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.
All paid for by the taxpayer. Who is the EBT processor? JP Morgan and JP Morgan makes over a half a billion dollars off food stamps. Banks make money from EBT Debit card withdrawals.
By making welfare inefficiency and abuse lucrative, the poverty industry has created a potentially toxic brew of corporate cronyism and government inefficiency that lets food stamp abuse enforcement slip through the bureaucratic cracks. Welfare jumped during the Obama administration so it is good for the banks. If that isn't government and banks in bed together I don't know what is.
A very interesting article the *******s here will go ranting nuts over but is quite clear and concise about the subject. I especially found this to be interesting:
I think without reading the article its clearly going no where. its a movement based on increasing spending and deficits leading to future of long repayments at best. Its really a very young movement has they go .Of course those I the ole guard all portraying them as bad because they recognize the gains they have made in state houses likely to move upward. hat is the reason they say all politics is local. It's even shifted the governing conversations in both parties to taxes and spending.
Yes you do. Maybe it doesn't get the votes when you stand up on principle and state those principles. Then if it does, your name is not forever attached to it.
No President, Republican or Democrat, is going to veto a bill that has more than 67% support in both the Senate and the House. No President has ever been that stupid.
As far as the President's name is concerned, bills enacted by Congress become law automatically after ten calendar days (excluding Sundays) while Congress is in session. The President's signature is not required.
Expect another wave of TEA Party candidates in 2014. The Democrats are going to get stomped.
Gerrymandering has more to do with the GOP House success than the TP, but the TP did reelect Obama, by wrecking the GOP brand in swing states ..again.
The TP is great at pulling a fast one on conservs..it does best where it isn't needed..states that have been Repub for decades now. Any R could win those states at any time.
It cripples the party though where a state can go either way.
In 2012, the GOP lost House seats, not easy to do, given gerrymandering. Take a bow for that, TP.
I think without reading the article its clearly going no where. its a movement based on increasing spending and deficits leading to future of long repayments at best. Its really a very young movement has they go .Of course those I the ole guard all portraying them as bad because they recognize the gains they have made in state houses likely to move upward. hat is the reason they say all politics is local. It's even shifted the governing conversations in both parties to taxes and spending.
Its a movement based on increasing spending and deficits.. You have that part right based on the Tea Partys dependency on SS, Medicare, VA, and other government spending which the article notes. The Tea Party version of Medicare reform Ryans Plan is essentially here is the plan for thee while existing Medicare is plan for me.
Gerrymandering has more to do with the GOP House success than the TP, but the TP did reelect Obama, by wrecking the GOP brand in swing states ..again.
The TP is great at pulling a fast one on conservs..it does best where it isn't needed..states that have been Repub for decades now. Any R could win those states at any time.
It cripples the party though where a state can go either way.
In 2012, the GOP lost House seats, not easy to do, given gerrymandering. Take a bow for that, TP.
You seem to forget the 2010 mid-term, which ushered in 75 House TEA Party Republicans. Mid-term elections typically benefit the party not in the White House.
It has more to do with the war between the TEA Party Republicans and the Establishment Republicans, than it has anything to do with Democrats. Democrats are going to lose seats in 2014, no matter what happens. The only issue is whether the majority of those lost seats will go to TEA Party Republicans or Establishment Republicans.
In Alaska's case, Sen. Mark Begich (D) is up for reelection in 2014. It is a given that he will lose by a landslide. The only question will be whether the TEA Party Republican candidate Joe Miller, or the Establishment Republican Lt. Gov. Mead Tredwell, will be the next Junior Senator from Alaska.
You seem to forget the 2010 mid-term, which ushered in 75 House TEA Party Republicans. Mid-term elections typically benefit the party not in the White House.
.
Mainstream Repubs would have gained just about the same quantity of seats. The TP jumped aboard the running back poised to cross the goal line.
But the TP harms the party every 4 years. Swing states went solidly for Obama, and many were available..had MR run as the mainstream candidate he once was. He ran for Ma Senate vs Kennedy as the more "Pro Choice" candidate, and he fully embraced and promoted Romneycare, which includes an individual mandate and tax penalty. Independents decide the POTUS, and the R's disenfranchised them from considering the nominee.
Mainstream Repubs would have gained just about the same quantity of seats. The TP jumped aboard the running back poised to cross the goal line.
But the TP harms the party every 4 years. Swing states went solidly for Obama, and many were available..had MR run as the mainstream candidate he once was. He ran for Ma Senate vs Kennedy as the more "Pro Choice" candidate, and he fully embraced and promoted Romneycare, which includes an individual mandate and tax penalty. Independents decide the POTUS, and the R's disenfranchised them from considering the nominee.
Incorrect. The Democratic Party harms the nation, all the time. The TEA Party is attempting to bring fiscal sanity back to the Republican Party. From FY00 through FY07 the Republican Party was spending like they were 1960s Democrats. The Republican base is primarily fiscal conservatives, and they are no longer being represented by the Establishment Republicans. That is why the TEA Party exists, and will continue to exist the more that fiscal insanity presides over Congress.
Wrong. You see you are talking emotionally and your wish list..I'm talking math.
This is the order, by quantity, of the voting pop:
(1) Independents
(2) Democrats
(3) Republicans
3 cannot win, without more support from 1 and 2, versus the support 2 needs from 1 and 3.
The TP eliminated GOP support from independents.
19 states are blue since 1988, add Va and NM now demographically blue, Dems start at 260. GOP has 21 red since 1988, they start at 180 or so.
See while you talk emotion, I prefer talking math. Math gets you to 270. You cannot start needing EVERY swing state as the GOP does, and win.
To win, the GOP needs to win a few of the 19 blue since 1988.
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.
