Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 02, 2014, 04:07:02 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 529
1  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Which U.S. President do you most closely identify with? on: September 01, 2014, 03:58:48 pm
The bizarre nostalgia for Bush 41 is pretty strange. His policies in office were basically Reagan-lite. And he was a shameless political opportunist who pandered to hard-line right-wingers and racists to get elected (Willie Horton, anyone??) even though it was transparently obvious that he was not a right-wing ideologue himself (unlike Reagan). He was so indifferent to domestic economic woes that a political catchphrase was coined for him ("It's the economy, stupid!") And his foreign policy is way overrated, particularly by Very Serious People.

Finally, no President named George Bush should ever be thought of as an example of someone who practiced "good governance." The fact that George Bush the Elder was somewhat less bad as President than his son doesn't negate this.


Well you know, on the Atlas Forum a "Moderate" Republican is an Ivy League educated white protestant from New England who speaks in a soft voice while wearing polo shirts and khakis.  So yes, this doesn't surprise me.
2  General Discussion / Alternative History / Re: Westman, Part II: The Rising on: September 01, 2014, 03:36:19 pm
Montpelier, Vermont
Governor's Office:

Jim Jeffords:
Why are we even spending money on this race?
Adviser Kevin LePage: Well sir, not many people buy your line about not supporting the Defend America Act.  Lawrence's team is doing a hell of a job convincing people that it is merely "triangulation" on your part to win the primary.
Jeffords: It's that Westman, isn't it?
LePage: Well, there are certainly a variety of actors working against you to be fair, but yes.
Jeffords: What with his regional tour?  The audacity of that cretin is astounding!  He just wants to discredit progressive Republicanism so that his party can take over!
LePage: This is a progressive ticket?  Could have fooled me sir with all your talk about balanced budgets.  We are not that different from Coventry, other than that mad fool wants to cut all pork and wants to surrender to the terrorists.
Jeffords: Yes, Coventry would be a lot easier to defeat than us, don't you think?
LePage: Well, he once railed against an agricultural bill on the grounds that it was "blatant agrarianism".  So that might work to our advantage if we can somehow turn the elitist label against him.  If Major Derricks does survive the Democratic Primary, he'll be at a massive disadvantage, having signed on the DAA and several other controversial pieces of legislation.
Jeffords: But what if Layton wins?
LePage laughs.
LePage: Oh come on sir!  The man is a mad dog socialist and outright Westman supporter!  No way he would ever win a statewide election in Vermont!
Jeffords: True, but there was a time when we thought that the state would never elect a Democrat to a statewide office.  Now look where we're at!  Now that madman is in Burlington, campaigning full time to stir up class warfare!  We don't need that in this state damn it!
LePage: Like I said, Layton's chances are nil.  He's slightly to the right of Robert Maguire, for crying out loud!
Jeffords: Oh yes, at least this isn't Maine.  I'm surprised that Kilkenny even attempted that land tax business.  Radicals the lot of them.  If only one of them were running for President.
LePage is oddly quiet.
Jeffords: What?!
LePage, who had been looking at all the internal polling for the past few weeks, knew that it was hopeless.  He knew that the Governor would more than likely firing him if he suggested the kind of policy positioning that would guarantee him re-election.  While "official" polls showed that Jeffords was polling at 55% and that Coventry was at 39%, he knew that in the months to come that those "undecided" votes would ultimately trend towards Coventry as civil liberty issues came to the forefront.  While the Governor did say he would not have voted for the Defend America Act, many Republicans were very cynical given his recent record on gun rights and drugs, positions that he have taken that were offensive enough to get rebuked by the ACLU on.  Vermont Republicanism was a very tricky thing, given that primary candidates had to find a right balance between affluent well-off "WASPs" and small town Yankees (a very odd lot indeed) to get victory.
Of course, things were much harder for Vermont Democrats (where do I even begin), due to the incredible party disorganization (due to never winning) as well as having to rely on very cynical coalition of urban laborers, ethnic Catholics, Jews, and other minorities to show up to the voting booth on election day.
He pitied Jack Layton, he was sacred of Lawrence Coventry.
LePage: Nothing sir.  Just a little hot in here.
Jeffords: Well then go outside.  It's March in Vermont, you should cool down pretty quickly.
LePage opens the door and goes outside, pulling out a pack of cigarettes.
LePage: These things will f***ing kill me someday.
Jeffords: Did you just say what I think you just said!?
LePage: I said this is a really nice breeze!
Jeffords: Okay!  Because it sounded like you just said the F-word!
LePage: (under his breath) oh blow me.
Jeffords: What!?
LePage: I said it looks like there won't be any snow.
3  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Opinion of /r/theFappening on: September 01, 2014, 02:44:55 pm
Good lord, are we still talking about reddit?
4  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: The Good Post Gallery II on: September 01, 2014, 10:03:26 am
WASP is a term that confers class status, political identity and secularism or liberal Protestantism in the United States and it's increasingly unrelated to having "ASP" descent. For instance: in 2014, Vermont dairy farmers are far more likely to have purely Yankee roots than blue blood families in Connecticut or Boston, who are increasingly likely to have some Irish or Italian or Jewish ancestry. Yet, Vermont dairy farmers are rarely described as "WASPs" while CEOs, CFOs and corporate lawyers will oftentimes be described as WASPs even if they have a non-WASP last name.

William F. Buckley is the modern symbol of WASPs and he's an Irish Catholic. George Wallace is portrayed as the enemy of WASPs by the history books and he is an unspoiled WASP.
5  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of Minutemen groups on: September 01, 2014, 09:51:06 am
Well-intentioned but nonetheless horrible groups. They do not seem to understand the situation or what it will take to change patterns in human migration.

Well-intentioned?  How!?
6  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: 1840 Presidential Election on: September 01, 2014, 09:50:14 am
Then probably a very reluctant vote for Martin Van Buren.  Now?  Definitely Liberty vote.
7  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Opinion of IceSpear on: September 01, 2014, 06:29:25 am
FF (just to piss of Snowstalker)
8  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Flo's sig on Gay Black Republican on: September 01, 2014, 06:24:24 am
Is this a joke? Does the band consist of a gay black Republican? I wonder what percent of gay blacks are Republican...gotta be under 5%.

They look like a hardcore punk band or something. . . . . so I'm lean yes on this.
9  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Should people with disabilities who are unable to attain orgasm, be allowed to.. on: August 31, 2014, 06:27:15 pm

10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Liz Warren shocks everyone who doesn't know her foreign policy. on: August 31, 2014, 03:38:52 pm
This doesn't surprise me at all. She's an American politician, with presumably high ambitions - supporting Israel strongly is the only logical thing for her to do (no matter here personal views, which of course may well be very pro-Israeli as well).

What does surprise me is the fact that she was a Republican as late as 1996, according to the article. Warren was near 50 at the time, so it's hardly some "youthful mistake" either. It's funny though how she uses that old tired (and generally untrue) clichť of "I didn't leave the party, the party left me" (paraphrasing her, of course). A strange choice for Hero of the True Leftists.
I don't know where you got this from... in her memoir she makes it very clear that she switched from because she did research on the causes of bankruptcies and figured out the Republican excuse of irresponsible spending sprees to be BS. Also, I think (though I'm not sure) her family was ancestrally Republican.

Also, True Leftists universally despise Warren

Wait, aren't True Leftists her fanbase?

Well, "activists" are her fanbase.  I bet if you asked TNF, SWE, or Sagestalker their opinion of her it probably won't be as glowing of an endorsement as you would figure.

If she left the GOP in 19freaking96 because she thought it was too pro-Wall Street she certainly isn't as bright as her degrees would imply.  Not saying the Dems were/are more so, but that the GOP being the Party of Big Business goes back a lot freaking further than Newt Gingrich and Ronnie Reagan, unlike what a few retards on this forum like to believe.
11  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: You have to get rid of one of the amendments to the Constitution - which one? on: August 30, 2014, 02:59:41 pm
I would like to get rid of them all, but if forced to choose probably the tenth.  I don't believe in governance, and I believe that getting rid of the tenth would be the easiest way to speed that process up.

The 2nd Amendment would be my second choice, but for far different reasons than the bourgeois class on here have for wanting to be rid of it.
12  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: You have to get rid of one of the amendments to the Constitution - which one? on: August 30, 2014, 02:56:50 pm
What's up with all the liberals choosing the 2nd over the 10th?  

Why can't liberals support federalism?

Because the 10th Amendment has been far too broadly and vaguely worded and has been used to support all sorts of reactionary state policies.

This critique applies to large sections of the Constitution. But "get rid of" is not the same as replacing, rewording, or taking a different interpretation. I don't support the "right to bear arms" at all - and I think that the belief in said right has caused our country and it's people a great deal of harm - so if the question is about eliminating an amendment entirely, the Second Amendment is any easy choice.

Yes, if only we applied to the violent arm of the government too, the fascists you probably condemned in another thread for their brutish savage tactics in Ferguson.
13  General Discussion / Alternative History / Re: Westman, Part II: The Rising on: August 30, 2014, 12:10:33 pm
Presently
Outside the Vermont Hall of Hibernia:


Brisco: So Scott, what is the agenda today.
Westman laughs as he pulls out a Kamel Red and lights it with a match he had.
Westman: I want to accomplish something here today Desmond.  Something many think cannot be done.
Brisco looks exhausted.  The poor old man (he turned 84 a few days ago) had been in the midst of a very bitter Civil War with pro-business Republicans back home in Billings.  And now, he came up on request of Scott Westman for some purpose.  He knew that Westman strongly opposed Major Derricks, the incumbent Democratic Senator, and went as far as to tour Vermont to make sure he didn't win the nod.
So far it made some sense he guess.  His campaign start in the Irish neighborhoods of Burlington, the state's largest city, made very good political sense as that group had been by far the largest growing demographic in the state in the 60's-80's in the midst of the Great Troubles.  Further, there was a bit of a strong backlash among the working class and unions among them in regards to the DAA.. . . . especially given the amount of enforcement that was used against largely first generation immigrant unions and the like.
However, Westman's attempt to play ethnic warfare might come to bite him in the ass surely.  Now yes, it was common sense to get high levels of support from the Irish Catholic community in a New England Democratic primary.  Especially in Rhode Island, Massachusetts, or even New Hampshire that was practically the only way a candidate could win a Democratic primary. . . . . but in Vermont?  In maple syrup land?  Even after the high levels of immigration from the East Coast Derricks could still overwhelm Layton's support among the Irish by drawing independent and moderate support from crossover Republicans (Vermont is infamously known as an "Open Primary" state where anybody can cast votes for both the Democratic and Republican candidates on the primary ballot, something that helped Derricks win the primary in 1982 over a little known labor foreman named Paul Levesque) and non-affiliateds.
And assuming that Westman's gambit bid or whatever the hell you want to call it did work, he manages to get Jack Layton elected off of record high turnout among many first generation immigrants who probably have never even bothered to vote combined with some strong anti-establishment Democratic support, how the hell is Jack Layton supposed to be helped by being known as "Westman's man" against whoever the Vermont GOP nominates?  Vermont is a diehard Republican state, has been since the dawn of time almost.
Scott must be either insane or a genius if he thinks he can overthrow nearly a century and a half of one party rule with the exception of Governor Chris Garrett (who only got elected to two two year terms, the first he won by a mere plurality and the second he won barely a majority in a Democratic wave year) and Senator Major Derricks (who only got elected with 37% of the vote due to a bad Civil War between conservatives and moderates in the GOP).  As far as Desmond could tell, with the inevitable doom of the Constitution and Conservative parties coming as more and more conservatives and others drift to the Republican Party (the conservative third party movement was widely successful mainly due to support for Phil Crane early on as the only halfway competent candidate in 1980 and the nomination of a crazy pills man by the GOP in 1980), whoever the Democrats in Vermont were would be Prime Rib Roast this year.
However, don't tell that to Scott Westman who thinks he can somehow convince old school Yankee Republicans to drop their cultural allegiances (that are as air tight as his are to the Democrats) and ally them with the Irish Democratic working class to somehow get an electoral majority in Vermont.
Yes, that is literally what he thinks, based on the discussion we had earlier at lunch.
Brisco laughs.
Brisco: You really think this will work?
Westman: Umm yep.  Why not?
Brisco: Scott, these people are Republicans.
Westman: Yeah, so was my grandfather.  He was Chinese or some sh*t.  I can never really tell, I just know that eggdrop soup gave me the sh*ts.
Brisco: Yeah, and I'm sure the first thing people think of when they think Scott Westman is "harmless friendly Asian American fellow I'd really like to vote for!"
Westman: Will you shut the hell up about the sarcasm?  We need to cement our support behind Democratic voters-
Brisco:-you mean "Irish voters", don't you?
Westman facepalms.
Westman: Friend, you don't understand the concept as well as you think you do!
Brisco: No I understand it pretty damn well my friend!  You are going Curley 2.0 on these people and you expect to be taken seriously by Yankee Republicans!?
Westman puffs out some smoke.
Westman: You know it's just f***in hilarious.  You called me a damn stereotypist for about a decade now. . . . and you are pulling this old tired canard about how New England Republicans are all elitist snobs who will never vote for an Irishman?!  Amazing!
Brisco: Bullsh*t Westman!  Bullsh*t!  I'm just saying that culturally they are-
Westman:-world's apart?  But both groups have large numbers who have hearts broken in two over the economic calamity of this decade.  Yankee farmers cannot produce crop due to destabilizing crop prices.  Small town WASP towns are running out of money due to their jobs going to Big Business and Big Corporations in other states.  For far too long people have preached that the struggles of the poor Englishman and the poor Irishman are different.  They are not.  They are one in the same.  You of all people should know this.
Brisco threw up his hands.
Brisco: My apologies.  But surely you don't expect this old brittle man to deliver a speech or anything do ya?
Westman smirks.
Westman: No, just sit behind me as I ascend to the podium and give one of the greatest speeches of all time.
Brisco laughs.
Westman: What?
Brisco: You're so full of sh*t, you know that right?
Westman chuckles.
Westman: Maybe, but at least it doesn't hang too much to the right.
14  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: Democratic-Republican Party Convention, August 2014 on: August 30, 2014, 11:02:45 am
Aye, though with reservations on the first paragraph under "Economic and Social Freedoms" and the bit about "user fees".
15  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Opinion of Ernest on: August 30, 2014, 10:36:15 am
Meh, I guess auto-HP because he's a moderator and a fascist.  THough I think he is pullin some of your legs more like.
16  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Would George Wallace have signed the Civil Rights Act? on: August 30, 2014, 10:33:48 am
Face it, your hero LBJ was just as much of a racist scumbag who only changed his position on things like the economy and Civil Rights because he was doomed without the Kennedy Coalition.

But who cares why people do good things?

My main point is more of a criticism of the accepted "Great Man" meme that many seem to buy into more than anything.
17  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Would George Wallace have signed the Civil Rights Act? on: August 30, 2014, 09:59:18 am
Perhaps, as he only supported racist policies because it was politically convenient. That said, I find a hard time imagining a situation where signing it wouldn't backfire on a theoretical President Wallace who was most likely elected because of the south.

I find it funny how everyone ignores the first fact you mentioned.  George Wallace lost his first major race because he had the support of the NAACP and was seen as "too liberal".  He was LBJ if LBJ had an Alabama residence instead of a Texas one.  The man was worse than a genuine racist in my opinion.  He was a principleless hack, much like our real life 36th President of the US.

