• 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 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Dinesh D'Souza... M. Night Shyamalan...what is up with this shitty Indian-American film maker phenomenon?
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
While we were distracted with all that news yesterday, it appears we missed that a judge ruled Florida's gerrymandering illegal. Florida currently has 17 republicans and 10 democrats representing them in the house.

That could equal 3 or 4 seats out of the 17 seats that need to change to overcome the gerrymander.
 
D

Diablos

Member
thepotatoman said:
While we were distracted with all that news yesterday, it appears we missed that a judge ruled Florida's gerrymandering illegal. Florida currently has 17 republicans and 10 democrats representing them in the house.

That could equal 3 or 4 seats out of the 17 seats that need to change to overcome the gerrymander.
Click to expand...
Gerrymandering case heading to the SCOTUS? smh

APKmetsfan said:
Lol at politicos cover today there are some gems
v1Godu4.jpg

He still thinks there are ways of 'shutting it down'. And attacks dems for having Clinton speak but attack him. Lol
Click to expand...
Hope he runs again in 2018. Give McCaskill a third term.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
thepotatoman said:
While we were distracted with all that news yesterday, it appears we missed that a judge ruled Florida's gerrymandering illegal. Florida currently has 17 republicans and 10 democrats representing them in the house.

That could equal 3 or 4 seats out of the 17 seats that need to change to overcome the gerrymander.
Click to expand...

This needs to be the first thing changed to fix this country. The maps should be totally redone equally.
 
A

AndyD

aka andydumi
Plinko said:
This needs to be the first thing changed to fix this country. The maps should be totally redone equally.
Click to expand...

It's always an interesting issue. I have read of so many studies and proposals of doing it right here. How do other countries do it?
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
speculawyer said:
If Hillary wins and some old conservative Justice gives up the ghost, the GOP is going to become salty as all fuck.
Click to expand...

Yup. This'd be the first major change in the court's philosophical center that we've seen in a long time. Many people alive today have only known a Supreme Court that tilts rightward. The GOP is going to go apeshit if, say, Scalia is unable to continue his duties. Hell, he might have standing orders to his clerks that they play "Weekend At Antonin's" if there's a Democrat in the White House.

I keep on pressing this to progressives who aren't thrilled about Hillary. If she wins, the high court (and, let's face it, the judiciary as a whole) will likely have a strong leftward tilt for decades. The culture war would effectively be over.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Looks like the GOP will have to move their convention, now that LeBron is going back to Cleveland. There's no guarantee the Cavs will go to the finals but if they do there will be scheduling conflicts for the arena in June.

Holding a political convention in June is such an idiotic idea, I can't believe they even tried this. Why would you waste your convention bump so early, and tie it so close to the VP announcement (which I'd imagine would happen in May or June)?
 
S

speculawyer

Member
PhoenixDark said:
Looks like the GOP will have to move their convention, now that LeBron is going back to Cleveland. There's no guarantee the Cavs will go to the finals but if they do there will be scheduling conflicts for the arena in June.

Holding a political convention in June is such an idiotic idea, I can't believe they even tried this. Why would you waste your convention bump so early, and tie it so close to the VP announcement (which I'd imagine would happen in May or June)?
Click to expand...
Maybe this was a Game of Thrones move by King James.
 
M

Mike M

Nick N
PhoenixDark said:
Looks like the GOP will have to move their convention, now that LeBron is going back to Cleveland. There's no guarantee the Cavs will go to the finals but if they do there will be scheduling conflicts for the arena in June.

Holding a political convention in June is such an idiotic idea, I can't believe they even tried this. Why would you waste your convention bump so early, and tie it so close to the VP announcement (which I'd imagine would happen in May or June)?
Click to expand...
They want to avoid another prolonged primary season that does more harm than good.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Early convention: eliminates a long, circus-like primary.. but it sacrifices the ticket's best regularly-scheduled chance at a significant poll bump.

Late convention: preserves a chance at a poll bump.. but primary fighting could last longer, and party crazies would have access to the microphone for a longer time.

Of course, there's no guarantee that a bump in the polls even materializes. Their convention could be a dud, like last time.

..

I do wonder what it would take for them to consider saying, "screw this! We aren't getting to 269, so let's divert all of our funding and efforts to winning as many Congressional seats and governorships as possible!"
 
Metaphoreus

Metaphoreus

This is semantics, and nothing more
Metaphoreus said:
In other news:

And here's the text of the proposed amendment:

Here's what the ACLU thinks of the amendment:
Click to expand...

Following up, I'm not sure that the text I quoted is the text that was voted on by the Judiciary Committee. While the Results of Executive Business Meeting - July 10, 2014 PDF links here, which has the text as I quoted it, the comments from some of the committee members during the meeting (of course I didn't watch the whole thing) seemed to be based on this substitute resolution (which is also linked to from the EBM webpage), which says:

SECTION 1. To advance democratic self-government and political equality, and to protect the integrity of government and the electoral process, Congress and the States may regulate and set reasonable limits on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to influence elections.

SECTION 2. Congress and the States shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation, and may distinguish between natural persons and corporations or other artificial entities created by law, including by prohibiting such entities from spending money to influence elections.

SECTION 3. Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the press.
Click to expand...

Oh, and Senator Cruz had offered this amendment, which was rejected.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Metaphoreus said:
Oh, and Senator Cruz had offered this amendment, which was rejected.
Click to expand...

More Republican plagiarism.

I don't like this particular amendment. I would be in support of a constitutional amendment that itself provided for nonpartisan election reform, but I see little benefit in guaranteeing Congress the right to control election reform. That's just an incentive problem waiting to happen.

I'm not really sure what an amendment that did what I wanted would look like, though. It sounds a little bit too much like a fourth branch of government.
 
C

Crisco

Banned
Yeah, you have to consider that not all of them are totally delusional. I'm sure even in the GOP there's some smart guy near the top that tells them "uh, the party as it is will struggle to reach 200 EVs, let alone have a path to 270" and they adjust their strategy accordingly. Look at all the joke candidates that sifted through the GOP primaries last year, that's not how a party that's serious about winning behaves. I'm still not convinced Herman Cain isn't some elaborate performance art.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Metaphoreus said:
It sounds like the decision was based on the Florida Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution. If that's right, then the Florida Supreme Court will be the highest the case goes.
Click to expand...

Yeah, florida voters voted in a rule to the state constitution which said district lines can't be made for political reasons. I guess Rick Scott thought that he could get away with just saying the lines weren't drawn for political reasons, but apparently the judge disagrees.

However, I do believe there are a lot of states with "no political district drawing" laws that aren't being enforced, so maybe it could reach out to other states, but really only florida sticks out as being downright obvious about it.

The supreme court already ruled that political affiliation isn't a protected class like race is, including while drawing districts, so while you're not allowed to draw lines based on subjugating a race, you can outright admit you're subjugating a political party all you want and get away with it, unless a state law says otherwise.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
So Paul Ryan held another hearing in his War on Poverty facade. For the first time, they actually had people in poverty being questioned. The line of questing went right in the direction one would expect.

A Congressman Questioned A Woman Living In Poverty And Revealed A Lot About Himself

On Thursday, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) held his fifth hearing on the War on Poverty, and for the first time he allowed a person actually living in poverty to testify. Tianna Gaines-Turner shared her personal experiences struggling to make ends meet and provide food for her three children who suffer from medical conditions along with her husband. She works as a seasonal employee with children for $10.88 an hour, while her husband works at a grocery store for $8.50.

But when Rep. Todd Rokita (R-IN) got the chance to ask questions of Gaines-Turner and the two other witnesses, he directed much of his attention toward calling into question whether she is dependent on government programs, whether she has tried to find more work, and if she is partisan. He gave a “theoretical example” in which the government would increase spending on government programs like food stamps and welfare by 500 percent and asked, “They [people on the programs] would be out of poverty and that would be a good thing?” to which Gaines-Turner responded, “Yes, the programs work, yes it would be good to move them out of poverty.”

He followed up saying, “But the cycle of dependency would certainly still be there which you also don’t like… The cycle of dependency, you wouldn’t be independent.”

“I’m independent now on the program,” Gaines-Turner told him. “You’re independent on this?” Rokita asked.

“Yes, I consider myself to be very independent. I work just as hard as anybody in this room,” Gaines-Turner replied. “I’m very independent.”

“You’re independent, but you’re here testifying that you have to have these programs, you need these programs,” Rokita responded.

Later in his questioning, Rokita interrupted Gaines-Turner to ask her about her job. When she said that she works for six months of the year at a recreational center for children, Rokita asked, “And is that by choice so you can spend more time with your kids the other six months or have you tried to get other employment or not?” But Gainer-Turner has tried to find work. And had no success. “I’ve tried to find a lot of employment but due to health issues and things like that I haven’t been able to find adequate jobs,” she responded. As she previously told ThinkProgress, “No one wakes up in the morning and says I think I want to be in poverty today.”

He also questioned her on whether she is “partisan” because she serves as a ward leader in Philadelphia, helping people to vote, and is a Democrat.

Rokita’s questioning seemed to imply that Gaines-Turner could make more money and escape her “dependence” if she worked harder. But for many of those living in poverty, that’s just not the case. The majority of adult, able-bodied, non-elderly poor people work. But in this economy, finding extra work, or any work at all, can be nearly impossible. In May, the most recent month for which there is data, there were more than two times as many job seekers as job openings. And unemployment rates are even higher for those with less education, who also tend to have lower incomes.

Gaines-Turner is also right that the programs that her family and millions of others turn to work. Safety net programs such as food stamps, welfare, housing assistance, Social Security, and others keep millions out of poverty each year. And it’s hard to claim that the impoverished are dependent on government programs when those who receive benefits are far more frugal than those who don’t, spending more of their budgets on the necessities and less on things like eating out or entertainment.
Click to expand...
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
K

KingK

Member
Plinko said:
This exact viewpoint (The "Everybody who wants to get out of poverty can get out of poverty" view) is what is helping to push this party toward eventual irrelevancy.
Click to expand...
That viewpoint is much more commonly held than you would expect I think. The vast majority of people I know who aren't poor or have never been poor hold that opinion. I suppose eventually when over half of the population is living in poverty it will backfire on them.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Wilsongt said:
So Paul Ryan held another hearing in his War on Poverty facade. For the first time, they actually had people in poverty being questioned. The line of questing went right in the direction one would expect.

A Congressman Questioned A Woman Living In Poverty And Revealed A Lot About Himself
Click to expand...

When are they going to get that most people are dependent on getting a paycheck no matter who it comes from? Why is there a seemingly important distinction between being dependent on the government and being dependent on a employer?

If you're worried about overall productivity, just say it, but that has nothing to do with dependency. Of course once you frame it like that, then we'd have to ask for proof that there is/would be a worker shortage epidemic, but with employment and wages where they are, it's clear that's not the problem here, although I'm sure there's plenty of business owners ready to come on Fox to complain about how their one specific store in one specific town can't seem to find people willing to work a difficult job with no upward mobility for minimum wage.
 
Rhomega Beta

Rhomega Beta

Member
thepotatoman said:
When are they going to get that most people are dependent on getting a paycheck no matter who it comes from? Why is there a seemingly important distinction between being dependent on the government and being dependent on a employer?
Click to expand...

Getting money from government/taxpayers=Bad, because you're a moocher who's stealing from people who worked hard to earn that money, and they should keep every cent that's coming to them.

Getting money from employer=Good, because you're not being a moocher, and the government isn't involved.
 
L

Lucky Forward

Member
Republicans for Hillary!

khpbmezsb0zfi4ks4bhw.jpg


Woman Finds Stack Of Anti-Hillary 'Lewinsky' Bumper Stickers At GOP Office

Carole Donoghue, a retired journalist, said she found the bumper stickers at Fairfax County Republican Committee headquarters in Fairfax, Va. The bumper stickers read “Monica Lewinsky’s X-Boyfriend’s Wife for President." In small print, they included the words "Authorized By Republican Party Of Virginia."

Donoghue talked to TPM hours after a spokesperson for Republican Party of Virginia denied the state party had anything to do with the anti-Hillary bumper stickers. The spokesperson told the Washington Post that the stickers were "an amateur effort" and the state party's strategy "does not involve that."
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom