Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - The American Politics Thread
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedThe American Politics Thread
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 161162163164165 434>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
King of Loss View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 21 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Status: Offline
Points: 16889 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 04 2019 at 22:33
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

one thing I do think I was wrong about.. Texas..  I figured that state wouldn't really be in play until 2024.

I think it will be a in play .. ie contested hard by Democrats in 2020.  They are likely going to need a 4th Semate pickup to go with likely pickups in Az, Co, and Me to gain control of the Senate.  And that topic was large at the debates.  Winning back the Senate is almost as important to Democrats as beating Trump.  If Judge Moore gets the nomination and to be honest.. I think he will... .. yeah.. Jones likely does hold the AL seat but I suspect the Democrats will want some insurance.   In Texas Corryn is up next year and one thing I learned that surprised me... was he is far less popular in Texas than Cruz is.  And the democratic candidate they recruited to run.. far more attractive candate.. a woman and a veteran... not the charimatic but otherwise  dope addled space cadet that Beto was. LOL Who raised a lot of money.. but ran a sh*tty campaign.

I think it a no brainer the Democrats hammer the rust belt hard to make sure Trump has zero chance in those states.. but think they pass on contesting Florida.. and make a strong play for Texas and perhaps flip it 4 years ahead of schedule.  I think this is shat the Trump campaign sees as well. .which is why they are already investing heavily in Texas which the artcile went on to note..  might win him Texas... but be fatal to his chances for taking away from efforts to hold on to WI, MI, and PA.

Texas demographics today are striking similar to those of California in 1990, before Democrats began their seven to nothing streak of Golden State victories in presidential races. Like California in 1990, the Texas population currently hovers around 29 million and is changing rapidly in light of heavy immigration from Mexico. The second generation children of Mexican immigrants have played a major role in keeping California out of Republican reach. This same transformation is taking root in Texas.

Immigration has already had a very tangible impact on Texas politics. While illegal immigrants cannot vote, their children born in the United States are indeed citizens and make up a significant share of the new generation of voters in the southern state. There are around 35 per cent of Texans under the age of 18 who are the children of immigrants, a figure that has nearly doubled in the last 30 years. This carries weight.

Young Texas voters overwhelmingly turned out for Beto O’Rourke over incumbent Ted Cruz in the Senate race last year. O’Rourke beat Cruz with 18 year olds to 24 year olds by a margin of 68 percent to 32 percent and with 25 year olds to 29 year olds by a margin of 73 percent to 26 percent. 


You read The Hill? I saw this article not too long ago.
Back to Top
King of Loss View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 21 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Status: Offline
Points: 16889 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 04 2019 at 22:58
As for interesting graphics and opinion, I'm going to post a link on here: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/26/opinion/sunday/republican-platform-far-right.html

Not surprised at all by this article.ConfusedAngry
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 05:21
^ not surprised either

^^ oh I love that site. Along with David and probably more than a few other. I have long dropped cable TV and get my informaton straight from the internet. Even there I am fairly picky about where I get it from. It is one of my holy trinity of information sites along with Politico which has a slight left of center tilt and Rollcall which is pretty much non partisan as it gets.  While TheHill has a slight right of center tilt, mainly in its oppo pieces, all 3 are great for simply reporting what is going on without spin or substantial bias. As well as having interesting analysis pieces. Politico also has a bit of emphasis on the historical side.  Very educational. One of the best pieces of political writing I've seen in many years was the piece they did prior to the 2016 election about the profound long term impact of the Hart-Cellar Act and how that is changing our politics.

 As I've often said, I am smart enough and make sure I'm educated enough to make decisions and draw inferences/conclusion on my own. Don't need to be force fed what to think. 
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 07:56
speaking of TheHill.. nice article this morning on the upcoming battle for the Senate.  Democrats, with reason, are privately very bullish on the chances of retaking the Senate.  Guess who has even less an approval number than Trump.. yep McConnell.  The reverse-Pelosi affect will likely loom large in 2020.

In large part, and I agreed with this, they do say who the candidate is might be the tipping point between getting the Senate or not.  As voters are increasingly voting straight ticket and that trend doesn't really apply much to Republicans due to their tribal insular politics but more to Democrats who had always been more pragmatic and splitting tickets. Thus while red state Democrats are pretty much all gone.. there are a larage number of blue state Republicans up in 2020.. and even more in 2022.  They are very much in danger.  

I think the question really isn't if they beat Trump.. short of a complete disaster they probably aren't losing in 2020.. but the question will be.. by how much do they win and through coat tails how much do they expand the House majority. The blueing of the suburbs only started in 2018..  there are still a fair number of seats to be taken from the Republicans that they barely held onto in 2018. Just from Texas alone

There were also a number of Republican close shaves — seats that stayed red, but were much closer than expected. Seven-term Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, won by just 4 points, down from a 19-point win in 2016. Rep. Kenny Marchant, also seeking an eighth term, won by just 3 points, down from 17 points. Rep. John Carter, who won by 22 points in 2016, edged Democrat MJ Hegar ( MICK EDIT: WHO IS RUNNING AGAINST CORRYN FOR SENATE IN 2020) — whose candidacy is best-known for viral campaign ads that highlighted her service as an Air Force combat pilot — by only 3 points.

all those races are back in play in just a year and change.. and with hundreds of thousands of new voters. Young and educated for the most part moving to Texas.

In Harris County, Republicans won the straight-ticket vote by 9 points in both 2010 and 2014. This year, Democrats outperformed Republicans in straight-ticket votes by 11 points.

Democrats won the straight-ticket vote in Dallas County by 1 point in 2002, by 7 points in 2006 and 2010, by 10 points in 2014 — and by 30 points this year. Straight-ticket voters in Travis County, home of liberal Austin, chose Democrats this year by a 45-point margin, as turnout among those voters nearly tripled from 2014.

“Urban Texas is home to a vast majority of the state’s population, so this is where future elections will be fought,” said Brandon Rottinghaus, a political scientist at the University of Houston. “Republicans are losing that war to date. If Republicans can’t keep Democratic numbers below 60 percent in urban Texas, winning elections is going to be much more difficult going forward.”

Almost half a million new voters cast their midterm ballots early in Texas this year, as did more than a million voters who do not typically show up in midterms, according to the Democratic data analytics firm TargetSmart. Election Day turnout figures, when they are officially released in coming months, are likely to increase those numbers by hundreds of thousands.

“Texas has not been a red state. It’s been a nonvoting state and when there’s large voter turnout, which overwhelms the gerrymandering efforts and voter suppression efforts of past cycles, it is very decidedly a purple state.”




 and is the Senate a 50-50 or 51-49 run.. or perhaps even larger. Early on we identified only 1 Democrat in danger in 2020..  there are 7 potential Republicans. Those running in not solid Red states but blue-purple-and light red thus in danger in case of a wipeout election.

As i posted in election preview... I think Warren more than any has the chance to bring a real wipeout for she probably has the best chance to flip red states like Ohio and Texas and appeal to the only real demographic support Repubicans have.. working class whites with no college.
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 08:33
and back to the debate topic of great interest and importance.. what about McConnell

and if the Democrats do retake the Senate and it isn't Biden in the White House who thinks the Republicans are rational enough to play alone and compromise and allow Democratic policies to go forward and ends up beating his head against the wall.. but Warren... I imagine there will be a meeting perhaps in the days after the election. Her, Schumer, and McConnell.

the jist of it...

-Yo Mitch...  you have two choices.  You are not going to be allowed to do what you tried to do to Obama and try to 'limit him to a 1 term Presidency' by obstructing what the American people voted for and want us to implement.

either you play along and get some things back in return..the way the Senate is supposed to work.. the protection of the minority.. not the tyranny of.... or we shut you out completely.. and eliminate the 60 vote threshold completely. You sir showed us what the truth is.. there will be no blow back.. no public revolt if we do so. Your choice?'
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 10:11
Originally posted by AFlowerKingCrimson AFlowerKingCrimson wrote:

Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by Easy Money Easy Money wrote:

Good for Amash and this backs up what I have been saying for some time. The true conservative and the intelligent conservative recognizes that trump is a self serving sham, and that trump's ignorant attempts to win battles at any cost are very bad for the political process.

Hopefully more conservatives with a backbone will come forward and stop the destruction.
Meanwhile, I still wouldn't count out trump, he still has strong appeal to the under educated who seem to appreciate his naive coarseness.


And going further, Never Trumpers who may have voted Democrat in the midterms (esp suburban affluent voters) may find a third party/independent candidate to be a useful option if they think Democrats are going too far left. So those are votes they could lose out on as well.  

Additionally, just because Trump seems to operate by a whole other set of rules doesn't mean Democrats should expect forgiveness for their gaffes.  It won't be forthcoming.  In the first debate, I watched with a mixture of alarm and amusement as three candidates fell over each other getting in a Spanish word or two.  I am given to understand two of them spoke bad Spanish at that. There's a word for it.  It's called pandering.  I know how the Hindu right base would react here if they saw a very transparent attempt at pandering to a minority group by a politician.  I don't believe the way those whites who already feel very conscious of their identity react to that Spanish outreach will be very different.  Gutfeld, again, already made sure to poke fun at it just so the Fox News audience doesn't fail to notice it.   There is a difference between a sincere commitment to a progressive platform and pandering.  Democrat candidates shouldn't think voters are too daft to tell the difference (even if they are daft enough to vote for Trump).  I really believe anxiety to galvanise the left base has gripped the Democrat candidates and way early in the race as well.  The Mid Term campaign was a lot more focused and that focus has since been lost.  There is time for a course correction but that depends on a centrist pulling far ahead enough of the others to force the others to align more with him/her.  I hope to be wrong, as per the usual.



In my opinion it's only pandering if it's insincere. I didn't see any evidence that they were doing it to be insincere or phony. Was it politically motivated in some way? What these days isn't. That doesn't mean they did it just so that people of a certain ethnic group will like them. I can see how someone might think this but ultimately you can't get inside of their heads and know what their motives were. I can't either but as I said I didn't see any evidence of pandering(all imo of course).


Well, if you can't speak good Spanish and still decide to speak the language without a "sorry, my Spanish is terrible" preface, then it sounds like pandering to me, straight up.
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 10:16
Originally posted by King of Loss King of Loss wrote:

Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by Easy Money Easy Money wrote:

Good for Amash and this backs up what I have been saying for some time. The true conservative and the intelligent conservative recognizes that trump is a self serving sham, and that trump's ignorant attempts to win battles at any cost are very bad for the political process.

Hopefully more conservatives with a backbone will come forward and stop the destruction.
Meanwhile, I still wouldn't count out trump, he still has strong appeal to the under educated who seem to appreciate his naive coarseness.


And going further, Never Trumpers who may have voted Democrat in the midterms (esp suburban affluent voters) may find a third party/independent candidate to be a useful option if they think Democrats are going too far left. So those are votes they could lose out on as well.  

Additionally, just because Trump seems to operate by a whole other set of rules doesn't mean Democrats should expect forgiveness for their gaffes.  It won't be forthcoming.  In the first debate, I watched with a mixture of alarm and amusement as three candidates fell over each other getting in a Spanish word or two.  I am given to understand two of them spoke bad Spanish at that. There's a word for it.  It's called pandering.  I know how the Hindu right base would react here if they saw a very transparent attempt at pandering to a minority group by a politician.  I don't believe the way those whites who already feel very conscious of their identity react to that Spanish outreach will be very different.  Gutfeld, again, already made sure to poke fun at it just so the Fox News audience doesn't fail to notice it.   There is a difference between a sincere commitment to a progressive platform and pandering.  Democrat candidates shouldn't think voters are too daft to tell the difference (even if they are daft enough to vote for Trump).  I really believe anxiety to galvanise the left base has gripped the Democrat candidates and way early in the race as well.  The Mid Term campaign was a lot more focused and that focus has since been lost.  There is time for a course correction but that depends on a centrist pulling far ahead enough of the others to force the others to align more with him/her.  I hope to be wrong, as per the usual.



Many of those affluent well-educated suburban voters are now part of the Democratic Party base. Any person nominated by the Democrats will have to pander to this base, regardless of how left the nominee is.


So why waste time anyway with left positions that may not work with these suburban voters? At the end of the day, politics is the art of the possible. They have to build a winning coalition and that has to be one that unites divergent interests.
Back to Top
omphaloskepsis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2011
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 6801 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 11:27
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

and back to the debate topic of great interest and importance.. what about McConnell

and if the Democrats do retake the Senate and it isn't Biden in the White House who thinks the Republicans are rational enough to play alone and compromise and allow Democratic policies to go forward and ends up beating his head against the wall.. but Warren... I imagine there will be a meeting perhaps in the days after the election. Her, Schumer, and McConnell.

the jist of it...

-Yo Mitch...  you have two choices.  You are not going to be allowed to do what you tried to do to Obama and try to 'limit him to a 1 term Presidency' by obstructing what the American people voted for and want us to implement.

either you play along and get some things back in return..the way the Senate is supposed to work.. the protection of the minority.. not the tyranny of.... or we shut you out completely.. and eliminate the 60 vote threshold completely. You sir showed us what the truth is.. there will be no blow back.. no public revolt if we do so. Your choice?'
 





The Democrats won't take back the Senate.  I give that less than a 3% chance.  I've yet to miss a prediction on this thread.   Why would a majority vote for a party that plans to destroy borders, charge tax payers a $100,000 a piece for reparations, tax CO2, and give public money to pregnant men, and free healthcare to illegal aliens?  Mickie, you might as well hypothesis whether leprechauns and Barbie dolls can mate and have My Little Ponies.  You're only fantasizing Mickie.  My prediction? Mickie can't explain how the Democrats win the Senate with their current platform. Wink    
Back to Top
King of Loss View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 21 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Status: Offline
Points: 16889 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 11:49
Originally posted by omphaloskepsis omphaloskepsis wrote:

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

and back to the debate topic of great interest and importance.. what about McConnell

and if the Democrats do retake the Senate and it isn't Biden in the White House who thinks the Republicans are rational enough to play alone and compromise and allow Democratic policies to go forward and ends up beating his head against the wall.. but Warren... I imagine there will be a meeting perhaps in the days after the election. Her, Schumer, and McConnell.

the jist of it...

-Yo Mitch...  you have two choices.  You are not going to be allowed to do what you tried to do to Obama and try to 'limit him to a 1 term Presidency' by obstructing what the American people voted for and want us to implement.

either you play along and get some things back in return..the way the Senate is supposed to work.. the protection of the minority.. not the tyranny of.... or we shut you out completely.. and eliminate the 60 vote threshold completely. You sir showed us what the truth is.. there will be no blow back.. no public revolt if we do so. Your choice?'
 





The Democrats won't take back the Senate.  I give that less than a 3% chance.  I've yet to miss a prediction on this thread.   Why would a majority vote for a party that plans to destroy borders, charge tax payers a $100,000 a piece for reparations, tax CO2, and give public money to pregnant men, and free healthcare to illegal aliens?  Mickie, you might as well hypothesis whether leprechauns and Barbie dolls can mate and have My Little Ponies.  You're only fantasizing Mickie.  My prediction? Mickie can't explain how the Democrats win the Senate with their current platform. Wink    

Civility, please. Confused
Back to Top
omphaloskepsis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2011
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 6801 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 16:41
Ex San Francisco mayor Willie Brown ( Kamala Harris's ex boyfriend) predicts no democrat can beat Trump. 

 

I didn't leave the left.  The left left me.Smile
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 17:01
Originally posted by King of Loss King of Loss wrote:


Civility, please. Confused

hey.. I'm not the a****le I used to be. I will be. You just met Ompah.. our resident Russian bot who gets her kicks sitting naked at her computer with a view overlooking the Kremlin having fantasies about the Big Mick and trolling PA's because.. well Putin is a f**king genius so who's to question him....posting bullsh*t and trying to stir up trouble.

but since we have a nice polite forum.. I'll be civil and play and address her ignorance of the real world she isn't getting from the FAUX and Breitbart bubble and the real state of play with the Senate.

3 seats to win back the Senate..

in order of likelihood.

Maine..   not even sure if Colins is going to run for re-election. She burned some serious bridges in the state with that .. inexplicable support of Kavanaugh.. and if she does decide to run she will be facing a very popular and experienced Democrat (and yes a woman) who will take advantage of the nearly 6 million already 18 months out... in the bank set aside specifically to defeat her. Oh yes.. and it is a blue state... in an election where we are extremely likely to see max Democratic turnout.

Colorado -  Garnder ain't such a bad guy.. but the state is a blue one.. and being moderate didn't save Repubicans in the state in 2018.  

two very likely gains

Arizona?   McSalley has already lost once.. and didn't do so in a way  that pleased the right. Her opponent this time.. an even tougher opponent than Sinema was.  Mark Kelly who is much beloved and respected not only as a former astromaut but husband of the same Gaby Gifford who had a f**king bullet put into her brain by some right wing nut case.

three very likely gains.. and thus control of the Senate

but yes there is Alabama..   even as red as that state is..  it is a rated a toss up for you know who is running again and if he gets the nomination .. he will likely lose again.

but assuming he doesn't

Texas.  Unpopular Senator..   very inspriing opponent..  max turnout race.  A toss up...
North Carolina..  again a toss up


Iowa -  Ernst should win.. but as 2018 showed.. still a very blue state.  Many democrats have come to realize that it isn't enough to simply beat Trump.. they need the Senate as well.  60-40 she hold on.. less if a populist like Warren is the nominee and crushes Trump there and has long coat tales and straight ballot voting.


Georgia.. a long shot.. but those are exactly the kind of seats that come into play in a wave election. Depends a lot of on the black vote. If Harris is the nominee and the Democrats do serve up a good candidate..  it could be in play.




Edited by micky - July 05 2019 at 17:07
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
omphaloskepsis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2011
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 6801 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 17:46
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by King of Loss King of Loss wrote:


Civility, please. Confused

hey.. I'm not the a****le I used to be. I will be. You just met Ompah.. our resident Russian bot who gets her kicks sitting naked at her computer with a view overlooking the Kremlin having fantasies about the Big Mick and trolling PA's because.. well Putin is a f**king genius so who's to question him....posting bullsh*t and trying to stir up trouble.

but since we have a nice polite forum.. I'll be civil and play and address her ignorance of the real world she isn't getting from the FAUX and Breitbart bubble and the real state of play with the Senate.

3 seats to win back the Senate..

in order of likelihood.

Maine..   not even sure if Colins is going to run for re-election. She burned some serious bridges in the state with that .. inexplicable support of Kavanaugh.. and if she does decide to run she will be facing a very popular and experienced Democrat (and yes a woman) who will take advantage of the nearly 6 million already 18 months out... in the bank set aside specifically to defeat her. Oh yes.. and it is a blue state... in an election where we are extremely likely to see max Democratic turnout.

Colorado -  Garnder ain't such a bad guy.. but the state is a blue one.. and being moderate didn't save Repubicans in the state in 2018.  

two very likely gains

Arizona?   McSalley has already lost once.. and didn't do so in a way  that pleased the right. Her opponent this time.. an even tougher opponent than Sinema was.  Mark Kelly who is much beloved and respected not only as a former astromaut but husband of the same Gaby Gifford who had a f**king bullet put into her brain by some right wing nut case.

three very likely gains.. and thus control of the Senate

but yes there is Alabama..   even as red as that state is..  it is a rated a toss up for you know who is running again and if he gets the nomination .. he will likely lose again.

but assuming he doesn't

Texas.  Unpopular Senator..   very inspriing opponent..  max turnout race.  A toss up...
North Carolina..  again a toss up


Iowa -  Ernst should win.. but as 2018 showed.. still a very blue state.  Many democrats have come to realize that it isn't enough to simply beat Trump.. they need the Senate as well.  60-40 she hold on.. less if a populist like Warren is the nominee and crushes Trump there and has long coat tales and straight ballot voting.


Georgia.. a long shot.. but those are exactly the kind of seats that come into play in a wave election. Depends a lot of on the black vote. If Harris is the nominee and the Democrats do serve up a good candidate..  it could be in play.


 


Hey Mick, why would American Citizen's in those states vote for Democrat senators?   The Democrats put illegal aliens above American Citizens.  Booker and Beto are campaigning in Mexico.  What polices would make American citizens vote for Dems?   Please enlighten me Mick.  

Want to make a bet Mick?  Loser can't post on PA for two years.   I'll bet you the Dems won't win the Senate?   Let's see how much you believe in your analysis.  Wink  
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 17:55
Omhpa.. dear Ompha..   you need to go back to the GRU English school and get your rubles back babe.

I never predicted they would win it..  my previews showed what could happen... even what I thought would happen based on the trends and the way our electorate and who they support is changing.  A bit of quick english lesson for you babe. That is not the same as saying they WOULD happen.  

I do believe they will.. for I believe in numbers and trends for I have been studying them and those are pointing to a large democratic win.. and yes control of the senate. 

sematics aside..  I will take you up on your bet.  On one condition....

I want to see some brains in addition to that hot body...

show me you have something in your head and just not posting stupid links and videos.

break down the Senate races and what you think of them. do that.. answer my questions with some degree of intelligence .. and yes .. you'll have yourself a bet.   Don't worry though..  I like you .. I won't hold you to it.  I'd miss hearing what you think about the new state of American moving forward... 
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65603 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 18:42
Originally posted by omphaloskepsis omphaloskepsis wrote:

Want to make a bet Mick?  Loser can't post on PA for two years.   I'll bet you the Dems won't win the Senate?   Let's see how much you believe in your analysis.  Wink  

That seems didactic and punitive, why don't you make a bet for cold hard cash like everyone else --
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."   -- John F. Kennedy
Back to Top
omphaloskepsis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2011
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 6801 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 05 2019 at 18:46
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Omhpa.. dear Ompha..   you need to go back to the GRU English school and get your rubles back babe.

I never predicted they would win it..  my previews showed what could happen... even what I thought would happen based on the trends and the way our electorate and who they support is changing.  A bit of quick english lesson for you babe. That is not the same as saying they WOULD happen.  

I do believe they will.. for I believe in numbers and trends for I have been studying them and those are pointing to a large democratic win.. and yes control of the senate. 

sematics aside..  I will take you up on your bet.  On one condition....

I want to see some brains in addition to that hot body...

show me you have something in your head and just not posting stupid links and videos.

break down the Senate races and what you think of them. do that.. answer my questions with some degree of intelligence .. and yes .. you'll have yourself a bet.   Don't worry though..  I like you .. I won't hold you to it.  I'd miss hearing what you think about the new state of American moving forward... 
 


Deal Dude!Clap   I'll break down the Senate races.   I'm studying for a Monday morning, major university exam.   After that, I'll break down the Senate races.   
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2019 at 08:18
cool. Look forward to it..  you'll find me to be a hard but fair judge of what you come up with ..  don't have to agree with you say. Just want to see some real thought, contemplation, and thinking processes at work. Something many of us feel is lacking with a large certain percentage of our electorate. 

Edited by micky - July 06 2019 at 08:19
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
Easy Money View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10679 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2019 at 09:28
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

don't have to agree with you say. Just want to see some real thought, contemplation, and thinking processes at work. Something many of us feel is lacking with a large certain percentage of our electorate. 

Yes, some real thought, not your typical lazy categorizations and cliches as in, you are 'conservative', you must think this way, or you are 'liberal' so you must think that way.
The purpose of the cliche labels is to let us know when we can tune out and not listen anymore, ie more laziness.

So getting back to my post about Justin Amash which seemed to be misunderstood. I am not here to promote any candidate or any way of thinking, I was not promoting Amash's work when I pointed out how different he is from trump, I was merely pointing out that trump is not a proponent of traditional 'conservative values' such as a reduced role for government and personal freedom from government intrusion.

trump is a big government right winger, which is much different from the more traditional and intellectual conservatism of Goldwater, Buckley, Kemp, Amash and the Libertarian party etc. trump's main appeal to his base is nationalism and government promoted religious intolerance, both of which are at odds with what the small government conservative stands for. This does not constitute my endorsement of small government conservatism, I am merely pointing out the very big difference.
Help the victims of the russian invasion:
http://www.jazzmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28523&PID=130446&title=various-ways-you-can-help-ukraine#130446
Back to Top
Man With Hat View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Jazz-Rock/Fusion/Canterbury Team

Joined: March 12 2005
Location: Neurotica
Status: Offline
Points: 166183 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2019 at 13:00
^ to be fair...most of the republican party today isn't 'traditional conservative values' focused...at least for areas that they care about. 
Dig me...But don't...Bury me
I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive
Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.
Back to Top
Easy Money View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10679 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2019 at 13:27
^ The intrusion of the 'religious right' started under Reagan, and Goldwater was out spoken in his disgust with this trend and the way in which the Republican party was headed.
Disclaimer: This is not an endorsement of Goldwater's policies, just another example of how Goldwater had a much deeper understanding of what limited and non-intrusive government really meant as compared to today's republican party. Barry also supported a woman's right to choose as he saw anything else as more govt. intrusion. He also supported 'gay rights' as being true to full constitutional rights for everyone.

Edited by Easy Money - July 06 2019 at 13:32
Help the victims of the russian invasion:
http://www.jazzmusicarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28523&PID=130446&title=various-ways-you-can-help-ukraine#130446
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2019 at 17:28
^ he also was one of the leaders in integrating our military.  
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 161162163164165 434>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 1.230 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.