Thus why I believe he would be more inclined to sign off on Civil Rights legislation in 1964 when opposing so as the US President would be political suicide (as the TNF quote showed).  Events up to that point had reached a point to where any support for Jim Crow on the national level would doom any president, regardless if they are Democratic or Republican.  The point where they started firehosing protestors and other sh*t is when it became unacceptable to the vast majority of Americans, which was before the 1964 election.

Maybe saying he would sign off on it if elected in 1960 was a stretch (given that a President Wallace in 1960 could result in some butterflies that impact the progress of the Civil Rights movement), but I think it's hard to see the man he actually was (as opposed to his public perception, which was more a result of events that took place while he was a state/local Alabama politician and not a national one)) opposing it just to please some old homeboys in Alabama who might not have liked him in the first place at the cost of any hope of being re-elected.  Especially if he was the VP of Kennedy or some other Northern Democrat.

Face it, your hero LBJ was just as much of a racist scumbag who only changed his position on things like the economy and Civil Rights because he was doomed without the Kennedy Coalition.

Really, you guys could use a class in psychology.  Here is a relevant video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97xN3yQH5zw
18  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: The Simple Truths Silver Mine on: August 30, 2014, 09:40:49 am
Of course he'd say this. He's in the same tradition as isolationists such as Abraham Lincoln, William McKinley, Charles Lindbergh and Bob Taft, before the Cold War made conservatives into temporary internationalists.
...what?

It's remarkable how their statures keep dropping, isn't it? Like the reverse evolutionary chart...
I'm not sure what you mean. Are you trying to make a joke? You don't really think William McKinley was an isolationist, do you?

Why not? He said he hated war, and the only one he was involved in during his presidency, he had to be dragged into by yellow journalists. The progressive Teddy Roosevelt is the one who lived and breathed the war.

"Less eager to start a war than Teddy Roosevelt" might include everyone not named Teddy Roosevelt.
19  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: 1860 Presidential Election on: August 30, 2014, 09:20:47 am
Lincoln then, Lincoln now.

I must say that I find it incredible that out of the many libertarian critiques of Lincoln's handling of the Civil War I've seen on here almost none of them mention the extremely classist draft that was implemented.  To my mind that seems about the only real moral failing of the Union North, though the Confederate South obviously did the same thing with a lot more horrendous side flavors to choose from.  Rather, we hear about "those poor northern newspaper owners!" and how the protectionist trade policy of the North was "just too mean for producers man!"

Says a lot about what they think about class.

EDIT: I predict that SPC is probably going to have a post up about how protectionism is evil.  Yes I agree, it's incredibly evil and was used more oft than not to impoverish the working class for the gains of the robber barons who robbed them.  However, that is besides the point in regards to the Civil War.  Hell, I would argue that the Slave Economy was by it's nature a protectionist economy, given that it effectively kept millions of poor farmers in extreme poverty by it's advantage of free farm/crop labor.
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Nobody noticed, but Hillary Clinton made the boldest comments on Ferguson/race on: August 30, 2014, 07:48:05 am
Her statements are very true, though I wonder what she has to say about the War on Drugs now days.  Given that's basically the New Jim Crow and is responsible for a lot of those "one third" arrests, hearing a concession or two on how well that's gone if not even a retraction of support would go a long way (which also ties into the whole militarization of the police debate).

But of course, Obama said similar things back in 2008.
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Past Election What-ifs (US) / Re: 1984: Reagan vs Glenn on: August 30, 2014, 07:35:42 am
The fact that Glenn did so poorly in the primaries doesn't help his general election argument. He probably would've done even worse than Mondale did, maybe even lost all 50 states.

I'm not sure if he would do quite that bad, but yes I don't see how he dramatically improves the map for Democrats.  Minnesota probably goes Republican under this scenario and Ohio is too much of a swing state for me to see the Homeboy AdvantageTM being very effective when the national environment favored Reagan as much as it did ("Morning in America" worked so well for a reason).

