in hell.

Unless you've been to these countries, you have no idea of how enormous the gap actually is.

I guess what I'm asking is that is there room for two spheres of immense economic power, or do most people subscribe to World Systems Theory here?
 
Reagan wasn't too liked by the Black community. He did worse with Black voters in 1984 than in 1980.

True but Elder's point is that black people did "better" under Reagan. Black unemployment was certainly lower under Reagan than Obama, but I'd imagine it was also lower under JFK and Eisenhower, and would anyone say black people were "better off" then, overall?* It strikes me as a disingenuous argument from republicans even if it's true to varying degrees. Black people were also better off when Clinton was president but I'd bet that Elder would try to argue they were somehow worse off.


*I suppose you could argue black families were better off under Eisenhower and JFK than today, but Jim Crow was still in effect so...
 
So the Baton Rouge police department has an anti-gay task force:

An undercover East Baton Rouge Parish sheriff’s deputy was staking out Manchac Park about 10 a.m. one day this month when a slow-moving sedan pulling into the parking lot caught his attention. The deputy parked alongside the 65-year-old driver and, after denying being a cop, began a casual conversation that was electronically monitored by a backup team nearby.

As the two men moved their chat to a picnic table, the deputy propositioned his target with “some drinks and some fun” back at his place, later inquiring whether the man had any condoms, according to court records. After following the deputy to a nearby apartment, the man was handcuffed and booked into Parish Prison on a single count of attempted crime against nature.

There had been no sex-for-money deal between the two. The men did not agree to have sex in the park, a public place. And the count against the man was based on a part of Louisiana’s anti-sodomy law struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court a decade ago.

The July 18 arrest is among at least a dozen cases since 2011 in which a Sheriff’s Office task force used the unenforceable law to ensnare men who merely discussed or agreed to have consensual sex with an undercover agent, an investigation by The Advocate has found.

What the fucking fuck?
 

Karakand

Member
I guess what I'm asking is that is there room for two spheres of immense economic power, or do most people subscribe to World Systems Theory here?

PoliGAF (and OT in general) is a modernization theory zone.

To answer your other question, looking at history, it's certainly possible, however the major (and well only) competitor to Western liberal capitalism is (for lack of a better term, and to disregard the differences between swathes of the planet) state capitalism, which like Marxism-Leninism in the 20th century I think there is a gravitation towards because it provides a more controlled path through primitive accumulation than liberal capitalism, not because it's a robust alternative through all stages of economic development.
 
Time-to-LGBT-slurs in the OT thread someone made was less than ten seconds, impressive even for GAF.

Ugh all around to everything.

The "lol day 1!!!1" and other gaming related bullshit when a thread is posted to the wrong section is the most annoying thing.

And yeah the "Can't wait for the tranny[sic] dlc" was absolutely abhorrent.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Only if you believe in fake scandals. I'm a little embarrassed for that site, they usually do a better job at this stuff.

Yeah, that writer in particular is usually better about this sort of thing.

It counts as lunacy that the Administration would continue to lend credence to right-wing conspiracies by acknowledging them, let alone send somebody on Fox News to talk about it.

This is the great irony of Obama actually going along with these stupid investigations.
 
Summers was the one responsible for the watered down stimulus package, btw, just one of the many innumerable fuck-ups in his career.

Seriously, look up this guy's track record. He's a colossal fuck-up in every sense of the word, and yet he keeps getting powerful positions in government over and over again. Regardless whether he "changed his ways" or not(which I don't buy for a second): shouldn't he face the consequences for all the mistakes he has already made? Why does he deserve a 9th chance to fuck things up? what happened with accountability?

If he posted a picture of his dick to some girl on the internet, his career would be over. Being one of the assholes responsible for the '08 crash, though? ah, whatever, people change

Perfect summary. Larry Summers should be in Guantanamo for all the screw ups he's responsible for. And Obama is backing this loser/idiot/asshole/scumbag????
 
Perhaps the one thing Summers has done "right" on the first try is advocating for the banks to be taken to the woodshed after that first set of executive bonuses in 2009. Of course he was shot down by the boy wonder himself, Timothy Geithner, and Obama unfortunately took that position.
 

Jooney

Member
True but Elder's point is that black people did "better" under Reagan. Black unemployment was certainly lower under Reagan than Obama, but I'd imagine it was also lower under JFK and Eisenhower, and would anyone say black people were "better off" then, overall?* It strikes me as a disingenuous argument from republicans even if it's true to varying degrees. Black people were also better off when Clinton was president but I'd bet that Elder would try to argue they were somehow worse off.


*I suppose you could argue black families were better off under Eisenhower and JFK than today, but Jim Crow was still in effect so...

Black unemployment was virtually zero under the first fifteen administrations, and the GOP are trying their best to reinstitute those policies.

too soon?
 
Glenn Beck.

But you also have to lack a moral compass.

Back at the height of Beck-mania, I tried to work on a book proposal to cash in (I have no shame). I was going to call it, "The 50 Most Outrageous Things Glenn Beck Has Said (and why he's perfectly right)." I spent a good bit of time reading and listening to him. In the end, I just couldn't go on, let alone figure out a way to argue that he was correct about any of it.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Obama agreeing to negotiate on the debt ceiling is one of the worst mistakes he's made throughout his administration. By doing so, it now allows the beltway to frame the issue as a case where both Dems and Reps are supposed to be geting concessions, instead of it being a goddamned mandatory thing that no one should be fucking with.
 
Obama agreeing to negotiate on the debt ceiling is one of the worst mistakes he's made throughout his administration. By doing so, it now allows the beltway to frame the issue as a case where both Dems and Reps are supposed to be geting concessions, instead of it being a goddamned mandatory thing that no one should be fucking with.

Yes, but it does seem like he's learned his lesson this time. I'd advise everyone to bookmark that article and be ready to email it out to people who are still confused about the issue if it does come up again in the fall.
 
I can see Obama negotiating to get rid of the sequestration cuts in this CR, but I don't think he'll negotiate over raising the debt ceiling. More and more republicans are coming out against Cruz and Lee's insanity, which should give Boehner the leeway to just bring it to the floor for a vote; democrats will ensure it passes.

Lee seems to think the CR can simply be split, so everything is paid for except Obamacare. That's not how it works.
 

Jooney

Member
The people who think both parties are the same are probably the people who think Fox News / MSNBC are the same.

See also: the embarrassing Fox News / Reza Aslan thread.
 

Jooney

Member
I can see Obama negotiating to get rid of the sequestration cuts in this CR, but I don't think he'll negotiate over raising the debt ceiling. More and more republicans are coming out against Cruz and Lee's insanity, which should give Boehner the leeway to just bring it to the floor for a vote; democrats will ensure it passes.

Lee seems to think the CR can simply be split, so everything is paid for except Obamacare. That's not how it works.

I hope Obama calls the House GOP bluff on a government shutdown over the debt ceiling / defunding ObamaCare. Let them shut it down and take the blame. It can only help the Dems in 2014.
 
I hope Obama calls the House GOP bluff on a government shutdown over the debt ceiling / defunding ObamaCare. Let them shut it down and take the blame. It can only help the Dems in 2014.
The debt ceiling ain't nothing to fuck with. Fortunately I think Cantor and Boehner ceded that when they passed a temporary extension without any strings attached.
 

Jooney

Member
The debt ceiling ain't nothing to fuck with. Fortunately I think Cantor and Boehner ceded that when they passed a temporary extension without any strings attached.

I get that, but I want Obama to not cede anything upfront and hammer the message early and often about the GOPs reckless position on the debt ceiling. Ditto for defunding ObamaCare. Paint them as the unreasonable sulks as they are. Basically a continuation of the message delivered at Knox last week.
 
The people who think both parties are the same are probably the people who think Fox News / MSNBC are the same.

See also: the embarrassing Fox News / Reza Aslan thread.

How is it not fair to say that the current state of both parties is terrible?

I would also say that both Fox news and MSNBC are terrible. Fuck talking heads. Who likes that shit?
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
I dunno, I think the "both parties are the same" people tend to be those on the far left who are unhappy about not being represented (at least on GAF),

That's true for a chunk of that group, but in my experiences I usually see that coming mostly from the libertarian set.
 
How is it not fair to say that the current state of both parties is terrible?

I would also say that both Fox news and MSNBC are terrible. Fuck talking heads. Who likes that shit?

World of difference between "both parties are terrible" and "both parties are the same."

they can both be terrible but for different reasons.
 
I don't think Fox and MSNBC are "the same" but it's pretty obvious that MSNBC is a liberal network from about 5PM to midnight. From what I understand MSNBC is just a normal news network from mornings to early afternoon, then the talking heads show up in the evening. Whereas there's a pretty blatant rightward slant on Fox all day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom