Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 30, 2015, 04:33:09 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 ... 160
26  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: 2018 MA Senate race on: January 07, 2015, 08:59:34 pm
Scott Brown, of course.
27  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: RIP Arch Moore on: January 07, 2015, 08:44:01 pm
He was convicted federally and never owned up to it. That's pretty sad, really.
28  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: New Congress will be sworn in today. on: January 06, 2015, 12:13:37 pm
JONI!!! JONI!!! JONI!!!
Gardner will become a senator today? Start stacking up on condoms...

The Westminster Dog Show begins today. Very unfortunate.
29  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: House Majority Whip Spoke at White Supremacists Conference on: January 06, 2015, 01:35:59 am
Thank you, Mikado.

That's the reason Black Republicans exist, to defend white Republicans who get into racial trouble. This isn't like Scalise made some comment that could be misconstrued, he spoke to an organization that would probably prefer that Congress be all white, so Love should have considered that prospect. Hardcore racists don't care if a black person has an R by their name, they don't make those sort of exceptions.

Or is it because black people are entitled to have their own opinions? Scalise appears to be a bigot. Love is profoundly mistaken to defend his apparent bigotry, which is offensive. But more offensive is the idea certain groups of people are not allowed to hold certain political views because of their un-normativity.

Let's judge people by the quality of what's coming out of their mouth, and not by what color their mouth is. Because that's sort of, you know, racist?

Let's be clear and not twist words, my point is that she is a newly elected representative that has not been sworn in yet and other than her, no newly elected representatives have stepped up to put up any sort of defense for Scalise. Do you really think that this is not a strategic maneuver on the part of the party to mitigate this problem? Mia Love defending Scalise does not make his affiliations any less racist, it just looks at if Republicans are playing a PR game here.

I did not say anything about her political views, my comment was in the content of her defense of Scalise, which seems to be more about making a political point than actually defending him.

"That's the reason Black Republicans exist, to defend white Republicans who get into racial trouble. "

That's realness and truth, this is politics and people want to pretend like games are not played. It's same concept as McCain picking Sarah Palin as his running mate thinking that it would gain him votes from women who supported Hillary in the Democratic Primary. When any party has issues with a certain group, they will play identity politics.
30  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: David Duke: I have a list of Republicans and Democrats who are white supremacist on: January 06, 2015, 01:10:21 am
Coming for Marcy Kaptur is lame, it's not like Republicans can win that district, it's a vote sink they created. This tea is weak, very weak.
31  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: House Majority Whip Spoke at White Supremacists Conference on: January 05, 2015, 11:55:08 pm
That's the reason Black Republicans exist, to defend white Republicans who get into racial trouble. This isn't like Scalise made some comment that could be misconstrued, he spoke to an organization that would probably prefer that Congress be all white, so Love should have considered that prospect. Hardcore racists don't care if a black person has an R by their name, they don't make those sort of exceptions.

Or is it because black people are entitled to have their own opinions? Scalise appears to be a bigot. Love is profoundly mistaken to defend his apparent bigotry, which is offensive. But more offensive is the idea certain groups of people are not allowed to hold certain political views because of their un-normativity.

Let's judge people by the quality of what's coming out of their mouth, and not by what color their mouth is. Because that's sort of, you know, racist?

Let's be clear and not twist words, my point is that she is a newly elected representative that has not been sworn in yet and other than her, no newly elected representatives have stepped up to put up any sort of defense for Scalise. Do you really think that this is not a strategic maneuver on the part of the party to mitigate this problem? Mia Love defending Scalise does not make his affiliations any less racist, it just looks at if Republicans are playing a PR game here.

I did not say anything about her political views, my comment was in the content of her defense of Scalise, which seems to be more about making a political point than actually defending him.

I believe a Black Democrat from Louisiana has already come to Scalise's defense, FYI.

That's politics as well, with Landreiu gone, Richmond has to find a way to get funding for his district and defending Scalise could be beneficial to that.
32  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: House Majority Whip Spoke at White Supremacists Conference on: January 05, 2015, 11:18:32 pm
That's the reason Black Republicans exist, to defend white Republicans who get into racial trouble. This isn't like Scalise made some comment that could be misconstrued, he spoke to an organization that would probably prefer that Congress be all white, so Love should have considered that prospect. Hardcore racists don't care if a black person has an R by their name, they don't make those sort of exceptions.

Or is it because black people are entitled to have their own opinions? Scalise appears to be a bigot. Love is profoundly mistaken to defend his apparent bigotry, which is offensive. But more offensive is the idea certain groups of people are not allowed to hold certain political views because of their un-normativity.

Let's judge people by the quality of what's coming out of their mouth, and not by what color their mouth is. Because that's sort of, you know, racist?