But really, the main point here is that John Glenn was just BORING as a candidate.  I mean the guy was an ASTRONAUT, not an actor.  His life's dream was to go to the stars, not giving wit laden speeches and being in picture perfect pose whenever the cameras were around.  Amusingly enough, NASA psychologists determined in the early 60's that Glenn, as stiff as his speaking style was, would be the astronaut best suited for public life.  He made his first Primary attempt in 1964 when he resigned to run against the incumbent before he slipped on his bathroom floor or some sh*t and hit his head on the bathtub and suffered a concussion.  When he again ran in 1970 he was defeated in that primary by Howard freakin' Metzenbaum, who he would face four years later in 1974 after the man was appointed by the incumbent Governor to fill a vacancy.  It was only when Metzenbaum provided Glenn a massive opening to attack him as an unpatriotic SOB that Glenn was able to destroy him.  And even in his "moment" Glenn is too calm and too stiff.
Mondale was at least capable of being excitable occasionally.

I mean, that is not to say that Glenn couldn't motivate people, he most certainly could.  He seems like he's the kind of guy you could have a drink with and that probably helped him a lot in Ohio.  However nationally, I don't see it helping that much against Reagan, who was both a drinking man's president and a made for tv one.
22  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: The Simple Truths Silver Mine on: August 29, 2014, 05:51:11 pm
I think both parties are pretty diverse in this sense, but there tends to be a lot more public infighting on the Republican side than on the Democratic side.

It's sort of like two dysfunctional families. The Democrats are the family that merely tolerate each other out of common self interest or obligation, but have little to no connection and rarely communicate with each other, and just try to push their agenda behind the scenes, even if it hurts another member in the coalition. On the other hand, the Republicans are like the family that you see screaming at and beating their child in public for having a temper tantrum (or in the case of real life, shutting down the government). This only further fans the flames of the rivalry.
23  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: What would you spend $42 000 from your piggy-bank on? on: August 29, 2014, 09:20:01 am
I'd put it in my savings account (assuming it was $42,000 after taxes, otherwise I'd obviously pay the taxes on it first).
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: How did Carter lose OK? on: August 29, 2014, 07:17:57 am
Are you seriously asking? Oklahoma was a solid-R state ever since 1952. It's already an impressive feat for Carter to come so close.

And yet party ID suggested otherwise until very recently.

Further proof that party ID is meaningless in predicting presidential vote. By 1976, Oklahoma had voted only once for a Democratic presidential candidate over the previous 25 years (and it was during LBJ's landslide). In the two close elections of that period, Kennedy and Humphrey both lost massively.

Yeah, I think a lot of people are underestimating how much influence things like the oil and gas industry are to Oklahoma voters, both Democrats and Republicans.  Practically every Democrat that Oklahoma elected since statehood was pretty supportive of the state's biggest industry, something that would go a long way in soothing the fears of enough OKC and Tulsa voters to win elections that national Democrats struggled with.  On the presidential level the story was much different, as the GOP candidate was almost always guaranteed to win at least 60% of the vote in Tulsa County (once known as "the Oil Capital of the world") and Oklahoma County was at least "likely" Republican barring a Dem landslide.  In fact I would argue that Ford's victory in Oklahoma in 1976 was due to his overperformance in the state's two largest cities (he beat Carter by landslide margins in Tulsa and by 15% in Oklahoma County).  That Carter got so close is more testament to his "good old humble pie boy" persona as well as his perceived "moderatism" compared to previous opponents.  His views on energy certainly could not have helped him.  Arguably, the case can also be made that Gerald Ford was a bad candidate for "Little Dixie", given that he was and still is seen as a more moderate Republican who could've been perceived as "urbane" by country voters.  He also made a few dumb comments about the Cold War, which wouldn't go well with many of the hawkish types in the state.

1976 is one of the elections that makes analyzing Oklahoma politics fun.
25  Forum Community / Forum Community Election Match-ups / Re: seatown vs Duke lacrosse case on: August 27, 2014, 12:36:41 pm
seatown/seatown

I prefer metaphorical rape over literal rape.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 529


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines