Favourite latest post by previous poster

[TDAS04]

Someone this forum seems to care deeply about, for reasons I can't comprehend.

[TDAS04]

The poll is stupid because it doesn't have an "I like her positions" option.

[TDAS04]

Do Nazi's still like Wagner?

I wonder what Hitler would say if heard Nazi metal though. Lol

[TDAS04]

Conversion therapy is dumb even for fundamentalist standards.  If you believe being gay is a sin and want to convert your child, then wouldn't that person just pray and ask the child to repent? 

[TDAS04]

Let's not be silly here guys. Bill Clinton was an incredibly popular president who presided over a huge economic boom and is still loved by many today (myself included). Bill's record will help Hillary more than it will hurt her.

[TDAS04]

Context:

Freedom Site, easily.  Sometimes, it's hard to distinguish them from real news.

[TDAS04]

Lets be real, Trump is an idiot.

385-153. In today's age, that's a gigantic landslide.

[TDAS04]

A little hard to choose from so many recent, well-thought out posts, but...

A true great, for more his promise than his achievements although many will overlook just how important his Presidency was.

His action against US steel, in Mississippi against racist mobs, against the mafia and his effort to scale back the CIA/Pentagon establishment that had grown in the 1950's meant that on domestic front he managed to achieve a great deal. His biggest problem was that congress was dominated by southern democrats who were far too rigid.

On foreign policy there's two rather ironic schools, the loudest is that he was some sort of reckless cold war warrior who was reckless. That's simply not true-his actions over Cuba were easily the best demonstration of US power for 30 years. The fact that he managed to use both soft and hard power so effectively to stop a global crisis should be praised.

Likewise his achievements in beginning Detente are clear-Khrushchev wept when he heard that JFK died, and Castro said 'they'd won' referring to the Pentagon/hard liners. The partial test ban treaty, ending the Loas civil war, the alliance for progress and his clear demand for 'an ethical' foreign policy in the 1960's show his impact on foreign policy. See his speech at the American University to see that he wasn't a cold war warrior, and apart from Reagan he was the only Cold War President who saw that you needed to work with the Russians. In 1963 he begun pushing for an opening with Cuba-the fact it took 50 years to sort it out shows how much leadership he showeed

Then his legacy/rhetoric-sadly this makes up a large part of JFK. He was the first irish catholic, him and his wife Jackie symbolized the new frontier in the 1960's and the team he established around himself was one of the smartest in the white house. He combined the best of American values in my view-the optimism and dedication to Public Service, the need for a strong moral America on the world stage and the importance of fighting poverty around the world. If we give Ike a higher score we're saying that the stale, old school teacher is better than the young, vibrant teacher that teaches us to be bold. We can't let Ike beat JFK

[TDAS04]

Context:

I was there.

[TDAS04]

It would basically be socialist or democratic socialist.

This is a hilariously awful post.

[TDAS04]

RFayette, who would he declare war on first: China or Mexico?

Probably Mexico, if he actually thinks Mexico will pay for a wall.  And the 2018 midterms, if they delivered a Democratic house, would be built on blue dogs and centrist Democrats in suburbs and rural areas, not Sanders Dems.

[TDAS04]

Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

He's basically proven guilty by now, TBH.

[TDAS04]

RADICAL CHANGES - 2000 TO 2056 ELECTORAL TIMELINE

Season 3 - The 2002 Midterm Elections

The Results are In! - Part 10

Analysis of the 2002 Midterm Elections

Overall, the results of the 2002 United States Midterm elections were great news for the Democrats, with President Gore's party doing relatively well in an election cycle generally toxic for the party of the incumbent Commander in Chief. Though the Republicans held the House with an extremely small 219-216 margin (Independent Representatives Bernie Sanders and Gatewood Galbraith both decided to caucus with Gore's party), the Democrats were able to hold their majority in the Senate, with 51 Democratic Senators (including Independent Jim Jeffords of Vermont) compared to the GOP's 49. Furthermore, the Democrats easily captured the majority of the nation's governorships, boasting 28 Governors compared to the Republicans' 21 and one governorship (that of Tim Penny in Minnesota) won by an Independent. The following is a complete analysis of the 2002 Midterm Elections:

Governorships:

In a hectic gubernatorial election cycle widely regarded as one of the most tumultuous in recent history, a total of fifteen gubernatorial pickups were seen this year, with only twenty-one governorships being held by a member of the incumbent party. Clearly victorious overall in the gubernatorial column, Democrats came out with eleven pickups in the states of Arizona, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Wisconsin, while Republicans only picked up four governorships, specifically those in Alabama, Alaska, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. However, Republicans were also able to hold a significant portion of the governorships up for grabs, keeping thirteen in their column while Democrats could only say the same of seven. Meanwhile, the state of Minnesota certainly saw an interesting scenario, with victorious Independence Party candidate Tim Penny holding the seat formerly held by fellow Independence Party member Jesse Ventura. As an outcome of the gubernatorial results in 2002, the Democrats captured a majority of the Governors' Mansions, winning 28 total compared to 21 for the GOP and one for the Independence Party. The following is a map of the 2002 gubernatorial races (60% is a hold and 30% is a pickup), followed by a general map of current gubernatorial party affiliations.

