cartoon_soldier
Member
It's also worst case scenario for Dems though. If the shutdown fight can't create a bigger margin 15 days in, nobody is going to care for 2014 house races.
-
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 |OT3| 1,000 Years of Darkness and Nuclear Fallout
- Thread starter bananas
- Start date
- Status
It's also worst case scenario for Dems though. If the shutdown fight can't create a bigger margin 15 days in, nobody is going to care for 2014 house races.
We already knew that though.
I think the Obamacare website fiasco explains half of that. The other half is how mediocre and unlikeable of a carpetbagger McAuliffe is. See Coakley vs Brown followed by Warren vs Brown in Massachusetts.
edit: I didn't mean to imply that Coakley was a carpetbagger, only that she was a terrible candidate
Officerrob
Banned
Nobody is going to care about the shutdown a year later (unless we do it again). Anyone who believed that was going to resonate for that long was fooling themselves. There will be a thousand mini crises before the next election which will put the shutdown far back in the rear view mirror. People need to not fool themselves into thinking dems have a chance at the house in 2014, it's not happening.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Exactly. Especially with the economy continuing to flounder, no chance of an immigration bill passing, and the typical second term curse being in full effect. Those upcoming sequestration cuts are going to be especially bad for the economy, gutting military bases around the country. I'm all for shitcanning the Pentagon's budget, but not with a sledgehammer.
She might be too conservative for cap hill though
.Avon Barksdale
Member
Never underestimate the dumbassery of the GOP.
Randolph Freelander
Member
But what about the real polls.
To be clear, my post was about what the right wing media will do and the right wing electorate will think, which is grasp at every last straw.
Him winning possibly gets medicaid expansion in VA and stops the GOP from passing bogus voter ID laws for 2016. In the short term, it also saves the Dems from a narrative the media is eager to run with...
Initiative 522 (GMO labeling ballot measure) currently down in the return here in WA. Honestly kind of surprised, thought that was the sort of thing that would appeal to the Puget Sound demographic.
Initiative 517 (Tim Eyman's latest bullshit) is also down, which is good because fuck Tim Eyman.
Initiative 517 (Tim Eyman's latest bullshit) is also down, which is good because fuck Tim Eyman.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
No celebrating for Illinois? Well, I'll do it. Hooray!
PhoenixDark
Banned
They're still running with the narrative though. It has morphed to "why didn't Terry win by 7-16 points? Must be Obamacare."
I'm glad he won obviously, this means the state gets the Medicaid expansion. It also kills any future plans for voter ID laws.
I"m surprised too about 522, I personally don't have anything against GMOs in general, but more information is never a bad thing, and lord knows the city is filled with extremely particular eaters.
And fuck Tim Eyman, 517 also happen to be a bad ballot measure, but for real, fuck that guy.
Yeah total bullshit. 8 in 10 voters who don't like Obamacare voted for the GOPer!!! And? what exactly does that prove?
This is concerning though:
Shady...
517 is axiomatically a bad ballot measure because of Tim Eyman, I just didn't feel the need to state such : )
Alternately, it was an off year election. We all know how great the Dem turnout machine is on those. Yet Terry McAuliffe - Terry McAuliffe! - still won in formerly reliably red Virginia. I find that rather encouraging, despite the margin.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Meh I don't think the media will care that much. You can't spin a Dem pickup as a loss for Democrats.
McAuliffe's been pretty open in his support for Obama and Obamacare so whether it was enough to make a dent in his margin is up for debate, but it certainly didn't cause him to lose.
Randolph Freelander
Member
Either way, does anyone think the GOP has learned anything tonight? VA was much closer than anyone predicted. People expected the GOP to be slapped down hard, and instead, they came a couple of more voter purges away from winning.
I think this is enough for them to continue to not get any particular message except for the ones they're already repeating to themselves. Go further right, conservatism wins, oppose Obama and his agenda at every step.
I think this is enough for them to continue to not get any particular message except for the ones they're already repeating to themselves. Go further right, conservatism wins, oppose Obama and his agenda at every step.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Herring wins then. There was an error in Buchanan County that gave Obenshain 200 extra votes which hasn't been factored into the total yet.
Link
The Autumn Wind
Final vote isn't in yet.
Aaron Strife
Banned
No but Obama won the five remaining precincts by 1200+ votes.
It'll go to a recount but like I said earlier I'd rather be the guy winning on election night than not.
Black Mamba
Member
If anything, I think the polls represented that the GOP voters were too embarrassed to answer polling firms after the shutdown. The race was always meant to be close, I suppose.
