Jump to content

The Democrat Thread


Rex Kickass

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 20.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • StrangeSox

    3536

  • Balta1701

    3002

  • lostfan

    1460

  • BigSqwert

    1397

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Bachmann signs pledge* which includes the benefits of slavery:

 

Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President.
Edited by StrangeSox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 11, 2011 -> 11:10 AM)
Let's be clear...that's not a statement from her, that's one of those "Pledges" from some interest group that she's signed on to, and which someone is probably going to be fired for her having signed on to.

 

Yeah I botched that. Still, she signed it.

 

BTW, just to emphasize how awful this is, it's not just incredibly racist but also completely inaccurate.

 

The plantation owners in America had complete freedom to buy and sell slaves. State laws gave slave marriages no legal protection and in these transactions husbands could be separated from their wives and children from their mothers. In his autobiography, Frederick Douglass claimed that in the part of Maryland where he was born: "to part children from their mothers at a very early age. Frequently, before the child has reached its twelfth month, its mother is taken from it, and hired out on some farm a considerable distance off."
Edited by StrangeSox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 11, 2011 -> 04:28 PM)
Not surprising.

 

To be fair it's not that good of a question, at least imo. I'd like someone who sticks to their principles a hell of a lot more than Obama does (or maybe these really are his principles!), but not the insanity the GOP is currently engaged in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 11, 2011 -> 04:31 PM)
I was more a fan of the first graph in that post.

 

Both sides are banking on the other taking the fall, though I'll probably lose all hope for this country if the "Democrats refuse to negotiate (and by negotiate we mean give us every single thing we demand, basically our entire party economic platform in one lump sum while getting absolutely nothing back), blame them!" line they're trotting out actually works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 11, 2011 -> 05:34 PM)
Both sides are banking on the other taking the fall, though I'll probably lose all hope for this country if the "Democrats refuse to negotiate (and by negotiate we mean give us every single thing we demand, basically our entire party economic platform in one lump sum while getting absolutely nothing back), blame them!" line they're trotting out actually works.

I was referring to this.

fivethirtyeight-0707-repvoters-blog480.j

 

I believe NSS and I had a discussion over the fact that I insisted elections were all about turning out your base and less about independents, to the point that base turnout decides just about everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 11, 2011 -> 04:36 PM)
I was referring to this.

fivethirtyeight-0707-repvoters-blog480.j

 

I believe NSS and I had a discussion over the fact that I insisted elections were all about turning out your base and less about independents, to the point that base turnout decides just about everything.

We got our graphs from different places, apparently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 11, 2011 -> 04:37 PM)
Also not sure how to reconcile this:

 

dbtceildefault_q37.png

 

with this:

 

dbtceilch4_q36.png

 

or the Republican response with this: Failing to raise the debt limit will result in ~10% loss of GDP spending, launching us off the cliff into another recession.

 

Republican economics has turned into a hardline religious orthodoxy.

 

I think people are adding the qualifier "without doing other things simultaneously" in their minds when answering that question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 11, 2011 -> 04:43 PM)
I think people are adding the qualifier "without doing other things simultaneously" in their minds when answering that question.

 

That still doesn't change the disconnect between a majority of people saying it would result in "very serious" economic problems if we defaulted while also having a plurality of all respondents dominated by a supermajority of Republicans rejecting a simple debt ceiling hike to avert said problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 11, 2011 -> 05:43 PM)
I think people are adding the qualifier "without doing other things simultaneously" in their minds when answering that question.

I'm pretty sure that some of the Republicans here have said they wanted the government to default. Or at least they said something leading to that, prompting me to respond with the question "Do you want the government to default on its debt"...usually without getting an answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama the Republican, pushing to cut medicare and social security.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/us/polit...iscal.html?_r=1

 

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html

 

This morning's New York Times article similarly makes clear that it is the President who is demanding an even larger "deficit reduction" package than has previously been discussed. Headlined "Obama to Push for Wider Deal With G.O.P. on Deficit Cuts," the article reports that "President Obama has raised his sights and wants to strike a far-reaching agreement on cutting the federal deficit" and that he "wants to move well beyond the $2 trillion in savings sought in earlier negotiations and seek perhaps twice as much over the next decade." This is all in pursuit of "an agreement that ma[kes] substantial spending cuts, including in such social programs as Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security -- programs that had been off the table." The President, as part of the package, is reportedly seeking some elimination of modest tax "loopholes" that benefit wealthy Americans to claim, absurdly, that there is "balanced" sacrifice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 11, 2011 -> 06:13 PM)

Depends on the type of cuts. Strengthening the IPAB or adjusting the growth rate of OASDI I can consider depending on the numbers. There's talk though of him supporting raising the Medicare eligibility age, which is the type of thing that would have me joining you in not voting next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 11, 2011 -> 07:28 PM)
Depends on the type of cuts. Strengthening the IPAB or adjusting the growth rate of OASDI I can consider depending on the numbers. There's talk though of him supporting raising the Medicare eligibility age, which is the type of thing that would have me joining you in not voting next year.

 

Krugman echoes Greenwald's (perpetual) meltdown over Obama's policies.

 

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/1...-that-into-you/

 

To paraphrase, at what point does "he's too weak" or "he gives in too easy" stop working and you have to say "he's not really very liberal at all?"

 

eta Krugman also lays into his speech here

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/1...l-flow-fallacy/

Edited by StrangeSox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 11, 2011 -> 04:37 PM)
Also not sure how to reconcile this:

 

dbtceildefault_q37.png

 

with this:

 

dbtceilch4_q36.png

 

or the Republican response with this: Failing to raise the debt limit will result in ~10% loss of GDP spending, launching us off the cliff into another recession.

 

Republican economics has turned into a hardline religious orthodoxy.

 

That is pretty funny after hearing about all of the ways that Obama won't compromise now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 12, 2011 -> 01:31 AM)
That is pretty funny after hearing about all of the ways that Obama won't compromise now.

 

Why should he compromise. Congress is refusing to honor the debts it agreed to pay when it voted on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...