• 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 |OT2| We need to be more like Disney World

Status
Not open for further replies.

benjipwns

Banned
Speaking of third parties, does anyone know what happened to them in California? Because as far as I can recall, there wasn't a single third party candidate for office on the ballot this last election.
California changed to a jungle primary.

Everyone who wanted to run regardless of party ran in the primary back in June, and the top two advanced to the general. There were a good number of House districts where Republicans were running against Republicans and Democrats against Democrats. I saw one where it was Republican vs. Constitution Party I think.

Example:

If in the primary you had say:
Ronald Reagan (R) - 30%
Bill Clinton (D) - 25%
Al Gore (D) - 20%
Ron Paul (L) - 10%
Ralph Nader (G) - 5%
Steve Jobs (I) - 5%
Hiram Johnson (R) - 5%

Then in the general you got on your ballot:
Ronald Reagan (R)
Bill Clinton (D)

If you flipped Gore and Reagan in the primary you would have got a ballot that had:
Al Gore (D)
Bill Clinton (D)
 

Diablos

Member
Why did Dems have to nominate Harry Reid for minority leader?

Time to change it up, Harry put in his time in the leadership.

Super disappointed in Democrats right now.
 

benjipwns

Banned
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are very powerful in their respective caucuses. You have to go back generations to find comparable examples. There's long been a rumor that Reid's Vegas ties had a huge hand in his rise in the party.
 

Diablos

Member
Pelosi I understand. Like I said in 2010, I wish the losses were the other way around; Pelosi is a much more respectable leader.
 

Averon

Member
Why did Dems have to nominate Harry Reid for minority leader?

Time to change it up, Harry put in his time in the leadership.

Super disappointed in Democrats right now.

If Warren half as good as liberals think she is, at least with her in a leadership position, it would force Reid and Pelosi to not immediately run away from progressive proposals and initiatives.
 

Lethe82

Banned
You just don't want to give up your titles of nobility!

Who wouldn't want a title of nobility? Titles of nobility are bad ass.

On a serious not I don't understand those who frame the desire for Canada and the US to merge to be reunification. I mean there was (more or less) a war fought over that very concept, and more often than not those who champion the concept seem to be Americans who have no consideration for, y'know, the will of the people on either side, but particularly Canadians (I would imagine would be more against the concept than Americans).
 

Diablos

Member
Man Dems are just barfing everywhere. Landrieu in particular just needs to give up. Nobody cares. She is just making herself look dumb. Maybe if she did the Keystone XL thing pre-election it would have mattered.
Obama will veto it anyway.

I don't know if Obama should sign the immigration EO so soon. Give the GOP a chance to demonstrate yet again they don't really care about governing -- this time with a majority in both chambers -- so Obama can win the optics. Wait until early next year.
 
Why did Dems have to nominate Harry Reid for minority leader?

Time to change it up, Harry put in his time in the leadership.

Super disappointed in Democrats right now.
Who wants to be in leadership? Its a shit job. Both pelosi and Reid are great at it and understand the system.

Why do you want to sack them?
I'd be in favor of you guys coming down and burning down D.C. again every once and a while if it'd make you feel better.
Just not were I live. (Well I'm not there now but will be soon)
 
Who wants to be in leadership? Its a shit job. Both pelosi and Reid are great at it and understand the system.

Why do you want to sack them?

Because change!

Ignoring the fact that Reid had to deal with his own caucus trying to save their own hide the most obstructionist GOP Senate ever and ya' know, being the first Majority Leader in history to have to get 60 voters to pass basic bills.

And also ignoring the fact that Pelosi is the one of the main reasons why health care ever passed in the first place.

But, they're olddddddddddddd!
 

benjipwns

Banned
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/13/harry-reid-obama-immigration_n_6153796.html
WASHINGTON -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said Thursday that he has urged President Barack Obama not to take any executive action on immigration until December, amid threats from Republicans that such a move could derail funding for the government.

"The president has said he's going to do the executive action -- the question is when he can do it. It's up to him," Reid told reporters on Capitol Hill. "I'd like to get the finances of this country out of the way before he does it."

Reid added that he has expressed his view to Obama, but ultimately "it's up to him."

Obama could take executive action on immigration -- potentially giving deportation relief to millions of undocumented immigrants -- as early as next week, according to reports. Republicans have said it would be a major overreach of his authority, "poisoning the well" for future immigration reform. But they have also indicated it could lead to a government shutdown, should GOP members insist that defunding the new policies be part of the must-pass funding bill.

"If the president illegally tries to grant amnesty to millions of more people, I believe Congress should use every available tool to stop that amnesty and to defend the rule of law," Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) told The Huffington Post.

Even Republicans who criticized last year's government shutdown agreed. Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), both vocal critics of the previous shutdown and co-authors of the Senate immigration bill that passed last year, warned of grave consequences of Obama were to act unilaterally.

"Why not give the new Congress six months to see if we can find a way forward?" Graham told HuffPost. "You've got a bunch of new people coming in who need to be tested about what they believe regarding immigration. Patience is a virtue in life, it's a necessity in a democracy. I just think it's ill-conceived and the public will rebel against it."

Graham added that he had appealed directly to the White House on the matter.

"I said, 'Listen, what's the downside of giving the new Congress a chance? I think most Americans will find this inappropriate and Democrats will pay a price,'" he said. "Most Americans would be for rational comprehensive immigration reform. Very few Americans are for Barack Obama going it alone."

McCain said Obama's decision to take executive action "poisons the well in more ways than one."

"If the president were serious about immigration reform, he'd say, 'It's a new Congress, new members, in both House and Senate, and I'll give them a chance to move forward on immigration reform.' He's not going to do that," McCain said. "So you have to question whether he's really serious about immigration reform or helping with the Hispanic vote in the 2016 election."

McCain also rejected the notion that Congress had forced Obama's hand by failing to act on the issue.

"There may be something happening. You should give it time in order to find that out. What's the difference between three months?" McCain said, adding that he would "absolutely" vote for a continuing resolution that defunds any executive action Obama takes on immigration.

"If he vetoes, he vetoes," McCain said. "I believe in the Constitution. He's the one who's violating the Constitution."
 
"If the president were serious about immigration reform, he'd say, 'It's a new Congress, new members, in both House and Senate, and I'll give them a chance to move forward on immigration reform.' He's not going to do that," McCain said. "So you have to question whether he's really serious about immigration reform or helping with the Hispanic vote in the 2016 election."

In response, the White House issued a letter to Senator McCain containing only three words.

"Go fuck yourself."

Senator McCain was not available to comment on the Obama administrations' latest "fuck you" to the Republican party admits their victory in retaking the Senate last week.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
And then they have to delay it until after the March 2015 debt ceiling deadline, or until they weather the storm of whatever scandal of the month they stirred up, or until they deal with the repercussions of the SCOTUS Obamacare repeal, or whatever other distractions there maybe.

Citizens are having their close friends and family deported and children are being sent into dangerous situations as we speak. How long must we make these people wait?
 
And then they have to delay it until after the March 2015 debt ceiling deadline, or until they weather the storm of whatever scandal of the month they stirred up, or until they deal with the repercussions of the SCOTUS Obamacare repeal, or whatever other distractions there maybe.

Citizens are having their close friends and family deported and children are being sent into dangerous situations as we speak. How long must we make these people wait?

forever
 

benjipwns

Banned
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/claire-mccaskill-harry-reid-opposition-112858.html
Harry Reid was elected by Senate Democrats as minority leader on Thursday but faced several “no” votes from red staters who took deep Democratic losses last week as a stamp of public disapproval in the Senate’s leadership.

Defectors included Sens. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, who faces a Republican challenger in a runoff race to keep her seat in December. McCaskill was the first Democratic senator to publicly announce her opposition to Reid; Heitkamp and Manchin had refused to say how they would vote going into the elections.

Later Thursday, aides to Virginia Sens. Tim Kaine and Mark Warner, who just narrowly won reelection, said the two had voted against Reid. An aide to Kaine said he “voted no because he believes the caucus should have had a more thorough discussion on strategy before taking a leadership vote.”
 

Diablos

Member
It isn't that he's ollllllllllllld. It's just that after eight years of being majority leader, someone else should be minority leader. His seat likely won't be safe in 2016 anyway if Sandoval runs. I also agree with Democats who think it's imporant to talk about strategy and such before blindly casting a vote for their minority leader.

Harry's best days in the Senate are now behind him; let someone else speak for the minority.

Also I wasn't "sacking" Pelosi. If you read my previous posts I said she's a great leader and I would add the House will not see a better Speaker in a long, long time.

Every time Boehner starts running his fucking mouth I really miss Speaker Pelosi.
 

Teggy

Member
Why do they have people who may not be in the Senate anymore vote for minority/majority leader? Shouldn't they wait for the new session?
 
In response, the White House issued a letter to Senator McCain containing only three words.

"Go fuck yourself."

Senator McCain was not available to comment on the Obama administrations' latest "fuck you" to the Republican party admits their victory in retaking the Senate last week.
Seriously. McCain needs to fuck off along with his girlfriend. They are saying "Mr President please give the new Congress a chance and not be a fascist." The GOP in current congress blocked everything immigration, including the senate bill. Why in the fuck would Obama trust the new congress, especially when its stacked with more Republicans? Yeah, this is another one of their tactics to screw the Immigration debate.

If GOP wants to shutdown the government or impeach Obama, go for it. Fuck GOP.
 

Cloudy

Banned
I don't know if Obama should sign the immigration EO so soon. Give the GOP a chance to demonstrate yet again they don't really care about governing -- this time with a majority in both chambers -- so Obama can win the optics. Wait until early next year.

Floating it but not signing it is dumb (taking the blowback with no achievement). This Congress or the next isn't going to pass anything that would be acceptable to him anyways
 
I'm surprised Reid said anything about it. The WH seems quite confident that they'll win a shutdown battle. I'd imagine there's a possibility that this blows up in their faces if the public outcry is large enough but I'd still take the risk. Funding the government shouldn't be played with, I think most people understand that. Especially once social security threats come into place.
 
George W. Bush Says Bill Clinton Is His 'Brother From Another Mother'
http://time.com/3584031/george-bush-bill-clinton/



You really can't make this stuff up.

Meanwhile, the reaction thread, full of frothing at the mouth as usual..
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3226648/posts
(I love the "New World Order" references. Makes me feel like I'm a high school kid again!)

Not really surprising, when the newly elected W. met with Clinton during the transition period between their administrations, I remember hearing that they immediately hit it off, and that Clinton's rapport with Bush was far better than any relationship he had developed with Al Gore after eight years.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Floating it but not signing it is dumb (taking the blowback with no achievement). This Congress or the next isn't going to pass anything that would be acceptable to him anyways

Exactly. It's possible congress will still try and use the budget to include legislation to block future executive orders like that anyway, with the knowledge that it is supposedly coming.
 

Wilsongt

Member
So Kansas is going to have an even bigger budget shortfall than predicted. Good job, Kansas. You deserve your economic disaster.
 
Can you imagine the wild parties Clinton/GWB would've thrown if they'd known each other in college? Coke and BJ's for everybody!

VMOW4wc.jpg


So Kansas is going to have an even bigger budget shortfall than predicted. Good job, Kansas. You deserve your economic disaster.

I really don't get this thinking. How is it different than the GOP wishing economic failure for Obama?
 
Kansas was dumb enough/apathetic enough to vote this clown back in.
Ok and? wishing ill on them?

Again how is it different between the GOP cheering economic destruction to hurt Obama? Besides your politics?

"those idiots were stupid enough to vote that clown back in too!"
 

FiggyCal

Banned
So Kansas is going to have an even bigger budget shortfall than predicted. Good job, Kansas. You deserve your economic disaster.

It's a really interesting experiment and I find myself constantly looking it up. But it isn't surprising at all. Just intuitively -- lower taxes = less revenue. I still see people making the argument that if businesses paid lower taxes, they'd have more money to hire people they don't need.

Ok and? wishing ill on them?

Again how is it different between the GOP cheering economic destruction to hurt Obama? Besides your politics?

"those idiots were stupid enough to vote that clown back in too!"

His policies weren't ever going to work. It's unfortunate they were ever put in place in the first place, but they were. The state is hurting. And they still chose more of it. At least now, they can learn from their mistakes. And to be clear, the republicans are doing their best to sabotage Obama's presidency and the economy. The democrats have absolutely nothing to do with what's going on in Kansas. It is all them.
 
Democrats don't seem to get that their base doesn't show up because their base is hurting the absolute most right now. Unemployment is still at astronomical levels amongst young people, it's still double digits amongst blacks, it's near double digits for Hispanics, etc. Single white women are also hurting.

You can't win like that when you're the party in control. A lot of people have completely abandoned hope - which is why participation was so low in this election, and why people are giving up looking for jobs.
 

pigeon

Banned
So California, by some measures, has the highest poverty rate in the nation?

Yes, and?

edit: To clarify: are you trying to ask a question here? What question? Are you trying to draw some conclusion here? What conclusion? Do you have any specific thoughts about why California might lead "some poverty measures"? For example, California is first in the nation for number of people below the poverty line, not per capita (that is, not the rate of poverty for people in the state, but the actual number of people who are impoverished). Can you think of any reason why California might lead that particular metric?
 
I really don't get this thinking. How is it different than the GOP wishing economic failure for Obama?

The GOP's wishing for economic failure for Obama is not so bad . . . what was bad was their apparent intentional actions trying to cause economic failure. Stopping every minimum wage hike, stopping every public works program, stopping all unemployment extensions, etc.

Now they can try to say 'we are just doing that to reduce deficits' . . . but they had no problem with massively bloating the deficit when it meant tax-cuts to rich people, pointless wars, AND EVEN A BUSH STIMULUS PACKAGE. But when Obama tried to do things to stimulate the economy . . . NOTHING . . . no cooperation at all. No fiscal stimulus at all . . . everything had to be done with monetary policy.
 

ivysaur12

Banned
Excellent. I've been waiting and checking for the past two days, hoping it'd be done ASAP.

We are a go. I need to start saving PTO for June. That's gonna be a doozy of a week.

I was wrong, TN is an out of state recognition case.

Michigan was the only state in the 6th that had a full marriage recognition case. That should be filed today or Monday.

Either way, it'll all be ready for the December 5th conference.

EDIT: Wrong again, Kentucky is also full marriage. But the TN brief is shitty and doesn't really deal with their case at hand.
 

ivysaur12

Banned
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/senate-races/224213-report-duckworth-interested-open-and-curious-about-senate-run#.VGaF_jlPIRY.twitter

Tammy Duckworth's gonna run, y'all

Lol politics:

Democrats have long been intrigued by her profile. The Iraq War veteran lost both her legs in a helicopter crash, and strategists privately say her story of overcoming adversity would help them cut into the goodwill Kirk has in the state following his recovery from a serious stroke in early 2012.
 
Motherjones on how Franken won.

Across the country, other Democratic Senate candidates distanced themselves from President Obama and the Democratic Party platform. Mark Warner, who squeaked by in Virginia, preferred to talk about how he'd tweak the Affordable Care Act than his vote for the bill, while arguing that he hasn't actually voted with President Obama all that often. Mark Udall in Colorado decided he didn't want to be seen with Obama. Challenger Alison Lundergan Grimes in Kentucky wouldn't even say if she voted for Obama in 2012—after serving as one of his delegates to the national convention.

Franken took the opposite approach. Instead of running away from the progressive accomplishments of the Obama era, he embraced them, railing against bankers, advocating for student loan reform—even defending the Affordable Care Act. Franken ran as an Elizabeth Warren-style Democrat, running a populist campaign that didn't shirk discussion of the specific policies Democrats could pursue to help the middle class. And voters rewarded him.

Comments are somewhat amusing, with a guy suggesting a Franken/Warren ticket. #believe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom