Third Party & Independents Archives

Speaker Ryan Can't Fake It

So how does it go again in the Art of The Deal? Protect the downside and the upside will take care of itself. In other words, imagine the worst outcome and prepare to deal with it, so if it happens you can handle it. Maybe Paul Ryan has read up a little on the Art of The Deal. Because he has deliberately dowsed with tepid water any expectations of a magically unified Republican Party as the result of his get together with Trump this Thursday.

This is not at all stupid on the Speaker's part. He's telling his party and the country that the GOP cannot fake being united. Unifying the GOP after a very hard-fought, sometimes nasty, and always divisive primary is inexorably a tough slog. It will take work, as in somehow agreeing to what can be agreed to in terms of principles. And agreeing to disagree without threats of banishment and exile, on those areas that cannot produce agreement.

Will it work? How flexible is Trump on policy? He's been accused of having no true policy and merely wanting power. Could that be why Mitch McConnell climbed on board so quickly, once Indiana was over? Or, Trump has been accused of being a liberal who's using populism to take over the Republican Party. Or, Trump is Berlusconi/Mussolini/Huey Long: a dangerous populist who will irreparably damage America's institutions.

Could it be that his conservative opponents can't agree on why they dislike him so much? Or is it when you go after the very rules of the game, rather than play the game, then you get planeloads of enemies attacking you? When you stride up the sacred, shining hill and just grab that three-legged stool and walk straight out the front door of the shrine, true believers will grab their pitchforks.

Could it also be that one of Ryan's goals is to find out exactly what it is about Trump that he dislikes: character, tactics, policy? As in sizing up a very formidable opponent who he never thought would make it to this point. And then seeing what he could negotiate. And where he should cede.

Trump and Ryan are playing very different games. Trump needs enough of the GOP (which is most of it) to beat Hillary in the brutal election that's just around the corner. Ryan will need to ensure he does not sink his own career, and that he has a leg and a platform to stand on in 2020 and beyond, if Trump loses in November. And they both know this. Don't expect too much too soon.

Posted by AllardK at May 11, 2016 7:51 PM
Comments
Comment #404709

Trump met Ryan and the Senate leaders. Nothing happened.

Trump changed his stand on barring Muslims from entering the US. Now he says it was just a suggestion.

Elizabeth Warren torched Trump is a series of tweets. Now HuffPo thinks HRC will consider her for VP. It would be a formidable ticket. Trump can not handle Warren. He can not handle strong women. They drive him crazy.

And finally, Trump refused to release any of his tax records. The Clintons have released over 30 years of filings, yet HRC is untrustworthy and lies, while Trump tells it like is it?

And 49/50 national polls show HRC ahead by solid margins, but the media plays up the one that shows Trump with a small lead. The one, Rasmussen, was one of the very worst from the 2012 campaign, in part because of its partisanship, and in part because it failed to account for cell phone users in polls, resulting in @ 4% bias for the GOP. Same things happened with Quinnipiac. While polls averages show HRC with solid leads in most swing states, this one showed Trump close or ahead in a few. Naturally, that received attention, and the fact HRC is ahead has been ignored.

Posted by: phx8 at May 13, 2016 9:24 AM
Comment #404711

Trump, Ryan and the others said the meeting was productive.

Just a suggestion? Perhaps he just ‘misspoke’ like he did when he stated he was going to “put a lot of coal miners out of jobs.”

Whacko Warren would be pandering to the bern-outs, so she just might do that.

Yes, it is a fact that HRC has been caught in multiple lies and many believe her to be untrustworthy. Hillary starts yapping about tax returns and Trump will likely counter with speech transcripts. Two peas in a pod.

Polls are silly, especially this far out. But I got to say that the left seems more nervous now that Trump is the nominee. They have doubled down on the false pro-Hillary and anti-Trump talking-points, and it’s only May.
LOL

Posted by: kctim at May 13, 2016 9:45 AM
Comment #404714

Individual polls should be viewed with caution. Polling averages are more useful.

It would be fine with me if all the candidates released all the transcripts of all the speeches they give. However, it seems reasonable to require all the candidates be given the same treatment, and that means BOTH Trump and Hillary. There is not precedent for this, but if that is a talking point, that’s fine, as long as it is applied equally.

There IS a precedent for releasing tax returns. Every presidential candidate since 1976 has released their taxes. Nixon released his in 1973 even though he was being audited at the time. There is no reason Trump can not release his taxes. None. His returns are no more complicated than Romney’s taxes.

“It is disqualifying for a modern-day presidential nominee to refuse to release tax returns to the voters, especially one who has not been subject to public scrutiny in either military or public service. Tax returns provide the public with its sole confirmation of the veracity of a candidate’s representations regarding charities, priorities, wealth, tax conformance, and conflicts of interest. Further, while not a likely circumstance, the potential for hidden inappropriate associations with foreign entities, criminal organizations, or other unsavory groups is simply too great a risk to ignore for someone who is seeking to become commander-in-chief.

Mr. Trump says he is being audited. So? There is nothing that prevents releasing tax returns that are being audited. Further, he could release returns for the years immediately prior to the years under audit. There is only one logical explanation for Mr. Trump’s refusal to release his returns: there is a bombshell in them. Given Mr. Trump’s equanimity with other flaws in his history, we can only assume it’s a bombshell of unusual size.”
Mitt Romney, 5/11/16

And remember, the Clintons have released over 30 years of returns.


Posted by: phx8 at May 13, 2016 10:37 AM
Comment #404715

As for Elizabeth Warren for VP, her nomination makes a lot of political sense. My chief reservation about her concerns her personality should she ever become president. Can she work with others? Can she craft compromises? Can she be president of all the people? Obama did this. HRC can do this.

Elizabeth Warren would make a great attack dog. She absolutely destroys Trump with her attacks and she really seems to enjoy doing it. She s incredibly effective. That’s a set of skills I’m not sure HRC possesses. And in purely political terms, she would be the perfect candidate for turning out the Millennials and the liberal left. A month ago I would have said ‘no way,’ but suddenly it begins to make more sense.

Posted by: phx8 at May 13, 2016 10:46 AM
Comment #404716

With there still being almost six months before the election, guess we will have to see just how important Trumps tax returns are to how everything plays out.
I don’t think you guys need them in order to win, but Trumps response, especially with the Clinton Foundations returns and questionable activity still hanging out there, it should be quite entertaining.

Um, no. Obama did not even try to be president of all the people. HRC won’t try. And Warren wouldn’t even give it a thought. All three are complete ideologues.

Yes, Warren is effective with the bern-outs and the far-left, and would definitely bring them out to vote. Personally, I think she would be more useful to you guys where she is now.

