Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 04, 2016, 10:34:49 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 94
1  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Huey Long Lives!: Gov. JBE discussion thread on: February 06, 2016, 12:48:46 pm
^ Yeah, I see where you're going with that.

Its hard not to blame Barras for this mess. He stacked the committee with legislators that he knew would either have to do the people's work and support JBE or go back on their campaign promises. Its a really unfortunate and unfair situation to them, but I guess that what happens when you have hacks like Barras and Henry calling the shots. They should have respected JBE's agency more.

Its seems that our best hope, given that everything, is that the partisan Republicans on the committee end up being insincere when it comes to their Norquistian campaign promises.

Oh, its "Leger," by the way, not "Legier."

First of all, you have completely failed to understand the concept of "agency." "Agency" is necessary to have free will. Someone who has agency has moral accountability.  The same action committed by a teenager may warrant punishment while punishing a five year-old for the same offense would be completely unfair and unjust. No one has in the slightest denied JBE agency.  When you call duly elected Representatives the "people's enemies" you at least acknowledge their agency. When Gene Reynolds called duly elected Representatives "rubber stamps" for keeping their campaign promises he did not.

I have to say that your characterization that the member of the committee have to either, "...support JBE or go back on their campaign promises" is simply wrong. They have a third option, which is to do nothing at all. Then, the budget will be balanced by spending cuts. One merely has to ask which side is hurt worse? Personally, I don't think it is the Republican side. They can simply do nothing until JBE is more willing to take cutting spending seriously.
2  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Huey Long Lives!: Gov. JBE discussion thread on: February 06, 2016, 03:09:56 am
I have to take strong exception to Rep Gene Reynolds claim that, "anything coming out of the Appropriations Committee will be no more than a rubber stamp of GOP talking points."

You sound a bit more optimistic than I'd be, but I really hope you're right. Despite the committee being woefully stacked in favor of the people's enemies, hopefully they'll put their talking points and partisanship aside.

Great observation!


Again, you make the same error as Rep Reynolds. The members of the committee are as much agents as other members of the House. Their agency ought to be respected. Part of what gives human being agency is their having principles and beliefs. If a candidate stands for office by saying that X, Y and Z are his principles by which he will govern, then, I for one, think that he ought to keep his commitment to his constituents back home. When they stood for office they had position that they stated to the voters [their "talking points,"] and they aligned themselves to the perceived ideologues of certain parties [their "partisanship."] Either, they were sincere, or, they were not.

When four members of the committee stood for office on a platform of, "No new taxes, no how, no way," either they were being sincere, or, they were not. I, personally, hope they were being sincere. And, if some Democrat ran on the platform of, "no cuts, no how, no way," I, likewise, hope they were being sincere. Being honest and sincere with the voters increases the efficiency of our democracy.  Asking them to "put aside their 'talking points' and 'partisanship' is, in the last analysis, asking them to put aside their constituents. Either their constituent's vote mattered, or it didn't.

Your comment above indicates you misunderstood what I was saying. I hope the above paragraphs clear up your misunderstanding.

When JBE proposed Walt Legier as Speaker, he did so with the understanding that Legier in turn would skew that committee towards JBE's position on taxes and spending. Someone else was elected Speaker, and, that person skewed that same committee against JBE's position. That's how politics works. JBE's whole pitch for Legier was to note to individual members that you can hop on the bandwagon or else be crushed by it. More specifically, you can support Legier or be assigned to insignificant committees. Now, certain members are finding out that hopping onto that bandwagon only made sense if it won.

What I see happening in Louisiana is the JBE wants taxes to increase, and, wants Republicans to take the political hit for raising taxes. If he wants to lead, then he ought to propose a budget with specific cuts, and specific tax increases, to balance out his proposed spending increases.


3  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Huey Long Lives!: Gov. JBE discussion thread on: February 06, 2016, 12:23:07 am
If I were Barras, I'd be mad that Cameron Henry will still be essentially running the House. I'm not sure how JBE will pull the state out the mess its in if he's working with these fools:

Quote
Still, Henry’s 24-member Appropriations Committee has six Democrats . Seven of the members just joined the House, at least four of whom won election last fall on a ‘no new taxes, no way, no how’ platform.

Speaker Barras’ partisan tilt to committee leadership and assignments led state Rep. Gene Reynolds, the leader of the House Democratic minority, to quip that anything coming out the Appropriations Committee will be no more than a rubber stamp of GOP talking points.

I have to take strong exception to Rep Gene Reynolds claim that, "anything coming out of the Appropriations Committee will be no more than a rubber stamp of GOP talking points."

The basic presumption ought to be that all 105 member of House have agency. That is, they are human beings with free will whose actions are subject to moral accountability. If four members ran on a platform of,  "No new taxes, no way, no how," then they ought to strive to keep their campaign promises. If they keep their campaign promise, then, their actions exhibit integrity. To characterize acting with integrity as merely "rubber stamping GOP talking points" is profoundly denigrating those individuals as moral agents. The false, and repugnant, premise of that line of attack is that moral agency can only be achieved by agreeing with Gene Reynolds.

Louisiana has a substantial deficit. There are five basic approaches to solving it: lowering taxes while lowering spending even more, lowering spending, lowering spending while raising taxes, raising taxes, and raising spending while raising taxes even more. Jindal favored the first, while Edwards, judging by the agenda he laid out, favors the last. If some members were elected on a platform of no new taxes, I would only note that their position was ratified by the voters back home.
4  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Mississippi 2015 Megathread on: January 21, 2016, 04:41:57 pm

This is just a committee. It still needs a vote by the full house to become official.

Expected. 2 seated Democrats would clearly be "too much" for Republican-dominated legislature...

Tullos had a legitimate concern, and, it was validated. In the Senate, the Democrat was declared the winner. If "partisanship" was the driving factor, why didn't the Republicans take both seats?



Simply"saved their face" - to seat both would be too naughty. Seating only one made them look objective. In addition - an idiot Sojourner was heavily disliked by many Republicans too....

Did it ever occur to you that Sojourner lost because her case was not persuasive, while Tullos' case was?
5  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Mississippi 2015 Megathread on: January 21, 2016, 12:44:33 pm

This is just a committee. It still needs a vote by the full house to become official.

Expected. 2 seated Democrats would clearly be "too much" for Republican-dominated legislature...

Tullos had a legitimate concern, and, it was validated. In the Senate, the Democrat was declared the winner. If "partisanship" was the driving factor, why didn't the Republicans take both seats?

6  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Mississippi 2015 Megathread on: January 21, 2016, 11:27:22 am

This is just a committee. It still needs a vote by the full house to become official.

It was official:

http://www.wapt.com/news/mississippi/miss-house-declares-gop-challenger-winner-of-contested-race/37548010
7  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Mississippi 2015 Megathread on: January 21, 2016, 01:30:43 am
Tullos wins.

http://wjtv.com/2016/01/20/panel-seat-gops-tullos-in-disputed-mississippi-house-race/
8  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Huey Long Lives!: Gov. JBE discussion thread on: January 11, 2016, 03:52:44 pm
Republicans have nothing to gloat - if neccessary JBE can always use veto pen. And it will always be sustained. In addition - Vitter's camp, that wanted Henry, was defeated much more convincingly then Edwards, and Barras, as former conservative Democrat and now "moderate" (by Louisiana standards) Republican, is acceptable to him. But he could do better offering as his candidate for speaker somewhat more conservative and more rural Democrat. Gisclair, Hill, Thibaut and Danahay come to mind immediately...

Again, it isn't about the ideology of the Speaker. It is about the ability to dole out committee assignments as a system of rewards and punishments. That threat held over the head of every Republican is over.
9  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Huey Long Lives!: Gov. JBE discussion thread on: January 11, 2016, 03:10:17 pm
JBE is dealt something if a blow on his first day, as his choice for Speaker, Walt Leger, will stay as Speaker Pro Temp instead. Taylor Barras (R) will be Speaker.

I think the truth falls much closer to "humiliating defeat" or "devastating defeat" than "something of a blow."

Now, Edwards does not control who is offered what committee assignment. There goes his leverage. Edward's has argued that his train was left the station and that Republican legislators had better get on board, or face the prospect of being crushed. That train has been derailed.

Given Republican control of the House, its large majority in the Senate, and the current projected shortfall, JBE starts a bit of a caretaker.

