I feel like the silver lining in this lame-duck session will be that we have two options:
Either Conservatives do good things, in which case, bravo, thank you conservatives.
Or Conservatives shit the bed, in which case we're nearly guaranteed a Democrat President.
Looking at my own county though, in Colorado, it's just crazy. We shot down personhood, shot down funding education with vice, and approved three taxes. All of these decisions had *wide* margins. 20-40 points. We were completely legislative liberal. But our county went full conservative on our senator. Udall done fucked up bad.
Yeah, how the fuck did that happen? I thought Brown was way ahead.
It happened because midterms, and because Brown was in charge of the Maryland Exchange and ROYALLY fucked it up.
At the very least Hogan isn't a tea partier, he's just a boiler plate business taxes are bad Republican, and the legislature is still high majority blue, so all he'll really do is cut some taxes. He'll be mostly ineffectual.
Catching up, but wanted to bring this up from a few pages back as another Marylander here. The thing that Hogan needs to comprehend is that he was voted in on taxes and literally NOTHING else (thus why he was able to capture many D areas). The millisecond he tries the old Republican bait and switch (i.e. House R's getting voted in on jobs and then spending their entire time trying to end Obamacare), he's toast. He's at most a one-termer, and depending on just how bad he screws up, he'll be recalled before that. He only won with Democratic help (not my household at least) and even that help came with a lot of hand-wringing. If he's expecting to be saved like Walker was from recall, he needs to remember that unlike Wisconsin, MD is super left-leaning.
Of course, the fact that Hogan brought in Christie, shows he's already fucking up because aside from the Republican base, the people who gave Hogan this win DO NOT LIKE Chris Christie and do not want MD to become anything like NJ. I'm already seeing people on my FB who voted for Hogan (just barely because of the taxes thing) regretting their vote just because of the Christie thing. Of course, I don't know why this didn't dawn on them when Christie was making his prior appearances stumping for Hogan, but there you have it.
So yeah, Hogan can trumpet all he wants, but the mostly blue MD legislature (after yesterday still 91 D, 50 R) will stop him from burning the house down. He's basically gonna be Ehrlich 2.0.
I'm amazed shitty republican candidates continue to win big in midterms. Still, this is probably the worst case scenario for a party as deeply flawed as the GOP is today. They're going to struggle mightily to get bills written that don't get destroyed by the ever increasing derp faction within their ranks. And with gladhanding trolls like Ted Cruz perfectly willing to fuck the party for personal gain, I suspect it's going to be a very long two years.
0
Options
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
So...from what I'm looking at from you guys.
We're basically looking at at least another two years of the Senate being completely deadlocked on everything.
And that's the best case scenario?
+12
Options
BigWillieStylesExpert flipper of tablesInside my mind...Registered Userregular
I'm amazed shitty republican candidates continue to win big in midterms. Still, this is probably the worst case scenario for a party as deeply flawed as the GOP is today. They're going to struggle mightily to get bills written that don't get destroyed by the ever increasing derp faction within their ranks. And with gladhanding trolls like Ted Cruz perfectly willing to fuck the party for personal gain, I suspect it's going to be a very long two years.
"Shitty candidates" to you is fine, but they're not shitty compared to the absolute shite candidates that won the primaries in 2010 and 2012 like Miss "I'm Not a Witch" and Mr. "Legitimate Rape."
We're basically looking at at least another two years of the Senate being completely deadlocked on everything.
And that's the best case scenario?
Yeah, best case scenario is Republicans don't remove the filibuster and it's basically two more years of getting nothing done.
It's more likely the Senate and House will start shitting out Obamacare repeal bills and bills designed to at least chip away at it, which will get vetoed by the President.
No federal appointments for two years.
No judicial appointments for two years.
Lots of talk of impeachment, but I don't think they are stupid enough to actually try to do it.
Allegedly a voice of reason.
+1
Options
BigWillieStylesExpert flipper of tablesInside my mind...Registered Userregular
Lots of talk of impeachment, but I don't think they are stupid enough to actually try to do it.
The only talk of impeachment was coming from Democrats trying to fearmonger off of it. Please, dispense with that. No one in the GOP House or Senate leadership would touch that bullshit with a 100-mile long pole.
BigWillieStyles on
3DS Friend Code: 1006 - 0121 - 6969
PM me with yours if you add me
We're basically looking at at least another two years of the Senate being completely deadlocked on everything.
And that's the best case scenario?
Yeah, best case scenario is Republicans don't remove the filibuster and it's basically two more years of getting nothing done.
It's more likely the Senate and House will start shitting out Obamacare repeal bills and bills designed to at least chip away at it, which will get vetoed by the President.
No federal appointments for two years.
No judicial appointments for two years.
Lots of talk of impeachment, but I don't think they are stupid enough to actually try to do it.
Don't be so sure. The derp is growing stronger.
+5
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
Lots of talk of impeachment, but I don't think they are stupid enough to actually try to do it.
The only talk of impeachment was coming from Democrats trying to fearmonger off of it. Please, dispense with that. No one in the GOP House or Senate leadership would touch that bullshit with a 100-mile long pole.
It is absolutely incorrect to say only Democrats were talking about the threat of impeachment.
Yup best case senario is pretty much all of the things are fillibustered for the next two years. Worst case is a lot of horrible bills wind up on the presidents desk that are then vetoed and again nothing happens for the next two years.
So really nothing different than the last four years other than we now go from almost no judicial nominations happening to zero judicial nominations happening.
Yup best case senario is pretty much all of the things are fillibustered for the next two years. Worst case is a lot of horrible bills wind up on the presidents desk that are then vetoed and again nothing happens for the next two years.
So really nothing different than the last four years other than we now go from almost no judicial nominations happening to zero judicial nominations happening.
Well, now Republicans get to make the case that Obama (The Democrat Party) is the obstructionist and actually have merit to their argument.
To be fair, I absolutely want to obstruct the Republican agenda because it's utter bullshit.
I'm curious to see how that line of reasoning plays out with voters when it's not ridiculously false.
Allegedly a voice of reason.
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
Last time Republicans held the majority a lot of things happened, but they weren't running on a platform of "The only good government is no government" before.
We have no idea what they'll do now that they have to actually take charge. The House voted to repeal the ACA 87 times because they could and because there was no fear of it passing the Senate or Obama's desk. They could do all the symbolic votes they wanted to shore up their base.
Now, though, they have to govern. They can't blame the Democrats when nothing gets voted on.
I figure they decide to finally write an immigration bill. The derp faction takes the bill hostage and the infighting drags out. Eventually the GOP leaders in congress dump a hot mess of a bill on the president's desk because they know full well that no matter what happens, they can just blame the president and no one in the media or in their districts will ever take them to task for passing the buck. The president hopefully vetoes it. The republicans all take to the media circuit to cry about it. Somewhere Hillary Clinton makes a backhanded comment about how the president handled it. And nothing gets done because no matter what, the tea party faction refuses to fund anything.
Last time Republicans held the majority a lot of things happened, but they weren't running on a platform of "The only good government is no government" before.
We have no idea what they'll do now that they have to actually take charge. The House voted to repeal the ACA 87 times because they could and because there was no fear of it passing the Senate or Obama's desk. They could do all the symbolic votes they wanted to shore up their base.
Now, though, they have to govern. They can't blame the Democrats when nothing gets voted on.
I'm expecting at least some level of the dog catching the car.
Also, there are a lot of the more insane elements that are vying for power, so it could get messy.
But the Republicans do have a high level of discipline for marching orders once they are in charge, so I'm mostly expecting bill after shitty bill getting passed and vetoed.
I figure they decide to finally write an immigration bill. The derp faction takes the bill hostage and the infighting drags out. Eventually the GOP leaders in congress dump a hot mess of a bill on the president's desk because they know full well that no matter what happens, they can just blame the president and no one in the media or in their districts will ever take them to task for passing the buck. The president hopefully vetoes it. The republicans all take to the media circuit to cry about it. Somewhere Hillary Clinton makes a backhanded comment about how the president handled it. And nothing gets done because no matter what, the tea party faction refuses to fund anything.
I expect the Republicans to do a drip-by-drip approach with legislation. Small bills, not comprehensive ones. Tackle one small thing at a time, don't let the bill get bogged down in random bullshit.
H1B would be a great thing to start with.
3DS Friend Code: 1006 - 0121 - 6969
PM me with yours if you add me
Lots of people do not connect liberalism with Democrats, basically.
Or how about the 20 point margin in the exit polls (which seemed biased towards Democrats, but still) saying that illegal immigrants should be offered legal status. Which Democrats (including the President) ran away from. And we lost 8 points in the Hispanic vote (to about 65-35 so still dominant, but not as dominant) and 20 in the Asian vote (to 50-50).
Our positions are popular nationally, even in that electorate. Our politicians are not. That's a problem.
My proposal is basically everyone run as a populist like the senior Senator from Massachusetts and see how that goes.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
+7
Options
Librarian's ghostLibrarian, Ghostbuster, and TimSporkRegistered Userregular
Lots of people do not connect liberalism with Democrats, basically.
Or how about the 20 point margin in the exit polls (which seemed biased towards Democrats, but still) saying that illegal immigrants should be offered legal status. Which Democrats (including the President) ran away from. And we lost 8 points in the Hispanic vote (to about 65-35 so still dominant, but not as dominant) and 20 in the Asian vote (to 50-50).
Our positions are popular nationally, even in that electorate. Our politicians are not. That's a problem.
My proposal is basically everyone run as a populist like the senior Senator from Massachusetts and see how that goes.
What about my Republican friend who says the only thing left of a Democrat is a Communist? :P
"So if the Democrats are so fucking smart, why do they lose so fucking always"
That's going to be the question going forward, i guess, and I say that as someone who voted straight ticket Dem yesterday.
Going to have to beat the Gerrymandering and the Citizens United money.
Because they keep showing how stupid they are by running away from what (ostensibly) makes a Democrat a Democrat.
Maybe? Problem is, the Dem party seems to be more or less locked into that Republican-lite position by default though since the well is so thoroughly fucking poisoned for a true left - wing party or platform in America. Republican-lite is what they are, isn't it?
What does make a "Democrat a Democrat" ? It's not what Europe or Scandinavia would understand as left wing, that's for sure.
Edit: there are meaningful differences in social policy between the two parties - same sex rights, drug policy, some entitlement issues - but a lot of it is more similar than different and the battle is already won w/r/t same sex marriage and is coming down from the USSC anyways, who understand the "wrong side of history" concept
The true left is not a poisoned well for America. Look at the actual policies Americans favor, they are by and large left wing policies (strong education, abortion rights, minimum wage increases, corporate regulations, all favored by a fairly good margin). The issue is the Democrats continuously allow the Republicans to own the media narrative, they never get out there and push their message, instead they step back and talk about how bipartisan they are.
Nobody fucking wants that shit.
Those aren't really accurate depictions of the "true left" in America. The "true left" wants
not just strong education but massive funding increases and the elimination of charter schools.
not just abortion rights but public abortion funding and late-term abortion allowance
not just minimum wage increases but massive hikes to a 'living wage' and in some cases a guaranteed basic income for all Americans.
not just corporate regulation but large tax hikes, union ascendance, executive salary caps, and an adversarial government relationship to industry
there are things that the Democrats are doing wrong, but "not running far enough left" isn't on the list, at least not imo. Going left and ramping up the partisanship handed Wendy Davis a 20pt loss in Texas last night. She didn't win men, whites, or women, and only won latinos by 5pts.
that "true lefT" has like maybe 5 members in Congress. to represent that as anything even marginally resembling the Democratic party as a whole is pretty disingenuous
I wasn't trying to do that... what I meant was that running toward those 5 members and their super-left position sis not going to win you mor eelections.
There's miles of space between super socialist and the center right positions of the bulk of the Democratic party. The Democrats could be much more liberal and still be nowhere near as leftist as you're describing.
Yeah it's actually pretty easy to think of a set of policy planks that could excite the base while getting people acclimated to 'not-center-leftism'. You run on a dollar increase on the minimum wage, you work for it, when it happens you move to work safety, when that happens you work on GLBT rights or accountability or something. We have a massive array of pretty popular left-of-republican policies that we could run on, and if people keep winning those battles at the state level that builds momentum, it builds up the number of viable candidates you have for major elections, and it builds the 'democratic brand'. That's what politics is: you accept your limitations within the moment but you work to push those limits in the long run.
None of this would require the democrats to open the floodgates to like, Leninists or whatever, but all of this would assume that the dems aren't afraid of their own shadow.
Nationally, I guess we can kiss any glimmer of doing something positive regarding the environment, women's rights (contraception, abortion, equal pay), and minimum wage (despite state victories) goodbye, huh?
I, for one, cannot wait for more Young Earth Creationists to be on the science committee. If we're gonna go derp, might as well go full derp.
The lesson from Obama 2008 should have been populism
The lesson from Elizabeth Warren should have been populism
The message from last night should be populism
I'm not optimistic about populism's chances.
Obama '08 wasn't really populist economically. It was populist as like, a campaign structure. And Warren did only win a blue state by single digits so it wasn't obvious the whole party should take her message.
Though I still agree. Democrats respond to all elections by moving right.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
+3
Options
BigWillieStylesExpert flipper of tablesInside my mind...Registered Userregular
Nationally, I guess we can kiss any glimmer of doing something positive regarding the environment, women's rights (contraception, abortion, equal pay), and minimum wage (despite state victories) goodbye, huh?
I, for one, cannot wait for more Young Earth Creationists to be on the science committee. If we're gonna go derp, might as well go full derp.
The GOP supports getting the pill to an over-the-counter medicine, so there's that. But, considering Planned Parenthood is somehow against that for some reason, Democrats may not support it.
Oh, YEC, that segment of the GOP liberals like to hate on but can never seem to find any Republicans of any influence who hold it.
All I care about as it pertains to climate change "solutions" is the economic cost. Because that's the only effect that can be measured with any certainty. Usually, the economic effects are completely terrible.
BigWillieStyles on
3DS Friend Code: 1006 - 0121 - 6969
PM me with yours if you add me
Nationally, I guess we can kiss any glimmer of doing something positive regarding the environment, women's rights (contraception, abortion, equal pay), and minimum wage (despite state victories) goodbye, huh?
I, for one, cannot wait for more Young Earth Creationists to be on the science committee. If we're gonna go derp, might as well go full derp.
The GOP supports getting the pill to an over-the-counter medicine, so there's that. But, considering Planned Parenthood is somehow against that for some reason, Democrats may not support it.
Over the counter medicine isn't covered by insurance, so it's increasing the cost of women's health care.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Those aren't really accurate depictions of the "true left" in America. The "true left" wants
not just strong education but massive funding increases and the elimination of charter schools.
not just abortion rights but public abortion funding and late-term abortion allowance
not just minimum wage increases but massive hikes to a 'living wage' and in some cases a guaranteed basic income for all Americans.
not just corporate regulation but large tax hikes, union ascendance, executive salary caps, and an adversarial government relationship to industry
there are things that the Democrats are doing wrong, but "not running far enough left" isn't on the list, at least not imo. Going left and ramping up the partisanship handed Wendy Davis a 20pt loss in Texas last night. She didn't win men, whites, or women, and only won latinos by 5pts.
that "true lefT" has like maybe 5 members in Congress. to represent that as anything even marginally resembling the Democratic party as a whole is pretty disingenuous
I wasn't trying to do that... what I meant was that running toward those 5 members and their super-left position sis not going to win you mor eelections.
I guess I just don't accept that's what the left, "true" or otherwise, actually wants.
It does sound like the boogeyman left that is used to scare R's into action though.
Is...is it wrong to want those things? I didn't really see anything wrong with those things. If you talked about specific policies this might translate to, maybe I would see how some of it could be walked back, but as a general statement of intent it didn't look bad to me...
edit: damn, massive code fail...still can't figure out what I did
Nationally, I guess we can kiss any glimmer of doing something positive regarding the environment, women's rights (contraception, abortion, equal pay), and minimum wage (despite state victories) goodbye, huh?
I, for one, cannot wait for more Young Earth Creationists to be on the science committee. If we're gonna go derp, might as well go full derp.
The GOP supports getting the pill to an over-the-counter medicine, so there's that. But, considering Planned Parenthood is somehow against that for some reason, Democrats may not support it.
Over the counter medicine isn't covered by insurance, so it's increasing the cost of women's health care.
The pill is already nine bucks a month.
And over the counter stuff is a good thing. It increases access for those without insurance. It solves an intermediary problem Obamacare isn't. Because for all those signed up for Obamacare, not that many were previously uninsured.
BigWillieStyles on
3DS Friend Code: 1006 - 0121 - 6969
PM me with yours if you add me
Nationally, I guess we can kiss any glimmer of doing something positive regarding the environment, women's rights (contraception, abortion, equal pay), and minimum wage (despite state victories) goodbye, huh?
I, for one, cannot wait for more Young Earth Creationists to be on the science committee. If we're gonna go derp, might as well go full derp.
The GOP supports getting the pill to an over-the-counter medicine, so there's that. But, considering Planned Parenthood is somehow against that for some reason, Democrats may not support it.
Oh, YEC, that segment of the GOP liberals like to hate on but can never seem to find any Republicans of any influence who hold it.
All I care about as it pertains to climate change "solutions" is the economic cost. Because that's the only effect that can be measured with any certainty. Usually, the economic effects are completely terrible.
That's the dumbest idea I've ever heard. Major hormone therapy treatments as an over the counter drug?
The lesson from Obama 2008 should have been populism
The lesson from Elizabeth Warren should have been populism
The message from last night should be populism
I'm not optimistic about populism's chances.
Obama '08 wasn't really populist economically. It was populist as like, a campaign structure. And Warren did only win a blue state by single digits so it wasn't obvious the whole party should take her message.
Though I still agree. Democrats respond to all elections by moving right.
Yeah Obama ran as a populist but has been ruling as a technocrat in a political environment very unsuited to that style of rule.
I figure they decide to finally write an immigration bill. The derp faction takes the bill hostage and the infighting drags out. Eventually the GOP leaders in congress dump a hot mess of a bill on the president's desk because they know full well that no matter what happens, they can just blame the president and no one in the media or in their districts will ever take them to task for passing the buck. The president hopefully vetoes it. The republicans all take to the media circuit to cry about it. Somewhere Hillary Clinton makes a backhanded comment about how the president handled it. And nothing gets done because no matter what, the tea party faction refuses to fund anything.
I expect the Republicans to do a drip-by-drip approach with legislation. Small bills, not comprehensive ones. Tackle one small thing at a time, don't let the bill get bogged down in random bullshit.
H1B would be a great thing to start with.
I would prefer a slow and measured approach as well. But the merry band of teapers have been dropping hints for a few weeks now about how this is the time to make big changes, and that they aren't going to allow establishment republicans to go weak kneed. I'm pretty sure Rand Paul will tow the line when it comes down to it, but Ted Cruz will burn the whole thing down if he feels so inclined, and I don't think he'll ever fall into line, he's too damn full of himself.
Posts
Either Conservatives do good things, in which case, bravo, thank you conservatives.
Or Conservatives shit the bed, in which case we're nearly guaranteed a Democrat President.
Looking at my own county though, in Colorado, it's just crazy. We shot down personhood, shot down funding education with vice, and approved three taxes. All of these decisions had *wide* margins. 20-40 points. We were completely legislative liberal. But our county went full conservative on our senator. Udall done fucked up bad.
Catching up, but wanted to bring this up from a few pages back as another Marylander here. The thing that Hogan needs to comprehend is that he was voted in on taxes and literally NOTHING else (thus why he was able to capture many D areas). The millisecond he tries the old Republican bait and switch (i.e. House R's getting voted in on jobs and then spending their entire time trying to end Obamacare), he's toast. He's at most a one-termer, and depending on just how bad he screws up, he'll be recalled before that. He only won with Democratic help (not my household at least) and even that help came with a lot of hand-wringing. If he's expecting to be saved like Walker was from recall, he needs to remember that unlike Wisconsin, MD is super left-leaning.
Of course, the fact that Hogan brought in Christie, shows he's already fucking up because aside from the Republican base, the people who gave Hogan this win DO NOT LIKE Chris Christie and do not want MD to become anything like NJ. I'm already seeing people on my FB who voted for Hogan (just barely because of the taxes thing) regretting their vote just because of the Christie thing. Of course, I don't know why this didn't dawn on them when Christie was making his prior appearances stumping for Hogan, but there you have it.
So yeah, Hogan can trumpet all he wants, but the mostly blue MD legislature (after yesterday still 91 D, 50 R) will stop him from burning the house down. He's basically gonna be Ehrlich 2.0.
We're basically looking at at least another two years of the Senate being completely deadlocked on everything.
