Rate Thread
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Voting
#31
One surprising result across the country. Several states had measures that would raise the minimum wage, and I think every single one of them passed.

Lex
Reply

#32
i usually vote absentee so I don't need to stand in line and I get to take my time to read all these propositions, esp in the state im currently in.

this thing is for sure: if ted cruz or Elizabeth warren is on the ballot, im voting for the other person. ESPECIALLY ted cruz! no one makes me cringe as much as that self-absorbed narcissistic all-about-me turd
Reply

#33
It doesn't seem credible that big money is silenced in any democracy, nor that it has ever been so. There have been more subtle hands at work in many times past, but the power of money has always reached into the halls of government. We don't like Citizens United and its derivatives, but they are merely the naked results of oligarchs dropping their shame and stepping out from behind the curtains.

And be sure about it, Democrats' hands are not clean either, so let there be no notion that the Kochs or the Republicans are some sort of singular evil force at work. The Democrats are just as guilty of gerrymandering where they hold sway as well.

Even though it is tempting to simply claim elections were bought with TV advertizing dollars, that is too convenient when analyzing races like Mitch McConnell's. He was hugely unpopular, but it wasn't hard to paint his opponent's PARTY as anti-coal in a state that has a black heart. I vote Democrat myself when there is not a more credible progressive candidate, and I am indeed anti-coal. Kentuckians aren't barefoot and sipping moonshine -- they got it, and they voted in self-interest, as many constituents do.

One good thing that can come of the landslide is that Democrats will now be FORCED to cast about and come up with a real alternative to Hillary Clinton in 2016. It is neither possible nor credible that she can be perceived as more centrist or capable of working across the aisle. Rand Paul's tweet today may be seen as a galvanizing force for the moment by Clintonians, but the ultimate result will be to mark her as un-runnable and un-winnable. Romney was doomed before and Hillary is doomed now.

Latinos also were a national factor in helping their erstwhile oppressors. Republicans have been strongly anti-immigration, with the notable exception of George Bush, but that didn't stop Latinos from voting 37% in favor of Republicans, an increase of about 11% over the last election. And it wasn't because the Republican platform appeals to Latinos economically. They beat the morality drum and won on it.

Lex Wrote:One surprising result across the country. Several states had measures that would raise the minimum wage, and I think every single one of them passed.

Lex

And that is a telling sign. In a nation swept by throw-the-bums-out routs of Democrats, the electorate voted plainly against a primary plank in the Republican platform, indicating that the nation isn't blindly nor stupidly red. That even happened in Arkansas, the seat of Wal-Mart and its repressive influence on minimum wage and workers' rights.

Another point is that Republicans were sent to Washington in cases in which the State House was kept Democratic. That's clearly a mixed message.

Much is said about Obama's recent unpopularity, but even his supporters have cited that he is too slow to find the center, and that isn't a new problem in his governing style.
Reply

#34
Step away from being partisan about this election's results and you can see some interesting things in it.

Think about these.

*Hard * core * southern * racist * Republicans* elected the first black senator in 130 years from South Carolina.

Gay Republican representative Carl Demaio in Southern California is still in the lead as votes are being counted in spite of two separate attempts by Democrats to have him labeled a "public bathroom sex pervert."

Senator Mark "Uterus" of Colorado learned women did fall for his campaign to win them on womens issues instead of his record. Obviously women in Colorado aren't as stupid as he thought they were.

Republican Joni Ernst beat the crap out of Senator Bruce Braley of Iowa... to become that state's first female in the Senate.

Gun owning red necks in Alabama passed a stricter gun registration law in spite of what everyone says about them.

Super redneck racist state Utah elected the FIRST REPUBLICAN BLACK WOMAN to Congress.

In spite of predictions by liberals, voters in conservative South Dakota passed a minimum wage bill.7

Do you see something odd about them all? They all undermine Liberal stereotypes of conservatives. Maybe voters are becoming immune to some of the partisan propaganda.
___________________________________________________
I heard a good analysis about how voters clearly rejected Obama's agenda by rejecting Democrats
Then today Obama said if Congress and senate don't cooperate with him to pass his agenda he'll do it by executive order. It makes perfect sense that it he does that to expect voters to take out their revenge on Democrats for at least 3 election cycles.
__________________________________________________
And I'm with Hardhead about Hillary Clinton. People have just rejected one progressive socialist president and won't likely be ready to have another one even if it's Hillary. No damned way I'll vote for her.
__________________________________________________
Reply

#35
Why the hell do you guys have mid term elections! It seems like a sure-fire way to make certain the government cannot do anything ever. I think the French had the same system up until the 90s, but then they realised they actually wanted government to be able to do something - not just party bickering.
Reply

#36
It's not like the government "does something" in the terms when we elect presidents. Those next two years are as blighted by gridlock, inaction, and blaming as any other.

Look deeper.

And I thought the whole Nation Front premise was that the government IS ineffectual in France, giving rise to the racists because social ills and government ineptitude are reaching intolerable levels in France. No?
Reply

#37
johnnyanger Wrote:Why the hell do you guys have mid term elections! It seems like a sure-fire way to make certain the government cannot do anything ever. I think the French had the same system up until the 90s, but then they realised they actually wanted government to be able to do something - not just party bickering.

Members of the House of Representatives are elected every two years.
The president is elected every 4 years.
Senators were appointed at the state level until 1912 when the Constitution was amended to make them elected every 6 years. This makes 1/3 of the senators up for election every two years.

It all works together to ensure that there are always some experienced individuals who aren't up for re-election.

As far as comparing the USA and France... let's see.... between 1779 and 1879 didn't they go through FOUR constitutions, THREE kings, TWO emperors, FIVE presidents, TWO Republics, ONE reign of terror, plus inventing a new state religion and goddess, a completely new calendar with new months and days..... ........

and they think they have a better government than who?
Reply

#38
Unless you're old, and in the majority, your vote don't count. History is the greatest teacher.


Which means that my vote is most likely to win over 20-something votes - sorry, old people vote more. :frown:
Reply

#39
All I meant on my point was that France had mid term elections until the 1990s, but realised there was a growing divide in ideology between the two major parties. With midterms, a lot of people protest vote and go against the party in government - meaning you get houses that are run by the opposition party, thus making legislation harder and harder to pass.

The ineffectual nature of the French government currently is because they are led by a moron, nothing to do with their set up. All I am saying is, its easier to have all your elections at once - so you set up your government and houses at once, that way they can get on with stuff rather than shutting down government a la 2013 (get ready for more of that in the coming years).
Reply

#40
I think the elections every two years has been a disaster for the US. The country is no longer focussed on governance....only on elections. It has become an addiction for the media and at the same time, because of the grindingly endless campaigning....and the abuse of the electoral process...has numbed too many people in the US who feel that their vote means nothing.
Reply



Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  THE RAINBOW AWARDS 2008: Let the voting begin!! Smurlos 19 2,447 03-20-2008, 10:51 PM
Last Post: princealbertofb

Forum Jump:


Recently Browsing
2 Guest(s)

© 2002-2024 GaySpeak.com