By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - The American Thread of Mid-Term Elections (2010)

Kasz216 said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:

I disagree, gerrymandering helps the conservatives gain the vote of the uneducated.

You can disagree... but your disagreement apears to be devoid of any actual facts, reasoning or arguement.

As you've not provided any.

 

I can disagree the sun is needed for life on earth.  I'd guess people would want that backed up by some kind of arguement though.

My post came out glitched so I just did a quick edit to point out my stance.

Gerrymandering sole purpose is for electoral purposes, this is how we get the extreme conservatives elected to the house. There are no extreme liberals in the house because there is no such thing as a major minority of liberals living in the countryside of each states. This is how the tea pary came to be, there will never be such a movement from the left in the United States. Certain situations and unequalities create communism, we are way passed that.  

You don't think there are any extreme liberals in the house?

What?   Dennis Kusinich doesn't even rank in the top 100 for most liberal.


As for the Tea Party coming from the "extreme conservative gerymander states".

Why is it that the Tea Party Candidates that got into congress defeated Democratic incumbents?   It's your opinion that the Democratic incumbants were the winners of "extremely republican districts."

Are you even remotely paying attention to anything political?

Dennis Kusinich an extreme liberal? Please spare me, you problably heard that on fox news.

I said Democrats incumbents were the winners of extremely republican districs? Really? Where? Your ass is blue, see I can make things up too.

It's obvious you think you know everything about politics, you don't.

No, I heard that from living in his district for the vast majority of my life... and the fact that nobody in said district actually likes him but keeps him around because of.... gerrymandering and the fact that nobody of worth ever runs against him in a primary.

Also, yes, you did say the democratic incumbents were the winners of extremely republican districts.

Because you said the tea-party only exists because of super republican districts.   Which would mean, they would be elected in those disctricts.

You know, because otherwise you've completely defeated your own point.


Oh? What is my point? Please do tell.


"Gerrymandering sole purpose is for electoral purposes, this is how we get the extreme conservatives elected to the house. There are no extreme liberals in the house because there is no such thing as a major minority of liberals living in the countryside of each states. This is how the tea pary came to be, there will never be such a movement from the left in the United States. Certain situations and unequalities create communism, we are way passed that.   "


Also, you do know the Blue Dog Republicans are in fact... moderate democrats who are defying the extreme liberals right?  I mean, did you pay attention the last 2 years...?


Again, there are no extreme liberals in office as we speak. The media always claims there is but there isn't, and gerrymandering is a corrupted sytem. You can say what you want, hold your opinion as true but the facts are still there in plain sight.



Around the Network
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:

I disagree, gerrymandering helps the conservatives gain the vote of the uneducated.

You can disagree... but your disagreement apears to be devoid of any actual facts, reasoning or arguement.

As you've not provided any.

 

I can disagree the sun is needed for life on earth.  I'd guess people would want that backed up by some kind of arguement though.

My post came out glitched so I just did a quick edit to point out my stance.

Gerrymandering sole purpose is for electoral purposes, this is how we get the extreme conservatives elected to the house. There are no extreme liberals in the house because there is no such thing as a major minority of liberals living in the countryside of each states. This is how the tea pary came to be, there will never be such a movement from the left in the United States. Certain situations and unequalities create communism, we are way passed that.  

You don't think there are any extreme liberals in the house?

What?   Dennis Kusinich doesn't even rank in the top 100 for most liberal.


As for the Tea Party coming from the "extreme conservative gerymander states".

Why is it that the Tea Party Candidates that got into congress defeated Democratic incumbents?   It's your opinion that the Democratic incumbants were the winners of "extremely republican districts."

Are you even remotely paying attention to anything political?

Dennis Kusinich an extreme liberal? Please spare me, you problably heard that on fox news.

I said Democrats incumbents were the winners of extremely republican districs? Really? Where? Your ass is blue, see I can make things up too.

It's obvious you think you know everything about politics, you don't.

No, I heard that from living in his district for the vast majority of my life... and the fact that nobody in said district actually likes him but keeps him around because of.... gerrymandering and the fact that nobody of worth ever runs against him in a primary.

Also, yes, you did say the democratic incumbents were the winners of extremely republican districts.

Because you said the tea-party only exists because of super republican districts.   Which would mean, they would be elected in those disctricts.

You know, because otherwise you've completely defeated your own point.


Oh? What is my point? Please do tell.


"Gerrymandering sole purpose is for electoral purposes, this is how we get the extreme conservatives elected to the house. There are no extreme liberals in the house because there is no such thing as a major minority of liberals living in the countryside of each states. This is how the tea pary came to be, there will never be such a movement from the left in the United States. Certain situations and unequalities create communism, we are way passed that.   "


Also, you do know the Blue Dog Republicans are in fact... moderate democrats who are defying the extreme liberals right?  I mean, did you pay attention the last 2 years...?


Again, there are no extreme liberals in office as we speak. The media always claims there is but there isn't, and gerrymandering is a corrupted sytem. You can say what you want, hold your opinion as true but the facts are still there in plain sight.


Ok... here is what I got out of your statement "I'm right even though I have no proof and nobody else agrees with me...?

Even really liberal people admit their are liberals in congress.   Unlike most conservastives, who actually feel there are no conservatives in washington... which is the real reason the tea party was formed.  Lack of fiscal conservatives.

What's your point with the map?  That the Democrats got killed because they pursued an extremely unpopular and very liberal agenda?  



Kasz216 said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:

I disagree, gerrymandering helps the conservatives gain the vote of the uneducated.

You can disagree... but your disagreement apears to be devoid of any actual facts, reasoning or arguement.

As you've not provided any.

 

I can disagree the sun is needed for life on earth.  I'd guess people would want that backed up by some kind of arguement though.

My post came out glitched so I just did a quick edit to point out my stance.

Gerrymandering sole purpose is for electoral purposes, this is how we get the extreme conservatives elected to the house. There are no extreme liberals in the house because there is no such thing as a major minority of liberals living in the countryside of each states. This is how the tea pary came to be, there will never be such a movement from the left in the United States. Certain situations and unequalities create communism, we are way passed that.  

You don't think there are any extreme liberals in the house?

What?   Dennis Kusinich doesn't even rank in the top 100 for most liberal.


As for the Tea Party coming from the "extreme conservative gerymander states".

Why is it that the Tea Party Candidates that got into congress defeated Democratic incumbents?   It's your opinion that the Democratic incumbants were the winners of "extremely republican districts."

Are you even remotely paying attention to anything political?

Dennis Kusinich an extreme liberal? Please spare me, you problably heard that on fox news.

I said Democrats incumbents were the winners of extremely republican districs? Really? Where? Your ass is blue, see I can make things up too.

It's obvious you think you know everything about politics, you don't.

No, I heard that from living in his district for the vast majority of my life... and the fact that nobody in said district actually likes him but keeps him around because of.... gerrymandering and the fact that nobody of worth ever runs against him in a primary.

Also, yes, you did say the democratic incumbents were the winners of extremely republican districts.

Because you said the tea-party only exists because of super republican districts.   Which would mean, they would be elected in those disctricts.

You know, because otherwise you've completely defeated your own point.


Oh? What is my point? Please do tell.


"Gerrymandering sole purpose is for electoral purposes, this is how we get the extreme conservatives elected to the house. There are no extreme liberals in the house because there is no such thing as a major minority of liberals living in the countryside of each states. This is how the tea pary came to be, there will never be such a movement from the left in the United States. Certain situations and unequalities create communism, we are way passed that.   "


Also, you do know the Blue Dog Republicans are in fact... moderate democrats who are defying the extreme liberals right?  I mean, did you pay attention the last 2 years...?


Again, there are no extreme liberals in office as we speak. The media always claims there is but there isn't, and gerrymandering is a corrupted sytem. You can say what you want, hold your opinion as true but the facts are still there in plain sight.


Ok... here is what I got out of your statement "I'm right even though I have no proof and nobody else agrees with me...?

Even really liberal people admit their are liberals in congress.   Unlike most conservastives, who actually feel there are no conservatives in washington... which is the real reason the tea party was formed.  Lack of fiscal conservatives.

What's your point with the map?  That the Democrats got killed because they pursued an extremely unpopular and very liberal agenda?  

My point is arguing with people like you - who are afraid of mexicans, still think pot is like meth, view gays as second class citizens, and screach out "tax cuts" but we all know its for the rich, don't beieve in science or global warming would not be an issue, and think that god will come to America one day - is fun. Glad I only have to hat you and not live among you.



Teo said:
Kasz216 said:

Ok... here is what I got out of your statement "I'm right even though I have no proof and nobody else agrees with me...?

Even really liberal people admit their are liberals in congress.   Unlike most conservastives, who actually feel there are no conservatives in washington... which is the real reason the tea party was formed.  Lack of fiscal conservatives.

What's your point with the map?  That the Democrats got killed because they pursued an extremely unpopular and very liberal agenda?  

My point is arguing with people like you - who are afraid of mexicans, still think pot is like meth, view gays as second class citizens, and screach out "tax cuts" but we all know its for the rich, don't beieve in science or global warming would not be an issue, and think that god will come to America one day - is fun. Glad I only have to hat you and not live among you.

Bahahaha. You really don't know who're talking to.

Kasz posts a lot on politics and such. Go to his post history and spend a little time reading before you throw out some ridiculous labels and generalizations.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

outlawauron said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
 

Ok... here is what I got out of your statement "I'm right even though I have no proof and nobody else agrees with me...?

Even really liberal people admit their are liberals in congress.   Unlike most conservastives, who actually feel there are no conservatives in washington... which is the real reason the tea party was formed.  Lack of fiscal conservatives.

What's your point with the map?  That the Democrats got killed because they pursued an extremely unpopular and very liberal agenda?  

My point is arguing with people like you - who are afraid of mexicans, still think pot is like meth, view gays as second class citizens, and screach out "tax cuts" but we all know its for the rich, don't beieve in science or global warming would not be an issue, and think that god will come to America one day - is fun. Glad I only have to hat you and not live among you.

Bahahaha. You really don't know who're talking to.

Kasz posts a lot on politics and such. Go to his post history and spend a little time reading before you throw out some ridiculous labels and generalizations.

Yeah, that's always a funny... the random generalzations.

FYI Teo.  For legalization of Mariujana... which i believe i said in this thread.  (Edit: Yep I did... in this thread 2) "It will fail because everyone who would vote for it will be high and forget to vote. (not joking, i know a bunch of people like this)   Hope it passes.")

And for Gay marriage.

As for Tax cuts... yeah tax cuts generally are one of the few things governments can do that have shown to be effective at boosting economies.  Of course it's really pointless if you don't match that with spending cuts.

As for the "afraid of mexicans" that's not even worth dignifying.

Currently a lot of liberal economists are saying the new round of quantative easing is STILL not enough.

So, a over TRILLION dollars total being injected into the economy isn't enough to fix it....

At this point even if Kensyian economists are right and you just need to spend more money to get an effect, the amount of money you'd need to spend is so comically high it makes the idea of cycle economics a joke.

How are we going to save up these trillions of dollars?

 

I'm your basic socially liberal, fiscally responsible type of person.

Which ironically is generally show to be on average the smartest and most successful. (Though i'm far from successful personally.)



Around the Network

Did somebody say that there are no liberal democrats?  wth



Teo said:

My point is arguing with people like you - who are afraid of mexicans, still think pot is like meth, view gays as second class citizens, and screach out "tax cuts" but we all know its for the rich, don't beieve in science or global warming would not be an issue, and think that god will come to America one day - is fun. Glad I only have to hat you and not live among you.

So, because Kasz argues - correctly - that gerrymandering benefits incumbents and not simply conservatives, you presume to extrapolate his every political belief from this? That's pretty fucking batty.

I wish I could say I'm surprised that you hate someone (even if you can't spell the word) who dares to disagree with you, but of course, this is sadly very common among the "tolerant" crowd.



Coca-Cola said:

Did somebody say that there are no liberal democrats?  wth

My guess would be that he himself is very liberal.

There is a very well known phenomena that people generally unknowelegable about something will without a doubt place themselves right in the middle of the pack.

Rich, poor or middle class, if they don't know the average salary they'd say they are "Middle class".

People usually describe themselves as "Slightly above average looking" etc.

I imagine he thinks there are no "super liberals" in congerss because he agrees with the most liberal democrats.



Kasz216 said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:
Kasz216 said:
Teo said:

I disagree, gerrymandering helps the conservatives gain the vote of the uneducated.

You can disagree... but your disagreement apears to be devoid of any actual facts, reasoning or arguement.

As you've not provided any.

 

I can disagree the sun is needed for life on earth.  I'd guess people would want that backed up by some kind of arguement though.

My post came out glitched so I just did a quick edit to point out my stance.

Gerrymandering sole purpose is for electoral purposes, this is how we get the extreme conservatives elected to the house. There are no extreme liberals in the house because there is no such thing as a major minority of liberals living in the countryside of each states. This is how the tea pary came to be, there will never be such a movement from the left in the United States. Certain situations and unequalities create communism, we are way passed that.  

You don't think there are any extreme liberals in the house?

What?   Dennis Kusinich doesn't even rank in the top 100 for most liberal.


As for the Tea Party coming from the "extreme conservative gerymander states".

Why is it that the Tea Party Candidates that got into congress defeated Democratic incumbents?   It's your opinion that the Democratic incumbants were the winners of "extremely republican districts."

Are you even remotely paying attention to anything political?

Dennis Kusinich an extreme liberal? Please spare me, you problably heard that on fox news.

I said Democrats incumbents were the winners of extremely republican districs? Really? Where? Your ass is blue, see I can make things up too.

It's obvious you think you know everything about politics, you don't.

No, I heard that from living in his district for the vast majority of my life... and the fact that nobody in said district actually likes him but keeps him around because of.... gerrymandering and the fact that nobody of worth ever runs against him in a primary.

Also, yes, you did say the democratic incumbents were the winners of extremely republican districts.

Because you said the tea-party only exists because of super republican districts.   Which would mean, they would be elected in those disctricts.

You know, because otherwise you've completely defeated your own point.

So you're saying that Dennis Kucinich isn't even among the Top 100 most liberal people in the House because you've heard from other people in his district that they don't like him? Do you have an actual list that might rank the House members in some way as to support your claim? I'll take Political Compass, I don't care. I'd just like some actual proof.

Also, Kucinich was hated when he was a mayor too. But that's an entirely different matter.



 

 

MontanaHatchet said:

So you're saying that Dennis Kucinich isn't even among the Top 100 most liberal people in the House because you've heard from other people in his district that they don't like him? Do you have an actual list that might rank the House members in some way as to support your claim? I'll take Political Compass, I don't care. I'd just like some actual proof.

Also, Kucinich was hated when he was a mayor too. But that's an entirely different matter.

His voting record in 2008 was the 187th most liberal according to the National Journal. Their more recent vote ratings are behind a paywall, but if anything he has probably moved down and not up over the past couple of years.