None of it matters. Terry won. It has no bearing on 2014 or anything outside of the state's politics. Don't read much into it, either way, other than Virginia is not reliably red.
None of it matters. Terry won. It has no bearing on 2014 or anything outside of the state's politics. Don't read much into it, either way, other than Virginia is not reliably red.
speculawyer
Member
Why should they have expected him to win by 7 to 16 points?
Bob McDonnell won 58.6% to 41.3%. Did anyone really think that the results would swing that much in the other direction?
Link
The Autumn Wind
Now we're talking.Indeed.
Officerrob
Banned
Indeed.
There we go!!!!!
speculawyer
Member
I'm torn on these issues. On the one hand, I don't see anything wrong with GMO food. Science has not shown any safety issues and there are good things that can be done. But on the other hand . . . so what if they have to label it? Heck, it would make me more likely to buy the stuff. And if it scares some people off? . . . so what? This just means that the companies have to spend a little more time & effort to explain things to the public and show them that there is no problem with GMOs. What's the harm in the labeling? Sounds like a great way to teach people some science! And if some nutty hippie refuses to buy it, so what?
So I don't really care if they label or not as long as it is safe.
Local Seattle newspaper put it best, when in doubt, err on the side of too much information.
I'm hard pressed to think of anything in our food supply that's not a genetically modified organism. Wild caught fish, maybe? Humans have been genetically modifying their food since dawn of agriculture, almost every item on the produce aisle is the product of artificial selection of genetics and has little resemblance to its progenitors.
Black Mamba
Member
HAHAHAHAHA
Angry Fork
Member
DeBlasio's first test will be stopping the city's appeal on stop and frisk. Hope he comes through. Have reservations about his rumored pragmatism, the worst thing would be another Obama. Would be devastating to see people's optimism stolen again.
Glad that socialist alternative candidate in Seattle got a high percentage though. Hopefully the people there don't become discouraged by the loss and are willing to keep at it.
Glad that socialist alternative candidate in Seattle got a high percentage though. Hopefully the people there don't become discouraged by the loss and are willing to keep at it.
I don't buy that argument at all. I voted against 522, FWIW. I just can't be a party to GMO fear-mongering, which is what that bill is at it's core.
I think it's a shit law that at best won't accomplish anything useful and at worst will raise prices and/or reduce availability of some products.
There is actually a pretty detailed definition in that initiative -
And while I definitely think there a whole lot of unnecessary and often ignorant hysteria around GMOs, I think the solution for that is education, not hiding that information because the public is too dumb to handle the truth.
JesseEwiak
Member
Spoiler Alert: He's going to disappoint you in some way. Because he actually has to govern, not stand on the sidelines and complain.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
We used recombinant DNA and other GMO techto modify our foods in the past, it's just we didn't use efficient methods and it was through many generations.
If you want a great lecture on the history of GMO's watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPoK-9GfGmM
and her book
http://amzn.com/B002U58AU0
Like Samarecarm said, it is like labeling every type of food process used. Some of those products like Stevia sweetener process uses ethanol and methanol and is claimed to be "natural and safe" by the alternative crowd because it's not aspartame. And the metabolization of these products contain scary sounding formaldehyde, even though it's just a normal part of metabolization.
Also, vaccines are GMO's. Insulin is a GMO. Many food products are GMO's or have "unnatural" methods of processing, even organic stuff. Are we going to have to label those too because some idiots are scared of a non-existant boogeyman?
The public isn't smart when it comes to these issues because there is too much FUD coming from the alternative medicine, fad diet, blogger crowd. It's huge compared to scientists and manufacturers (like they would believe them anyway).
Science Left Behind: Feel-Good Fallacies and the Rise of the Anti-Scientific Left
Great book to read on these issues.
Again, I'm not against GMOs in general (there are some bullshit stuff that Monesto do, but it's a problem of application, not of method) I just think that the fact that some people will freak out over that is a good enough reason to withhold that information from the public.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
I don't view it as such. Does the public really care about other farming techniques?
There are much bigger issues in our food supply linked to public health and especially worker safety. It seems like a waste of time to be battling for GMO labeling.
http://scienceblogs.com/thepumphandle/2013/11/05/salmonella-crippled-workers-tortured-chickens-and-toxic-chemicals-surely-usda-is-now-ready-to-ditch-its-plan-to-modernize-poultry-inspection/
There are much bigger issues in our food supply linked to public health and especially worker safety. It seems like a waste of time to be battling for GMO labeling.
http://scienceblogs.com/thepumphandle/2013/11/05/salmonella-crippled-workers-tortured-chickens-and-toxic-chemicals-surely-usda-is-now-ready-to-ditch-its-plan-to-modernize-poultry-inspection/
Regardless, more information for the consumer in this case is a good thing.