Leger received a number of Republican votes on both ballots. I wonder what side deals they made for themselves. Hopefully, they'll serve on the committee overseeing dogcatchers, or such. Ideally, the Republicans will not be gracious in victory, and, each and every one of them will face recall, or worse.
10  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Kentucky 2015 - Predictions and Results Thread on: January 09, 2016, 01:13:44 am
Kentucky House Republican leader Jeff Hoover blurted out to a gathering of business leaders that Monday could be a "historic" day for the House.

But how??? It's too late for legislators to switch parties. The deadline was Dec. 31.

Three Democrats and 46 Republicans could elect a different Democrat.

Cryptic remarks by the Republicans hint that something might be up:

http://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article53718020.html
11  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Kentucky 2015 - Predictions and Results Thread on: January 08, 2016, 08:03:09 pm
Kentucky House Republican leader Jeff Hoover blurted out to a gathering of business leaders that Monday could be a "historic" day for the House.

But how??? It's too late for legislators to switch parties. The deadline was Dec. 31.

Three Democrats and 46 Republicans could elect a different Democrat.
12  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Kentucky 2015 - Predictions and Results Thread on: January 03, 2016, 01:48:55 pm
These party swappers are dumb as hell. They need to become independents and make their alliegence up to the highest bidder - that's the way to get maximum pork for their districts.

Which is merely a backhanded way of stating that they chose principle over expediency in switching to the Republican party.

If you think these gloryhunters are doing so out of "principle", I've got a great beachfront property in Kentucky I'd like to sell you.


Your problem is that I simply said no such thing. You did.
13  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: House: Could Trump Lead to Apocalypse for Republicans? on: December 31, 2015, 02:38:48 pm
Nominating George Herbert Walker "Read my lips, no new taxes!" Bush left the party in shambles. Not shamed by his repudiation by the American people, he leveraged his past control over the GOP apparatus to juice his boys into the nominations for Governorships in Florida, and Texas respectively. In an election where Republicans were winning in places like New York, the elder Bush boy was one of the few GOP failures that year. Because the elder Bush brother lost, daddy put his political machine behind getting George Walker Bush the GOP nomination in 2000. The Bush boy proceeded to blow it, losing all three debates very badly. He was only saved by the fact that Al Gore sighed repeatedly at his ineptitude. As President, George Walker Bush pursued neo-conservative warmongering.  Like his father before him, he squandering sky-high approval ratings from an Iraqi war. He only squeaked by to reelection when Osama Bin Laden endorsed his opponent the last week of the election. As the American people soured on our boys coming home in body bags, George Walker Bush doubled down on stupid by trying to make the 2006 midterm a referendum on neo-conservatism. The election was a disaster. The economy nearly collapsed on his watch. Between the neoconservative warmongering, and the economic mismanagement, George Walker Bush paved the way to a second consecutive electoral disaster leaving the Democrats with Presidency, a large majority in the House, and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Like his father before him, George Walker Bush almost single-handedly destroyed the Republican party.

After two Bushes have led the Republican party to near extinction, some are suggesting that the Republican party nominate a third Bush. The old cliché about the definition of insanity comes to mind. I, for one, consider the Bush family a blight on the Republican party that ought to be ripped out by the roots.

Ironically, others are suggesting that the party face disaster if they nominate someone else. Reagan left the Republican party in better shape, and bucked the historical trend and was succeeded by a Republican. Yet, all we read is fearmongering about a new Reagan.
14  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Kentucky 2015 - Predictions and Results Thread on: December 30, 2015, 03:11:37 am
These party swappers are dumb as hell. They need to become independents and make their alliegence up to the highest bidder - that's the way to get maximum pork for their districts.

Which is merely a backhanded way of stating that they chose principle over expediency in switching to the Republican party.

15  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Kentucky 2015 - Predictions and Results Thread on: December 29, 2015, 04:18:07 am
Another KY Democratic State Representative switches to the GOP. Democrats down to 50-46 in the chamber. If one more occurs the GOP has the chance to take the chamber in the special elections.

http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2015/12/28/state-rep-jim-gooch-switches-gop/77975148/

No, it is 50-48. The next switch makes it very interesting. Two Republican members are scheduled to resign on the 4th, but, they have yet to resign. What is to say they can't delay their swearing in to statewide office for a couple of days? At 49-49, an ambitious Democrat more acceptable to the Bevins could be seated 50-48. The next day the two Republicans could resign, yet the Democrats could only muster a 48-48 tie to depose the duly elected Speaker. With two more switches, the Republicans could appoint one of their own, and survive a 48-48 vote to depose.
16  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Kentucky "right-to-work" opponent switches to GOP on: December 16, 2015, 10:01:50 am
Another Democrat Representative, Tanya Pullin, has resigned to take a job offer:

http://m.dailyindependent.com/news/pullin-appointed-to-law-judge-position/article_a22cfa78-a39c-11e5-9c9e-bb13381f8faf.html?mode=jqm

One more such departure and control of the House of Representatives is potentially at stake, if the Republicans sweep all the special elections.
17  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Kentucky "right-to-work" opponent switches to GOP on: December 13, 2015, 11:56:27 pm
The gutting of the power of unions is a cornerstone of the Republican Party. Without question this is a party of brutal management of cheap labor.

In turning a blind eye to illegal immigration it could be said that the Democratic party is the other party of cheap labor.
18  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Kentucky "right-to-work" opponent switches to GOP on: December 10, 2015, 10:34:37 pm
We have the second Democrat in the House to leave:

http://mycn2.com/politics/stumbo-we-re-worried-about-the-possibility-of-more-defections

John Tilley has accepted a job in the Bevin administration.

I'm reminded of when a Democratic governor repeatedly offered sitting Republican members of the Senate state jobs in an attempt to flip the chamber. Now, the shoe is on the other foot, and, Democrats such as Stumbo are crying foul.

Here is Stumbo on Tilley taking a state job:

Quote from: Stumbo
“I think you owe to them to serve out your term in the party you were elected to serve from....”

“There will be takers, .... We’ve seen that. That’s true all throughout our society — there are those who don’t have the character. We see them everyday. I see them in the court of justice — they call them criminals.”

Here is Stumbo on Wade Hurt switching to the Democratic party in 2011:

Quote from: Stumbo
"We certainly welcome him into our party and into our caucus and we will do everything that we can to make his transition smooth."


Here is then Democratic chairman on the party switch of Milward Dedman to the Democratic party in 2007:
Quote from: Jonathan Miller

The Tide Is Turning

Dear Democratic Friends,

Today we are proud to welcome a new member to the Democratic Caucus in the Kentucky House of Representatives.

Former Republican Representative Milward Dedman of Harrodsburg today announced he will switch his party registration to Democrat, giving our House Speaker Jody Richards a total of 62 Democratic votes versus 38 Republican votes in the chamber.

I want Representative Dedman to know we are delighted to have him join the Kentucky Democratic Party. It is an exciting day for Democrats and one that signals things to come. This is just the beginning of what will be a tidal wave of new Democratic leadership across the state and, certainly, in Frankfort.

For more information about Representative Dedman's party change, please see below for the press release from the Kentucky Democratic House Caucus.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Miller

19  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: French regional election - December 6 and 13, 2015 on: December 09, 2015, 10:22:16 am
The trouble is with pan-national trends is you have to draw with incredibly broad strokes, otherwise every sentence you say will be burried under asterisks. Yes, you can daw up a General narrative comprising, among other things, the SNP, the South China Sea, Flanders, Make America Great Again, Artur Mas, Crimea, Tsipras, Panzergirl, Shinzo Abe, the Pan-Green coalition, Gerry Adams, Kurdistan, the Islamic Calpihate and how they were each prompted by certain contexts of contemporary times; but it probably won't be very useful. Even if you limit it to the various nationalists that have sprouted in the Eurozone the best you can say is "Brussels screwed up as per usual in regards to the euro and the refugee crisis, and caused an upsurge in nationalist sentiment rooting from each nation's unique tradition and character'. And even then I would be wary of drawing pan-national trends even as broad as that. It's not like upswings in nationalism and anti-immigration sentiment has been completely foreign until the last half-decade.

The last sentence merely indicates that the trend towards nationalism is older than a half-decade.

Again, either the simultaneous rise of such movements is coincidental, or it is not. If it is not coincidental, arguments that attempt to create some meta-explanation "aren't very useful" are irrelevant because the situation demands a meta-explanation however difficult formulating such an explanation is and no matter how little power such a theory has. [The trees mays be of different species, but, that doesn't mean they don't constitute a forest. A forest grows because the climatic conditions favor a forest over grasslands, or such, etc. Sure, the last explanation is rather simplistic, while an explanation of why any particular forest has hardwoods versus evergreens, or visa versa, is more complex. But, the existence of the forest necessitates an explanation as to why there is a forest.]

Suppose, some force had the ability to impose their will in the formation of a EU-type union of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Bhutan. How would such a union turn out? Meta-theories would make predictions. Since French culture is simply different than the cultures of India, Pakistan, etc., explanations for the rise of the FN would have no predictive power. I, for one, would see such a union suffering from massive internal frictions leading to nationalistic movement within the member states.


 
20  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: French regional election - December 6 and 13, 2015 on: December 09, 2015, 01:59:30 am

It is concise, to the point and accurate. Therefore not waffle. As far as I'm concerned any attempt to explain the FN that ignores its Frenchness is a waste of time.





Currently, and the recent past, there have been a  series of nationalist movements occurring through out the world. One approach would be to try to explain the nationalist movement in France in terms of its "Frenchness," the nationalist movement in Quebec in terms of its "Frenchness," The nationalist movement in Ulster according to its "Irish Catholicness, etc"


Another approach would be to note that there has been a rise of nationalist movements. And, then, ask, is the rise of such movements coincidental, or not? If you believe that they are coincidental, then explaining the rise of the FN in terms of its "Frenchness" makes some sense. If you believe that the simultaneous rise is not coincidental, then, trying to explain the FN in terms of its "Frenchness" is not only silly, it is counterproductive.

I, for one, do not believe that it is coincidental.
21  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Mississippi 2015 Megathread on: December 04, 2015, 11:33:53 am
Well, those who can't lose with dignity, appeal to partisanship. The last retreat of scoundrels, as one writer said..


As you can read here,


http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2015/11/30/house-committee-set-election/76558978/


that is what Tullos is accusing Eaton of doing. Specifically, Tullos is claiming that that after the ballots were counted, commissioners in Smith County held a secret meeting, and, counted nine previously rejected ballots. That is simply not the procedure typically used in such a close election. Typically, a public meeting is held in which it is decided whether, or not, to reconsider ballots. Then, if the decision is made to reexamine ballots, a date and place is set where the ballots can be reexamined in front of observers from both campaigns.

The process used reeked of partisanship. If the same commissioners were keen on Tullos winning, they would not have reconsidered any ballots. If that isn't a legitimate basis for an election challenge, what is the point of having election challenges? The election was so close that only one documented error could change the outcome, and, the process used in the revised initial count was highly irregular, and seemly partisan.

I would note the article explicitly notes,

Quote from: CL
Eaton said before the drawing of straws that he'd live with the results of the game of chance. But Tullos had said he likely would not accept such a loss and had filed an appeal with the state House even before the straws were drawn.

Note, that Tullos never agreed to abide by the drawing of straws, and, that he had filed a challenge before the drawing. Your "moral argument" was underpinned by assumptions that simply had no factual basis.

22  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Mississippi 2015 Megathread on: November 27, 2015, 12:22:16 pm
Bob,   f**k off (i am really tired discussing all this here))))... Are you satisfied now?))))

The basic facts are that you accused me of being a "troll" and claimed that I was arguing in bad faith ["Trolls don't care about their 'information' being correct, they care only about 'achieving their purpose'..."] I consider both accusation, which are highly personal, to be profoundly untrue. I believe what I say, and say what I believe. I strive for accuracy. And, whether you accept it or not, I believe in democracy. One of the necessary tenant of democracy is that the candidate who received the most lawfully cast votes  must be declared the winner.

After launching a personal attack,  you responded to my attempts at rebuttal by saying "f@@k off" and claiming you "don't want discuss it here." You then asked if I was "satisfied?" Why should I be satisfied?

Going back to the election,  I find it unlikely that had the clerks conducting the count had been keen on the Republican winning, I highly doubt any rejected ballots would have been reconsidered. Instead, he, or she, would have left that to a challenge. I find a process were rules are made up ad hoc depending on the partisan preferences of those doing the counting to be highly unfair. If this election isn't morally the subject of a challenge, how could anyone claim any election challenge in any circumstance is not "moral?" I simply don't see any there there in your "moral argument."
23  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Mississippi 2015 Megathread on: November 27, 2015, 03:11:49 am
^ Well, i understood situation right since your first post, and understand it now too. But - personally for ME moral side still prevails. Let's end the talk on this and see how it turns out... Thanks!

Don't bother feeding the troll.


In an update, it has been reported that one of the voters in the disputed election was the Democratic candidate's brother. He lives outside the district. Somehow, posters here have claimed that the Republican candidate has forfeited his moral right to object to voting fraud for reasons that, fundamentally, remain unspecified.

FWIW - it was the GOP's candidate's brother not the Dem.

Trolls don't care about their "information" being correct, they care only about "achieving their purpose"...

I stand correct. The truth matters, so you last statement is yet another strawman.

Correcting the record, the Democrat's objection is that the Republican's brother may have voted illegally, and that he believes the Republican majority might be unfair to him, while Republican's objection is that was that he was leading by six votes with four disputed ballots, until rejected ballots were counted.

In light of my correction, I would note that if the Republican won the draw, and the his brother was determined to have illegally voted for him, with no other error discovered, the Democrat, not the Republican, ought to have been seated. The forum is rife with rank partisan hypocrisy, but, that is not an excuse to presume that I am similarly inclined.

Further, supposing one of the Republican's votes is stricken, and one of the Democrat's vote is stricken, resulted again in a tie, the Democrat ought to be seated, because he won the draw, which is how Mississippi election law states how tied elections are to be settled.

The only "moral argument" against an election challenge would be if before the draw both the Democratic, and Republican candidates agreed to drop any potential challenges, and abide by the results of the draw. The Democrat wanted a rerun, while the Republican wanted a challenged. Any other "moral argument," including the one offered, is specious.
24  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Mississippi 2015 Megathread on: November 26, 2015, 10:20:09 am
^ Well, i understood situation right since your first post, and understand it now too. But - personally for ME moral side still prevails. Let's end the talk on this and see how it turns out... Thanks!

Don't bother feeding the troll.

In an update, it has been reported that one of the voters in the disputed election was the Democratic candidate's brother. He lives outside the district. Somehow, posters here have claimed that the Republican candidate has forfeited his moral right to object to voting fraud for reasons that, fundamentally, remain unspecified.
25  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: What Will/Would Louisiana Look Like Under A Governor Edwards? on: November 24, 2015, 01:23:32 pm
Only noted idiot BigSkyBob could suggest that Edwards should switch parties before he is even elected as a Democrat.

OT: Freedom State, of course.

Your theory has the problem that I don't suggest "Edwards switch parties" precisely because I believe that John Bel Edwards is left of center. Other have stated thing like Edwards is a "conservative Democrat" and that Vitter [certainly a conservative] and Edwards agree on most major issues. If they are right, which I do not believe, then Edwards easiest path forward to govern from the right is to switch parties. [Nor, did I suggest he switch parties today. I merely speculated about him following the example of Buddy Roemer [sp?] and switching parties after he was elected as a Democrat, assuming he is a conservative, and wants to govern as a conservative, which are two things that I simply don't believe to be true.]

'Conservative Democrat' means 'conservative for a Democrat', not 'Democrat who is A Conservative'.

I've pointed out your tendency to speak as if 'conservative' is a binary, yes-or-no, non-relative descriptor before. It's a very curious belief you have there.

And, I consider your belief to be rather odd yourself.  In general, "conservative" and "liberal" a nexus of beliefs about issues of public concern. Either "conservative" as a label refers to the former nexus or it does not.

The English language has a term for a somewhat liberal Democrat who is further to the right than a liberal Democrat: "a relatively conservative Democrat."

When you conflate, "a relatively conservative Democrat" with "an [actually] conservative Democrat" then you negate any ability to distinguish between the two [which, is probably the point to this particular abuse of the English language. "Conservative Democrat" is much easier sell than "somewhat liberal" south of the Mason Dixon line.]

OK, but nobody is going to campaign while referring to themselves "a relatively conservative Democrat" (and the media certainly won't either) because that essentially is word-vomit and sounds stupid.

Umm, "moderate" would suffice, as would "moderate Democrat." Note that "moderate Democrat" would connote a Democrat that is "moderate" on the issues. So, why shouldn't "conservative Democrat" refer to a Democrat that is conservative on the issues?

Nor, do people say "liberal Democrats" to refer to Democrats that are relatively further to the left than a generic "liberal" or a generic "Democrat."

"Conservative Democrat" is a marketing ploy akin claiming one particular model is "the sporty Yugo!," or "the fuel-efficient Hummer!"
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 94


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines