Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 20, 2014, 03:59:21 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 239
51  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: GOP Official Says Voter ID Is To Supress Votes Of 'Lazy Blacks,' Resigns on: October 25, 2013, 12:11:51 pm
In before one of our esteemed Republicans tries to claim that this isn't actually racist, or that Democrats are still the racist party because a bunch of now-dead segregationists were Democrats. Or my personal favorite, that Jimmy Carter is a segregationist who wields a large amount of influence in the Democratic party in 2013.
52  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Odds of an anti-SSM Democrat winning a primary? Odds of a pro-SSM Republican? on: October 25, 2013, 12:08:16 pm
0% for both. Gay issues would be a deal-killer for Manchin if he decided to run for President. And that's a GOOD thing.
53  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / The South in 1980? on: October 25, 2013, 12:03:27 pm
Reagan wasn't particularly religious. He rarely prayed or went to church, and he and his wife dabbled in astrology, which is a big no-no in evangelical congregations. In spite of all of this, the Religious Right believed he was a devout Christian, which for political purposes, is what matters.
54  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Tea Party favorability/unfavorability on: October 24, 2013, 05:31:10 pm
What's the point of doing this when every state except Oklahoma will have a negative Tea Party approval? I get that you think it is interesting, but the results are predictable and we all now the Tea Party is horrible.

South Carolina and Tennessee will probably also give the Tea Party net approval, sad to say. Idaho might also.
55  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Thorough List of Employers Cutting Hours (and Jobs) Due to Obamacare on: October 24, 2013, 01:28:11 pm
LA Times says that the data shows that this idea that Obamacare is resulting in more part-times works is a myth.

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-obamacare-20131022,0,5237220.story

Whether or not Obamacare is resulting in a net-increase in part-time work isn't something I alleged (and it's hard to prove in an economy as fluid as the U.S.'s right now), but it's undisputed that there are employers cutting hours because of Obamacare.

Actually it is disputed, in that article by the LA Times and the article from the Wall Street Journal. Employers cutting hours because of Obamacare is a right wing talking point myth because we now have facts and data instead of just random anecdotes dug up by the likes of Sean Hannity.


My employer cut our hours for that reason.  It's not just some random anecdote.

You work for one of the 5% of large employers that doesn't provide health insurance?  And instead of providing it,  your employer is just going to cut everyone's hours? I'm sorry for you, but your employer sounds like a dick.

More importantly,  ytf is your employer cutting hours now to comply with a rule that doesn't go into effect for more than 14 months?  Sounds like your employer is cutting hours for his own profit and just blaming it on Obamacare.

Yeah, thiinking about it more it sounds like an excuse.

But overall hours worked haven't decreased.

LA Times says that the data shows that this idea that Obamacare is resulting in more part-times works is a myth.

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-obamacare-20131022,0,5237220.story

Whether or not Obamacare is resulting in a net-increase in part-time work isn't something I alleged (and it's hard to prove in an economy as fluid as the U.S.'s right now), but it's undisputed that there are employers cutting hours because of Obamacare.

How can you say it is "undisputed"?  I have heard this disputed endlessly.

I mean... you can dispute it, but I've given you an objective first-hand example.  If someone's going to dispute that, they're ignoring facts.

Again, why is he cutting your hours now because of a law that won't even go into effect for 14 more months? You should really ask him.

And in any case, the employer mandate should have a relatively small impact because most employers were already providing healthcare, even if not required to by law.
56  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Manchin Working On Bill To Delay Obamacare Individual Mandate on: October 23, 2013, 09:10:02 pm
A year may be too long, but a six month delay may not be such a crazy idea if they can't get this durned website working.

IIRC six months out of 12 is all you have to be enrolled for to meet the mandate, so this is already in effect.

Also, Manchin continues to be a joke Democrat who should be expelled from the caucus.  It's actually much worse to have insiders chipping away at Obamacare than outsiders.  Without the individual mandate, Obamacare falls apart like a house of cards.  Even worse, it's too late to change prices for next year, which were all calculated with the assumption that the individual mandate would be in place.

^THIS.
57  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Why are right wing morons more likely to comment on sites than left wing morons? on: October 23, 2013, 10:37:46 am
58  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Thorough List of Employers Cutting Hours (and Jobs) Due to Obamacare on: October 22, 2013, 08:52:20 am
It's interesting how a large % of the cutters are government. Virginia seems to be one of the worst offenders there.
How much of that do you think is Republican governors, state legislatures, and local officials grandstanding against Obamacare?
59  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Rubio says House GOP deserves Obama's captitulation on immigration reform on: October 21, 2013, 07:51:07 am
Rubio is irrelevant now that teabaggers have a new shining toy to play (Ted Cruz).

Yup.

Aye, Rubio himself might even get teabagged.
60  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Escaped Killers may have paid $8,000 for forged realease papers on: October 20, 2013, 06:22:28 pm

Why am I not surprised that this story happened in Florida?
61  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Could Brad Henry or Phil Bredesen win "open" Senate seats in OK/TN? on: October 20, 2013, 05:55:50 pm
Bredesen could win if his opponent Akined himself. Henry couldn't.
62  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Could Democrats achieve 4 back to back wins? on: October 20, 2013, 10:18:19 am
Basically, it is possible: long winning streaks were common historically but have been rare in more recent times. However, there have only been 56 presidential elections, which presents us with a very small number of test cases, and many of those occurred before the modern party system came into being.
63  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Ted Cruz on effort to defund Obamacare: "It was an incredible victory" on: October 18, 2013, 02:38:58 pm
64  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: KY-PPP: Grimes leads on: October 17, 2013, 10:20:32 pm
Now that you know Mitch McConnell supported
the government shutdown, I’ll ask you one
more time: If the election for US Senate next
year were today, would you vote for Democrat
Alison Lundergan Grimes or Republican Mitch
McConnell?
Alison Lundergan Grimes ............................... 47%
Mitch McConnell ............................................. 45%
Not sure .......................................................... 8%

So even after that "push," he's only down by two.

He was also down by 2 before the push, just with more undecideds:

Q1 If the candidates for US Senate next year were
Democrat Alison Lundergan Grimes and
Republican Mitch McConnell, who would you
vote for?

Alison Lundergan Grimes ............................... 45%
Mitch McConnell ............................................. 43%
Not sure ........................................................ 12%
65  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: So is Boehner's job really in danger? on: October 17, 2013, 10:04:18 pm
38% of people think the House will flip D in 2014....

Really?

Do you wanna bet?

Are you serious? Of course the House isn't going to flip D in 2014. Don't kid yourself.

If the Republicans pull this kind of nonsense again in February, when the election is that much closer, it just might.
66  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: mcconnell got some pork for the deal on: October 16, 2013, 10:11:04 pm
It's not like 1.5 million will break the federal budget. If that's what it takes to keep the government funded, then so be it.
67  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: So is Boehner's job really in danger? on: October 16, 2013, 10:01:05 pm
I'm in an optimistic mood tonight, so I'll vote option 5.
68  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Predict the votes on the likely Reid/McConnell CR/debt deal on: October 16, 2013, 09:17:29 pm
242 votes in favor so far.  This thing is passing.

UPDATE:

votes so far:

Dems: 185 yea, 0 nay, 17 haven't voted yet
GOP: 72 yea, 122 nay, 38 haven't voted yet


Glad to hear it's passing, but it's getting more GOP votes than I thought it would - I had figured it would get 50 tops.
69  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Christie's debate answers on climate change & hypothetical gay child on: October 16, 2013, 06:20:11 pm
Christie also reiterated on climate change “I think climate change is real and I think human activity plays a role”, though that's something he's said before.


RINO
70  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: WI-1: Sikh temple leader's son to challenge Ryan on: October 14, 2013, 09:51:01 pm
Oops, didn't mean to say it was an accident, but an indecent. Sorry Sad
Do you mean "incident"? What about "tragedy"?

ElectionsGuy probably doesn't think it was a tragedy since they're brown and all...

He already apologized. Lay off the poor guy.
71  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Senate leaders nearing a deal on: October 14, 2013, 02:47:44 pm
Political theater to satisfy the far right. That's all this ever was from the start.
72  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: is it possible that both parties become left wing over time on: October 14, 2013, 12:17:29 pm
The Republicans will have to moderate their stance on gay relationships(endorsing civil unions) and will have to endorse medical marijuana in the near future for their party platform. The Dems are in a cat bird seat for now.
The ship has sailed on Civil Unions. The debate in the 2016 and 2020 Republican primaries will be between those who want to continue to press for a federal ban on gay marriage and those who are still opposed to gay marriage but believe it should be left to the states.
73  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Politico/Harper/PPP poll: Cruz is unpopular in Virginia on: October 14, 2013, 11:58:00 am
At least in NOVA, virtually everyone knows someone who's been furloughed or who's being forced to work unpaid, and many of these are people in their 30s and 40s with kids and mortgages. Even the Republicans I know (who admittedly, are more defense types & fiscal conservatives rather than SoCons or Tea Partiers) are upset with the GOP over the shutdown.
74  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: GOP congressman: Default will be like the American Revolution! on: October 14, 2013, 11:43:37 am
Do you think, maybe, this sort of thing is an intentional aspect of the GOP's negotiation strategy

Obama: Look. All I'm asking is for a clean vote to fund the government, with no conditions. If we don't have that, we risk a government default, which would have catastrophic consequences for everyone.
Griffith: Default the government? I don't give a [Inks], I'll do it. Hold me back bro! Hold me back!!!
Boehner: Obama you better agree to this deal here, my man Griffith here is uncontrollable, I can't tell you what he's gonna do if he don't get his way

Griffith is one of 435, and Boehner has more power than anyone else in the House of representatives.

You get control of the loose cannons, or you render them innocuous even if you must cast them overboard lest you allow your own ship to sink. "I can't control the extremists in my own Party" is no excuse for fail to cut a deal with the aid of the moderates.

If John Boehner can't cut a deal with President Obama, then there might be a female Speaker of the House in January 2015. Initials NP, that is.

Boehner is a coward who has no control over his backbenchers. That's the key problem here.
75  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Why the Zell Miller transformation? on: October 12, 2013, 09:23:15 pm
It's because of politicians like Miller that people hate politics. The man is either an opportunist, a traitor or just simply insane.

Would you say the same thing about Lincoln Chaffe or Jim Jeffords? Or Miller is an admirable man for sticking to his values and principles instead of blindly following his party? What do you have to say to this?
But that's not the issue, nor even what's being discussed in this thread. Compare Zell Miller's keynote address at the 1992 Democratic Convention, in which he praised the social safety net and the Democratic presidents who built it, with his record in the Senate or any speech he gave after 2002 and you'll see the contradiction. It wasn't a matter of the party leaving him or him sticking to the principles. Either something deep within him changed or he was a con-man and an opportunist all along.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 239


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines