Jump to content

Archived

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

sebasour

Game Thread: Alabama Senate Race

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, youngrebelfan40 said:

It’s amazing he was viewed as the early favorite despite having no significant accomplishments other than happening to be the mayor of NY during 9/11. 

 

It must’ve been tough for him these past couple years to learn how to speak without mentioning 9/11 at least once in a sentence.

Seems like he'd always caught a ton of shit, then 9/11 happened and it vaulted him into "t3h gawd"-like status. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

There is no party for me and people like me who are liberal enough to want well run government programs for the poor and vulnerable.  I want to get military spending under control and I want economic freedom.  I don't want a bullshit tax plan for poor and special interests that complicates a tax code and does nothing to spur the economy.  I don't want another of the biggest handout to special interests in history a trillion dollar infrastructure debacle.  I am tired of wars with no national interest.  I am tired of a federal government verging on the powers of king george to kill citizens, spy on them and hand out favors to the favored elite.

I used to be a republican because they were the party of the environment and business.   People forget Nixon was at least partially if not totally responsible for almost all modern environmental law.  Clean water and clean air act's, RCRA, Superfund, endangered species act, EPA being cabinet level ect....  

I held my nose when Reagan brought in the evangelicals.  

Sadly since George HW Bush there hasn't been a president worthy of the title.  Democrats could claim since Clinton and I wouldn't object.

Now the republican party is what the democratic party was in the 50's and 60's.   I have very little interest in the party.  I am just too lazy to change affiliation and have nothing to change too.

This. All of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 406WarriorFan said:

Seems like he'd always caught a ton of shit, then 9/11 happened and it vaulted him into "t3h gawd"-like status. 

He did basically run a police state in minority communities. His policies generated this gem 

 

 

On 12/1/2016 at 12:26 PM, WyomingCoog said:

I own a vehicle likely worth more than everything you own combined and just flew first class (including a ticket for a 2 1/2 year old), round trip to Las Vegas and I'm not 35 yet. When you accomplish something outside of finishing a book, let me know. When's the last time you saw a 2 year old fly first class in their own seat? Don't tell me about elite.  

28 minutes ago, NorCalCoug said:

I’d happily compare IQ’s with you any day of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 406WarriorFan said:

Not only was Bush himself unpopular, but the GOP as a whole was towards the end of his term...the whole Jack Abramoff scandal helped turn both houses blue in the 2006 election. Between Bush's quagmire in Iraq and the collapsing economy, no one was going to win. I think that the whole Sarah Palin nomination helped doom the R's in the 2008 election as well, though I don't think anyone was beating Obama that cycle. Dude was like a rock star on campaign events, and had an excitement going for him that no one had had in quite some time. Compared to him, McCain looked like a dusty old can of tomato soup. 

No R would have won in 2008...not when you had stalwarts like Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, and Mike Huckabee leading the way. 

But didn't the Tea Party movement precede Palin? I had always remembered Palin's nomination as pandering to that movement, but maybe I am misremembering. I think we also find the seeds of the alt right in the Tea Party. Though on the surface they were all about taxation and national debt, there was a very deep undercurrent of racism and borderline anarchism there. The "anything to blow it all up" mentality seemed to come from that movement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SharkTanked said:

But didn't the Tea Party movement precede Palin? I had always remembered Palin's nomination as pandering to that movement, but maybe I am misremembering. I think we also find the seeds of the alt right in the Tea Party. Though on the surface they were all about taxation and national debt, there was a very deep undercurrent of racism and borderline anarchism there. The "anything to blow it all up" mentality seemed to come from that movement.

No. Palin came before the Tea Party. The TP didn't show up until around the 2010 midterms. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

The black people who stood in line to vote in the cold despite the republicans best efforts to make sure they didn’t are heroes. 2018 is going to be a bloodbath. Get ready. 

I wouldn't over estimate this result.  Roy Moore was a special kind of dirt bag.  Thanks to Trump the Democrats will win a lot of seats in the mid-terms but I'd be cautious to predict a bloodbath from this one race.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

There is no party for me and people like me who are liberal enough to want well run government programs for the poor and vulnerable.  I want to get military spending under control and I want economic freedom.  I don't want a bullshit tax plan for poor and special interests that complicates a tax code and does nothing to spur the economy.  I don't want another of the biggest handout to special interests in history a trillion dollar infrastructure debacle.  I am tired of wars with no national interest.  I am tired of a federal government verging on the powers of king george to kill citizens, spy on them and hand out favors to the favored elite.

I used to be a republican because they were the party of the environment and business.   People forget Nixon was at least partially if not totally responsible for almost all modern environmental law.  Clean water and clean air act's, RCRA, Superfund, endangered species act, EPA being cabinet level ect....  

I held my nose when Reagan brought in the evangelicals.  

Sadly since George HW Bush there hasn't been a president worthy of the title.  Democrats could claim since Clinton and I wouldn't object.

Now the republican party is what the democratic party was in the 50's and 60's.   I have very little interest in the party.  I am just too lazy to change affiliation and have nothing to change too.

Amen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, IanforHeisman said:

Yeah I forgot how hated Bush was at the end of his term. Iraq was big mess in 2007-2008. 

 

I always hated the guy but after reading his book it really changed my perspective of him. Whether I agreed with it or not at the time, I really believe he was 100 percent dedicated in his job unlike our current president.

W was a good man personally but his Iraq policies and the state of the economy at the end guaranteed a Democratic President.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, BSUTOP25 said:

I disagree. Obama was elected because of Bush. 

Obama was elected because he was a well spoken black man in 2008 and any democrat would have won given the economic situation.

In 2012 if Bush had ran he would have beat Obama.  He would have beat Obama on an economy that 4 years later after trillions in more debt more than Bush created in 8 years,   The economy was still in recession.   He would have not been nice like Romney, he would have hammered him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

There is no party for me and people like me who are liberal enough to want well run government programs for the poor and vulnerable.  I want to get military spending under control and I want economic freedom.  I don't want a bullshit tax plan for poor and special interests that complicates a tax code and does nothing to spur the economy.  I don't want another of the biggest handout to special interests in history a trillion dollar infrastructure debacle.  I am tired of wars with no national interest.  I am tired of a federal government verging on the powers of king george to kill citizens, spy on them and hand out favors to the favored elite.

I used to be a republican because they were the party of the environment and business.   People forget Nixon was at least partially if not totally responsible for almost all modern environmental law.  Clean water and clean air act's, RCRA, Superfund, endangered species act, EPA being cabinet level ect....  

I held my nose when Reagan brought in the evangelicals.  

Sadly since George HW Bush there hasn't been a president worthy of the title.  Democrats could claim since Clinton and I wouldn't object.

Now the republican party is what the democratic party was in the 50's and 60's.   I have very little interest in the party.  I am just too lazy to change affiliation and have nothing to change too.

Well said!  The GOP left me during the Clinton years.  I left the GOP 10 years ago when I moved from TX to WA where I can vote in primaries as an independent.  Neither party holds anything for me anymore and I see them both as corrupt and driven by self interest.  Good candidates get swallowed up by the GOP and Dems.  They are either defeated or they conform but in no way are they allowed to be creative, independent or pragmatic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

Yeah I agree with this. I remember how much I disliked a lot of dubyah's policies but thinking that I'd enjoy having a beer with him. 

The Iraq War & the meltdown of the economy did the GOP in for 2008 - Not sure any republican could have won the White House in 2008.

Bush was misguided in some of his policies and actions but he wasn't a nut job - Since 2008 the GOP has gravitated towards nut jobs as much as sane candidates 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 406WarriorFan said:

No. Palin came before the Tea Party. The TP didn't show up until around the 2010 midterms. 

There was the original Ron Paul Libertarian themed Tea Party movement prior to 2008.

As soon as McCain lost the 2008 election, with Koch Bros funding and Fox news promoting it. For about two years it was the biggest thing going. When the Kochs stopped funding it, it just sort of fizzled out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jackmormon said:

There was the original Ron Paul Libertarian themed Tea Party movement prior to 2008.

As soon as McCain lost the 2008 election, with Koch Bros funding and Fox news promoting it. For about two years it was the biggest thing going. When the Kochs stopped funding it, it just sort of fizzled out.

Yeah, the TP movement was the RP movement with a bunch of social conservative/race baiting/anti-Obama stuff mixed in with it, plus it got hijacked by lunatics who wanted to vote everyone and their brother out in favor of "principled" candidates like the witch lady, that deranged mutant in the NV Senate race (Lowden or Tark probably would have upset Reid), and all of the others. 

We're still seeing remnants of it as the Freedom Caucus and all of the other idiots who refuse to compromise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jackmormon said:

There was the original Ron Paul Libertarian themed Tea Party movement prior to 2008.

As soon as McCain lost the 2008 election, with Koch Bros funding and Fox news promoting it. For about two years it was the biggest thing going. When the Kochs stopped funding it, it just sort of fizzled out.

 

23 minutes ago, 406WarriorFan said:

Yeah, the TP movement was the RP movement with a bunch of social conservative/race baiting/anti-Obama stuff mixed in with it, plus it got hijacked by lunatics who wanted to vote everyone and their brother out in favor of "principled" candidates like the witch lady, that deranged mutant in the NV Senate race (Lowden or Tark probably would have upset Reid), and all of the others. 

We're still seeing remnants of it as the Freedom Caucus and all of the other idiots who refuse to compromise. 

The Koch's and Ron Paul were very active long before 2008; here's an excerpt from WikiP:

References to the Boston Tea Party were part of Tax Day protests held in the 1990s and before.[16][67][68][69] In 1984, David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch of Koch Industries founded Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE), a conservative political group whose self-described mission was "to fight for less government, lower taxes, and less regulation." Congressman Ron Paul was appointed as the first chairman of the organization. The CSE lobbied for policies favorable to corporations, particularly tobacco companies.[citation needed]

In 2002, a Tea Party website was designed and published by the CSE at web address www.usteaparty.com, and stated "our US Tea Party is a national event, hosted continuously online and open to all Americans who feel our taxes are too high and the tax code is too complicated."[70][71] The site did not take off at the time.[72] In 2003, Dick Armey became the chairman of CSE after retiring from Congress.[73] In 2004, Citizens for a Sound Economy split into FreedomWorks, for 501c4 advocacy activity, and the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. Dick Armey stayed as chairman of FreedomWorks, while David Koch stayed as Chairman of the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. The two organizations would become key players in the Tea Party movement from 2009 onward.[74][75] Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks were "probably the leading partners" in the September 2009 Taxpayer March on Washington, also known as the "9/12 Tea Party," according to The Guardian.[76]

Commentaries on origin

Fox News Channel commentator Juan Williams has said that the Tea Party movement emerged from the "ashes" of Ron Paul's 2008 presidential primary campaign.[77] Indeed, Ron Paul has stated that its origin was on December 16, 2007, when supporters held a 24-hour record breaking, "moneybomb" fundraising event on the Boston Tea Party's 234th anniversary,[78] but that others, including Republicans, took over and changed some of the movement's core beliefs.[79][80] Writing for Slate.com, Dave Weigel has argued in concurrence that, in his view, the "first modern Tea Party events occurred in December 2007, long before Barack Obama took office, and they were organized by supporters of Rep. Ron Paul," with the movement expanding and gaining prominence in 2009.[58]Barack Obama, the first African American President of the United States, took office in January 2009. Journalist Joshua Green has stated in The Atlantic that while Ron Paul is not the Tea Party's founder, or its culturally resonant figure, he has become the "intellectual godfather" of the movement since many now agree with his long-held beliefs.[81]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Joe from WY said:

You're older than I am, but you hit the nail on the head with regards to my feelings as well. My family was historically heavily Democrat leaning, mostly because they thought the Dems stood for the poor, and as my grandparents both lived through the Depression, that was important to them. That was a different Democratic Party though. That wasn't the party of free handouts for everyone and the idea that there's 67 Genders and if you think different you're a bigot. No, there were some real statesmen in that party back then. I couldn't with a clear concious join that party in its current manifestation. 

Likewise, the GOP kind of has deteriorated as well. I've read a lot of conservative and libertarian literature (Goldwater's "Conscious of a Conservative" and Milton Friedman's "Capitalism and Freedom" have both been heavily influential and among my favorite books), and I agree with a lot of the old stuff. I believe in free enterprise, after all, and I believe that my rights end where my fist touches your nose. There was a strong libertarian ethos in the Party around the 50s and 60s. Sadly, though, it's been overrun by special interests and bizarre mantras; that is, either you support the President and his spying on you and the wars and the troops or you hate America and should go to Iran with likeminded people.

In another sense, it's been overrun by hillbillies. This is probably a product of both appealing to the lowest common denominator of Jesus Freaks, anti-abortion people, and anti-immigration policies. That said, the hillbillies probably make up a necessary component given that poor (to me, rich means a cut off of 1 mil in assets, but even that isn't a clear indicator of rich per se...that could be just getting by in some cities after all) people by and large are the majority of people in the country and to stay relevant, they had to appeal to one segment. The Jesus People and hillbillies were easily co-opted in b/c they bought all the bullshit about the "American Dream". And as much as I don't want to get into the weeds. 

One could probably say that the same thing that corrupted the Dems is the same thing that has corrupted the GOP, that is, both decided to stake strong positions on divisive social issues in an effort to woo voters who otherwise may not have any other convictions. The Dems chose one side, and the Repubs chose another. But they're all the same assholes, even if they loathe one another. 

Furthermore, as much as I don't want to get into these weeds and potentially derail the whole thing, there probably is a degree of racism involved in the hillbillies' flock to the GOP. The Dems, by staking themselves as the party of minorities and the disenfranchised, don't do much to sell themselves to hillbillies who see themselves as not necessarily well off, but in a bad position because of the "government" catering to minorities. So, when Repubs go to slash social programs, the hicks go along with it b/c they actually think they're somebody and better off than "the minorities" despite the fact the hick may be living in a squalor that is worse than that of the minority he disdains. 

Sorry for the long rant. Finals are finally over. I took a bunch of adderall today to power through and its still having residual effects. As a result, when I go to type one or two paragraphs I end up with a novella instead. 

Joe-

i curious how you reconcile your free trade model with international trade when other countries aren’t playing by the same rules? 

If their is a great leveling do you want to see the US general populace deteriorate to the level of India?   

I ask because my journey is opposite of yours.   I grew up conservative and libertarian but have moved away the more I have done global business and realized the US was the only one playing that game in a global economy.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, renoskier said:

 

The Koch's and Ron Paul were very active long before 2008; here's an excerpt from WikiP:

References to the Boston Tea Party were part of Tax Day protests held in the 1990s and before.[16][67][68][69] In 1984, David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch of Koch Industries founded Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE), a conservative political group whose self-described mission was "to fight for less government, lower taxes, and less regulation." Congressman Ron Paul was appointed as the first chairman of the organization. The CSE lobbied for policies favorable to corporations, particularly tobacco companies.[citation needed]

In 2002, a Tea Party website was designed and published by the CSE at web address www.usteaparty.com, and stated "our US Tea Party is a national event, hosted continuously online and open to all Americans who feel our taxes are too high and the tax code is too complicated."[70][71] The site did not take off at the time.[72] In 2003, Dick Armey became the chairman of CSE after retiring from Congress.[73] In 2004, Citizens for a Sound Economy split into FreedomWorks, for 501c4 advocacy activity, and the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. Dick Armey stayed as chairman of FreedomWorks, while David Koch stayed as Chairman of the Americans for Prosperity Foundation. The two organizations would become key players in the Tea Party movement from 2009 onward.[74][75] Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks were "probably the leading partners" in the September 2009 Taxpayer March on Washington, also known as the "9/12 Tea Party," according to The Guardian.[76]

Commentaries on origin

Fox News Channel commentator Juan Williams has said that the Tea Party movement emerged from the "ashes" of Ron Paul's 2008 presidential primary campaign.[77] Indeed, Ron Paul has stated that its origin was on December 16, 2007, when supporters held a 24-hour record breaking, "moneybomb" fundraising event on the Boston Tea Party's 234th anniversary,[78] but that others, including Republicans, took over and changed some of the movement's core beliefs.[79][80] Writing for Slate.com, Dave Weigel has argued in concurrence that, in his view, the "first modern Tea Party events occurred in December 2007, long before Barack Obama took office, and they were organized by supporters of Rep. Ron Paul," with the movement expanding and gaining prominence in 2009.[58]Barack Obama, the first African American President of the United States, took office in January 2009. Journalist Joshua Green has stated in The Atlantic that while Ron Paul is not the Tea Party's founder, or its culturally resonant figure, he has become the "intellectual godfather" of the movement since many now agree with his long-held beliefs.[81]

Yeah, but they didn't show up en masse and frothing at the mouth until after Obama got elected and the stimulus was voted in. That one dude who was on CNBC was the impetus, he started screaming about being "Taxed Enough Already" and it caught steam IIRC. 

The Paul-ites were relatively peaceful...I was one of them who supported him during 2008. The movement got hijacked and doused with a social conservative bent after that election though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Joe from WY said:

I didn't mention free trade in the rant...at least I don't think I did. Anyway, I suppose here is as good as any to stake out where I stand. My position on it is similar to yours. In theory, it's great...and they push that narrative a lot, the theoretical one. I mean, if you listen to the theory, it makes a lot of sense; through specialization and comparative advantage principles, the consumers benefit from efficiencies. 

However as you (and I) both know, that isn't the case. Often times, we get boned based on things we agreed to in the WTO, for example, or we are subjected to tariffs when we don't subject certain imports, etc. In short, its +++++ed. I don't want to see the leveling. I don't want the US to be India. And, honestly, one of the (few) things I liked about Trump was his stance on the trade treaties, however, it wasn't enough on its own to get me to vote for him, and well, we all know how his promise turned out. 

So, I guess, where I stand is, that in theory (much like Communism or some other "ideal"), it sounds great, but in practice it's a disaster. Personally, I'd like to do away with it. 

And also, it's a common mischaracterization on here that I'm some kind of Republican/Conservative. I'm not. I abhor those people. If anything, I'm an anarchist, but more of a nihilist the longer things go. I have lots of bizarre beliefs that really don't comport into any of the messages espoused by the major parties. And the only real political issue I care about (aside from drug legalization) has to do with a free Palestine. The rest is just entertainment to me. A circus. I've written in every major candidate on every ballot I've ever submitted, and I will vote on the issues on a whim. I generally inform myself as to what they are about, of course, but I don't get all worked up over them because it is pointless.  

Fair enough we are pretty close.

Part of me is actually still a free trader but I’m convinced it won’t work at the country level.    The only way to make it work is to drive it into the private enterprise level out of the hands of government.   Hence the cash flow tax which forces Business to balance their cashflow or pay a 35% tax on the exported cash.   

Since I believe in free enterprise and businesses desire to minimize expenses I think businesses will largely find a way to balance it on our behalf.   

We should talk about the Palestinian’s some time.   I think we share a support for them.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, 406WarriorFan said:

Yeah, but they didn't show up en masse and frothing at the mouth until after Obama got elected and the stimulus was voted in. That one dude who was on CNBC was the impetus, he started screaming about being "Taxed Enough Already" and it caught steam IIRC. 

The Paul-ites were relatively peaceful...I was one of them who supported him during 2008. The movement got hijacked and doused with a social conservative bent after that election though. 

There was a tea party rally in Fallon in 2006.  It was a reaction to Bush passing an expansion of medicare after running on a promise to rein in entitlements.  That was also when the term RHINO came into use.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, jackmormon said:

There was the original Ron Paul Libertarian themed Tea Party movement prior to 2008.

As soon as McCain lost the 2008 election, with Koch Bros funding and Fox news promoting it. For about two years it was the biggest thing going. When the Kochs stopped funding it, it just sort of fizzled out.

Hey, we actually agree on something! The pre-2008 tea party was far different than what it morphed into during the Obama years and what it is today. A lot of people still try and equate the Libertarian and Tea Party movements but reality is that the two philosophies simply share some views but are worlds apart on others, especially with regard to their disagreement on nationalism and moral legislation. Also, some conservative Republicans have attempted to self identify as Libertarians when they are anything but. For instance, Idaho’s moron drunk governor Butch Otter. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The subversion of the Ron Paul Revolution into the "Tea Party" is one of the more disgusting and egregious moves made by the establishment GOP in recent memory. It started out as something positive and an attempt to actually bring about change, and instead it just turned into a movement that did nothing but promote vitriolic hatred towards anything Obama. 

My dad actually spoke at a rally in regards to his concerns as a physician about Obamacare as it was being drafted. He now regrets ever being associated with them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...