Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

bornontheblue

Will the Democrats regain the house and Senate

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Joe from WY said:

Or if you get a law degree then people just won't +++++ with you in general. And you can always use it to sell guns in Syria if all else fails. 

Heck.  They even are outsourcing lawyers.   My cousin has started a nice business in the Phillapines outsourcing legal work....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Joe from WY said:

 

If you're a dem you shouldn't be too excited about this, because it took a child molester as GOP candidate to win. 

I partially agree with this. It took a child molester as the GOP candidate to win in ALABAMA, one of the reddest of the red states. The bar won't be so high in other states. Not to mention we don't know what the republican primaries will shake out in these states. It will be pretty much impossible to find a candidate as bad as Moore but the base could still nominate some pretty bad candidates especially if Bannon stays involved and remains a powerful voice.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NVGiant said:

Dude, I was being TIC. Relax. 

This is what our politics have become, and both bases reward politicians for acting this way.

And to be fair, CNN wasn't lying about the Diet Cokes. It was reporting on superficial nonsense, which is what cable news is best at. Let's get it straight!

My rant wasn’t directed at you, it was for posterity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, happycamper said:

No. Software "engineering" is lumped in with engineering for... no discernible reason to me; it is far more analogous to architecture than engineering. 

And... man, there is a lack of mechanical and electrical jobs in this country. Especially in oil and gas for mechanicals and for power engineers for electrical. There are a lot of ways that engineering jobs just cannot be outsourced.

The fact that you see a single department being outsourced as a sign that an entire career field is in trouble is... silly really. 

I think part of the problem lies with how the education system is structured within the United States currently...

We've got this whole idea that in order to be "successful", one must obtain a four-year degree from a college/university of their choosing. Anything less, and welp, you've done +++++ed up. Of course, this is a flawed way of thinking, though it's a flawed way of thinking that has driven the educational system in the country for the better part of the last half decade. People think that if you get a two year degree doing something like welding, plumbing, or electrical work, you're automatically going to be considered a "failure" and on a quick way to meet the dregs of society, when in reality, this is hardly the case...many in those professions outperform their four-year counterparts in terms of employment and salary. 

As a result of this "feel-good" craze, we've forced a number of colleges to accept a lot more students than they should via Federal loans, and the like...who have in turn created a number of degree programs that aren't going to get you hired anywhere, short of being a barista at Starbucks. I think that this movement has helped create an inefficient economy, where we are placing people into positions that they're entirely unqualified for, or underemployed at. 

In order to fix this, we'd have to radically change the educational system...not through religious private schools or even unsupervised charter schools, but rather through "choice" for students. Instead of taking this "one-size-fits-all" approach that has been the norm seemingly forever, and constantly re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic with things like NCLB, ESSA, and whatever else government program comes up from the coke straws of the policy makers of education, we need to take a radically different approach. We need to finally accept the fact that not every student needs to go to a four-year college, nor do they want to, and we need to quit structuring our schools around that premise. 

Schools should offer a whole bevy of electives, in everything from Sports Marketing to Agricultural to Electrical Engineering...there's a great system of Career and Tech Ed "Pathways" that have begun to show up across the country, and they contain dual-enrollment with local colleges/universities. It's a nice start, but I think it could be definitely built on. 

Let students choose what track or pathway they'd like to follow...if they want to go to a 4-year college, let them follow a path of college prep..if they want to follow something like plumbing, or another technical skill...let them take core classes (Math, Science, English, History) in the morning and then in the afternoon, let them form an apprenticeship with a local business, company, etc., where they can go work/job shadow one of these people and earn credit, all while learning the skill they'd like to pursue after school. 

It's radical, but I think it would definitely do more to help fill the positions that are open than anything else...while it is true that there is an over-loaded amount of workers for fewer positions, there are also a good number of sectors that cannot fill enough positions, either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 406WarriorFan said:

I think part of the problem lies with how the education system is structured within the United States currently...

We've got this whole idea that in order to be "successful", one must obtain a four-year degree from a college/university of their choosing. Anything less, and welp, you've done +++++ed up. Of course, this is a flawed way of thinking, though it's a flawed way of thinking that has driven the educational system in the country for the better part of the last half decade. People think that if you get a two year degree doing something like welding, plumbing, or electrical work, you're automatically going to be considered a "failure" and on a quick way to meet the dregs of society, when in reality, this is hardly the case...many in those professions outperform their four-year counterparts in terms of employment and salary. 

As a result of this "feel-good" craze, we've forced a number of colleges to accept a lot more students than they should via Federal loans, and the like...who have in turn created a number of degree programs that aren't going to get you hired anywhere, short of being a barista at Starbucks. I think that this movement has helped create an inefficient economy, where we are placing people into positions that they're entirely unqualified for, or underemployed at. 

In order to fix this, we'd have to radically change the educational system...not through religious private schools or even unsupervised charter schools, but rather through "choice" for students. Instead of taking this "one-size-fits-all" approach that has been the norm seemingly forever, and constantly re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic with things like NCLB, ESSA, and whatever else government program comes up from the coke straws of the policy makers of education, we need to take a radically different approach. We need to finally accept the fact that not every student needs to go to a four-year college, nor do they want to, and we need to quit structuring our schools around that premise. 

Schools should offer a whole bevy of electives, in everything from Sports Marketing to Agricultural to Electrical Engineering...there's a great system of Career and Tech Ed "Pathways" that have begun to show up across the country, and they contain dual-enrollment with local colleges/universities. It's a nice start, but I think it could be definitely built on. 

Let students choose what track or pathway they'd like to follow...if they want to go to a 4-year college, let them follow a path of college prep..if they want to follow something like plumbing, or another technical skill...let them take core classes (Math, Science, English, History) in the morning and then in the afternoon, let them form an apprenticeship with a local business, company, etc., where they can go work/job shadow one of these people and earn credit, all while learning the skill they'd like to pursue after school. 

It's radical, but I think it would definitely do more to help fill the positions that are open than anything else...while it is true that there is an over-loaded amount of workers for fewer positions, there are also a good number of sectors that cannot fill enough positions, either. 

Honestly, I think that the problem starts earlier than that. I think that having 1 size fits all high schools is, frankly, idiotic. All high schools do not need to be college prep schools with an expected 85% passing rate and some votech classes thrown in for the hell of it, I guess. We could stand to have several "levels" of degree in high school so kids can "graduate" at 16 if they just straight up aren't going to go to college. Pair a degree type to higher test scores, so if a kid gets a "lesser" diploma, he can still get in to college if he scores in to it (actually, let's be honest, that student would more often be a "she"). Have either separate votech high schools, expand votech in high schools, or expand community college programs to take in kids starting at 16 while the other kids stay at the "normal" high school for college prep. Shoot, while they are there they could go for an extra year so they can hit the ground running - basically make the high schools a gymnasium or have them be an IB program.

The issue I have with this is as an academic kid I would have loved to have taken welding and shop in high school (I didn't because half-assing a year in Argentina amazingly didn't get me a full year's worth of graduation requirements) and if the schools are split that gets a lot harder. 

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tspoke said:

I partially agree with this. It took a child molester as the GOP candidate to win in ALABAMA, one of the reddest of the red states. The bar won't be so high in other states. Not to mention we don't know what the republican primaries will shake out in these states. It will be pretty much impossible to find a candidate as bad as Moore but the base could still nominate some pretty bad candidates especially if Bannon stays involved and remains a powerful voice.

 

Well, that’s the possible silver lining.  The bannonites lost credibility, it should help mainstream republicans in the primaries.  In theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

Uhh, California has 14 Republicans in the House of Representatives, including the Majority Whip. Idaho has 2.

I think it was 20 when I was in DC after the Contract landslide.  There are a few potentially vulnerable seats, but it’s so gerrymandered now towards the dems, and has been for a long time, there aren’t many vulnerable seats in Cali left.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, bornontheblue said:

I don't think they will. The Democrats have a lot more territory to defend in states that could go either way. 

Doug Jones winning is not a pre cursor to the 2018 mid terms either. That has more to do with the fact that the GOP put up a horrible candidate. 

 

The Alabama fiasco doesn’t mean squat in predicting the next election.  The VA race was a little bit more telling, but not necessarily a harbinger.

The issue is that the populists run against the republicans as much as they do against the democrats. Now they’re supposed to turn out in droves to vote for the very congressman they rail against when Trumps name isn’t on the ballot?  And traditional republicans who are lukewarm or worse to Trump are supposed to just show up like they always do in  midterms?  I don’t see it.

The dems are still a wreck, and the turf is favorable for the gop, so maybe they eke it out in the Senate, but I don’t think so.  I’d be shocked if they lost the house though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, CPslograd said:

I think it was 20 when I was in DC after the Contract landslide.  There are a few potentially vulnerable seats, but it’s so gerrymandered now towards the dems, and has been for a long time, there aren’t many vulnerable seats in Cali left.

 

I think they'll get Issa for sure. The Tax Bill will the the final nail despite his laughable pivot towards being a moderate. Even Hunter may be vulnerable given his other scandals. I'm not as familiar with what's going on up north. 