Posted by: kctim at May 13, 2016 11:54 AM
Comment #404718

phx8, while I would thoroughly enjoy Warren attacking Trump I have some reservations. She is such a force in the Senate, I am uncertain she would be replaced by someone as efficient as she is at getting stuff done that helps our country. I did see a definite no from Julian Castro as to a suggestion of him as a VP running mate to Hillary. I really thought that would be a good fit at one time, I would respect his decision now. The VP running mate decision will be interesting for both parties. Who ever Trump picks will need to grow some pretty thick skin, given Trump’s ability to alienate nearly everyone listening to him with very little aplomb displayed. Trump keeps digging further and further the hole of discontent he seems to think appeals to many people. I suppose there is a limited electorate out there that has not been paying attention to what has happened in the last 7 and a half years but they didn’t seem to understand much then or now.

Posted by: Speak4all at May 13, 2016 12:01 PM
Comment #404719

Another ugly American.

Hilarious that this dreg of humanity is getting punked so badly but I can’t think of anyone more deserving.

Posted by: Speak4all at May 13, 2016 12:21 PM
Comment #404720

Basing guilt and innocence on skin color and the resulting unjustified hatred and name calling of people proven to not be in the wrong, is yet another reason the anti PC message is resonating with people.

IF the talking-point is true and the Conservatives are who created Trump, there can be no doubt that liberals are who made him viable.

Posted by: kctim at May 13, 2016 12:55 PM
Comment #404721
But I got to say that the left seems more nervous now that Trump is the nominee.

Not me kctim. I’m happier than a pig in s**t that Trump will be running for president against the dems. It is a win win IMHO.

First of all it means Cruz or some other dangerous low life won’t get the chance to put someone on the SCOTUS whilst shoving the current bogus stalemate regarding the SCOTUS up the conservative senators a**es.

Second we get the repubs all laid out and on the table for the voters to decide where the country goes from here. I mean what passes for the repubs/consrvatives idea of truthful will stop being hidden in “luntzisms”. Racial slurs and such will be on the table, the voters will decide if PC is what we want. After all that is what the Trumpsters mean when they tell us they think Trump is honest and tells us like it is, right?

Third, guess what happens when the repub establishment gets their hooks into Trump and the working poor realize he is just another pawn of the party. They won’t vote in masses, just like before. On top of that the more moderate repubs will realize they have ran a dumbed down less capable GWB.

But hey lets just say he wins. He does have years of anti Clinton propaganda, voter suppression , computer glitches that favor repubs and a dumbed down America on his side. So he gets in and in the first 100 days gets the wall shoved up his a** by Mexico and disillusions the American people as the economy crumbles and stock markets fail. This type of creative destruction may be just what we need as a country. An eye opener not seen since…well…Hoover and the great depression. Conservatives start to question, I know asking a lot but sooner or later. Anyway on the other side of the aisle they too start to question the corporate dems and the corruption that has left all of us angry and fearful.

Maybe we realize as a country that it does matter and government is what we make it and leadership is important. Or we fall to pieces and become the 3rd world nation conservatives have fought so long to bring us to. Either way chaos and war come home to roost and we settle the bitter partisanship that divides us and we move on or backwards into the “good ol’ days” of conservative mythology.

So at the least, should Trump win and the country goes to hell all of us share in the globalization of America not just the working poor. At the least we can use racial slurs or “Trump truths” as we look to blame others for the calamity right?

Posted by: j2t2 at May 13, 2016 1:02 PM
Comment #404722

Jesus, J2, no wonder you guys lose your collective minds when every single thing doesn’t go your way. If I didn’t know better, I’d say it looks like you are starting to actually believe all that doom and gloom hyperbole.

Cruz is a dangerous low life? ‘Repubs/consrvatives’ are all racists just dying to racial slurs? Anti Clinton facts are nothing but propaganda? A simple ID equals voter suppression? They use Diebold, black boxes or whatever to steal elections? A crappy country like Mexico will be able to bully the US because a liberal isn’t President? The economy crumbles and stock markets fail because a liberal isn’t President? That under a Republican President chaos and war come home to roost and we settle the bitter partisanship that divides us? (Actually, I like that one)

Look, there is only one reason why liberals seem nervous about Trump: They know that the majority of people are moderate and they may just say eff it and vote for actual change. Which means their ridiculous pet issues like free abortions, gun control, and special treatment for certain groups won’t be the top priority anymore.

Trump wins and our lives won’t be any different than they are today. Well, the left will be complaining about all the things they defend Obama on today, of course, but our day to day lives won’t be all that different.

Posted by: kctim at May 13, 2016 1:59 PM
Comment #404725

One of the odd things about the GOP primary is that there was so little vetting of trump by his opponents. He is a veritable gold mine of scandals and embarrassments. The Democrats could conceivably soak up media bandwidth every day by bringing up a new one.

It’s been a very bad couple of days for Trump. His refusal to release tax returns did not go well. When asked about his effective tax return while on television, he snapped ‘none of your business.’ He announced everything he said in the campaign up until now was just a suggestion. Seriously. He said that after attempting to walk back his pronouncement about banning all Muslims from entering the US (except returning US citizens and leaders of foreign countries). First, he made an exception for the Mayor of London. Then he claimed the initial pronouncement was just a suggestion. Whoops! To top it up, a recording emerged of him on the phone pretending to be someone else, and talking up Trump. That takes narcissism to a whole new level! Trump denied it, but analysis shows it was him, all right, and he actually testified under oath that he did that kind of thing occasionally.

Trump said bringing up things from the 1990’s was “so low.” This, from a guy who called Hillary Clinton “an unbelievable mean, nasty enabler.”

Bad week for Trump. This election is going to end in a landslide for HRC.

Posted by: phx8 at May 13, 2016 4:30 PM
Comment #404726


So what do you think American’s care more about?

Banning muslims from certain areas until we can get a better handle on our vetting system, in the name of national security?
OR
Putting a lot of American citizens out of work and a lot of American companies out of business, in the name of climate change?

Posted by: kctim at May 13, 2016 5:51 PM
Comment #404727

Climate trivia:
In Portland, OR, by May we average one day with a temperature of over 80 degrees. (Record keeping began in 1940). 33 years have no days with temperatures over 80 degrees by the end of May.

The previous record in 1987 had 9 days over 80 degrees.

This year we have already had 13 days.

Just a wild coincidence, I know. Scientists predict Global Warming due to human activity, and we have warmer and warmer temperatures just as predicted.

We have recently experienced 15/16 warmest years on record. 2014 set a record. 2015 broke that record. 2016 is already a virtual lock to break that one, even though it is only May.

But what the hey! We wouldn’t want to economically inconvenience anyone, would we? After all, we can always get another planet.

Posted by: phx8 at May 13, 2016 6:10 PM
Comment #404728

I wouldn’t be too sure about that, phx8. The emergence of Elizabeth Warren is a sign that the Democrats need a plain speaking, confident populist to counter Trump and compliment Hillary. Warren is a good campaigner who beat a formidable incumbent (Scott Brown) in a high visibility contest. I suspect that she would be very effective with the female voter, young and old.

Posted by: Rich at May 13, 2016 6:30 PM
Comment #404731

I hope Al Franken lends a hand to the HRC camp. I think he’d be a good VP pick too.

Posted by: Warren Porter at May 13, 2016 7:45 PM
Comment #404733

WP,
Intriguing idea. The problem with choosing either Warren or Franken is that they are already so good at what they are doing in the Senate.

A recent poll by PPP showed a majority of Republicans believe the stock market has gone down and the unemployment rate has increased during the Obama presidency. This is wrong. This is 100% dead wrong. But what will happen when a majority of a party believe things that are factually wrong? If FOX and right wing talk show radio encourage these kinds of wrong beliefs, and various conspiracy theories, how in the world is the country supposed to succeed?

Posted by: phx8 at May 13, 2016 11:47 PM
Comment #404742
Cruz is a dangerous low life?
Yep. But it is bigger than that kctim. The low life included anyone in the Senate that refuses to move forward on the SCOTUS nominee because they believe the next president should nominate.
‘Repubs/consrvatives’ are all racists just dying to racial slurs?

Kctim what do you think PC is about? It is conservatives that whine because they cannot call people names based upon their race without the wrath of public opinion. Does that mean they are racist? I don’t know you tell me if calling the black guy a ni**er is racist. Even if it only for fun or whatever.

A simple ID equals voter suppression? They use Diebold, black boxes or whatever to steal elections?

Sigh… Pleeze kctim you act as if the ID was the only part of the laws passed by conservatives to suppress the vote. Don’t be ridiculous everyone but conservatives know better. But that being said even the ID requirement was an attempt to keep people from voting. The facts are out there ignore them at your will.

A crappy country like Mexico will be able to bully the US because a liberal isn’t President?

Funny you mention “bullying” considering Trump telling us he will build the wall and Mexico will pay for it. A bloated military and a neo fascist and you worry about a liberal president, really? I mean might above right will make us great again right?

The economy crumbles and stock markets fail because a liberal isn’t President?

Well that is what economist were saying kctim. Not so much because a liberal isn’t in office but because of Trump and his plans for the economy. I say good lets let it fall to pieces, some creative destruction will be good for us right? I mean free trade hasn’t exactly helped the working class nor has the importation of cheap labor to fill jobs. Stop that and we will rise from the ashes..right?

Look, there is only one reason why liberals seem nervous about Trump: They know that the majority of people are moderate and they may just say eff it and vote for actual change.

I would suggest the parallel between the people of Germany in the early 30’s and the anger and fear of many people of today are more frightening. Bad decision happen when anger and fear causes one to say “eff” it and vote for “actual change”. Careful what you wish for there.

Trump wins and our lives won’t be any different than they are today.

Well that may be the conservative line now that he looks to be the man running against HRC but if he makes good on his campaign promises, which is why he made it this far, then our lives will be different kctim. When is the last time a conservative held office that we didn’t have a collapsed economy? Eisenhower? Nixon took us off the gold standard an inflation ran amok. Reagan cut taxes and socialized loss (S&L scandal) as well as saddled us with debt and voodoo economics that has led to income inequality of a scale not seen since the glory days of conservative ideology, the Hoover era or as we now know it, the great depression. GWHB continued the trend down to 3rd world status. Then of course came GWB and the financial collapse, what more do you need to know before you stop telling us “our lives will be the same”?

Now don’t get me wrong kctim, I like Trump and have swallowed the neofascist kool aid just like many of my fellow Americans, I can see the shining city on the hill Reagan promised and the means to make America great again that Trump speaks of, so much better than anger and fear…right? I know,I know I should know better and I do but the sweet sound of making America great again has taken hold and getting rid of those immigrants and cutting taxes on the rich sounds so good, this time they will invest it in jobs in this country right? Hell just bankrupting the federal government to pay off the debt, why didn’t we think of this sooner? SO I blindly follow without thought or concern. Zeig Heil mein Trump.

Posted by: j2t2 at May 14, 2016 12:05 PM
Comment #404743
The problem with choosing either Warren or Franken is that they are already so good at what they are doing in the Senate.

Warren and Franken have very different roles in the Senate. Warren has been focused on a small selection of issues from the moment she got there. If Warren leaves the Senate, there is not garauntee that the Senate will continue to have such an outspoken defender of the CFPB. Perhaps as vice President, Warren will find a way, but I suspect that she’ll find many obligations (attending foreign funerals, weddings, etc) ultimately distracting from her true mission.

Franken, on the other hand is quite replaceable. He is much more of a generalist than Warren. Whoever Mark Dayton chooses to replace him will likely do as nearly a good job. On the other hand, as a former comedian, Franken knows how to punch back against Trump and he is not afraid to be politically incorrect either. I think Franken will thrive in an election which is bound to get very dirty given the high unfavorable ratings for both candidates. HRC cannot risk betting on anyone without thick skin. Warren has demonstrated her chops on twitter recently, so this may not be an issue, but it is important when considering other possibilities.

Bill Scher has been advocating for Franken for quite a while and I’m mostly parroting his ideas here, but I feel they are quite solid. Also,you might want to remember that Charlie Baker will appoint a temporary replacement for Elizabeth Warren should she ascend to the vice presidency. Although I like Baker very much, I think we would prefer he not choose Massachusetts’ next Senator.

A recent poll by PPP showed a majority of Republicans believe the stock market has gone down and the unemployment rate has increased during the Obama presidency. This is wrong. This is 100% dead wrong. But what will happen when a majority of a party believe things that are factually wrong? If FOX and right wing talk show radio encourage these kinds of wrong beliefs, and various conspiracy theories, how in the world is the country supposed to succeed?
Left-wing economic populists aren’t helping the matter either. Constantly complaining about the minimum wage or wealth inequality has distracted much of the public from the Obama economic success story. Posted by: Warren Porter at May 14, 2016 12:06 PM
Comment #404749

WP,
Issues like the minimum wage or wealth inequality are not the same as the issue of the overall health of the economy, the performance of the stock market, or the unemployment rate. As for the issue of wages, if we wait long enough and the economy keeps growing at this steady, sustainable pace, then supply and demand will have its way. We are already near or at full employment, which means employers will be competing for employees. That drives up wages.

However, there is no need to wait it out. The obvious solution to stagnant wages and wealth inequality is to increase the minimum wage, support labor unions, redistribute wealth through taxation, and to equal the playing field by punishing companies that attempt to offshore their labor and then sell discounted goods in the US, all while the owners remain in the US.

It is ironic that Republicans and conservatives resent Obama and the left, yet support the same politicians who caused wages to stay stagnant in the first place. With the rise of Trump many of them have forcefully repudiated failed conservative principles, yet the voters still can’t quite figure out what will actually help them to make more money.

Posted by: phx8 at May 14, 2016 2:39 PM
Comment #404751
there is no need to wait it out

No, there are plenty of reasons to wait for the market to sort things out. Most importantly, embedded in the market is information no government official will ever posses. Ultimately, everyone needs to be paid the VALUE of their work. Nothing more and nothing less. I think there are lots of jobs out there that do not provide $15/hr worth of value to the employer.

Posted by: Warren Porter at May 14, 2016 2:56 PM
Comment #404765

“The latest polls are out, and just as I predicted, I’m leading the Republican presidential race by a wide margin. You might be wondering how that could be. After all, it’s hardly been a month since I entered the field and I’ve already alienated America’s largest immigrant population, seen dozens of my high-profile business deals implode one after the other, and publicly insulted a national hero’s military service, all while not offering a single viable policy idea. But none of that matters at all, and my candidacy continues to surge forward, because none of you—not a single one of you—can look away. Not even for a second.

Admit it: You people want to see just how far this goes, don’t you?”

The Onion
July 21, 2015

Posted by: phx8 at May 15, 2016 5:18 PM
Comment #404767

Constantly complaining about the minimum wage or wealth inequality has distracted much of the public from the Obama economic success story.

No it hasn’t the conservative propaganda machine is responsible for that. The issue of wealth inequality is much more important than blowing smoke about Obama’s economic success in recovering from GWB’s economic collapse. The problem is many haven’t recovered Warren.

Income inequality has continued to grow under Obama. He did speak briefly about it a few years back but then went silent on the issue. He knows it is a problem so why give him any slack because the investor class has recovered and are prospering. Use to be the dems would raise all the ships when the tide came in but now they bail out the investor class and let the working class flounder. Same as the repubs. So Hillary, Obama and the corporate dems just don’t deserve any breaks for doing half the job of a recovery.

Before conservatives get all happy over the negativity towards Obama lets remember they deserve even less credit for the recovery and no credit for their lack of anything to help the working class during the changing economic conditions of globalization and technological advances. All the “free market” hubris fails to take into account that it doesn’t work for most of the people. It serves only to socialize loss while privatizing profit.

Posted by: j2t2 at May 15, 2016 10:18 PM
Comment #404768

“But what the hey! We wouldn’t want to economically inconvenience anyone, would we? After all, we can always get another planet.”

Phx8, the question is who’s comments are going to turn voters away? The guy calling for stricter vetting in the name of national security? Or the woman calling for putting American’s out of a job?

Posted by: kctim at May 16, 2016 8:42 AM
Comment #404770

J2,
You label Cruz a “dangerous low life” simply because he is a person you disagree with politically. Typical left-wing display of intolerance and hatred.

Speaking out about political correctness is not about calling people names. Sigh.
If you recall, there was pretty much nationwide support for putting certain words on our ‘not nice to say list.’ The PC pushback didn’t start until groups started demanding special acknowledgement and treatment.

The vast majority of Americans have an ID and those who don’t can get one. If a person values their vote, they will ensure they can vote on election day.

Cries of fascist are silly, and we definitely could and should cut back on our military spending. As history has proven that liberal President’s strip away at our individual rights, YES I worry more about them doing more damage.

Economic alarmists pop up every national election.

“I would suggest the parallel between the people of Germany in the early 30’s”

Of course you would, Trump is running as a Republican and you guys think the silly a$$ Nazi comparisons will get you votes.

The scariest thing about our economy is how our massive debt will start hurting us more and more.

“Now don’t get me wrong kctim, I like Trump and have swallowed the neofascist kool aid”

I don’t like him, and the ‘neofascist’ claims are ridiculous.

“but the sweet sound of making America great again has taken hold and getting rid of those immigrants”

Enforcing immigration laws is not ‘getting rid’ of immigrants, it is dealing with our verifiable problem with illegal aliens.

“and cutting taxes on the rich sounds so good, this time they will invest it in jobs in this country right?”

Don’t know, don’t care. I believe all men should be treated equally so I don’t dwell on what others have.

“Zeig Heil mein Trump.”

FFS. You guys are just go full on nuts, aren’t you.

Posted by: kctim at May 16, 2016 10:10 AM
Comment #404771

kctim,
I have ignored the whole coal controversy. Coal is no longer economical and everyone knows it. No one is more aware of it than the people living where they mine it, such as KY and WV. Fracking and alternative energies made coal uneconomical. Nothing is going to change that.

In addition to being uncompetitive in the market place and dangerous to mine, coal contributes to Global Warming. More statistics out today about what is happening with global temperatures. The past seven months have all set records for their warmest month on record. The last three months have set records for largest the largest margins of increase; in other words, the warming trend accelerated. May is on track to do the same. Based on just the first four months alone, 2016 is likely to be yet another record setter.

On another note, Carson revealed Trump’s short list for VP. I’m not sure if it was a mistake or someone is pranking us, but believe it or not, as of this morning, here is the list:

Palin, Kasich, Rubio, Cruz, and Christie.

Posted by: phx8 at May 16, 2016 10:27 AM
Comment #404772
You label Cruz a “dangerous low life” simply because he is a person you disagree with politically. Typical left-wing display of intolerance and hatred.

No I don;t kctim, I include Cruz in with the low life’s in the Senate who do not do their jobs. The guys that refuse to advise and consent on judicial appointments, the guys that shut the Senate down over ideology. The intolerant and hateful far right extremist who hide behind names like “liberty” and such.

The vast majority of Americans have an ID and those who don’t can get one. If a person values their vote, they will ensure they can vote on election day.

Yes yet despite this vast majority having ID many do not. In fact since you are using vast majority, as your reasoning while defending the voter suppression laws of the neofascist right wing, ask yourself why the laws when so few cases of voter ID fraud are committed despite the faux outcry from conservatives/neofascist. I mean really no smoke no fire just rhetoric to create the 3% difference conservative movement leaders wasnt to win elections. As ol’ Adolph said “if you win you don’t need to explain….” right?

Speaking out about political correctness is not about calling people names. Sigh.

Of course not kctim it is about liberty and justice for yourself……right? Keep telling yourself this but please don’t ask me to believe it. I know far to many conservatives who insist upon spearchucker and such to this day.

The PC pushback didn’t start until groups started demanding special acknowledgement and treatment.

Oh is that the spin. SO if I get this straight then you are telling me PC should actually be called “group special treatment correctness”…right? But we are all confused so we call it PC instead. We get to call them black guys ni**ers once again because they want their civil rights, all of them not just some of them, so they are a group. But us white guys who want liberty for the landed gentry only cannot be called tea baggers because …why? OH yeah we aren’t a group wanting special treatment? Really!

You guys are just go full on nuts, aren’t you.

Kctim are you grouping me in with the Trump camp or including me in the liberal group? Well either way you were wrong to group me in with anybody I’m just an individual who at the time of that writing got sucked up into the Trump propaganda and lost myself in the shining city on the hill where America is great again. Just like many on the right I to am susceptible to the constant drumming of neo-fascism propaganda of the American right wing.

Posted by: j2t2 at May 16, 2016 12:09 PM
Comment #404773
Palin, Kasich, Rubio, Cruz, and Christie.

Well that’s what I like about Trump he is up front. You know who you gotta blow to get a seat at the table with him don’t ya?

Posted by: j2t2 at May 16, 2016 12:14 PM
Comment #404774

J2,
Delaying a pick is not dangerous, nor does it make somebody a low life. That is nothing but partisan nonsense.

“Yes yet despite this vast majority having ID many do not.”

Because they CHOOSE to not have one. Making that choice is not having your vote suppressed.

“But we are all confused so we call it PC instead.”

Yes, you are VERY confused.
The majority of society frowns upon the use of those ugly words, J2. IMO, the problem is the leftist activists expanding the definition of rights and being inconsistent in their beliefs.

“are you grouping me in with the Trump camp or including me in the liberal group?”

You are a liberal, J2. Embrace it. Just lighten up on the propaganda and hysterics some. Those who dare disagree with you are not dangerous low life’s. We are not your enemy.

Posted by: kctim at May 16, 2016 2:07 PM
Comment #404775
Delaying a pick is not dangerous, nor does it make somebody a low life. That is nothing but partisan nonsense.

Oh pleeze kctim, have you had your head in the sand the past few months and missed the death of Scalia? Immediately afterwards McConnell told the country he would not allow the seat on the SCOTUS to be filled by this president. That is low life when a sitting US Senator has such little regard for the Constitution, the law, the Administration and the people of this country. Yes you are right it is partisan nonsense.

Because they CHOOSE to not have one. Making that choice is not having your vote suppressed.

My God kctim they tell you they are doing it and you still stick your head in the sand! Suppressing the vote is the end result of the law enacted in many conservatives legislatures the past few years. We have been through this and these silly arguments you guys come up with to protect movement leaders, hell do they even fool you? Enacting laws to protect us from nonexistent crimes and you prattle along as if it is anything but voter suppression.

You are a liberal, J2. Embrace it.

Well you confused me with the batshit crazy thing kctim, I mean conservatives calling others BSC is the pot calling the kettle black, ya know.

Just lighten up on the propaganda and hysterics some.

Yeah I know the shining city on the hill, Make America great again is a bit out there isn’it.


Those who dare disagree with you are not dangerous low life’s.

So did you just add the “dangerous” part? Anyway why not low life, certainly you cannot believe they are doing this for any principles other that gain power at any cost. Not my idea of character and integrity at all.


We are not your enemy.

I know kctim but with friends like that who needs enemies…right?

Posted by: j2t2 at May 17, 2016 9:18 AM
Comment #404776

J2, activist judges who base their rulings on personal beliefs instead of the Constitution, have made the SCOTUS part of the political game. The ACA was rushed to beat election results, this is being delayed.
The Constitution isn’t being violated and the delay isn’t dangerous to the people. To call them low lifes for simply not giving you the liberal court you want, is ridiculous. Especially since you would be cheering if liberals were the ones delaying.

“Enacting laws to protect us from nonexistent crimes and you prattle along as if it is anything but voter suppression.”

WE gave government the power to enact those laws, J2. From dictating what we can eat, to what we must be forced to do for others, to how we use restrooms, WE gave government the power to set rules.
Again though, the ONLY reason the left is against voter ID is because it is mainly their voters who lack the personal responsibility required.

“Well you confused me with the batshit crazy thing”

Yes, I know. Everybody who disagrees with you about rewriting the Constitution and ‘progressing’ into your Utopian liberal society, is BSC. Blah blah blah.
The very least you all could do is TRY to be consistent.

“Yeah I know the shining city on the hill, Make America great again is a bit out there isn’it.”

Considering the current state of our nation, the desire to hold on to the culture and form of government that made America the greatest country on earth, doesn’t seem ‘out there’ in the very least.

“So did you just add the “dangerous” part?”

Nope: “First of all it means Cruz or some other dangerous low life”

“certainly you cannot believe they are doing this for any principles other that gain power at any cost.”

I believe they are doing this for the same reasons liberals are constantly doing such things: To have the power to use their principles when shaping the path our country will take.

“I know kctim but with friends like that who needs enemies…right?”

Wrong. They are your fellow American’s who desire nothing more than preserving at least part of the things that made this country great. The fact that you view them with so much hate simply because they won’t give in to your emotional and materialistic desires, speaks volumes.

Posted by: kctim at May 17, 2016 10:40 AM
Comment #404777

Kctim, the Constitution is being rewritten by these Senators who tell us their is no time frame so a change of administration is within the Constitution. But the Constitution says the “President” not the “next President” doesn’t it? SO maybe dangerous is an apt qualifier for these guys. It is a dangerous precedent to set because if not the current president then it could mean the president in 50 years right? Well right according to conservative logic and interpretation of the Constitution.

The ACA wasn’t rushed the PATRIOT ACT was rushed kctim.


Again though, the ONLY reason the left is against voter ID is because it is mainly their voters who lack the personal responsibility required.

It is exactly this targeting of the other parties voters that makes this a suppression law kctim. Your blame the victim thing doesn’t work for me because the crime was nonexistent my friend. These laws of which voter ID’s is only part of the picture are meant to squash 3% of the opposition vote. It’s funny you guys “forget” about the rest of the laws. Almost as funny as you guys believing the line you run on the rest of us. You close down drivers license places and force people of limited means to jump hurdles to vote. Don’t ya wish you r team could run on issues instead of having to suppress the vote.


The very least you all could do is TRY to be consistent.

Well you seem to be doing the consistency thing for me with words I don’t say, such as liberal utopia. I would suggest you are confused but consistent. I mean I haven’t rewritten anything and many repubs consider the Trumpsters to be BSC so I would think you could see the confusion.

I believe they are doing this for the same reasons liberals are constantly doing such things: To have the power to use their principles when shaping the path our country will take.

SO we resort to “well they kinda somewhat well they talked about doing it to” to justify the abuse of their power! If they had principles kctim they wouldn’t do this, if they truly respected the Constitution they wouldn’t abuse it with weasel words. Yes they would like to appoint all conservatives but it isn’t their job to do so it is the president who went by qualifications more than ideology a principle those on the right should consider IMHO.

Wrong. They are your fellow American’s who desire nothing more than preserving at least part of the things that made this country great.

Well IMHO it wasn’t the confederate flag that made America great, although owning slaves did make a few in this country prosperous it didn’t make it great. Holding on the flaws from the past doesn’t make the country great IMHO kctim it makes it safer for the few that benefited from the oppression of others. Allowing women and minorities the right to vote made the country great yet your boys want to suppress the vote of these same people and that doesn’t make the country great IMHO. Of course this is but one example but I think you get my point on why with friends like that who needs enemies right?


Posted by: j2t2 at May 17, 2016 1:00 PM
Comment #404778

J2, this delay is not rewriting the Constitution, and extreme ‘what if’s’ don’t help your case at all. The precedent is that Presidents won’t fill a seat in a presidential election year.

“The ACA wasn’t rushed the PATRIOT ACT was rushed kctim.”

They BOTH were rushed, J2. That is why they were bad and are in constant need of fixing.