The historically large amount of party switches in this year's gubernatorial election cycle most likely comes as a result of significant geopolitical affiliation trends between 1998 (the year in which these offices were last up for grabs) and 2002, by which time the progressiveness of President Gore caused a noticeable pro-Democratic shift in the Northern, Pacific Coast, and Atlantic Coast regions, along with a pro-GOP shift in the South likely due to many pro-Clinton Southern conservatives seeing Gore's liberality as an affront to traditional Southern values.

Senate:

Unlike the results in the gubernatorial column, very few pickups were seen in the Senate this election cycle, with each party winning two seats previously held in the other. While the Republicans did see more victories specifically in this election cycle, the Democrats held their majority in the Senate, with seats in Senate Classes 1 and 3 giving Gore's party a 51-49 advantage over the GOP (Independent Jim Jeffords of Vermont currently caucuses with the Democrats). The following is a map of all 2002 Senate races, followed by an overall map of each Senator's party affiliation by state (grey indicates one Republican and one Democrat, while blue and red indicate both Senators coming from the same party - Republicans blue and Democrats red.

As with the gubernatorial races, the Senate results indicate a pro-Democratic shift in the Northern and Coastal regions due to Gore's popularity as a progressive president, while the South continues its Republican trend due to seeing Gore's policy as a betrayal of traditional Southern values.

House:

While the Gubernatorial and Senate results came as major victories for the Democrats, a disappointment for President Gore's party found itself in the House of Representatives, where Republicans were able to hold onto their majority by a slim 219-216 margin (Independents Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Gatewood Galbraith of Kentucky both caucus with the Democrats). The following is a map indicating which party now controls the majority of House seats in each state (grey indicates a tie between Democrats and Republicans; percentages indicate by what margin the majority party is in the lead in each state).

The results in the House of Representatives confirm the geopolitical trend seen in tonight's races, with Northern states trending Democratic as an affirmation to Gore's policies and Southern states trending Republican as a rebuttal.

Summary:

Overall, the results of the 2002 Midterm Elections came as good news for the party of President Gore, with Democrats winning majorities in both the Gubernatorial and Senatorial columns, as well as expanding their numbers in that of the House of Representatives. Furthermore, the 2002 election results confirmed a lasting geopolitical trend in the nation, with the pro-Democratic trend of Northern and Coastal areas being balanced out by a pro-Republican one in the South (this is likely due to the varying popularity of President Gore and his policy throughout the nation).

As the beginning of the 108th Congress approaches, Democrats should be expecting a slightly easier legislative path ahead, as they are close to controlling the House and have affirmed their majority in the Senate. However, many challenges for the nation and both parties lie ahead, with economic conditions, social progression, and terrorism both domestically and abroad all acting as catalysts to what is sure to be a contentious next few years. All of these factors, along with the mysterious rise of two powerful new political factions in our nation's midst, are sure to carry with them a host of difficult, vehement, and potentially revolutionizing radical changes in the United States of America.

Season 3 - The 2002 Midterm Elections is now over. Season 4 - Let the Changes Begin has commenced.

[TDAS04]

c-span tbh

[TDAS04]

Context:

I think a better question would be "how would the GOP cope with a Trump win?"

[TDAS04]

HC
10. Chicago

No.  Just no.

[TDAS04]

Context:

I think he has a good shot at American Samoa.

[TDAS04]

I honestly don't think that relationships with more than two people in (and I'm not talking about exclusive "one man, two or three women", there's also a thing called polyandry) are inherently bound to be oppressive. We've seen literally thousands of "normal" monogamous relationships that were just going awful.

No, of course no one specific relationship is bound to be oppressive. I have no problem imagining a perfectly healthy and loving polyamorous household, though it's not something I could ever myself into. I can't say if having children in such a situation would present a risk to their development, because I haven't heard of any study on the matter (and frankly I hope it never comes to the point where we need studies on that). But there are consequences for society at large. Thinking only at the individual level (as modern political discourse, left and right, tends to do) completely omits the impact of social norms and values on policies and vice versa. Again, the fact that patriarchy exists and that, even if weakened, it's here to stay for the foreseeable future, is not something you can shrug off.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Some specific cultural practices are morally inferior to others. I don't see what's problematic about that. Moral relativism is sh*t.

[TDAS04]

Also, I'm sorry for the extremely long amounts of text that you will have to read here!

[TDAS04]

Context:

Zero, including myself

[TDAS04]

Plain rice cakes with peanut butter, cinnamon, and banana are heavenly.

We agree on something, for once.