|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:Why do we have state legislatures do the redistricting, instead of say a commission of judges? A while back, and by a while back I mean possibly years, I think I remember someone in D&D talking about efforts (a ballot issue maybe?) to create a nonpartisan effort to redistrict, which got shot down by voters after Republicans fearmongered that unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats would now be drawing our districts.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 06:25 |
|
|
# ? Apr 26, 2024 00:15 |
|
Trabisnikof posted:Do you realize how your second paragraph kinda counters your first? The good news is that SCOTUS may make the argument moot this term as Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission could end up outlawing nonpartisan redistricting commissions altogether!
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 07:54 |
|
I wonder how many dead congresses it will take before the majority of liberals start taking matters into their own hands? The Westminster model has never looked so appealing before.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 08:35 |
|
Now we of course all know about the scourge that is voter fraud, but apparently, the Republicans have been fighting it even more thoroughly than I previously thought or knew about. Not sure if this has been posted before, but if not, this Al Jazeera piece is well worth the read. Jim Crow Returns quote:Election officials in 27 states, most of them Republicans, have launched a program that threatens a massive purge of voters from the rolls. Millions, especially black, Hispanic and Asian-American voters, are at risk. Already, tens of thousands have been removed in at least one battleground state, and the numbers are expected to climb, according to a six-month-long, nationwide investigation by Al Jazeera America. This is especially inspired. quote:The three states’ lists are heavily weighted with names such as Jackson, Garcia, Patel and Kim — ones common among minorities, who vote overwhelmingly Democratic. Indeed, fully 1 in 7 African-Americans in those 27 states, plus the state of Washington (which enrolled in Crosscheck but has decided not to utilize the results), are listed as under suspicion of having voted twice. This also applies to 1 in 8 Asian-Americans and 1 in 8 Hispanic voters. White voters too — 1 in 11 — are at risk of having their names scrubbed from the voter rolls, though not as vulnerable as minorities.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 10:17 |
|
I just want to say thank you Obama. For being the most ineffectual president in the history of this country. For loving everything up. Being a poor decision maker. A poor fighter. And a weak leader. For not willing to stand up on anything and dragging your whole party into the poo poo heap due to it. Hillary should have won. We are now going to have a Republican Majority in the senate. A republican majority in the congress. A republican majority in the state senates of the majority of states in the nation including liberal strongholds like loving WASHINGTON. You are either going to stand up and block the GOPs bills or you are going to bend over backwards for them. And ultimately it doesn't loving matter which one you do you loving retard because at the end of the day you will either be the the "No" president or the cowardly surrendering one. There is no win here. The name will stick. You hosed up you loving moron. And the thing is because of your incompetency. Your stupidity. And your inability to show any kind of backbone the next Democratic Presidential candidate is going to lose to. We will lose the White house and have a Republican Dictatorship. They will roll back every voting rights law. They will roll back obamacare. They will end social security. They will bankrupt the government as we know it and ensure a dictatorship for the next 20 to 40 years by corporations. Poor Americans will never have a single chance again. Not that you gave a single poo poo about them anyway. You think it was racist when Nader called you a Uncle Tom back in 2008? Well guess loving what. He was right. You weren't fit to be president. You weren't fit to lead this country. You were never fit to stand on your convictions. You are a utter coward. And you have caused the end of America for all its citizens. You are the worst president in the history of this nation and you will go down in history as a Bourgeoisie traitor you piece of scum. In 2050 when the violent uprising that places the marxist dictatorship a la Venezuela or Cuba in power with a military figurehead like Chavez or Castro we will have no one to loving thank but you. You loving retard. By then the corruption that will be inherent in our poor population will be impossible to combat and have become the norm of our culture. We will collapse as a nation because there will be no one fit to run a country any more like in South America. We will have the poor or people who care about the poor in power but they will be too stupid and too corrupt to actually do anything to help the poor. RIP America. Thanks Obama.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 10:26 |
|
England Sucks posted:I just want to say thank you Obama. For being the most ineffectual president in the history of this country. For loving everything up. Being a poor decision maker. A poor fighter. And a weak leader. For not willing to stand up on anything and dragging your whole party into the poo poo heap due to it. Did you forget to refill your Xanax prescription?
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 10:40 |
|
Obama why are you not the dragon slayer we demanded!
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 10:47 |
|
richardfun posted:Now we of course all know about the scourge that is voter fraud, but apparently, the Republicans have been fighting it even more thoroughly than I previously thought or knew about. Not sure if this has been posted before, but if not, this Al Jazeera piece is well worth the read. I didn't get through the second paragraph when I thought, "That list must be full of names like 'Juana Rodriguez' with no further identifiers like DOBs attached." Boy howdy.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 10:59 |
|
England Sucks posted:I just want to say thank you Obama. For being the most ineffectual president in the history of this country. For loving everything up. Being a poor decision maker. A poor fighter. And a weak leader. For not willing to stand up on anything and dragging your whole party into the poo poo heap due to it.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 11:08 |
|
Antti posted:I didn't get through the second paragraph when I thought, "That list must be full of names like 'Juana Rodriguez' with no further identifiers like DOBs attached." Boy howdy. The first name that popped into my head was 'Jose Garcia', but other than that, yeah...
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 11:14 |
|
Honestly, this could be one of the greatest things this midtermquote:Rep. Tom Cotton (R-AR) is against same-sex marriage and believes that LGBT workplace protection would cost too much money Well this happened quote:The ad was bought by the National Rifle Association, and for some reason, ended up on Grindr, to the embarrassment of the campaign, which told the Beast that they had “not paid for or placed that ad.”
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 12:45 |
|
England Sucks posted:I just want to say thank you Obama. For being the most ineffectual president in the history of this country. For loving everything up. Being a poor decision maker. A poor fighter. And a weak leader. For not willing to stand up on anything and dragging your whole party into the poo poo heap due to it. lol Ed - Tom Cotton grindr ad is hilarious as gently caress too.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 13:06 |
|
England Sucks posted:I just want to say thank you Obama. For being the most ineffectual president in the history of this country. For loving everything up. Being a poor decision maker. A poor fighter. And a weak leader. For not willing to stand up on anything and dragging your whole party into the poo poo heap due to it. Love, Hillaryis44
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 13:58 |
|
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 14:27 |
|
England Sucks posted:In 2050 when the violent uprising that places the marxist dictatorship a la Venezuela or Cuba in power with a military figurehead like Chavez or Castro we will have no one to loving thank but you. You loving retard. ...Literally thanks, Obama!
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 14:28 |
|
Read his custom title, you idiots, its not a lie.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 14:34 |
|
New Quinnipiac poll shows Gardner 46%, Udall 39% in CO SEN while Suffolk-Herald has Baker 46%, Coakley 43% in MA GOV. If the Herald has this in the MoE, rumors of Coakley's demise may be premature.Cliff Racer posted:Read his custom title, you idiots, its not a lie. I was hoping Pex had returned.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 14:48 |
|
The flip flopping, out for Charlie, attacks would work a lot better if the other choice wasn't Rick Scott. Yes, Charlie Crist is not an optimal candidate by any means, but his previous stint at the job was pretty OK. The other one term governor in the race seeking to become a two term governor is however approaching comic book levels of evil.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 16:00 |
|
Luigi Thirty posted:My dad was reading the local newspaper today. Buried below the fold of page 8 of the classifieds is "public notice" from the city supervisor of elections (a Republican shill) is ~notice of challenged voter registration~ and a list of a bunch of names. It says in the fine print at the bottom that if you don't show up to the city elections office and provide proof of your eligibility to vote, your name will be purged from the Florida voter rolls. Who the hell is going to see that? Is it today's Tampa Bay Times? I might look into it for a news story pitch at my work. Edit: I'm not seeing it. Do you mind posting a picture or PMing me the info? Ballz fucked around with this message at 17:33 on Oct 30, 2014 |
# ? Oct 30, 2014 16:40 |
|
