Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know well about Tesla. I wrote a paper about their business strategy.
First off, they are taking a strategy similar to that of Apple - going for those consumers that are first adapters and can and are willing to pay premium prices for a brand new technology. They have plans of putting out a car that is less than $30,000 for the general public I believe it was originally this year.. Their SUV was a step into more affordable cars from their original Roadster. They have also taken care in building more slowly to build supporting infrastructure to service and charge cars so that as more consumers are aware of the Tesla autos, their use is well supported. No one will buy a car that they can't get serviced or are afraid that there would be no place to plug it in for a recharge!
They have an excellent strategy that will sustain them.. their stock has increased nearly 400% since I first bought their stock. And. the fact that I've heard of Tesla and not the other company goes to show that the loans mean squat.
As for what the "green " dems did -what part of I understand that not all "dems" are good do YOU not understand. I don't agree with EVERYTHING that they do and as I stated, I'm well aware that most of the time or on a lot of issues they are the differnet sides of the same coin.
However, I vote for them because on certain issues, like healthcare, they are at least getting us closer to where we need to be.. Republicans.. not so much. Republican party is FAR WORSE than the democrat party on EVERY issue that matters.
You may think you are making a 'statement' but really it's moot when the person you voted for doesn't even get anywhere CLOSE to winning office to effect that change. At least for me, that's how I look at it. I might make a statement by voting for the third guy, but in the meantime others didn't and rather than choosing the lesser of the two evils to give them a vote, the greater of two evils may have just won over the lesser and I didn't really have a say. Again, this is my opinion.
And, as i said before, the REAL problem is the money tied up in politics and particularly in our election system. If candidates didn't have to worry about loosing their corporate sponsors, they would act more on what is best for the nation rather than what is best for the crony capitalists....
Third party people will continue to loose and we'll ahve a batter of Repubs vs Dems until we really shake up our election system and do away with the money involved in running and really just run on the issues with EVERY candidate will get equal aire time to voice their positions to stand a chance..
Until that time, I will continue to cast my vote for Democrats - because Republicans are the WORST CASE Scenario...
As for R&D - I believe the CIA was the reason for the internet... And perhaps not ALL military spending is bad - at least when new tech comes out of it, but not what we are spending on these days.
Oh.. and the healthcare website debacle - the problem was that it was outsourced to various PRIVATE companies, rather than worked in house by the government. I see THAT as an issue.. perhaps if the governmnet directly hiired talent rather than outsourced to a private firm, it would have gone over much better..
If every issue that matters is green energy, gay rights and abortion, then voting Dem is for you.
For me, every issue that matters is the economy, the economy, the economy.
You did give me a good laugh, though. You really think the website would have been better off being run by the govt? If you can name one govt agency that is not full of waste, fraud and abuse, I might agree with you. But you won't. And the govt agencies that were in charge of the private company that built the website were so incompetent, I'd rather it all just go away.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,483,414 times
Reputation: 12187
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint
With their current platform of being anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-minorities, anti-immigrant, anti-poor people, pro -military and most importantly pro-obstructionist , the party of "no", the party of "do nothing"---- I don't think the GOP has a chance to regain the White House until they make some major changes.
The extreme candidates the Tea party is helping win primaries will keep moderates like myself from voting Republican. Many debates about "legitimate rape" wins votes in Afghanistan but not here
The democrats of course are favored by those who don't want to work for what they have and want but as they begin to outnumber those who have to pay for it all, it becomes unsustainable. Look at the USSRm once the fall began, it fell fast.
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy."
If every issue that matters is green energy, gay rights and abortion, then voting Dem is for you.
For me, every issue that matters is the economy, the economy, the economy.
You did give me a good laugh, though. You really think the website would have been better off being run by the govt? If you can name one govt agency that is not full of waste, fraud and abuse, I might agree with you. But you won't. And the govt agencies that were in charge of the private company that built the website were so incompetent, I'd rather it all just go away.
Yes,
Gay rights (rights of minorities together)
Right to choose
Healthcare FOR ALL
Green energy - because after all if we have no planet to live on nothing else matters
Is VERY IMPORTANT.
And, indeed, the economy is important.. the difference is in the priorities. SEe us Dems. or at least this dem, believes the priority should be in imporving our infrastructure, improving green energy and creating jobs with green energy.. helping those less fortunate (over giving tax breaks and subisidies to wealth corporations!)
Hey.. guess what. WASTE exists everywhere.. and yes in private industry too.. only it's disguised as over compenstation and corporate jets.... as well as other excess.. the only difference is that the costs of that waste is passed on to the consuer in higher prices.. Funny. now companies are paying less and less while raising their prices. Oh.. and they say that they can't afford to wage raises.. yet they manage to raise the wage of excutives nearly 400% in the last decade (while everyone elses salary decreased).
And yup, it would have been better handled all under one roof rather than piecemealed to various differnet private entities where there was no real centrailized control as a result. Too many of our government functions have been outsourced lately to private industry undre the guise that it's more efficient.. Yet, ironically eveyrone talks about how unefficient government is.
AS John Stewart once said, the Republicans are great at breaking the government than complaining about how it's broken and doesn't work..
Wow. Every democrat is a better choice than any republican, in all cases....yep, my bad....I incorrectly assumed we had the potential for a reasonable discussion.
Yup.. ANY democrat is better than ANY republican ..
Unless said republican:
is pro choice
voted for equal pay for woman
willing to actually negotiate with the Democrats on issues, rather than hold the country hostage
Voted for Obamacare and/or is for a one payer system
Wouldnt DREAM of cutting food stamps
Extended unemployment and voted to extend unemployment.
Is not against equal rights for gay couples
I could go on..
But alas .. you'll find very few Republicans who would take that position on those issues
Oh... and I voted Republican ONCE.. and that was a HUGE mistake..
I will say that compared to the field of Republicans these days..McCain seems less scary to me today than he did then.. then again.. he kick started it all by nominating that dimwit Sarah Palin. I actually was willing to listen to what he had to say.. until he picked Sara Palin as his running mate trying to pander to the female vote because we didn't have Hillary..
You think I'm unreasonable. Not more unreasonable than someone who casts a vote that doesn't go anywhere.
Yup.. ANY democrat is better than ANY republican ..
Unless said republican:
is pro choice
voted for equal pay for woman
willing to actually negotiate with the Democrats on issues, rather than hold the country hostage
Voted for Obamacare and/or is for a one payer system
Wouldnt DREAM of cutting food stamps
Extended unemployment and voted to extend unemployment.
Is not against equal rights for gay couples
I could go on..
But alas .. you'll find very few Republicans who would take that position on those issues
Oh... and I voted Republican ONCE.. and that was a HUGE mistake..
I will say that compared to the field of Republicans these days..McCain seems less scary to me today than he did then.. then again.. he kick started it all by nominating that dimwit Sarah Palin. I actually was willing to listen to what he had to say.. until he picked Sara Palin as his running mate trying to pander to the female vote because we didn't have Hillary..
You think I'm unreasonable. Not more unreasonable than someone who casts a vote that doesn't go anywhere.
If you can come up with a rational non emotionally based answer on how you can pay for it all maybe you'll garner some republican interest. Otherwise, you're simply repeating all the same vote gathering schemes democrats do who have no plan to pay for any of that or any of the other vote gathering schemes they shoehorned in to the American budget.
It really doesn't matter anyway. We all won't be around in the next 30-40 years. It will be over by then. Until then, the libs have completely ruined this country and will continue to make it worse than it already is because they are lazy scum and think that everyone owes them everything.
It really doesn't matter anyway. We all won't be around in the next 30-40 years. It will be over by then. Until then, the libs have completely ruined this country and will continue to make it worse than it already is because they are lazy scum and think that everyone owes them everything.
Speak for yourself. I'll be 64 in 30 years which is what pisses me off about all the liberals wanting to blow their wad now and f everyone else after they're gone.
In that respect the only party even remotely attempting to not make my life a miserable hell 30 years from now is the republicans. Young people both my age and before my age should pay close freaking attention NOW because we won't be able to drag those responsible out into the streets and hang them.
Going back to the start of Abraham Lincoln's presidency, which is when the two-party system we know today first started, there have been two extended periods of Republican dominance in the White House, and one period of Democrat dominance.
For 72 years from 1861 to 1933, the United States had 52 years of Republican presidency, and only 20 years of Democrat presidency between three presidents (Andrew Johnson, Grover Cleveland, Woodrow Wilson). The end of this era came with the ouster of Herbert Hoover.
For 36 years from 1933 to 1969, the United States had 28 years of Democrat presidency, and Dwight Eisenhower had the only eight years of Republican presidency during this time. This era ended when Lyndon B. Johnson chose not to run for reelection.
More recently, for 40 years from 1969 to 2009, the Republicans had the upper hand again, with 28 years of the presidency to only 12 years for the Democrats (Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton). It appears to me that this era has ended with George W. Bush's second term.
Right now, I believe that we've entered a second period of Democrat dominance. Why? Because Herbert Hoover, Lyndon B. Johnson and George W. Bush were all highly unpopular when they left office. Hoover was unpopular because of an economic calamity. Johnson was unpopular because of a controversial war. Bush was unpopular because of an economic calamity and a controversial war.
It took the Republicans a generation to recover from Hoover's bad reputation, and it took the Democrats a generation to recover from Johnson's bad reputation. Rightly or wrongly, Bush has a bad reputation, and I wonder if it'll take a generation for the Republicans to recover from it.
With that said, it's worth noting that the less popular political party has put at least one president into the White House for two terms during the dominance of the opposite party. Grover Cleveland and Woodrow Wilson were both two-term Democrats during a long era of Republican dominance. Dwight Eisenhower was a two-term Republican when the Democrats had the upper hand, and Bill Clinton was a two-term Democrat during the most recent Republican era.
The longest period of time that one political party has had control of the White House is 20 years, when the Democrats had it from 1933 to 1953. There were two 16-year periods of one-party control, both by the Republicans, from 1869 to 1885, and 1897 to 1913. Other than that, neither party has been in control for more than 12 years at a time, which illustrates that Americans don't tolerate continuous one-party rule well.
Any thoughts?
I don't.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
