Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nenjin]

It still seems like a bad idea. Moderate republicans should be able to tell which way the wind is blowing socially in America, and it's definitely going in support of LGBT rights. Sure, they may solidify the support of their base to cinch the nomination, but they'll lose out on undecided voters during the elections when they have to defend their support of it.

More likely this is just another Republican purity test. They like to issue those right around the primaries, just to see who is still playing ball with the establishment or not. Sort of like the perennial "no new taxes" pledges.

[RedKing]

Republican Candidates:
Ted Cruise: A loud moron.

Democratic Candidates:
Queen Hillary Clinton.

Are these really the only choices?

The only way Clinton will be pushed at least a little to the left would be with a friendlier congress, Presidents don't exist in a vacuum.  That said, there are numerous pick up opportunities for the Dems in 2016.  WI-Senator, for example.  Ron Johnson is waaaaay too conservative for the state and should fall with Pres year turnout out of Madison & Milwaukee.  Ditto for Kirk (R-Illinois).

Also, Dan Coats (R-Indiana) is retiring, opening up another pick up opportunity.  Aaron Burr (R-North Carolina) is near invisible, but does sit in a seat that could flip.

Think you mean Richard Burr. Who unfortunately has far less chance of being killed in a duel.

And yes, he's nearly invisible because he doesn't fucking *do* anything except take lobbyist money and vote however they pay him to. Burr is the epitome of an empty suit senator.

And with Thom "Government shouldn't make food service employees wash their hands" Tillis up there now, he's not even the most conservative NC senator. I'm curious if he might face a surprise Tea Party insurgency in the primaries.

I expect the Democrats to run the same slate of underwhelming candidates as usual, which means the seat is likely a lock for Burr, unless he takes damage in the primaries. Especially given the general red shift in the state.

[SalmonGod]

It still seems like a bad idea. Moderate republicans should be able to tell which way the wind is blowing socially in America, and it's definitely going in support of LGBT rights. Sure, they may solidify the support of their base to cinch the nomination, but they'll lose out on undecided voters during the elections when they have to defend their support of it.

More likely this is just another Republican purity test. They like to issue those right around the primaries, just to see who is still playing ball with the establishment or not. Sort of like the perennial "no new taxes" pledges.

You're giving far too much credit to the average voter's willingness and ability to pay attention to politics, or retain any memory of their observations.

[nenjin]

It still seems like a bad idea. Moderate republicans should be able to tell which way the wind is blowing socially in America, and it's definitely going in support of LGBT rights. Sure, they may solidify the support of their base to cinch the nomination, but they'll lose out on undecided voters during the elections when they have to defend their support of it.

More likely this is just another Republican purity test. They like to issue those right around the primaries, just to see who is still playing ball with the establishment or not. Sort of like the perennial "no new taxes" pledges.

You're giving far too much credit to the average voter's willingness and ability to pay attention to politics, or retain any memory of their observations.

Darn it, I always do that.

[Zangi]

It still seems like a bad idea. Moderate republicans should be able to tell which way the wind is blowing socially in America, and it's definitely going in support of LGBT rights. Sure, they may solidify the support of their base to cinch the nomination, but they'll lose out on undecided voters during the elections when they have to defend their support of it.

More likely this is just another Republican purity test. They like to issue those right around the primaries, just to see who is still playing ball with the establishment or not. Sort of like the perennial "no new taxes" pledges.

You're giving far too much credit to the average voter's willingness and ability to pay attention to politics, or retain any memory of their observations.

I'd like to think that it is just a tiny little bit harder to forget, if the opposition is competent enough to strategically bring up recent primary promises that contradict general election promises.

[nenjin]

It still seems like a bad idea. Moderate republicans should be able to tell which way the wind is blowing socially in America, and it's definitely going in support of LGBT rights. Sure, they may solidify the support of their base to cinch the nomination, but they'll lose out on undecided voters during the elections when they have to defend their support of it.

More likely this is just another Republican purity test. They like to issue those right around the primaries, just to see who is still playing ball with the establishment or not. Sort of like the perennial "no new taxes" pledges.

You're giving far too much credit to the average voter's willingness and ability to pay attention to politics, or retain any memory of their observations.

I'd like to think that it is just a tiny little bit harder to forget, if the opposition is competent enough to strategically bring up recent primary promises that contradict general election promises.

Assuming anyone actually listens to/watches and absorbs political ads instead of tuning it out in disgust.

[misko27]

Average voters tend to care more in presidential years. And when they do tune in, there is a whole frenzy waiting to tell them things. And since people don't typically outright lie in a way that can be easily and obviously contradicted, they are forced to at least acknowledge events on the ground.

In Indiana, that reality includes businesses cancelling expansions in the state. Jeb Bush at least seems to have distanced himself. Ted Cruz is just loud and proud on it (I believe five thirty eight noted that Ted Cruz is the most conservative candidate out there, for reference; the difference between Michelle Bachmann and Jeb Bush is less then the difference between Michelle Bachmann and Ted Cruz.) Cruz is certianly the most right-wing Republican, and Jeb is pretty far the to center with regards to the party (although he certainly isn't the most left-wing republican). We'll see how the potential candidates left of Cruz and right of Bush deal with it: Gay marriage is more internally divisive than many issues in the republican party, not the least of which for electability; potentially, things could be interesting.

[smjjames]

One hopes for a day when conservative =/= crazy and/or stupid. I mean, it should be possible to be really conservative without being stupid or crazy.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

One hopes for a day when conservative =/= crazy and/or stupid. I mean, it should be possible to be really conservative without being stupid or crazy.

I agree, it really is a shame when all people of group x are x. /generalizations

[Descan]

Conservative ideas can make sense. "Let's not go changing things willy-nilly, it could end up even worse." Just that it ends up being "Don't damn well change a thing!" And then you get things like basic human rights and climate change which need change and soon, and it's obvious to nearly everyone that it needs change.

There was another point I wanted to make but I've forgotten. Oh well.

[Angle]

And then you've got the modern republican party: "Things should be exactly as we imagine they were 50 years ago!" Where their imagination has no bearing on reality.

[Dutchling]

Where their imagination has no bearing on reality.

Really? I thought racism was pretty rampant in the US 50 years ago. /circlejerk

[RedKing]

Conservative ideas can make sense. "Let's not go changing things willy-nilly, it could end up even worse." Just that it ends up being "Don't damn well change a thing!" And then you get things like basic human rights and climate change which need change and soon, and it's obvious to nearly everyone that it needs change.

There was another point I wanted to make but I've forgotten. Oh well.

Point being that modern "conservatives" are in fact reactionaries. They're not trying to preserve status quo, they're looking to undo decades of progress as quickly and haphazardly as possible.

Those who actually are conservatives are called "moderates" and seen by the new GOP as Quislings, as worse than Democrats.

[smjjames]

Guess what Mike Huckabee said. He said "gays won't rest until there are no more churches". And he says he has friends of his that are gay? Pfft......

I bet his gay friends would punch him in the face if he said that to their faces. Way to burn the bridges Huckabee.

I'm not gay myself, but I do know people who are gay and they certainly don't have that sentiment.

[scriver]

Maybe all his gay friends happen to also be norwegian extreme-anti-christian death-metal activists.