quote:New Quinnipiac poll: Crist 43%, Scott 40%, Wyllie 8%, Undecided 9% Even if Crist wins, I'm positive Pam Bondi won't lose: quote:Partners with a powerful Washington, D.C., law firm aren't registered as Florida lobbyists, but that hasn't stopped them from wining and dining Attorney General Pam Bondi the past four years to discuss clients. Her opponent didn't run a single ad on TV. No one really knows who he is. I mean, I'd assume if you vote Crist you'll vote for George Sheldon, but I doubt that actually happens. She's really awful. I think I'd prefer to see her go over Rick Scott.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 16:46 |
|
lil mortimer posted:Even if Crist wins, I'm positive Pam Bondi won't lose: She's a pretty blonde lady of less that 50 years of age. Of course she's not going to lose.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 16:55 |
|
Joementum posted:New Quinnipiac poll shows Gardner 46%, Udall 39% in CO SEN while Suffolk-Herald has Baker 46%, Coakley 43% in MA GOV. If the Herald has this in the MoE, rumors of Coakley's demise may be premature. Republicans up 22 points among male likely voters in Colorado with the Democratic lead in women not as large. Democrats, please.stop.doing.anything.about.guns. Don't even say the loving word gun. The people who support gun control don't loving vote.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 16:55 |
|
Gyges posted:She's a pretty blonde lady of less that 50 years of age. Of course she's not going to lose. I was gonna say "what about Wendy Davis" but she's 51
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 17:21 |
|
Ballz posted:Is it today's Tampa Bay Times? I might look into it for a news story pitch at my work. October 29th Bradenton Herald. I think this is part of that thing where they purged 6,000 people from the voter rolls using that cross check system a few weeks ago. They said they're not really purged and can still vote but they get provisional ballots (95% of which are challenged and thrown out). Luigi Thirty fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Oct 30, 2014 |
# ? Oct 30, 2014 19:00 |
|
Luigi Thirty posted:October 29th Bradenton Herald. Thanks for the pic and the info. At first glance, it does look like a portion of the inactive voter list that caused some controversy earlier this month. Cute that the notification is buried in the Classifieds less than a week before election, though. Gonna get in touch with our Manatee/Sarasota reporter to see what she's got on this. Ballz fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Oct 30, 2014 |
# ? Oct 30, 2014 20:09 |
|
Luigi Thirty posted:October 29th Bradenton Herald. It says they have 30 days from the date of publishing (the 29th), so it can't be part of any purging for this election.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 20:16 |
|
Welp. I'm off to see Obama's rally in Portland now. I'll be back in a few hours.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 20:21 |
|
SedanChair posted:...Literally thanks, Obama! LOL If you think anyone is going to live comfortably under one of those.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 21:13 |
|
Dr.Zeppelin posted:8 years in? Sure. 4 years? I'm skeptical. If it only benefited you for one of the five elections you got with it, people wouldn't do it. Political parties tend to be a bit better than that at playing the long game. There is no "only helps for one election". If you can knock off an opposing incumbent, that helps you in future cycles (both for that seat and for hurting their ability to run for a higher office). Plus now you have an incumbent who'll be harder to unseat. If you can increase your hold on the legislature, you can pass more legislation that benefits your "side" and encourages outside groups to donate to you. If you can re-district some of your opponents into the same district, you can create a divisive primary and start drama in their party. Even if an opposing incumbent wins an election, but changing his seat boundaries you potentially weaken his connections by moving his previous donors and allied party members/electeds out of his district and force him to buddy-buddy with new folks. Dude can't run on widening the big road if that road's no longer in his district. Also political parties are frequently morons. For every guy looking 4-6 years out, there are two guys who want to further their ambitions this year, drat the cost. Unless they're bringing five or six figure donation to the table, the long-term visionaries can get crowded out pretty easily by the State Assemblymen worried about their election next year. Most party apparatchiks aren't looking out for long term idyllic future of the Party, they're looking for more power and money now. Amused to Death posted:Republicans up 22 points among male likely voters in Colorado with the Democratic lead in women not as large. Democrats, please.stop.doing.anything.about.guns. Don't even say the loving word gun. The people who support gun control don't loving vote. Honestly, the Republicans are gonna say the Democrats are coming to take your guns either way. The NRA will 99% of the time endorse Republicans regardless of what the Democrats do on guns. Jackson Taus fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Oct 30, 2014 |