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2018 might be good for D's........if the anti-Trump sentiment continues to build it could drive people to the polls.........cause a change in just one House or Senate would mean Trump & his agenda would be hindered, that could be enough to get people out to vote since Trump isn't on the ballot.

Of course this all comes down to which way non-partisan registered voters go..........will the "moderates" who voted Trump in 2016 still be on board or will they have bailed on Trump & his clown show?

If the NP's and even D's (Hillary haters) that voted Trump defect, then the GOP needs to hold on to more of their base 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

I think they'll get Issa for sure. The Tax Bill will the the final nail despite his laughable pivot towards being a moderate. Even Hunter may be vulnerable given his other scandals. I'm not as familiar with what's going on up north. 

 

13 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said:

2018 might be good for D's........if the anti-Trump sentiment continues to build it could drive people to the polls.........cause a change in just one House or Senate would mean Trump & his agenda would be hindered, that could be enough to get people out to vote since Trump isn't on the ballot.

Of course this all comes down to which way non-partisan registered voters go..........will the "moderates" who voted Trump in 2016 still be on board or will they have bailed on Trump & his clown show?

If the NP's and even D's (Hillary haters) that voted Trump defect, then the GOP needs to hold on to more of their base 

 

1 hour ago, NVGiant said:

Excellent. You’re not wrong, BTW. It’s looney tunes right now.

 

How soon we forget in 2008 you  all claimed republicans were never going to win an election again.   You all brought up the demographics and how out of touch the republicans were.  Now  democrats manage to beat an old pedophile and you think all of a sudden you are going to defend 25 seats in the senate and pick up 2 more.

You are all delusional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CPslograd said:

The Alabama fiasco doesn’t mean squat in predicting the next election.  The VA race was a little bit more telling, but not necessarily a harbinger.

The issue is that the populists run against the republicans as much as they do against the democrats. Now they’re supposed to turn out in droves to vote for the very congressman they rail against when Trumps name isn’t on the ballot?  And traditional republicans who are lukewarm or worse to Trump are supposed to just show up like they always do in  midterms?  I don’t see it.

The dems are still a wreck, and the turf is favorable for the gop, so maybe they eke it out in the Senate, but I don’t think so.  I’d be shocked if they lost the house though.

The problem in both of the parties is populism. The Bernie Bros. vs. the Trumpeters. Does the "feel the Bern" crowd still have such distaste for the Dems after the nomination shenanigans that they swing to a Repub populist, or are the Dems going to wade into the populist pool too? That may determine how successful the midterms are for the Dems. I'm honestly starting to think these elections are not about issues anymore, but just cults of personalities. Maybe I am late to that realization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

 

 

 

How soon we forget in 2008 you  all claimed republicans were never going to win an election again.   You all brought up the demographics and how out of touch the republicans were.  Now  democrats manage to beat an old pedophile and you think all of a sudden you are going to defend 25 seats in the senate and pick up 2 more.

You are all delusional.

That same argument kind of sounds like the Republicans today saying there is no way that the Dems can flip the Senate or the House. If there is one thing that both Trump and Alabama taught us it is that conventional wisdom doesn't always apply today.

I doubt Dems get enough seats, but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens. Nothing really surprises me anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SharkTanked said:

That same argument kind of sounds like the Republicans today saying there is no way that the Dems can flip the Senate or the House. If there is one thing that both Trump and Alabama taught us it is that conventional wisdom doesn't always apply today.

I doubt Dems get enough seats, but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens. Nothing really surprises me anymore.

Pretty hard to flip the senate when you are defending 25 seats and can only attack 8.

They might flip the house but the gerrymandering makes that pretty unlikely.

Those are just facts.

I suspect the democrats will lose a seat or two inh 2018 and then do really well in 2020 when the slate favors them in the senate.

They might win a couple seats in the house making it closer, but I doubt they take control although they could.

 

What is obvious though is that no party is dead despite you democrats trying to act like it is all over.  You spend too much time congratulating each other and no time at all trying to do anything positive for the american people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

What is obvious though is that no party is dead despite you democrats trying to act like it is all over.  You spend too much time congratulating each other and no time at all trying to do anything positive for the american people.

I think the same can be said for both parties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, SharkTanked said:

I think the same can be said for both parties.

I haven't heard republicans ever crowing like you guys.

You beat a +++++ing pedafile and you think that means you are going to sweep elections forever.  Jones wouldn't have beat a pig named moore in Alabama as long as the pig hadn't raped any children and was pro-life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...