Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-07-2014, 10:29 PM
 
25,021 posts, read 27,942,602 times
Reputation: 11790

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by radiolibre99 View Post
You guys are SO weird! Obama is not this unique politician. In fact he's a Clinton retread. He's not this "radical" lefty like you guys think, jeez.

Seriously you guys have a complex with this guy 'cus the level of strange hate and characterization of him as a "commie" is getting to be pathologically insane.
Considering that you have wingnuts on here saying that the government is trying to take control of their lives all the time, can you blame them on being insane, paranoid, and disconnected from reality? Obama is a centrist, that's it. But when you are so far gone to the right, anyone that is to the left of Milton Friedman is a commie
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-07-2014, 11:33 PM
 
Location: NJ
18,665 posts, read 19,975,497 times
Reputation: 7315
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUTGR View Post

Demographically and culturally things seem to favor democrats. I think the shelf life of running against GWB, however, has expired with the last election.

I do think Democrats, and Obama in particular, tend to misread fairly close victories
For POTUS, it has not been close at all. Bush's 286 and 271 are the sole GOP wins in 6 tries, while the Dems lowest electoral win was a 332-206 electoral shellacking.

19 states blue since 1988, plus Va and NM demographically locked blue now (solid blue, highly educated NOVA is the growth in Va)..that starts Dems around 260.

21 red states since 1988 start GOP around 180.

In short, all the Dems must do to win is take any ONE of about 5 or 6 medium or larger pop swing states, or 2 smaller ones of about 11. (51 electoral "sites" exist, including DC).

The GOP to sqeak by, must run the table on swing states, or get bison the vote as states like the Dakotas are essentially worthless from the electoral vote impact standpoint.

The OP is correct, at least for POTUS.

Last edited by bobtn; 02-07-2014 at 11:48 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2014, 11:49 PM
 
22,662 posts, read 24,605,343 times
Reputation: 20339
YES, the Naziocrats just about have things wrapped up.
When Texico goes Blue in 8-10 years, the dominance of the Skankocrats will be absolute.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2014, 04:23 AM
 
Location: texas
9,127 posts, read 7,944,791 times
Reputation: 2385
Quote:
Originally Posted by tickyul View Post
YES, the Naziocrats just about have things wrapped up.
When Texico goes Blue in 8-10 years, the dominance of the Skankocrats will be absolute.
Texico is a gas station...you mean Tejas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2014, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Cole neighborhood, Denver, CO
1,123 posts, read 3,111,930 times
Reputation: 1254
As Rush Limbaugh said, "You can't compete with Santa Claus". As long as the Democrats keep making empty promises to steal from the few and give to the masses, the majority will vote for them. It's sad, but I've accepted it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2014, 09:12 AM
 
924 posts, read 667,400 times
Reputation: 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dude_reino View Post
As Rush Limbaugh said, "You can't compete with Santa Claus". As long as the Democrats keep making empty promises to steal from the few and give to the masses, the majority will vote for them. It's sad, but I've accepted it.
Right...

Two administrations in and we have the biggest wealth gap since the Great Depression.

How exactly is Obama stealing from the few and giving to the masses? By letting the Bush tax cuts expire? Lol....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2014, 10:11 AM
 
78,432 posts, read 60,628,324 times
Reputation: 49733
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint View Post
I wish they were just one-liners. Unfortunately the GOP's lack of regard for those groups have deep insidious roots in the party that will be difficult for them to overcome. They can't just act like a party of inclusion ---they actually have to start including more people, or risk representing an ever-smaller sliver of the nation.
I heard the same stuff from the right in 2004 about how the left was doomed.

Tell you what, let's put your money where your mouth is....I will wager 2 weeks of not posting here that the Republicans pick up seats in the Senate in 2014. How is that possible with their imminent demise?

Care to wager?

P.S. You probably don't even know why they delayed implementing Obamacare until after 2012 eh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2014, 10:13 AM
 
78,432 posts, read 60,628,324 times
Reputation: 49733
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecstatic Magnet View Post
Right...

Two administrations in and we have the biggest wealth gap since the Great Depression.

How exactly is Obama stealing from the few and giving to the masses? By letting the Bush tax cuts expire? Lol....
Well, you have hit on one of the classic issues in politics. Promising stuff to people to get their votes then not wasting political capital delivering it if you don't have to.

Say <> Do.

The republicans and dems are far apart on "say" and almost identical on "do".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2014, 10:21 AM
 
78,432 posts, read 60,628,324 times
Reputation: 49733
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn View Post
For POTUS, it has not been close at all. Bush's 286 and 271 are the sole GOP wins in 6 tries, while the Dems lowest electoral win was a 332-206 electoral shellacking.

19 states blue since 1988, plus Va and NM demographically locked blue now (solid blue, highly educated NOVA is the growth in Va)..that starts Dems around 260.

21 red states since 1988 start GOP around 180.

In short, all the Dems must do to win is take any ONE of about 5 or 6 medium or larger pop swing states, or 2 smaller ones of about 11. (51 electoral "sites" exist, including DC).

The GOP to sqeak by, must run the table on swing states, or get bison the vote as states like the Dakotas are essentially worthless from the electoral vote impact standpoint.

The OP is correct, at least for POTUS.
There are pros and cons to using a 6 election historic timeframe.

The pro is it reflects more current voter make-ups.

The con is that it includes just 2 charismatic and popular democratic presidents and one kinda meh republican one.

I would point to the republicans controlling the house as somewhat calling into question your limited selection of 6 data points to draw conclusions from.

P.S. This is the same conundrum faced by insurance companies when trying to reflect hurricane etc. risks. 6 elections is woefully thin but going back and including elections from 50 years ago would also be inappropriate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2014, 10:22 AM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,473,584 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecstatic Magnet View Post
Right...

Two administrations in and we have the biggest wealth gap since the Great Depression.

How exactly is Obama stealing from the few and giving to the masses? By letting the Bush tax cuts expire? Lol....
Obamacare is one of the largest wealth transfer schemes in America's history. It's essentialy a transfer of $2700/year to the 52,000,000 "poor" in America. That doesn't even include EITC and all the other welth transfer programs that were put in place before he took office.

The point is the bills are coming due, not today, not tomorrow, but they are coming and when they're due it's going to create a perfect storm of eroded buying power, higher taxes, less government benefits, a heavily decreased social safety net and crippling public debt. You'll be luck if you get to 30 - 40 years before that happens. It looks like early 2030's is the best you'll do before austerity is your only choice and not just a little austerity for fun.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:56 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top