Scott Walker - America's answer to Stephen Harper?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 11:26:38 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Scott Walker - America's answer to Stephen Harper?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Scott Walker - America's answer to Stephen Harper?  (Read 5096 times)
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 19, 2015, 11:05:24 AM »

Dull as who knows what, very acceptable to his party, loathed by his political opponents...
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 19, 2015, 11:11:24 AM »

Romney, Dole, and Bush Sr were also Stephen Harper.
Logged
bobloblaw
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,018
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 20, 2015, 02:00:48 PM »

Romney, Dole, and Bush Sr were also Stephen Harper.


What?Huh Romney and Dole never won,. Bush Sr was more like Mulrooney, just less corrupt


Harper brings out the worst in the left as does Walker
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 20, 2015, 02:03:31 PM »

Romney, Dole, and Bush Sr were also Stephen Harper.


What?Huh Romney and Dole never won

Walker will share that characteristic eventually.
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 20, 2015, 06:11:22 PM »

Not true. I don't hate Susana Martinez, Brian Sandoval, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford. I don't even really hate Scott Walker. I just recognize the fact that he will not be elected President of the United States and that Hillary Clinton will be.

The real question is why do all these other Republicans lower their standards and accept these "people" like Ted Cruz in their party. They are the real phony sheep.

Logged
ElectionsGuy
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,107
United States


Political Matrix
E: 7.10, S: -7.65

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 20, 2015, 06:20:14 PM »

Not true. I don't hate Susana Martinez, Brian Sandoval, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford. I don't even really hate Scott Walker. I just recognize the fact that he will not be elected President of the United States and that Hillary Clinton will be.

The real question is why do all these other Republicans lower their standards and accept these "people" like Ted Cruz in their party. They are the real phony sheep.



I can accept that you're a Republican, but I've never really seen you irritated by Democrats or Democratic policies.
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 20, 2015, 08:32:30 PM »

Not true. I don't hate Susana Martinez, Brian Sandoval, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford. I don't even really hate Scott Walker. I just recognize the fact that he will not be elected President of the United States and that Hillary Clinton will be.

The real question is why do all these other Republicans lower their standards and accept these "people" like Ted Cruz in their party. They are the real phony sheep.



I can accept that you're a Republican, but I've never really seen you irritated by Democrats or Democratic policies.

If they went in an actually annoying liberal direction like labeling/banning GMOs, NIMBYizing America to protect the people's unfounded whims, going full isolationist in national security matters, raising tax rates to ridiculous amounts across the board, and seriously backing unionization of all workers, then I'd have a reason to be irritated. But what are the national Democrats really advocating for at the moment?

Establishing a website where private health insurers can compete for business? Simplifying the once complexly regulated health insurance industry so all plans are simply 4 choices? Tax credits for purchasing health insurance? 10.10/hr minimum wage? Eliminating the bureaucracy tied to our immigration system and allowing a clear path for naturalization?

The only really irritating thin is stalling the Keystone XL, which is a bit NIMBY, but at the same time, the Republican idea that it's some amazing thing that will create millions of jobs is really hyperbole, too. It should be approved simply because it's not worth caring about in either direction.

To be irritated by what they stand for is irrational. The Obama Administration really is perfectly reasonable for any fair-minded citizen. There's nothing remotely controversial about what he advocates at the moment.  

And on a personal level, I have a full time job, I can afford everything I want, and I don't feel like my tax burden is really a burden at all. In fact, I could probably live on $500 less a month if I had to do so. So what reason would I have, at this moment, to be aligning myself hardline with a national Republican Party that isn't interested in anything else but cutting taxes and complaining about a government that is too big? I don't experience this at all. Anger about this would be pure spite.

Logged
Goldwater
Republitarian
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,054
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.55, S: -4.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 20, 2015, 11:22:49 PM »

So... Remind me again why you aren't a Democrat?
Logged
RogueBeaver
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,058
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 20, 2015, 11:31:39 PM »

Both evangelicals who got thumped in their first race, first elected in '93, first executive post in '02.
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 21, 2015, 01:46:00 AM »

So... Remind me again why you aren't a Democrat?

Because I'm not a Democrat. I'm not the one who needs to leave. I am the real Republican. I am the true meaning of a conservative.

The real question is when are the radical Federal Reserve-destroying, Medicare-privatizing, federal funds-denying anarcho radicals who got loud in 2009 and took over the primary system going to stop pretending to be Republicans and join their own freakshow third party? The answer is not soon, but I will be the tortoise to their hare.

The demographic apocalypse is slowly coming. The Republican Party will have to be Republican again someday soon. They need my vote to win, anyway.
Logged
Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort
Joshua
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,710
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: -5.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: February 21, 2015, 03:20:54 PM »

So... Remind me again why you aren't a Democrat?

Because I'm not a Democrat. I'm not the one who needs to leave. I am the real Republican. I am the true meaning of a conservative.

The difference between conservative and reactionary is not stressed enough, and thank god there are people that understand that.

Eisenhower was a conservative (today, he would be a RINO). Today's Republicans won't do anything about the status of the country's infrastructure until a major disaster happens. That's called being a reactionist. They don't acknowledge government can actually be proactive sometimes. (Even then, did Texas do anything after that unregulated fertilizer plant blew up?)
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,258
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 21, 2015, 05:40:43 PM »

Scott Walker is Stephen Harper in that he implements right-wing policies in the dullest, most underwhelming and unnoticeable way possible.
Logged
RFayette
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,951
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 21, 2015, 06:00:06 PM »

So... Remind me again why you aren't a Democrat?


The real question is when are the radical Federal Reserve-destroying, Medicare-privatizing, federal funds-denying anarcho radicals who got loud in 2009 and took over the primary system going to stop pretending to be Republicans and join their own freakshow third party? The answer is not soon, but I will be the tortoise to their hare.


As opposed to the 2000's Republicans that ballooned the deficit, went to war on false pretenses, cut taxes without paying for it, and created a massive security state?

I'm not a big fan of either, but it's hard to argue the mid-2000's Republicans were better. 

It seems like you would've been a "Republican" in the '80s but since then, the party's gone downhill for you?
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 21, 2015, 09:34:05 PM »

Harper has a Master's Degree in Economics, he is brilliant.

Walker is not in Harper's league.
Logged
anvi
anvikshiki
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,400
Netherlands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 21, 2015, 10:28:59 PM »

Actually, though I don't like either character at all, I think Harper is a lot politically smarter than Walker.
Logged
RFayette
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,951
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 22, 2015, 01:06:57 PM »

Harper has a Master's Degree in Economics, he is brilliant.

Walker is not in Harper's league.

A master's in econ isn't that impressive........I mean, a BS in engineering is loads harder.
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,258
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 22, 2015, 01:35:59 PM »

Harper has a Master's Degree in Economics, he is brilliant.

Walker is not in Harper's league.

I too have a Master's Degree in Economics. Do I get to be Prime Minister of Canada also?
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 22, 2015, 05:49:43 PM »
« Edited: February 22, 2015, 05:52:52 PM by Lincoln Republican »

Harper has a Master's Degree in Economics, he is brilliant.

Walker is not in Harper's league.

A master's in econ isn't that impressive........I mean, a BS in engineering is loads harder.

Depends entirely on your field of endeavor my friend.

A Bachelor of Science Degree in engineering is certainly what you need in pursuing a career in the engineering field, however, a Master's Degree in Economics is infinitely more useful if you are the leader of a G-7 nation.

A BSC in engineering is not necessarily any harder to earn than a Master's in economics, depending on your mind set and your focus.
Logged
Sprouts Farmers Market ✘
Sprouts
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,749
Italy


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: 1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: February 22, 2015, 06:19:30 PM »

Harper has a Master's Degree in Economics, he is brilliant.

Walker is not in Harper's league.

A master's in econ isn't that impressive........I mean, a BS in engineering is loads harder.

At top 10-15 US schools, undergrad econ is usually considered an equivalent to engineering, physical science, comp sci, and math because there is a very high degree of quantitative emphasis according to Wall Street Oasis. (At non-elite schools, it's sort of already at an in-between tier of difficulty between those and some of the more rules-based disciplines.) At the graduate level, that quantitative element is ubiquitous. The comparison you are making isn't really fair as much as you love your engineering.

Nonetheless, the argument was that graduate work in economics >>>> a 2.5 whatever in an incomplete Mickey Mouse stratego curriculum only done so that he could obtain power in a semi-meaningless organization. I don't usually believe education is very indicative of intelligence, but it should be obvious that Harper is very bright. Hard to tell with Walker so far.
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: February 22, 2015, 06:40:46 PM »
« Edited: February 22, 2015, 10:03:38 PM by Lincoln Republican »

Harper has a Master's Degree in Economics, he is brilliant.

Walker is not in Harper's league.

I too have a Master's Degree in Economics. Do I get to be Prime Minister of Canada also?

Congratulations to you on that most impressive designation you have achieved.  That is a real accomplishment in my estimation.

I am sure you would make a fine Canadian Prime Minister, however, there would be many obstacles in your path along the way, and some may prove insurmountable.
Logged
RFayette
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,951
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: February 22, 2015, 07:45:07 PM »

Harper has a Master's Degree in Economics, he is brilliant.

Walker is not in Harper's league.

A master's in econ isn't that impressive........I mean, a BS in engineering is loads harder.

At top 10-15 US schools, undergrad econ is usually considered an equivalent to engineering, physical science, comp sci, and math because there is a very high degree of quantitative emphasis according to Wall Street Oasis. (At non-elite schools, it's sort of already at an in-between tier of difficulty between those and some of the more rules-based disciplines.) At the graduate level, that quantitative element is ubiquitous. The comparison you are making isn't really fair as much as you love your engineering.

Nonetheless, the argument was that graduate work in economics >>>> a 2.5 whatever in an incomplete Mickey Mouse stratego curriculum only done so that he could obtain power in a semi-meaningless organization. I don't usually believe education is very indicative of intelligence, but it should be obvious that Harper is very bright. Hard to tell with Walker so far.

Good points.........I was speaking more along the lines of state universities where engineering tends to be kick-butt (a lot of weeding out) and econ not so much.  A master's in econ is impressive and I definitely like the field; I just thought "brilliant" was a bit of an overstatement.  Then again, no credentials really guarantee "brilliance," with Bush and his Harvard MBA.
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,258
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: February 22, 2015, 10:16:43 PM »

Harper has a Master's Degree in Economics, he is brilliant.

Walker is not in Harper's league.

A master's in econ isn't that impressive........I mean, a BS in engineering is loads harder.

At top 10-15 US schools, undergrad econ is usually considered an equivalent to engineering, physical science, comp sci, and math because there is a very high degree of quantitative emphasis according to Wall Street Oasis. (At non-elite schools, it's sort of already at an in-between tier of difficulty between those and some of the more rules-based disciplines.) At the graduate level, that quantitative element is ubiquitous. The comparison you are making isn't really fair as much as you love your engineering.

Nonetheless, the argument was that graduate work in economics >>>> a 2.5 whatever in an incomplete Mickey Mouse stratego curriculum only done so that he could obtain power in a semi-meaningless organization. I don't usually believe education is very indicative of intelligence, but it should be obvious that Harper is very bright. Hard to tell with Walker so far.

Good points.........I was speaking more along the lines of state universities where engineering tends to be kick-butt (a lot of weeding out) and econ not so much.  A master's in econ is impressive and I definitely like the field; I just thought "brilliant" was a bit of an overstatement.  Then again, no credentials really guarantee "brilliance," with Bush and his Harvard MBA.

Engineering is kick-butt at pretty much any university, and with good reason. You don't want the people designing the bridges we drive on and the pressure valves keeping dangerous chemicals away to be woefully incompetent fools who just phoned it in for four years. Same story with pre-med.

Economics can be as hard or as easy as you want it to be. If you want to focus on econometrics and multivariate time series analysis and all that, it gets messy. If you want to focus on economic history and do a thesis on lesbian Guatemalan women using microfinance to sell artisanal crafts to finance local water infrastructure, it's going to be more like your run-of-the-mill social sciences degree. Obviously your job opportunities will be less horrifying if you choose the former route.

Getting the master's degree was more a function of me not really knowing what I wanted to do and feeling like I needed some sort of post-graduate credential to make myself acceptable to my haut bourgeois family and peer group, and pursuing a doctorate seemed so intimidating and committing. Did I enjoy it? Yes. Did it generate a good ROI in terms of my salary and job opportunities? Not really. Were I to go back in time a couple of years, I probably would have done something more marketable like accounting or information systems.
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: February 22, 2015, 10:37:15 PM »

You would not want an expert in designing bridges as Chair of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, for example.   

Janet Yellen, Chair of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors has a PhD in economics from Yale.

Graduate degrees in economics and engineering both have their valued and necessary places in society.

It's like comparing apples and oranges. 

Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,509
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: February 23, 2015, 12:45:12 AM »

Uh, no.  There is no comparison.  Unlike Scott Walker, Stephen Harper has brains -love him or hate him, you have to give him that.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: February 23, 2015, 09:05:21 AM »

At top 10-15 US schools, undergrad econ is usually considered an equivalent to engineering, physical science, comp sci, and math because there is a very high degree of quantitative emphasis according to Wall Street Oasis.

I know at least one Ivy League school has a two-track major in Economics: Economics with calculus for future economists and quants; economics without calculus for people heading into investment banking or consulting who aren't up for the math and just need a general ground in how economies work.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.063 seconds with 13 queries.