Personal experience or is the deep south really the best place for an East Indian person to be? (versus, Atlanta)

[Metro Matt]

Originally Posted by grapico

He certainly speaks for most Texans, he is governor in a representative democracy, on his 4th term no less and succeeded the great one Bush... Liberal pocket or not, you are still in Texas and are subject to any laws they decide to make in your state.

Guess who presided before Bush as Governor of Texas?

A Democrat.

Guess who was Bush's Lt. Governor?

A Democrat

Texas is becoming more a moderate state than anything.

Cities like Austin & Houston give out Misdemaenor traffic tickets for less than 4 Oz. of Marijuana 1st offense now.

Guess who signed it into law?

Conservative Rick Perry

http://ezinearticles.com/?Changes-to-Texas-Marijuana-Laws&id=4727371 (broken link)

[grapico]

Originally Posted by Metro Matt

Guess who presided before Bush as Governor of Texas?

A Democrat.

Guess who was Bush's Lt. Governor?

A Democrat

Texas is becoming more a moderate state than anything.

Cities like Austin & Houston give out Misdemaenor traffic tickets for less than 4 Oz. of Marijuana 1st offense now.

Guess who signed it into law?

Conservative Rick Perry

Changes to Texas Marijuana Laws (http://ezinearticles.com/?Changes-to-Texas-Marijuana-Laws&id=4727371 - broken link)

Bush Lt Gov was Perry as well, Bush certainly did not PICK a democrat, its elected separately... and bullock came in under richards, not bush anyhow. bullock was also pro bush, he campaigned for him in 98 against a democrat (mauro)... did you not want me to bring that up or did you have more insightful information?

Re Bush Re-election:
"His opponent is 44 year old Democratic land commissioner Garry Mauro, who is so far behind in the race that observers say it's almost no contest. Mauro is campaigning with limited money and without the support of the state's most powerful Democrat -- Lt. Governor Bob Bullock, who broke from the party to endorse Bush. "

Source PBS NewsHour Oct 1998

There are plenty of conservative democrats, they are blue dog/dixie crats, the kind that texas elected for almost a century. your point?

Do you really want to do this? Because I will... no problemo.

As for pot, just arrested Willie Nelson and charged him $2500 for 6 oz this week.

http://hosted2.ap.org/RAMIT/3a22d4a5...af91bac0a7fab7

[DANNYY]

Originally Posted by grapico

He certainly speaks for most Texans, he is governor in a representative democracy, on his 4th term no less and succeeded the great one Bush... Liberal pocket or not, you are still in Texas and are subject to any laws they decide to make in your state. This is the issue many have, once you get out of these pockets...uhmmmmmmm yeh.

I disagree with this for a bit.

It's true that the Governor has the authority to pass laws and bills, but he has done so in the past and he has been voted down quite a good bit. In fact even his crazy Textbook Controversy has been revised and edited to not be what he made it to be. The Trans-Texas Corridor is dead. Many of the things Perry does dies because the legislation which actually does represent the people turn it down.

That's the beauty of democracy, one hack can say anything they want but it wont end up being true, because they are just words. Voters control the state.

And honestly its a state of 26 Million people but lets look at how voters vote:



A few things with this picture above.

Democrats: 3,521,164
Republicans: 4,467,748
Total: 7,988,912

So almost 8 Million people vote, out of 26 Million people in the entire state. (Including those under the age of 18) So voters who put these hicks like Perry into office account for 17% of the states total population. 4,467,748/26,000,000. So 17% of the entire state support hicks like Perry.

However, Perry can say whatever he wants, succession, textbooks, whatever, doesn't mean it will ever liquidate and become a reality just like half the stuff he tries to do.

A State Government focuses it's attention on its Governor as the man in charge, but its run by the people and by the state legislators even if people forget that. Rick Perry's ideas that become hickwash are turned down or revised immediately, no exceptions.

Anything his administration spews, it gets press attention, and the first to jump on it are the hippies. They ride on the topic so much thinking one man represents the entire state, when he doesn't.

Legislative, Executive, & Judicial. Those three run any form of democratic government in America. Rick Perry, ermm Hick Perry, most certainly doesn't speak for the people overall, he speaks for those that follow him, and those that vote for him, which in contrast to the state population is a very minimal number. The rest of the people rest assured that anything Hick Rick throws out will be dished out and sent to the trash from the legislators they put into the state government.

And anyone thinking that a border state with more than 37% of its population being Hispanic can really dish out Conservationism to the core is in for a new awakening. The entire state is not represented by one man, the press can say whatever, and honestly what is the difference? So hippies get a chance to hate, thats all haters do either way. Most of the laws in the state haven't impaired anyones lives to the point where its been awful political climate.

[grapico]

Originally Posted by DANNYY

I disagree with this for a bit.

It's true that the Governor has the authority to pass laws and bills, but he has done so in the past and he has been voted down quite a good bit. In fact even his crazy Textbook Controversy has been revised and edited to not be what he made it to be. The Trans-Texas Corridor is dead. Many of the things Perry does dies because the legislation which actually does represent the people turn it down.

