800lb Gorilla in the forum

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by stubeeef, Nov 3, 2009.

  1. stubeeef macrumors 68030

    stubeeef

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    #1
    Gee, no election threads?
    Looks like Change to me......
    Va had ALL 3 major candidates win in landslides.Gov/LtGov/St Atty Gen.
    Christie beats Corzine after Mr O came out as well as Biden...Hmmmm
    3rd party candidate Hoffman is having problems in NY, but that whole race is wacked.
    I am happy so far, how about you...?:):)
     
  2. Sky Blue Guest

    Sky Blue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    #2
    I'm happy. Looks like Hoffman might go down. I'll be loving Fox News & the Loony party tomorrow if he does. Q1 in Maine is too close to call. This the one I care most about

    408 of 606 Precincts Reporting - 67%

    Name Party Votes Vote %
    Owens, Bill Dem 47,826 49%
    Hoffman, Doug Con 44,349 46%
    Scozzafava, Dede GOP 5,294 5%
     
  3. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604

    thegoldenmackid

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    dallas, texas
  4. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #4
    A few local elections scattered around the country does not make a referendum on anything and I wish the right and the media would **** about a referendum on Obama. It's not.

    Virginia, despite Obama winning in 2008, has always been a right leaning state. New Jersey has a varied history with governors, with both Ds and Rs winning about equally. And a Democrat hasn't represented NY-23 since sometime in the 1800s.
     
  5. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604

    thegoldenmackid

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    dallas, texas
    #5
    Thank you. I really think that a Democrat could have won in New Jersey as long as it wasn't Corzine.
     
  6. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #6
    Sorry, we're all too busy worrying about the Obama handing us over to become slaves to the New World Order.

    Or is that food for the Visitors? I'm not sure which conspiracy we're going with today.

    Anyway, we can take solace in the fact that it's only gubernatorial races. Still, it's too bad there are so many people who have quickly forgotten how creepy the GOP can be.
     
  7. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #7
    Why is there an implication that this election somehow represents Obama or even reflects on his performance in office?

    If it does, how does it reflect on the GOP to be losing a district in New York that they've held for over a century and a half? It certainly seems far more troubling to me than a very unpopular Democratic governor being ousted or a typically right-of-center state selecting GOP executives.

    They would have. Corzine has been unpopular since his first year in office. It also helps to keep in mind that in off-year elections, conservatives have a very decisive advantage in turn-out.
     
  8. fivepoint macrumors 65816

    fivepoint

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    Location:
    IOWA
    #8
    The only reason Obama was voted in, was because the country hated Bush. Little did they know, that Obama would carry on virtually the same policies of growth of government, expensive bailouts, entitlement programs, and endless war.

    America is a CONSERVATIVE nation.

    [​IMG]


    It's just that sometimes we get fooled by those promising us 'free' things, and those offering 'change', when quite the opposite is true. At any rate, these changes demonstrated by tonight's elections should not surprise anyone. The more our nation learns about Obama's socialist (dare I say Marxist) intentions, the more they despise them.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]


    My only two hopes are that these results, and plummeting public approval ratings will hault Obama's transformational plans in their tracks... and that the Republicans return to true conservatism, true small-govermnent values, true fiscal responsibility, and stop trying to be liberal-lite.
     
  9. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #9
    Five point, your saying Obama is exactly the same as bush?
    Funny, I consider the revival of diplomacy a complete 180.
     
  10. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #10
    Not quite the same, Bush had balls. Even Bill Maher agrees.
     
  11. jecapaga macrumors 601

    jecapaga

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    #11
    And when was the last time "we" had these things you are wanting to return to?
     
  12. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #12
    Hell, I hope Obama stops trying to be liberal-lite. :D

    And America is not a conservative nation. It may have an identity problem; it may think of itself that way; but on the issues -- health care reform, abortion, the minimum wage, the wars and other topics of the day -- liberals usually win.
     
  13. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #13
    Is a comedian political commentator anti-vaxxer a good endorsement?
     
  14. Prof. macrumors 601

    Prof.

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Chicago
  15. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #15
    It certainly seems that way, yes.

    Anytime you ask the vast majority to decide on the rights of the minority, you have a recipe for disaster.
     
  16. sysiphus macrumors 6502a

    sysiphus

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    #16
    So why doesn't this argument translate to voting for tax increases on the wealthy? :p
     
  17. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #17
    When it comes to political power, the wealthy are not a minority.

    Secondly, taxation is an inherent power in any and every legitimate government that has ever been formed on Earth. The distribution of these taxes is left to the legislatures to decide.

    A government attempting to disadvantage a group of citizens based on an immutable characteristic is not a legitimate power in any government at any time.
     
  18. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604

    thegoldenmackid

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    dallas, texas
    #18
    Polls are crap. People don't really know what they are and the majority do not vote. Conservative ≠ Republican and Liberal ≠ Democratic.
     
  19. sysiphus macrumors 6502a

    sysiphus

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    #19
    The wealthy are by definition a voting minority. I'm not arguing against taxation--it's a critical part of our system. However, there's something ugly about the mentality of "we want XXX, but we want somebody else to pay for it for us."

    Finally, governments disadvantage groups of citizens based on immutable characteristics all the time--it's called Affirmative Action. Seems to have a fair bit of popular support, too.
     
  20. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #20
    How are you defining "wealthy" here? Is it anyone who qualifies for the top tax brackets in 2009? There are quite a few of those people, and they vote in very large numbers.

    They most likely do not quantify a "minority," and they are very probably a strong plurality, especially given their consistent voting patterns and ability to expend considerably more for the political causes important to them.

    If you were to break down voting patterns by income, you'll find that most voters earn above the median income, and this makes them invested in voting against any increase in progressive taxation (largely because they believe they will one day move into a higher tax bracket).

    So, no, the wealthy are not a political nor a voting minority. A plurality perhaps, but not a minority. At least certainly not in the same category as the LGTB community, which carries with it the burdens of political stigma (compare a politician who is wealthy vs one who is gay-which one do you think is going to be more successful?), and has not had the same historical access to political power.

    This is completely off topic, and quite frankly couldn't be further from the truth if we're talking about same-sex marriage. Here we have a group of people who are saying, "let us get married and watch out for ourselves." And yet, conservatives across the nation insist on saying, "no."

    It's the most illogical, inconsistent, and harmful voting pattern that has struck this nation since Jim Crow reigned supreme.

    Affirmative Action does not take away fundamental rights from anyone. Any attempt to compare it to same-sex marriage (or the banning thereof) is entirely superfluous and blatantly false.

    Moreover, if you believe that AA disadvantages anyone, you have a serious misunderstanding of Federal law governing AA. Quotas are not legal, "points" are not legal, and outright discrimination for being white or any other race is not legal. What is legal is a holistic approach that considers the unique aspects of each candidate.
     
  21. sysiphus macrumors 6502a

    sysiphus

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    #21
    We're arguing semantics with regard to the taxation idea--and it is getting off topic, you're right. I'd be happy to debate it with you, but it's probably best left to a separate thread...as you said, it's getting off topic.

    AA absolutely disadvantages people--you take a field of people, and deliberately skew the odds of selection based on race/other demographics out of one's control. There's never a justification for being more OR less considered for xxxxxxx because of the color of my skin--doesn't matter if I'm an underrepresented minority or WASPy McWASP.
     
  22. Sky Blue Guest

    Sky Blue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    #22
    Hopefully the far Right hand some more seats in congress to the Democrats in 2010. Good job guys.
     
  23. tofagerl macrumors 6502a

    tofagerl

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    #23
    I love how you americans lump everything into tiny categories. All US political opinions in three groups: conservative, liberal, and "unsure".
    You really should consider getting some other parties, it might help things.
     
  24. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #24
    .
     
  25. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #25
    So republicans won two governor seats that tend to change party around every 8 years or so. Big deal. The bigger news of the night is the Democrats won in NY-23, beating a teabagging conservative endorsed by Glenn Beck and all those other morons to take a seat that hasn't been held by a Democrat in over 100 years.
     

Share This Page