This statistic from the Seattle Times is pretty alarming
We've been getting phone calls from the "No campaign" multiple times a day for weeks. Big business just carpet bombed the election with cash.
These are obviously ridiculous overextensions of analogy (you say so yourself) that don't map at all to GMO labelling.
Foods already carry labels like "country of origin" and "previously frozen". It is more along those lines.
And, as chichikov pointed out, there is a specific definition.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
On very rare occasions big business is right. This is one of them.
None of those carry the stigma of GMO.
None of those carry the stigma of GMO.
I know it's fun to brow-beat hysteric hippies, but explain to me exactly how big business is right here?
There has been various hysteria about calories, saturated fat, salt, msg, etc. in the past (and much of it continues). Should we not label the products' ingredients because the current consensus is that these things are OK for you, and people are too stupid to synthesize information?
Angry Fork
Member
Not being able to get $11/hr minimum wage or higher due to city council or Cuomo would be disappointing and not his fault. De Blasio never attempting to raise the minimum wage at all is something else. There's a difference, I was talking about the latter, which is what Obama did when it came to healthcare, the drug war, and going after torturers.
How did McAuliffe win by only 3 points when most polls had him ahead by double digits? His opponent was extremely conservative, this suggests had the GOP run someone less conservative he could have lost. Does it stand to reason the rollout of healthcare.gov and the law's implementation is turning a lot of voters off?
This will pay the dividends for Hillary in 2016 no doubt, but only +3 points against a Tea Party loon is still somewhat unsettling.
Also, Christie is gonna have a field day with his results. He's going to go right into the jugular of GOP leadership with: "I can win moderates. I can win women. I can make progress with Latinos. I can, for a GOP candidate, make notable gains with African Americans in a blue state. None of you other people can do that." CNN was basically fapping to this talking point all night, but it is true.
This will pay the dividends for Hillary in 2016 no doubt, but only +3 points against a Tea Party loon is still somewhat unsettling.
Also, Christie is gonna have a field day with his results. He's going to go right into the jugular of GOP leadership with: "I can win moderates. I can win women. I can make progress with Latinos. I can, for a GOP candidate, make notable gains with African Americans in a blue state. None of you other people can do that." CNN was basically fapping to this talking point all night, but it is true.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
Apples to oranges. GMO label isn't telling you anything useful or informative. They already go through extensive testing (especially for allergens) and strengthening that side would be a lot better than slapping a label. It's useless. It does nothing for the consumer. Diet and ingredient labels do. It's nothing like a PKU warning label on artificial sweeteners or allergy labels.
http://www.biofortified.org/blog/example of a nice non profit GMO site. But for ever one of these informative sites you get twenty FUD sites.
Msg was another example of this type hysteria.
The point is that it does more harm than good because of the stigma associated with GMO foods. Every damn food we eat is a GMO. Watch the lecture I posted before.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/05/chris-christie-acceptance-speech_n_4175161.html
Frankly as a Democrat I find that to be pretty fucking formidable.
Democrats have to be nervous about what this means when Christie runs for President. He performed this well in a state that Obama carried by 17 points this time last year.
Frankly as a Democrat I find that to be pretty fucking formidable.
Sirpopopop
Member
Many NJ Dems are DINOs.
Especially Steve Sweeney. I hate that man, ever since I first ran into him while doing work in law school. He's so awful I would vote for Christie over him.
The South Jersey democrat political machine (as nakedly sleazy as they come) helped Christie win re-election. Rather than rail against Obama, Angry Fork should look into them. They are the type of Democrats that worry me.
They fucked over Buono hard. She's not their kind of liberal. She's not about graft and exploiting the system for monetary gain. Christie was willing to play their game though.
Especially Steve Sweeney. I hate that man, ever since I first ran into him while doing work in law school. He's so awful I would vote for Christie over him.
The South Jersey democrat political machine (as nakedly sleazy as they come) helped Christie win re-election. Rather than rail against Obama, Angry Fork should look into them. They are the type of Democrats that worry me.
They fucked over Buono hard. She's not their kind of liberal. She's not about graft and exploiting the system for monetary gain. Christie was willing to play their game though.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
Naked Capitalism Yves Smith was on Harry Shearer's show this past Sunday talking about trade agreements and JP Morgan.
http://harryshearer.com/le-shows/november-3-2013/
http://harryshearer.com/le-shows/november-3-2013/
- Status