That's the beauty of democracy, one hack can say anything they want but it wont end up being true, because they are just words. Voters control the state.

And honestly its a state of 26 Million people but lets look at how voters vote:



A few things with this picture above.

Democrats: 3,521,164
Republicans: 4,467,748
Total: 7,988,912

So almost 8 Million people vote, out of 26 Million people in the entire state. (Including those under the age of 18) So voters who put these hicks like Perry into office account for 17% of the states total population. 4,467,748/26,000,000. So 17% of the entire state support hicks like Perry.

However, Perry can say whatever he wants, succession, textbooks, whatever, doesn't mean it will ever liquidate and become a reality just like half the stuff he tries to do.

A State Government focuses it's attention on its Governor as the man in charge, but its run by the people and by the state legislators even if people forget that. Rick Perry's ideas that become hickwash are turned down or revised immediately, no exceptions.

Anything his administration spews, it gets press attention, and the first to jump on it are the hippies. They ride on the topic so much thinking one man represents the entire state, when he doesn't.

Legislative, Executive, & Judicial. Those three run any form of democratic government in America. Rick Perry, ermm Hick Perry, most certainly doesn't speak for the people overall, he speaks for those that follow him, and those that vote for him, which in contrast to the state population is a very minimal number. The rest of the people rest assured that anything Hick Rick throws out will be dished out and sent to the trash from the legislators they put into the state government.

And anyone thinking that a border state with more than 37% of its population being Hispanic can really dish out Conservationism to the core is in for a new awakening. The entire state is not represented by one man, the press can say whatever, and honestly what is the difference? So hippies get a chance to hate, thats all haters do either way. Most of the laws in the state haven't impaired anyones lives to the point where its been awful political climate.

Uhhh, so either Texas is apathetic in voting, or the majority of voters vote for Perry, 4x now, 1 lt gov, 3 gov, including just recently. That isn't exactly an anomaly. You can't really say that the apathetic voters who didn't turn up would not support Perry, they just happened not to vote. He has been elected in public office consistently since 1998. How does this have anything to do with the press, that is Texas citizens, period.

[diablo234]

Originally Posted by grapico

Uhhh, so either Texas is apathetic in voting, or the majority of voters vote for Perry, 4x now, 1 lt gov, 3 gov, including just recently. He has been elected in public office consistently since 1998. How does this have anything to do with the press, that is Texas citizens, period.

It's due to voter apathy. There have been studies that shown that more people in Texas don't vote than in any other state. Plus the state is so gerrymandered that the electoral districts are designed to favor Republicans. In short what you see in the polls isn't an accurate indicator.

[DANNYY]

Originally Posted by grapico

Uhhh, so either Texas is apathetic in voting, or the majority of voters vote for Perry, 3x now, including just recently. He has been elected in public office consistently since 1998.

Eh most people just don't vote. I haven't really seen many people get politically involved to be honest. Yeah Perry won again, it was a given and I expected no less from it all in all, I'm no Democrat and I am no Republican but for me Perry was just the wrong kind of guy regardless of what Political party that hack belonged too/belongs too.

The state's registered voter population is still more so Conservative than Liberal by about a million people regardless of the fact that the big cities leaned became blue and continue to do so. Texas wont officially go Blue until it can get the surrounding areas to vote Democrat OR until it can get more people to vote in general. Which if it does it will swing straight from a Conservative Red state into a Blue state easily.

38& of the state is Hispanic, 13% African American, 4% Asian, and large amount of Liberal Caucasians. This isn't to say that every Asian, every Hispanic, or every African American votes Blue.

But Democrats in Texas have yet to figure out a drive, they have the potential to have a state become overwhelmingly Blue, but the problem isn't the people in the state. Its their political parties, the Republicans try and they invest more into their strategy despite being at a natural disadvantage than the Democrats. The Democrats don't try at all as much as they can.

That can be true of Bill White as well, he just didn't try anywhere close to as much as Perry.

Texas will probably be a Red State until 2020 to be honest, and it wont be shedding it until it gets more people in its cities or until it gets out an incentive for more people to get out there and vote.

But my point was that the Governor may to some represent the people, which I disagree with, because he was an elected official by a mass of people, and only a mass. Not the full state, and there are other branches of the Government to counter what he says or does as well. Hick Perry's policies get lots of media attention, that's surely true, but its very rare when any of them liquidate into law (the hick policies not the normal build roads and whatever ones).

[grapico]

Originally Posted by DANNYY

Eh most people just don't vote. I haven't really seen many people get politically involved to be honest. Yeah Perry won again, it was a given and I expected no less from it all in all, I'm no Democrat and I am no Republican but for me Perry was just the wrong kind of guy regardless of what Political party that hack belonged too/belongs too.

The state's registered voter population is still more so Conservative than Liberal by about a million people regardless of the fact that the big cities leaned became blue and continue to do so. Texas wont officially go Blue until it can get the surrounding areas to vote Democrat OR until it can get more people to vote in general. Which if it does it will swing straight from a Conservative Red state into a Blue state easily.

38& of the state is Hispanic, 13% African American, 4% Asian, and large amount of Liberal Caucasians. This isn't to say that every Asian, every Hispanic, or every African American votes Blue.

But Democrats in Texas have yet to figure out a drive, they have the potential to have a state become overwhelmingly Blue, but the problem isn't the people in the state. Its their political parties, the Republicans try and they invest more into their strategy despite being at a natural disadvantage than the Democrats. The Democrats don't try at all as much as they can.

That can be true of Bill White as well, he just didn't try anywhere close to as much as Perry.

Texas will probably be a Red State until 2020 to be honest, and it wont be shedding it until it gets more people in its cities or until it gets out an incentive for more people to get out there and vote.

But my point was that the Governor may to some represent the people, which I disagree with, because he was an elected official by a mass of people, and only a mass. Not the full state, and there are other branches of the Government to counter what he says or does as well. Hick Perry's policies get lots of media attention, that's surely true, but its very rare when any of them liquidate into law (the hick policies not the normal build roads and whatever ones).

Yeah I'm sure people in Dallas/Houston/Austin aren't big Perry supporters, just that you still have to live with that, for better or worse. As some one who is pretty politically active, that would bother me.

As you say Perry is just a poor candidate, especially to the public, whether he be a D/R.

IL is certainly full of well... I won't get into it but not counties I would particularly want to live in. In IL though Chicago completely dominates the political spectrum of the state, in Texas well, it seems the good ol boys of Texas still hold major swagger in terms of state policies.
But there are a lot of rural and small town areas too that don't feel so hickish, esp if you go just north into Wisconsin which is pretty socially liberal and tolerant. I don't think the rural small town experience in Texas is the same.

[DANNYY]

Originally Posted by grapico

Yeah I'm sure people in Dallas/Houston/Austin aren't big Perry supporters, just that you still have to live with that, for better or worse. As some one who is pretty politically active, that would bother me.

As you say Perry is just a poor candidate, especially to the public, whether he be a D/R.

Eh we're opposites here. I'm more so politically inactive. And to be honest I keep my real Political side hidden on this site but I'm no liar.

I've found myself like the ideals of the Republican Party more, but the problem with the Republican Party is that almost 80% of the Republicans who come up to bat, are hacks. And I just cant agree with them. And its a shame because that political party has more of what I would like to see in America which is more corporate power, more jobs, less taxes, more revenue, and sustainable healthcare.

The policies I like with Democrats would be environmental. But the problem with Democrats for me is not their people as much but their political parties signature, and thats a LARGE Centralized Government. In my opinion that is a gateway to political corruption, and its evident. How is it possible for Federal Employees to gain in numbers so much from the last administration to this one? There are 80,000 more Federal Employees today than the last Presidential Administration.

I guess being a Moderate comes with the flaws that I just cant go out there and vote. If there was a political party that combined Economical Advancements + Environmental Advancements along with Open Minded Policies then I would probably vote for that. But there isn't a MAJOR political party that can bring that into substance.

I think of myself as a Moderate to Slight Liberal, but the problem is that there isn't much of a drive in politics. Major flaws exist in both parties enough to the point where I hold both Republicans & Democrats in disdain.

And on that hand, I also am not at all fond of hippies or hicks. They represent two sides of a very large spectrum. Places like San Francisco, Oklahoma City, etc are way too much for me.

Originally Posted by grapico

IL is certainly full of well... I won't get into it but not counties I would particularly want to live in. In IL though Chicago completely dominates the political spectrum of the state, in Texas well, it seems the good ol boys of Texas still hold major swagger in terms of state policies.
But there are a lot of rural and small town areas too that don't feel so hickish, esp if you go just north into Wisconsin which is pretty socially liberal and tolerant. I don't think the rural small town experience in Texas is the same.

The thing I like about Texas & Illinois is this. The big cities in both states are good. They aren't hippie driven like San Francisco or Portland or something but they aren't driven by hicks either like Knoxville, Tennessee or something. And you're definitely right, the small towns in Texas are conservative to their core unless they are dominated by Hispanic culture which leaves the Valley and South Texas small towns are major exceptions to the rule.

Frankly I would go absolutely nuts in either of those types of cities. I cannot psychologically take these hippie antics on a daily basis and I don't give two cents of a crude about what their motives are. I find those people to by hypocrites and useless to American society. I prefer the political climate to places like Boston, New York City, Chicago, Houston, Miami, Dallas, Washington DC over San Francisco, Oklahoma City and other cities that lean so far into the extremes of the spectrum that its absolutely insane imagining a life there.

[grapico]

conjures up images...
so basically none of this


or this



k time for bed.

[DANNYY]

^ Absolutely!

No hippies & No hicks!