Jump to content

2018 Mid-term elections!


Ms. Spam
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't believe whether Cruz was holding townhalls or not is relevant to whether he should be allowed to freely walk in public without harassment. It's not etiquette, it's basic human decency.

 

If you lack the doubt in the infallibility of your views to give the other side the respect to live their lives, then you've gone down a dark path. A path I may add that Trump isn't even stepping towards. So you can't even blame crazy Republicans. This is a disease of the left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If/When a public servant ignores their constituency it is the very antithesis of being an American to just let them go about their way. If the Founding Fathers held your view we would all be speaking English right now. ;-) Well, the Kings English.

 

Afterthought: Thats obviously bipartisan btw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If/When a public servant ignores their constituency it is the very antithesis of being an American to just let them go about their way.

 

That's a completely new formulation. I cannot point to a single example in the history of this country where it was considered acceptable to intrude upon a politician's after hours lives because they haven't set up enough town meetings.

 

If the Founding Fathers held your view we would all be speaking English right now. ;-) Well, the Kings English.

 

I've read the Declaration of Independence with its expansive list of 27 grievances, and studied the American Revolution as my favorite historic time period. At no point did the Founding Fathers complain about King George or any other high member of the British government not spending more time meeting and greeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all your study youve never heard of no taxation without representation?

 

When a public servant ignores their constituency they can no longer claim to be representing the people, which is a clear breach of their position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all your study youve never heard of no taxation without representation?

 

Cruz is a duly elected representative so clearly that doesn't apply.

 

When a public servant ignores their constituency they can no longer claim to be representing the people, which is a clear breach of their position.

 

And so you've come to the conclusion that this makes it acceptable to accost them while they go about their lives? That's a radical leap.

 

The truth is that the reason Republicans in general have been curtailing their public appearances in the first place is because these scream mobs have made them unproductive and potentially dangerous. Because once you've made the radical leap that your position is so infallible that it's okay to harass some, and you're in an echo chamber of self-perpetuating rage, the dehumanization of your opposition has approached a level close to violence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I clearly and repeatedly promoted peaceful protest.

 

And yes, the concept behind no taxation without representation would apply if/when a public servant no longer represents their constituency either through willful action or incompetence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I clearly and repeatedly promoted peaceful protest.

 

I didn't say you did. I am saying that by encouraging the erasure of a line of civility where the peaceful difference of political opinions are respected and advocating for essentially driving that person from public, really the only next line is violence.

 

 

 

And yes, the concept behind no taxation without representation would apply if/when a public servant no longer represents their constituency either through willful action or incompetence.

 

No it does not. The only mandated thing in order to hold the mantle of a representative of the people of Texas is to be held accountable through the ballot box. What he has to do to show his worthiness is up the the people of the state. And since he's literally running for office right now, the results are the ultimate decider in whether Texas as a whole believes he should continue representing them.

 

Not a screaming mob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh and Texas as a whole does not want Ted Cruz representing them. It's neck and neck in polls now which with a three percent margin is not really "whole" state wants Ted Cruz. Hell members of Congress are probably hoping that Cruz gets the boot. He's introduced no legislation of meaning, had a failed presidential campaign bid and is a Trump sycophant. *Shrug* I think DC is ripe with crazy people willing to go in a restaurant to bother all kinds of Congressmen eating. Cruz may have been too stupid to realize this would happen when he went out with his wife. A lot of GOP Congressmen keep their heads down and support Kavanaugh so they can get their dream SCOTUS while Trump continues rule by chaos to distract us. You don't even see much news about the hurricane that hit the Carolinas. It's all Trump 24/7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The Republican party is lead by an administration that believes Infowars is a legitimate news organization. That's pretty damn looney.

Obama want's to claim credit for Trump's economy after claiming it wasn't possible. Trump isn't the only one in looney land. At least he get's results.

 

What are you talking about? Obama began the economic recovery-but I've never heard of him claiming credit for it outside his administration nor saying it wasn't possible-can you link us? I missed something. Also-could you be specific about "at least he get's results", please? Poe, could you get specific, as well? Give me a short list of the things you consider loony from either the GOP or Democrats? (I appreciate your attention to detail in this regarding exactly whom you mean within the parties!) I'd like to be on the same page with you and not guess at what you mean

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THANKS for the link! I'm going to save that for future reference...good stats in that.

 

But-did you READ the article? Because it doesn't say what you claim it does-it's just headline clickbait.

 

THIS is what Obama said "When you hear how great the economy's doing right now, let's just remember when this recovery started," he said. He didn't take any credit for Trump's part-he only said 'remember when it started'-which is accurate according to almost everyone I've heard talk about it. Do you have a different view of when the economic recovery began?

And I don't see where he said anything about claiming it wasn't possible here-did that come from another article?

Also, still curious about what you meant by '"at least he get's results"-can you give a few specific examples?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Before he popped off a month ago Obama's acolytes have been been claiming that the economy want getting better under Obama's watch. He was the one that dragged is it of the recession. It's like your kid piling the car out of the driveway, you drive half way across the country to Grandma's house, and your kid claiming "remember who got the trip started".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Before he popped off a month ago Obama's acolytes have been been claiming that the economy want getting better under Obama's watch. He was the one that dragged is it of the recession. It's like your kid piling the car out of the driveway, you drive half way across the country to Grandma's house, and your kid claiming "remember who got the trip started".

Except the kid drove for 8 years and the ride was pretty smooth the entire time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had an interesting opposition candidate for Governor here in Idaho for a while. One that could have started some interesting conversations. Then she went off the rails on the liberal train reck.

 

http://www.kboi.com/2018/09/21/gubernatorial-candidate-paulette-jordan-sits-down-with-nate-shelman/

 

"As the only real Idahoan, the only real American running for this position, as a governor in of a state in our country, were setting all kinds of examples, in ways to show that, as an indigenous voices, you know, we are wholly connected to this land, were connected to our people."

 

She is running against a 4th generation Idahoan, like myself. She had a zero percent chance of winning before, but she could have energized races that Democrats could have won in the minor leagues around the state. Welcome to negative territory.

 

There are a lot more problems with her campaign to go with that stupid statement. She said in a debate that AR-15s have no place in Idaho, like she forgot where she was. She has been basically running her campaign from the Hollywood studio where she is filming her self titled documentary. Sheddind staffers in drabs. It's a shit show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<Looks at Democrat Senate behavior the past few weeks>

 

"Yeah, I stand by my statement."

 

Great. You stand wherever you want-it's still a ****ing hilariously funny statement, especially if you really believe that "Democrat Senate behavior" is the ONLY thing we have to measure Republican Congressional delegation's behavior by. That's even FUNNIER.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Before he popped off a month ago Obama's acolytes have been been claiming that the economy want getting better under Obama's watch. He was the one that dragged is it of the recession. It's like your kid piling the car out of the driveway, you drive half way across the country to Grandma's house, and your kid claiming "remember who got the trip started".

No, it really isn't and it's a situation that doesn't need an analogy to dumb it down and make it understandable. It's simply a fact. No matter how complete or incomplete, no matter the sluggishness of gdp growth, RECOVERY STARTED in Obama's terms. The US economy isn't analogous to car driven to Grandma's house. THAT is a simple, straight line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little update on the battle for the Senate. The balance of power is currently 51-49 Republican, so the Democrats need to net two seats to take the chamber -2 seats from taking the chamber thanks to Pence as a tie-braker. There are two Republican seats where polls show them ahead by a little. Let's just give those to them.

 

Nevada -> D

Arizona -> D

 

New balance: 49-51 Democrats hold the chamber by a single race.

 

Unfortunately, North Dakota looks like it's not going to be close and will give Republicans one of those seats right back.

 

North Dakota -> R

 

New balance 50-50 with Republicans maintaining the chamber by tie-breaker.

 

That means that Democrats are going to have to find at least one more seat. There are currently only two other marginally competitive Republican seats. Tennessee where Marsha Blackburn trailed at the start, but is now leading and Texas where it's merely closer than expected, but Cruz has never trailed in a major poll.

 

Tennessee -> D

 

Still, let's say the blue wave happens and one of those races goes to the Democrats.

 

New balance: 49-51 Democrats.

 

That alone would take a bit of luck. But that's not all. Republicans are competitive in several other states. So Democrats would have the run the table in the following states (all of which Trump won).

 

Florida

Montana

Missouri

Indiana

 

Gonna be a tall order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.