USA Mid-Term Election Results

[Wrath of Dagon]

Well, we seem to be off into foreign policy weeds, but for those interested in domestic American politics, here's a couple of articles:

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/11/the-scariest-part-of-the-republican-blowout-for-democrats/382375/

 

He's right, social issues are best dealt with at the state level, but he's wrong about lumping amnesty in with social issues. In fact all the Republican Senate candidates that won made opposition to amnesty for illegals an issue in their campaigns.

 

Here's another one about Texas : http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/11/06/Anti-Amnesty-Pro-Border-Security-GOP-Candidates-in-TX-GA-Got-Over-40-of-Latino-Vote Given the margin of Republican victory for all state wide offices of 20% or more, I now feel much better about Texas staying Republican for at least 20 years, demographics or not. Also what the article doesn't say is the Lieutenant Governor candidate was even to the right of Abbott, unlike Abbott made opposition to illegal immigration the centerpiece of his campaign, and ran against a Hispanic woman, yet got the same margin of victory as Abbott, which means about the same Hispanic support as well. So may be Hispanics aren't the Republican Kryptonite the Democrats think they are.

[licketysplit]

My take. The publicans control everything. We're all doomed.

[ShadySands]

I got a laugh out of this

[BruceVC]

I got a laugh out of this

 

This is a good read about some of the misunderstandings  around the what the Mid-Term election results mean

[Leferd]

I got a laugh out of this

Reads to me like a victory for the libertarian wing of the GOP.

[Guard Dog]

 

I got a laugh out of this

Reads to me like a victory for the libertarian wing of the GOP.

 

Let's hope

[ShadySands]

I rather just have the actual Libertarians, who I mostly* voted for but did not win.

 

 

*I admit also voting for a couple Green party candidates

[Guard Dog]

I rather just have the actual Libertarians, who I mostly* voted for but did not win.

 

 

*I admit also voting for a couple Green party candidates

  Pick a lane Shady you're all over the road!

[Guard Dog]

In other news an 18 year old college freshman was elected to the West Virginia state house: http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/11/05/18-year-old-freshman-elected-to-w-va-house-of-delegates-becomes-youngest-state-lawmaker-in-us/

 

Also New York voters (New York is like mecca for democrats) rejected a low key democrat in favor of a Republican under indictment for fraud. He may not even complete his term in office if he ends up doing prison time. http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/05/new-york-city-elects-a-republican-under-federal-indictment/?_r=0

 

I guess that is just two more examples of how out of favor the democrats are.

[ShadySands]

To be fair Staten Island is more Jersey than NYC

 

Edited November 7, 2014 by ShadySands

[Darth InSidious]

My take. The publicans control everything. We're all doomed.

 

Doomed to drunkenness?

[pseudonymous]

But my question is really towards those people who voted for the Republicans. I am interested in the main reasons why?

 

No one in this country votes for who they like, we vote for who we hate the least.

[Guard Dog]

 

But my question is really towards those people who voted for the Republicans. I am interested in the main reasons why?

 

No one in this country votes for who they like, we vote for who we hate the least.

 

Amen!

[ShadySands]

Pro tip to any politician who wants my vote in a couple years. I have just two words for you: moon base

[Gorgon]

 

To be fair Staten Island is more Jersey than NYC

 

That was bizarre. I kinda wished the reporter had persisted. I mean he didn't walk away but tried to bully his way out of a question.

[TMZuk]

*Sigh* No, Obama isn't close to being a "commie". Read a bloody book, for crying out loud.

 

And this made me laugh. Otherwise I'd cry.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqDBz4M9Jkg

[Wrath of Dagon]

I got a laugh out of this

The butthurt is strong with this one. A few left-leaning states voted as expected, this is supposed to prove something? True raising the minimum wage is fairly popular, but mostly only people earning the minimum wage feel strongly about it. And as we have seen, states that want it are perfectly capable of doing it for themselves, it doesn't have to be done at the federal level.

[BruceVC]

 

I got a laugh out of this

The butthurt is strong with this one. A few left-leaning states voted as expected, this is supposed to prove something? True raising the minimum wage is fairly popular, but mostly only people earning the minimum wage feel strongly about it. And as we have seen, states that want it are perfectly capable of doing it for themselves, it doesn't have to be done at the federal level.

 

 

WOD when do you think Texas will legalize Marijuana for recreational use? I imagine this will take some time as I consider Texas conservative when it comes to these types of issues?

[Valsuelm]

Maher is a class A moron. A bitter shallow minded semi comedic hack that seems to find fans from other politically shallow minded, jaded, or bitter folks. If you're going to listen to a modern guy who thinks he's a comedian take on the news at least listen to someone who is occasionally amusing like Colbert or Stewart. No one alive I know of has anything on Carlin or Hicks though, both of whom were far more intelligent and funny than any of the aforementioned.

 

As for Texas and marijuana? Probably within 10-15 years tops, as with all the other states. Texas is not the red state it once was. Like most other large cities in the U.S., Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, and especially Houston are bastions of socialist nutjobs. As those cities grow and the urbanite ignorant masses who suck in brainwashing propaganda like a sponge swell Texas grows bluer and bluer.

 

That said, it's a myth that Republicans are against legalizing marijuana and Democrats are for it. You have numerous people in both parties that are for and against it, and most 'blue' states, including the one I live in are quite aways from legalizing it (if I were wagering I'd wager Texas will legalize it before New York). Right now it's still generally perceived as politically unintelligent to come out for legalization (note that for the most part where it's become legal it was made legal by ballot initiative, not due to politicians passing bills) though this is slowly changing. Legalizing drugs however is going to be interesting in the long run as it's one of a few major emerging fronts where the states will be pit against the Feds. I don't see the federal government ending it's 'war on drugs' anytime remotely soon, despite the growing sentiment all over the U.S. (it's actually very large now) that it needs to end.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Valsuelm

[BruceVC]

Maher is a class A moron. A bitter shallow minded semi comedic hack that seems to find fans from other politically shallow minded, jaded, or bitter folks. If you're going to listen to a modern guy who thinks he's a comedian take on the news at least listen to someone who is occasionally amusing like Colbert or Stewart. No one alive I know of has anything on Carlin or Hicks though, both of whom were far more intelligent and funny than any of the aforementioned.

 

As for Texas and marijuana? Probably within 10-15 years tops, as with all the other states. Texas is not the red state it once was. Like most other large cities in the U.S., Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, and especially Houston are bastions of socialist nutjobs. As those cities grow and the urbanite ignorant masses who suck in brainwashing propaganda like a sponge swell Texas grows bluer and bluer.

 

That said, it's generally a myth that Republicans are against legalizing marijuana and Democrats are for it. You have numerous people in both parties that are for and against it. Right now it's still generally perceived as politically unintelligent to come out for legalization (note that for the most part where it's become legal it was made legal by ballot, not due to politicians passing bills) though this is slowly changing. Legalizing drugs however is going to be interesting in the long run as it's one of a few major emerging fronts where the states will be pit against the Feds. I don't see the federal government ending it's 'war on drugs' anytime remotely soon, despite the growing sentiment all over the U.S. (it's actually very large now) that it needs to end.

 

Yeah I hear you about the legal dichotomy between the Fed and state laws that exists in some cases

 

I was watching a documentary on CNN about the states that have legalised Marijuana and how this has created huge amounts of revenue and is very profitable but because the  Federal government still considers Marijuana an illegal drug they wont allow the various weed shops to deposit any money directly,  generated from weed sales, into banks and people have to pay for the stock with cash. So the owners of these shops normally always have huge amounts of money on there premises which  they have to probably keep

"under there mattresses "

 

Its a weird legal issue that exists because of the fact that various states have legalised something the Fed considers illegal

Edited November 9, 2014 by BruceVC

[Namutree]

It's f**king bull**** that weed (or any drug) is illegal. One would think that the self described, 'conservatives' would be interested in traditional American values, but no; they're just statist radicals. The government has no right to determine what we do or do not consume.

[BruceVC]

It's f**king bull**** that weed (or any drug) is illegal. One would think that the self described, 'conservatives' would be interested in traditional American values, but no; they're just statist radicals. The government has no right to determine what we do or do not consume.

 

I agree but I suppose you have to have some exceptions like Heroine which most countries criminalize and don't allow you to legally consume  because of the addictive nature of the substance

[Guard Dog]

 

Maher is a class A moron. A bitter shallow minded semi comedic hack that seems to find fans from other politically shallow minded, jaded, or bitter folks. If you're going to listen to a modern guy who thinks he's a comedian take on the news at least listen to someone who is occasionally amusing like Colbert or Stewart. No one alive I know of has anything on Carlin or Hicks though, both of whom were far more intelligent and funny than any of the aforementioned.

 

As for Texas and marijuana? Probably within 10-15 years tops, as with all the other states. Texas is not the red state it once was. Like most other large cities in the U.S., Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, and especially Houston are bastions of socialist nutjobs. As those cities grow and the urbanite ignorant masses who suck in brainwashing propaganda like a sponge swell Texas grows bluer and bluer.