Let's be clear and not twist words, my point is that she is a newly elected representative that has not been sworn in yet and other than her, no newly elected representatives have stepped up to put up any sort of defense for Scalise. Do you really think that this is not a strategic maneuver on the part of the party to mitigate this problem? Mia Love defending Scalise does not make his affiliations any less racist, it just looks at if Republicans are playing a PR game here.

I did not say anything about her political views, my comment was in the content of her defense of Scalise, which seems to be more about making a political point than actually defending him.
33  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: NY-20: Gibson retiring on: January 05, 2015, 11:05:32 pm
Bye, Felicia.
34  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Stabenow: I'm running in 2018 on: January 05, 2015, 08:44:42 pm
They control the legislature and the congressional delegation due to gerrymandering, and only wins statewide elections because they are in midterms. When the people actually turnout to vote, the GOP loses (see recent presidential elections).
35  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: House Majority Whip Spoke at White Supremacists Conference on: January 05, 2015, 08:40:12 pm
That's the reason Black Republicans exist, to defend white Republicans who get into racial trouble. This isn't like Scalise made some comment that could be misconstrued, he spoke to an organization that would probably prefer that Congress be all white, so Love should have considered that prospect. Hardcore racists don't care if a black person has an R by their name, they don't make those sort of exceptions.
36  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Louie Gohmert running for Speaker on: January 05, 2015, 12:20:42 am
Hard conservatives always insist that they can govern best, so why not give one a chance to finally have a position of authority? Let them prove their own delusions wrong on the public stage. And going into 2016, it can't hurt Democrats to have Gohmert as a GOP leader.
37  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Madigan vs. Kirk: Blowout or not? on: January 04, 2015, 09:56:46 pm
Madigan would prevail about 56-44.
38  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Toomey vs. Sestak rematch on: January 04, 2015, 09:53:41 pm
Sestak 52-48. I think a Republican majority Senate is somewhat of a plus for him going into the campaign.
39  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Kind vs. Johnson on: January 04, 2015, 09:52:30 pm
Kind 52-47.
40  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Louie Gohmert running for Speaker on: January 04, 2015, 12:29:45 pm
Democrats seriously should troll and vote for him.
41  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Oklahoma considering banning wearing hoodies in public on: January 04, 2015, 01:37:31 am
That will never stand up in court.
42  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Sandoval vs. Reid hypothetical on: January 02, 2015, 12:42:08 pm
Winning a constitutional office big is not a guarantee of winning federally (Robin Carnahan, Alison Lundergan Grimes, etc). Assuming that Sandoval runs, Reid has a Republican lead Senate to run against and presidential turnout, which is a big plus for Reid right out of the gate.

What about ticket splitters though?

Just because Nevada could go to HRC doesn't mean that a considerable number of people couldn't vote for her AND Sandoval.

There really aren't many recent cases of a Democratic incumbent losing a seat while their nominee for President carries the state. I never said that no one will vote for Sandoval and Clinton, but it's hard to see that much crossover happening.
43  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Sandoval vs. Reid hypothetical on: January 01, 2015, 10:44:49 pm
Winning a constitutional office big is not a guarantee of winning federally (Robin Carnahan, Alison Lundergan Grimes, etc). Assuming that Sandoval runs, Reid has a Republican lead Senate to run against and presidential turnout, which is a big plus for Reid right out of the gate.
44  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Sandoval vs. Reid hypothetical on: January 01, 2015, 08:01:22 pm
Reid will win, by 4-5%.
45  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Wendy Davis vs. Carly Fiorina on: January 01, 2015, 12:00:36 am
Davis would win. Voters don't like or trust CEOs for the most part.
46  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Concealed carrier stops assault, robbery with handgun on: December 31, 2014, 05:32:25 pm
That's more the exception and not the standard.
47  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Toddler shoots mom at Idaho Walmart. on: December 30, 2014, 08:26:52 pm
At least it wasn't a stranger that was hurt.
48  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: House Majority Whip Spoke at White Supremacists Conference on: December 30, 2014, 02:09:40 pm
If a transcript pops up, this whole thing will blow up in Boehner's face big time. It's already bad enough as it, Democrats have a huge talking point now.
49  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: House Majority Whip Spoke at White Supremacists Conference on: December 30, 2014, 12:51:45 am
Duke making threats over Scalise hardly helps Scalise any. And I doubt any Democrat that associated with him would worry much about the reveal, as Louisiana Democrats have zero to lose at this point.
50  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: House Majority Whip Spoke at White Supremacists Conference on: December 29, 2014, 11:28:47 pm
12 years ago is not that long ago and Scalise was already an elected official when he spoke at that conference. He could claim ignorance, but that is never an excuse, as professionals always do their homework. His comments regarding Duke pretty much show he had an attitude that Duke's views were okay, but just needed to be presented in a more subtle, electable package.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 160


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines