OT : Another reason to say "Fuck Texas"

[TerpEagle]

Voters chose a third party over him. He got 43% and 49% of the popular vote, W got 48% and 51%. Just the facts

The Democratic candidate received the most votes in 5 out of 6 elections. When given a choice, including a 3rd party choice, more people chose the Democrat than anyone else in those elections.

[Riccardo]

OK this is my last post in this thread, I promise

Ref is an extremist with extreme views, I was pointing out that he (and apparently you) are the minority here, and always will be. The funniest part of these exchanges with Ref is that I'm a moderate - always have been. I am the majority. I can only laugh when he attempts to paint all republicans as right wing loons and therefore evil - yet I'm beginning to wonder if you are exactly the same. Some of your comments of late point in that direction.. At least ref is honest about it. Your attempts to denigrate potential republican candidates because they are not real minorities (Rubio is a rich white guy - by your standards neither is Obama - he's a rich, half-white guy) or because they will pursue republican polices (well duh, and every democrat candidate will pursue dem policies). That's how presidential elections work - they pander to the extremes in primaries and then move to the middle in the general election. Seems to me leadership skills and the ability to work with the opposition to get things done is a much more important criteria than campaign platitudes and party planks that will never get enacted. And this is Obama's biggest failure - he never knew how to lead, negotiate, work with the opposition, and after 5 years, he seems to have no interest in learning. And the country is worse off because of it. This leadership void IMO will be a key driver in the next election. You try to dismiss Bobby Jindal but seems to me the last Rhodes scholar governor from a southern state that got elected president did a pretty good job at leadership and working with the opposition.

Anywho, to elections. As you correctly pointed out elsewhere regarding the economy and employment, these things are cyclical. And so are presidential elections. The fact is the democrats have won exactly TWO elections in a row. That is hardly an entrenched trend. Republicans won 5 out of 6 elections from 1968 to 1988 and many on the far right made the same "dems are dead and buried" claims. Of course it was nonsense, just as are ref's rantings now. When the dems win 5 or 6 elections in a row, you might have a leg to stand on, until then, it's just wishful thinking.

[Big Little]

Before you leave this post can you answer this?

Riddle me this, if POTUS Barack Hussein Obama did not have this name, which "birthers" are still still screaming about, why would he change it to THAT and then run for POTUS?

I ask because this an extremist belief by some "republicans"

To what you pointed out above, I don't think the country is worse off, people have short term memories 03-08 was a very brutal time period in our history. Obama has not bridged the gap between the parties I agree, however the right came out on day 1 saying they would not work with him. I mean it would take AMAZING leadership to close that divide.

I think the whole system needs a face lift, with gerrymandering and corporate donations our democracy has become an abortion of what it was intended to be, and that is from both sides f'in it up..

Thing is, it is going to take OUR generations' to fix it, so time to start the dialog and see what we can get done. I just know it is not functioning the way it was intended

[Riccardo]

For a man of reason, yes

I think birthers are as ridiculous as truthers, period.

Regarding leadership, it's a two way street - he shut out the republicans since he didn't need them from day one - remember the "elections have consequences" comments? This is not how a true leader starts a presidency:

"The decline of the Obama presidency can be traced to a meeting at the White House just three days after the inauguration, when the new president gathered congressional leaders of both parties to discuss his proposed economic stimulus. House Republican Whip Eric Cantor gave President Obama a list of modest proposals for the bill. Obama said he would consider the GOP ideas, but told the assembled Republicans that "elections have consequences" and "I won." Backed by the largest congressional majorities in decades, the president was not terribly interested in giving ground to his vanquished adversaries."

[Drama Queen]

I have another question that I hope you will answer.

How would you contrast your views as a moderate Republican with that of conservative Republicans?

[T.D-Bag]

I think birthers are as ridiculous as truthers, period.

Regarding leadership, it's a two way street - he shut out the republicans since he didn't need them from day one - remember the "elections have consequences" comments? This is not how a true leader starts a presidency:

"The decline of the Obama presidency can be traced to a meeting at the White House just three days after the inauguration, when the new president gathered congressional leaders of both parties to discuss his proposed economic stimulus. House Republican Whip Eric Cantor gave President Obama a list of modest proposals for the bill. Obama said he would consider the GOP ideas, but told the assembled Republicans that "elections have consequences" and "I won." Backed by the largest congressional majorities in decades, the president was not terribly interested in giving ground to his vanquished adversaries."

I recall GWB using the "elections have consequences" line, so don't make too much of that in regards to PBO. The GOP top brass meeting on Jan 20,2009 has everything to do with the Republicans stated goals to not give PBO a single legislative accomplishment.
"Cantor's moderate proposals...." I doubt any proposal from Cantor could be described as moderate

[Riccardo]

This is it

No more questions!

I support national gun control laws like we have here in NJ. I am morally opposed to abortion but don't think the government should dictate whether it is legal or not. I don't think government has any business deciding what is marriage or who can legally be married. I think government does have a role in financially supporting scientific research, especially in the areas of alternative energy sources and health sciences. I think there needs to be more immigration controls especially with Mexico but there should be a path for citizenship for those already here. That's it off the top of my head.

[Drama Queen]

One more: When did you first realize that you were gay?

I kid!

Thanks.

[harls]

No more questions!

I support national gun control laws like we have here in NJ. I am morally opposed to abortion but don't think the government should dictate whether it is legal or not. I don't think government has any business deciding what is marriage or who can legally be married. I think government does have a role in financially supporting scientific research, especially in the areas of alternative energy sources and health sciences. I think there needs to be more immigration controls especially with Mexico but there should be a path for citizenship for those already here. That's it off the top of my head.

I can't believe I am saying this but I agree with all these statements with the possible exception of gun control laws like NJ has as I am not sure what NJ has on the books.

More often then not you come off as more of the right wing loon but that may be due to arguing with the left wing loons.

[TerpEagle]

No more questions!

I support national gun control laws like we have here in NJ. I am morally opposed to abortion but don't think the government should dictate whether it is legal or not. I don't think government has any business deciding what is marriage or who can legally be married. I think government does have a role in financially supporting scientific research, especially in the areas of alternative energy sources and health sciences. I think there needs to be more immigration controls especially with Mexico but there should be a path for citizenship for those already here. That's it off the top of my head.

Librul.

[TerpEagle]

Ref is an extremist with extreme views, I was pointing out that he (and apparently you) are the minority here, and always will be. The funniest part of these exchanges with Ref is that I'm a moderate - always have been. I am the majority. I can only laugh when he attempts to paint all republicans as right wing loons and therefore evil - yet I'm beginning to wonder if you are exactly the same. Some of your comments of late point in that direction.. At least ref is honest about it. Your attempts to denigrate potential republican candidates because they are not real minorities (Rubio is a rich white guy - by your standards neither is Obama - he's a rich, half-white guy) or because they will pursue republican polices (well duh, and every democrat candidate will pursue dem policies). That's how presidential elections work - they pander to the extremes in primaries and then move to the middle in the general election. Seems to me leadership skills and the ability to work with the opposition to get things done is a much more important criteria than campaign platitudes and party planks that will never get enacted. And this is Obama's biggest failure - he never knew how to lead, negotiate, work with the opposition, and after 5 years, he seems to have no interest in learning. And the country is worse off because of it. This leadership void IMO will be a key driver in the next election. You try to dismiss Bobby Jindal but seems to me the last Rhodes scholar governor from a southern state that got elected president did a pretty good job at leadership and working with the opposition.

Anywho, to elections. As you correctly pointed out elsewhere regarding the economy and employment, these things are cyclical. And so are presidential elections. The fact is the democrats have won exactly TWO elections in a row. That is hardly an entrenched trend. Republicans won 5 out of 6 elections from 1968 to 1988 and many on the far right made the same "dems are dead and buried" claims. Of course it was nonsense, just as are ref's rantings now. When the dems win 5 or 6 elections in a row, you might have a leg to stand on, until then, it's just wishful thinking.

My point about Rubio is that the only thing different about him than the majority of other Republican candidates is that he has a Spanish last name. What else differentiates him from the rest of the Republican field? I don't think that aspect alone is going to garner him a whole lot of Latino/Hispanic votes.

As for Texas, which was the original discussion, the Hispanic population (of mostly Mexican descent) is growing and so far the Republican party and conservatives have yet to endear themselves to that demographic. Especially the loudmouth conservatives. Allen West just ranted about the Coke commercial where American the Beautiful was sung in different languages and not only English. Throwing out a clone of the average Republican candidate whose last name ends with a vowel isn't going to do it capture that vote when actions haven't changed.

You put a lot of blame on Obama but fail to comment on the GOP's stated goal to obstruct as much as possible. Doing whatever the other party wants is not compromise. He was elected by a popular vote majority and significant electoral vote majority twice. It's not his job to do what the GOP wants because they're a pain in the ass as every turn.

As for liberals and moderates, if you look at Gallup polling data, moderates (and conservatives to some degree but not that significantly) are moving more towards the liberal side of the spectrum (in terms of self identification).

http://www.gallup.com/poll/166787/li...high-2013.aspx



2009 showed a jump in conservatives from moderates as things become polarized with Obama's election and the rise of the Tea Party, but it's since headed the other towards the left again.

As for your stated positions, I agree with most of them. I think quite a few "liberals" would agree with them as well. My "librul" comment was a joke but I'm sure many conservatives would label you that way rather than a moderate. I think it just does though, that you're a self-identifying moderate and most of your views fall in line with what many liberals support.

As for Bobby Jindal, he's no Bill Clinton. He's a social conservative who is anti-science, pro-creationism, anti-immigration, and anti-gay marriage. He's from a deep South state that lauds that form of conservatism. He has a Republican house and senate. He hasn't been brokering political compromises in a moderate state. As far as GOP governors working with the opposition, Romney and Christie are far more impressive than Jindal.

[dookie]

Dallas is a blue dot, too. Evidence suggests Texas is turning purple and eventually blue-ish in a couple more election cycles. Then it truly will be game over for the GOP ever recapturing the white house.

Awesome, then we get to live in a country with a one party system. I'm sure that's something that will work out well.