 

That said, it's generally a myth that Republicans are against legalizing marijuana and Democrats are for it. You have numerous people in both parties that are for and against it. Right now it's still generally perceived as politically unintelligent to come out for legalization (note that for the most part where it's become legal it was made legal by ballot, not due to politicians passing bills) though this is slowly changing. Legalizing drugs however is going to be interesting in the long run as it's one of a few major emerging fronts where the states will be pit against the Feds. I don't see the federal government ending it's 'war on drugs' anytime remotely soon, despite the growing sentiment all over the U.S. (it's actually very large now) that it needs to end.

 

Yeah I hear you about the legal dichotomy between the Fed and state laws that exists in some cases

 

I was watching a documentary on CNN about the states that have legalised Marijuana and how this has created huge amounts of revenue and is very profitable but because the  Federal government still considers Marijuana an illegal drug they wont allow the various weed shops to deposit any money directly,  generated from weed sales, into banks and people have to pay for the stock with cash. So the owners of these shops normally always have huge amounts of money on there premises which  they have to probably keep

"under there mattresses "

 

Its a weird legal issue that exists because of the fact that various states have legalised something the Fed considers illegal

 

Personally whenever the states defy the federal government I have a big smile on my face. This country was founded as a union of sovereign states. We've lost that along the way and it's something we need to get back at least in some measure. So whether it's gay marriage, marijuana, whatever, right or wrong it erodes the power of the federal leviathan and that is only a good thing.

Edited November 9, 2014 by Guard Dog

[Namutree]

Personally whenever the states defy the federal government I have a big smile on my face. This country was founded as a union of sovereign states. We've lost that along the way and it's something we need to get back at least in some measure. So whether it's gay marriage, marijuana, whatever, right or wrong it erodes the power of the federal leviathan and that is only a good thing.

 

 

 

 

 

To be fair the Articles of Confederation era of the US was only ever meant to be temporary. The founders themselves would be the ones to end the idea that the states are sovereign.

 

As for your concern for state's rights: The usefulness of state's rights is only really a result of a deeper problem; the government governs too much. When the founders established our legal system they intended for the US to develop towards John Locke philosophy, but we lost our way (mainly due to Christian zealots). Deal with the lack of John Locke, and you'll fix the problems with the federal government.

 

Personally, I don't see what's so great about state's rights. Sure, in this case it give us more freedom, but what if weed was federally legal? Would you support an individual state's right to ban it? I say f**k that. I'll accept state's rights only when it conforms to John Locke philosophy; otherwise 'state's rights' can give us things like Jim Crow.

 

 

 

It's f**king bull**** that weed (or any drug) is illegal. One would think that the self described, 'conservatives' would be interested in traditional American values, but no; they're just statist radicals. The government has no right to determine what we do or do not consume.

 

I agree but I suppose you have to have some exceptions like Heroine which most countries criminalize and don't allow you to legally consume  because of the addictive nature of the substance

 

Nope, no exceptions needed. Most of our history there was no drug prohibition at all, and that position conforms to our founding values. Anyone accepting less than NO prohibition of any kind is both wrong, and NOT a conservative (in the US). They can call themselves conservative if they like, but it's a lie.

[TMZuk]

Maher is a class A moron. A bitter shallow minded semi comedic hack that seems to find fans from other politically shallow minded, jaded, or bitter folks. If you're going to listen to a modern guy who thinks he's a comedian take on the news at least listen to someone who is occasionally amusing like Colbert or Stewart. No one alive I know of has anything on Carlin or Hicks though, both of whom were far more intelligent and funny than any of the aforementioned.

I do listen to Colbert and Stewart. That doesn't change the fact that Maher is right about this. And about a great many other things as well.

 

"Trickle down economy" has never worked! Not once. Not in any country, anywhere, ever! It is complete and utter nonsense. Tax cuts for the wealthy serves one purpose and one purpose alone. Make the wealthy wealthier! The don't create more jobs, when they get richer, they don't buy more. They just get richer. And the money accumulates on fewer and fewer hands. What makes the wealthy create more jobs and invest more money in production is one thing and one thing only: More demand for what ever it is they make money on.

 

Taxes is about taking money from the rich and put them back in circulation. You want to get a capitalist economy working? Raise the taxes on the wealthy and lower it for the middle and the lowest incomes. They get more money, they spend more money. On stuff. Stuff that other people produce. It is so simple that anyone who's not a greedy, right wing politician or millionaire can see it.

Edited November 9, 2014 by TMZuk