“It is exactly this targeting of the other parties voters that makes this a suppression law”

The voter ID laws apply to everybody in the state. If a person refuses to follow the same law that everybody else follows, that is their fault. Not the fault of the people and places who won’t accommodate their lack of personal responsibility.

“Don’t ya wish you r team could run on issues instead of having to suppress the vote.”

As I don’t equate the lack of personal responsibility with having ones vote suppressed, no. What I do wish though, is that people would embrace personal responsibility and stop demanding special treatment for their own personal comfort and convenience.

“SO we resort to “well they kinda somewhat well they talked about doing it to” to justify the abuse of their power!”

Um, no.
What ‘we resort to’ is the reality of the situation. BOTH sides are using the government to forward their political agendas. They BOTH are taking advantage of whatever they can in order to get what they want. They BOTH are playing the game the exact same way.

“If they had principles kctim they wouldn’t do this”

IF they had principles J2, Obama wouldn’t have f**ked up the country as bad as he has.

“Holding on the flaws from the past doesn’t make the country great IMHO”

Neither does living in the past and fighting battles that have already been won.

“Allowing women and minorities the right to vote made the country great”

They can STILL vote and the lack of special treatment does not change that.

“Of course this is but one example but I think you get my point on why with friends like that who needs enemies right?”

I get your point just fine. Everybody who disagrees with your stereotypes, myths, misinformation and politics, are your enemy. Sad J2, just sad. He11, even as extreme as I am, I don’t look upon liberals, progressives and Marxists as my personal enemy.

Posted by: kctim at May 17, 2016 2:27 PM
Comment #404779
The voter ID laws apply to everybody in the state. If a person refuses to follow the same law that everybody else follows, that is their fault. Not the fault of the people and places who won’t accommodate their lack of personal responsibility.

Strange how this logic doesn’t apply to the ACA’s individual mandate, isn’t it?

Posted by: Warren Porter at May 17, 2016 5:55 PM
Comment #404780
The precedent is that Presidents won’t fill a seat in a presidential election year.

But it’s not kctim you are spouting conservative myth which means the phony delay by senate low life’s is in fact “rewriting the Constitution” due to the illogical interpretation they .

http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/supreme-court-vacancies-in-presidential-election-years/


They BOTH were rushed, J2. That is why they were bad and are in constant need of fixing.

The ACA took 8 months the PATRIOT ACT took less than a month. I will stick by my original comment. The claim it was rushed is conservative myth it seems.

The voter ID laws apply to everybody in the state. If a person refuses to follow the same law that everybody else follows, that is their fault. Not the fault of the people and places who won’t accommodate their lack of personal responsibility.

Well lets continue to go around in circles kctim. Blaming the victim doesn’t sit well with me. The law serves nonexistent crimes kctim. It is just a part of the overall suppression laws ALEC and conservative legislatures have enacted. The stated goal was 3% of the voting public. Yet you can’t seem to make a connection choosing instead to blame those that aren’t allowed to vote. Jeez kctim victory uber alles, good job of not letting the facts get in the way though.

You keep on now using the “well they kinda did it to” once again, but as I have stated it doesn’t hold water kctim it is lacking in principle.

IF they had principles J2, Obama wouldn’t have f**ked up the country as bad as he has.

Well it seems we can agree they have no principles at least. But it sounds as if there is no common ground on what Obama has done, oh well.

Sad J2, just sad. He11, even as extreme as I am, I don’t look upon liberals, progressives and Marxists as my personal enemy.

Oh boy you sure can twist things can’t you kctim. What I said is “with friends like that I don’t need enemies. What I didn’t say is anything about them being my personal enemies. But it is kinda nice to see you come out as extreme, a wee bit of honesty….

Posted by: j2t2 at May 18, 2016 1:55 AM
Comment #404781

Indefensible

From the article:

“‘What I’m concerned about here is winning and that’s what really matters here. … We better get this done quickly while we have the opportunity.”

and

“Here’s the thing, I fundamentally believe that Democrats cheat, and I don’t believe our side does, and that’s why we need this bill,” Grothman told Allbaugh

Sure, sure it’s all about the sanctity of the perceived threats to voting truthiness. These people don’t deserve to govern and should not be considered sincere. It’s a despicable attempt to deter a voting segment, that is all.

Posted by: Speak4all at May 18, 2016 9:22 AM
Comment #404785

“Strange how this logic doesn’t apply to the ACA’s individual mandate, isn’t it?”

Not really, Warren. The voter ID law doesn’t mandate people get an ID against their will, nor does it punish people for not wanting an ID.

In reality, voter ID laws are no different than our laws to buy alcohol, tobacco, p*rn, or to register your car or attend school.

Posted by: kctim at May 18, 2016 4:30 PM
Comment #404786

J2,

“But it’s not kctim you are spouting conservative myth”

For Pete sakes, J2, follow the discussion.
YOU claim this delay “is a dangerous precedent to set” because it could mean the President in 50 years. I am simply saying the precedent being set is no filling a vacancy in an election year.

“The claim it was rushed is conservative myth it seems.”

The sorry results speak for themselves, J2. It is no myth that people lost their plans and doctors. It is no myth that premiums are skyrocketing. It is no myth that insurance companies are dropping out. It is no myth that the ACA has been losing in the courts. It is no myth that people are getting screwed and are p1ssed.

“Well lets continue to go around in circles kctim. Blaming the victim doesn’t sit well with me.”

Doesn’t matter how it sits with you J2, giving them victim status is factually wrong.

“But it sounds as if there is no common ground on what Obama has done, oh well.”

There will never be common ground as long as you continue to defend, ignore and excuse people simply because they support liberal policy.

“But it is kinda nice to see you come out as extreme, a wee bit of honesty….”

Come out? FFS J2, I have stated numerous times that I support the Constitution and because the Constitution is seen as extreme today, that makes my views extreme.
I support the extreme views of individual rights and freedom and no, I am not naive enough to believe that Americans, especially leftists, will ever give up their materialism, comfort and convenience in order to get them back.

Posted by: kctim at May 18, 2016 5:12 PM
Comment #404788
nor does it punish people for not wanting an ID.

Wow! So losing one’s right to vote isn’t punishment? Give me a break.

Posted by: Warren Porter at May 18, 2016 5:44 PM
Comment #404792
YOU claim this delay “is a dangerous precedent to set” because it could mean the President in 50 years. I am simply saying the precedent being set is no filling a vacancy in an election year.

First of all there is no precedent regarding filling a vacancy in an election year. That is conservative myth. There is no need to wait out a year it isn’t constitutional and therefore a dangerous precedent. Unless of course the conservative reading of the Constitution mentions the last year of the of the presidents terms is just for fun or at the whim of Congress or some such nonsense you guys use to justify this abuse of power by low life Senators. The same Senators we agreed lacked principles.

The sorry results speak for themselves,

So using conservative logic here it isn’t the time it took to pass the law it is whether the law meets some standard set by conservatives! Sorry kctim while the ACA may not be perfect it wasn’t rushed as you claimed.