# ? Oct 30, 2014 21:16 |
|
In my experience, at least here in R+12 world, the "visionaries" are idiots. I keep getting spammed with crap from some idiot that lost by 30+ in 2012 with his visionary ideas to...take on the Republicans DIRECTLY! And by that, he means "engage America in a war of light and dark forces" or some poo poo. Unsurprisingly, this guy is into "Noetics." Also unsurprisingly, he actually gets paid attention to by the hippies that get left running things. The largest progressive blog in the state promotes his crap, too. In short; nurture your craven machine politicians, because they get poo poo done and the alternative is worthless.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 21:29 |
|
Jackson Taus posted:Honestly, the Republicans are gonna say the Democrats are coming to take your guns either way. The NRA will 99% of the time endorse Republicans regardless of what the Democrats do on guns. 2012 election: Obama gun control history: None at all. Zero. Zilch. Romney gun control history: Supports and signs assault weapon ban in Massachusetts. NRA in 2012 election: Vote for Romney, Obama is going to take your guns! Oh, and this gun group in Massachusetts totally supports Romney(*ignores rebuttal from said group that they most certainly do not support Romney*)
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 21:32 |
|
Khisanth Magus posted:2012 election: Sotomayor's and Kagan's nominations were both lobbied against, and the former one at least was proven accurate. And regardless of whether Romney really believed his new arch-Republican positions, there isn't much doubt he would've upheld them, just like Obama pushing hard for the new AWB in 2013 wasn't a surprise. e: Do you think Romney wouldn't have repealed PPACA because he signed RomneyCare? Kiwi Ghost Chips fucked around with this message at 21:45 on Oct 30, 2014 |
# ? Oct 30, 2014 21:41 |
|
I saw a news channel I hadn't seen before on my TV, One America News. Apparently it's Fox News but worse? Anyway, they were playing a commercial featuring an old speech about welfare from Bill Clinton. He talks about how we need to reform welfare and how it lets people make bad choices, and the shot cuts from Clinton to a figure wearing a hoodie throwing tennis shoes onto a power line.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 22:04 |
|
Jackson Taus posted:Honestly, the Republicans are gonna say the Democrats are coming to take your guns either way. The NRA will 99% of the time endorse Republicans regardless of what the Democrats do on guns. Sten Freak fucked around with this message at 22:07 on Oct 30, 2014 |
# ? Oct 30, 2014 22:05 |
|
The NYT Upshot blog has a neat article showing how the different election forecasters have rated the close Senate races over the past few months: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/30/upshot/senate-forecast-comparisons.html It's interesting to see how 538, NYT, DailyKos, and HuffPo are all pretty similar, but the rest have some kinda wacky things going on.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 22:42 |
|
Khisanth Magus posted:2012 election: Not true, Obama signed a bill allowing people to take guns into nation parks. That was fun pointing out in 2012.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 23:00 |
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:The NYT Upshot blog has a neat article showing how the different election forecasters have rated the close Senate races over the past few months: What you're gonna wanna use is: http://weaskamerica.com/tools/turnout.php
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 23:07 |
|
Joementum posted:I was hoping Pex had returned. First person I thought of, as well. His post lacked any ungainly, difficult to pronounce portmanteaus, though, and failed to insult all of us who ever voted for Obama with same.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 23:32 |
|
One thing that surprises me is people talking about how the war on women is stale. Why does stuff like that never apply to Republicans' arguments? How does a woman decide that while she was utterly horrified by the things this guy said two years ago, now she'll give him a try?
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 23:55 |
|
|
# ? Apr 26, 2024 00:15 |
|
Dr Christmas posted:One thing that surprises me is people talking about how the war on women is stale. Why does stuff like that never apply to Republicans' arguments? How does a woman decide that while she was utterly horrified by the things this guy said two years ago, now she'll give him a try? The war on women is state because Democrats are too good at defeating personhood amendment and real women don't care about abortion anymore.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2014 23:57 |