Doesn’t matter how it sits with you J2, giving them victim status is factually wrong.

Kctim when you put unnecessary obstacles in front of a persons right to vote it makes them a victim of voter suppression which is what conservative legislatures have done on the past few years in an attempt to stop 3% of the voters from voting. The crime the law was supposed to stop was rarer than a truthful conservative.

Come out? FFS J2, I have stated numerous times that I support the Constitution and because the Constitution is seen as extreme today, that makes my views extreme.
Well.. kctim it is hard to accept this “I support the constitution” thing, coming from people who also support voter suppression laws and are willing to violate their constitutional oath to keep Obama from appointing a qualified person to fill the SCOTUS vacancy. To me you are simply blowing smoke up the a** of the American people with your “I support the Constitution” baloney.
I support the extreme views of individual rights and freedom and no, I am not naive enough to believe that Americans, especially leftists, will ever give up their materialism, comfort and convenience in order to get them back.

Well this is interesting kctim are you suggesting supporting individual rights and freedom means the American people will have to give up comfort and convenience to do so? Are these individual rights and freedom you support the culprits that would cause many Americans to forgo material goods, comfort and convenience. Sounds to me more like you support the individual rights and freedom of the landed gentry but not the “for all” in “liberty and justice for all”.

Posted by: j2t2 at May 19, 2016 1:10 AM
Comment #404798

“The obvious solution to stagnant wages and wealth inequality is to increase the minimum wage, support labor unions, redistribute wealth through taxation, and to equal the playing field by punishing companies that attempt to offshore their labor and then sell discounted goods in the US, all while the owners remain in the US.”

Hmmm…hasn’t that been tried before phx8? Surely if government can mandate higher wages they can mandate more hiring too. Business will simply absorb the cost as we all know Main-street small business makes obscene profits.

Labor unions needs support from government to survive as they are so unpopular, ineffective and tyrannical.

Absoutely punish those who work and accumulate wealth. Government needs to give perverse incentives to get these folks to work less, produce less, and become mediocre. We all know they just waste their wealth on themselves.

For certain we need to punish companies who have been encouraged and abetted by government to offshore jobs. Why not punish the politicians first?

“When a country allows its central bank to encourage yield-seeking speculative malinvestment; suppresses interest rates in a way that punishes those on fixed incomes and destroys the incentive to save; allows too-big-to-fail institutions to use deposit insurance as a public subsidy to expand trading activity instead of traditional banking; focuses fiscal policy on boosting transfer payments to make up for lost income without at the same time encouraging investment - both private and public - that could create new sources of income; that country is going to keep failing its people.

…financial analysts have described how QE and ZIRP have done nothing but allow zombie corporations which should have gone bankrupt to survive and contribute to the low level economy we are experiencing. The creative destruction essential to produce a dynamic economy has been outlawed by the Federal Reserve. The encouragement of consumption through low interest rates has failed.”

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article51720.html

Posted by: Royal Flush at May 19, 2016 1:39 PM
Comment #404799

“Wow! So losing one’s right to vote isn’t punishment? Give me a break.”

Luckily, NOBODY actually loses their ‘right’ to vote.

You know, it almost sounds as if you are saying that it is wrong for government to require proof of identification.

Posted by: kctim at May 19, 2016 2:48 PM
Comment #404800

kctim…I find it hilarious that the lib/soc crowd tell us that the current voting laws have prevented fraud so we should eliminate the laws that are working so well.

It’s not broken so let’s fix it.

Posted by: Royal Flush at May 19, 2016 3:02 PM
Comment #404801

“First of all there is no precedent regarding filling a vacancy in an election year.”

Sigh. But, if this delay does set a precedent, as YOU say it will, it will be one where a vacancy isn’t filled during an election year. NOT one where the seat remains empty for 50 gazillion years like you are ranting about.

Like it or not, J2, the fact is that the delay is NOT unconstitutional and there are not yet enough far-left liberals on the Supreme Court to reinterpret it to be so.

“So using conservative logic here”

You should get a handle on your own ‘logic’ before trying to use others.

The healthcare industry is huge and effectively reforming it requires much more than a mere 8 or so months. The goal of the ACA was to create a government program to cover everybody, get it passed and then work out the kinks later. It is no secret that liberals were scrambling to get it passed BEFORE they lost the power to do so. They rushed it.
The resulting problems, failures and lawsuits prove that the ACA was NOT ready and needed much more work before it was.

“when you put unnecessary obstacles in front of a persons right to vote it makes them a victim”

Our government puts ‘obstacles’ in front of people on a daily basis, but yet you want a special exception for this? Please.
It’s only an ‘obstacle’ to a select few and you guys on the left usually have no objection to throwing them up.

“The crime the law was supposed to stop was rarer than a truthful conservative.”

And actual mass shootings with so-called ‘assault weapons’ are even rarer. What’s your point?

“To me you are simply blowing smoke up the a** of the American people with your “I support the Constitution” baloney.”

No, to you I am wrong simply because I do not fall for the partisan rhetoric that seems to cloud your mind. He11, you don’t even know my actual positions on voter ID or the SC delay.

“are you suggesting supporting individual rights and freedom means the American people will have to give up comfort and convenience to do so?”

Suggesting? No. I am stating that one persons comfort and convenience does not trump the individual rights of another person.

“Sounds to me more like you support the individual rights and freedom of the landed gentry but not the “for all” in “liberty and justice for all”

No, I just understand that individual rights and freedoms have NOTHING to do with money. I also understand that the wealthy you envy and despise so much are also part of the ALL you speak of.

Posted by: kctim at May 19, 2016 3:48 PM
Comment #404803

RF,
Donald Trump just came out in favor of repealing Dodd-Frank. He is on the side of the Big Banks now. Guess he needs all those sweet contributions to fund a general election campaign. So much for self-funding. Those contributions are worth selling out his supporters and screwing the little guy, but Trump supporters will never even know it. Who wants to be the first to tell those poor saps Dodd-Frank was passed to prevent another economic crash like we experience at the end of the Bush administration?

The Federal Reserve does not set high interest rates so retirees can enjoy bigger fixed incomes and dividends. Sorry. That’s not how it works. Higher interest rates means money costs more. Interest rates are literally the time value of money. Low rates are better for all of us because it means the cost of doing business is lower. Mortgages are lower. It is easier to start a new business or obtain a loan to buy a car.

The biggest beneficiaries of higher interest rates are the Big Banks.

Posted by: phx8 at May 19, 2016 4:38 PM
Comment #404804

phx8 focused on interest rates and ignored all the rest of my quote above. No need to wonder why.

“Huszar, who managed the Fed’s $1.25 trillion mortgage-back securities purchase program (the centerpiece of QE1), is a repentant quantitative easer. In a 2013 WSJ op-ed, he apologized for his role in what he now considers “the greatest backdoor Wall Street bailout of all time.”

“Despite the Fed’s rhetoric, my program wasn’t helping to make credit any more accessible for the average American,” he wrote. “The banks were only issuing fewer and fewer loans. More insidiously, whatever credit they were extending wasn’t getting much cheaper. QE may have been driving down the wholesale cost for banks to make loans, but Wall Street was pocketing most of the extra cash.”

https://www.thestreet.com/story/13372592/1/the-fed-s-qe-program-has-been-great-for-banks-but-maybe-not-for-your-wallet.html

Posted by: Royal Flush at May 19, 2016 5:15 PM
Comment #404805

“…financial analysts have described how QE and ZIRP have done nothing but allow zombie corporations which should have gone bankrupt to survive and contribute to the low level economy we are experiencing.”

Nonsense, Royal. The Fed’s QE program in 2008 and 2009 was not designed to prop up zombie banks, it was designed to give a market to legitimate mortgage backed securities which had tanked in value due to the subprime collapse. Under the mark to market rules in effect at the time, the value of these securities were undervalued reducing the capital requirements of the banks. The Fed stepped in and gave cash value for the securities. Eventually, in 2009, the mark to market rules were suspended.

The proof that the QE program was not a give away to banks is the fact that the Fed has made a huge profit annually off the securities purchased under QE. In 2015 alone, the Fed made almost a 100 billion dollar profit which was returned to the US Treasury.


Posted by: Rich at May 19, 2016 6:01 PM
Comment #404806

Nonsense Rich. The QE program has resulted in a weak economy in which only the few benefit at the expense of the many. The Middle Class is hurting and the liberal/socialist dingbats could care less. Government bailouts of the wealthy and well connected is just one reason why Hillary will lose the election.

Phx8 is fond of pointing out how well Wall Street is doing. The Middle Class is much less invested in the equity market over the past eight years. They have been screwed royally by Obama and his banker and Wall Street friends.

Posted by: Royal Flush at May 19, 2016 7:29 PM
Comment #404808

RF,
I’m not following your entire argument. It presumes of lot of things happened that simply did not occur.

The middle class was hurt by Obama? Really? Because I would suggest the middle class got creamed by the Bush administration and conservative policies. They resulted in the a crash in the real estate market which directly affected the price of people’s homes and resulted in foreclosures on a scale as bad or worse than the Great Depression. It also resulted in a crash in the stock market, which directly affected people’s 401k’s. It resulted in people losing their jobs- 2.4 million in just 2008 alone.

The Obama administration put the economy back together again. The middle class benefited when housing prices recovered. The middle class benefited when people saw their 401k’s go up and up and up. The middle class benefited when jobs were recovered- we are now in the longest period of private sector job growth in American history, over 71 months and counting. The middle class benefits from low interest rates, low inflation, and low oil prices.

And remember, Trump wants to repeal Dodd-Frank, which was passed in order to make another such economic crash impossible. Hillary Clinton wants to keep it in place. Don’t ever forget who stands with who. Let’s be clear. Trump just told you which side he chose.

Posted by: phx8 at May 19, 2016 8:56 PM
Comment #404810
Luckily, NOBODY actually loses their ‘right’ to vote.

Please quit the doublethink. When laws make it impossible for some legitimate voters to vote, then their rights have been violated. Universal suffrage is a right enshrined in many parts of our Constitution.

You know, it almost sounds as if you are saying that it is wrong for government to require proof of identification.
It is wrong for the government to impose unnecessary burdens upon voters, such as requiring photo identification in order to prevent voter impersonation fraud, an extremely rare crime.
I find it hilarious that the lib/soc crowd tell us that the current voting laws have prevented fraud so we should eliminate the laws that are working so well.

It’s not broken so let’s fix it.


RF, The right is the one changing our voting laws, not the Left. 10 years ago, zero states had laws requiring photo IDs and impersonation fraud was virtually nonexistent. Yet, Republicans across the country have tried to “fix” a system which was already working quite fine and continues to work quite fine in the blue states.
Posted by: Warren Porter at May 19, 2016 9:37 PM
Comment #404811

The problem, RF, is that conservatives cannot address the one real economic issue that needs addressing: wages for most have remained stagnant for decades. The reflexive conservative response is to denounce things like raising the minimum wage, promoting unions, and so on, and then fall back on the need not to do anything that would punish the ‘job creators.’ But that is precisely the problem. That is the RINO argument. The job creators- the richest of the rich- have seen their wealth increase dramatically over the past decades while everyone suffered from wage stagnation. The wealth was there. It just went to a very small group of people. It is certainly not the fault of workers. Productivity increased a great deal. And that is why Trump has been successful. He has not been making the RINO argument about ‘job creators’; instead, he has been talking about jobs lost due to trade agreements. He has changed his opinions on minimum wage at least four times, so I don’t know what to expect there. He said wages are too high already, but walked it back, so once again, who knows what he actually wants to do?

What his supporters don’t realize is that Trump just sold them up the river with that call to repeal Dodd-Frank, and the decision to take the big money from Wall Street for the election. Of course, he refuses to release his tax returns and he has no history of holding public office, so who knows who Trump is actually in bed with.

Posted by: phx8 at May 19, 2016 9:51 PM
Comment #404815

But, if this delay does set a precedent, as YOU say it will, it will be one where a vacancy isn’t filled during an election year. NOT one where the seat remains empty for 50 gazillion years like you are ranting about.

First of all kctim this “delay” isn’t a delay it is intentional stonewalling by a bunch of low life Senators without principle. This attempt to subvert the intent of the Constitution by conservatives will set a dangerous precedent. When you guys tell us there is no time frame, when you use such nonsense as election year doesn’t count and such you demean the integrity of out system with such perversions.

They rushed it.

The ACA took several months less, from the introduction of the bill until passage in both houses, than Medicare/Medicaid. So while you claim they rushed it the facts don’t bear you out. Just because conservatives tried and failed to table it until hell froze over doesn’t mean it was rushed.

Our government puts ‘obstacles’ in front of people on a daily basis, but yet you want a special exception for this? Please.

Yes at one point in time they did put obstacles in the way of voting it seems you and your conservative friends want to go back to the poll tax with these ridiculous voter suppression laws in order to steal the election.

And actual mass shootings with so-called ‘assault weapons’ are even rarer.

So this apples to oranges comparison and you are asking what is my point! Desperation?

What’s your point?

Wow and you tell me I need to get a handle on my own logic! My point is very clear kctim. When no crimes have been committed that the law would solve the law is intended to suppress the vote the facts are very clear on this.

No, to you I am wrong simply because I do not fall for the partisan rhetoric that seems to cloud your mind

The problem with this kctim is you do fall for partisan rhetoric. When movement leaders tell you they want to suppress 3% of the vote and you sing the praises of a law that attempts to do just that while denying it does just that you are blinded by partisan rhetoric kctim. Don’t kid yourself my friend.

Posted by: j2t2 at May 20, 2016 3:19 AM
Post a comment