And that's the best case scenario?
I doubt there will be deadlock on the Senate level. I think Obama will be that deadlock.
And there are a TON of generally moderate Democrats in the Senate. Some are even saying there's a veto-proof majority for the Keystone pipeline bill.
PM me with yours if you add me
Yeah, best case scenario is Republicans don't remove the filibuster and it's basically two more years of getting nothing done.
It's more likely the Senate and House will start shitting out Obamacare repeal bills and bills designed to at least chip away at it, which will get vetoed by the President.
No federal appointments for two years.
No judicial appointments for two years.
Lots of talk of impeachment, but I don't think they are stupid enough to actually try to do it.
PM me with yours if you add me
Don't be so sure. The derp is growing stronger.
It is absolutely incorrect to say only Democrats were talking about the threat of impeachment.
So really nothing different than the last four years other than we now go from almost no judicial nominations happening to zero judicial nominations happening.
It doesn't need to be veto-proof. Although he hasn't been very public about it, Obama already supports Keystone.
PM me with yours if you add me
Well, now Republicans get to make the case that Obama (The Democrat Party) is the obstructionist and actually have merit to their argument.
To be fair, I absolutely want to obstruct the Republican agenda because it's utter bullshit.
I'm curious to see how that line of reasoning plays out with voters when it's not ridiculously false.
This isn't really on-topic to the thread, but I never said the GOP leadership was talking about it, so it doesn't matter that they weren't.
Last time Republicans held the majority a lot of things happened, but they weren't running on a platform of "The only good government is no government" before.
We have no idea what they'll do now that they have to actually take charge. The House voted to repeal the ACA 87 times because they could and because there was no fear of it passing the Senate or Obama's desk. They could do all the symbolic votes they wanted to shore up their base.
Now, though, they have to govern. They can't blame the Democrats when nothing gets voted on.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Penny Arcade Rockstar Social Club / This is why I despise cyclists
I'm expecting at least some level of the dog catching the car.
Also, there are a lot of the more insane elements that are vying for power, so it could get messy.
But the Republicans do have a high level of discipline for marching orders once they are in charge, so I'm mostly expecting bill after shitty bill getting passed and vetoed.
There's definitely going to be a high level of derp.
H1B would be a great thing to start with.
PM me with yours if you add me
Lots of people do not connect liberalism with Democrats, basically.
Or how about the 20 point margin in the exit polls (which seemed biased towards Democrats, but still) saying that illegal immigrants should be offered legal status. Which Democrats (including the President) ran away from. And we lost 8 points in the Hispanic vote (to about 65-35 so still dominant, but not as dominant) and 20 in the Asian vote (to 50-50).
Our positions are popular nationally, even in that electorate. Our politicians are not. That's a problem.
My proposal is basically everyone run as a populist like the senior Senator from Massachusetts and see how that goes.
So, Terry gets to join the "GOP incumbents who lost in 2014" club with Corbett.
PM me with yours if you add me
What about my Republican friend who says the only thing left of a Democrat is a Communist? :P
(yes, I know an actual person who says this)
Yeah it's actually pretty easy to think of a set of policy planks that could excite the base while getting people acclimated to 'not-center-leftism'. You run on a dollar increase on the minimum wage, you work for it, when it happens you move to work safety, when that happens you work on GLBT rights or accountability or something. We have a massive array of pretty popular left-of-republican policies that we could run on, and if people keep winning those battles at the state level that builds momentum, it builds up the number of viable candidates you have for major elections, and it builds the 'democratic brand'. That's what politics is: you accept your limitations within the moment but you work to push those limits in the long run.
None of this would require the democrats to open the floodgates to like, Leninists or whatever, but all of this would assume that the dems aren't afraid of their own shadow.
The lesson from Elizabeth Warren should have been populism
The message from last night should be populism
I'm not optimistic about populism's chances.
Can I trade you Ashford for Adrian Smith? Pretty please?
Nationally, I guess we can kiss any glimmer of doing something positive regarding the environment, women's rights (contraception, abortion, equal pay), and minimum wage (despite state victories) goodbye, huh?
I, for one, cannot wait for more Young Earth Creationists to be on the science committee. If we're gonna go derp, might as well go full derp.
Obama '08 wasn't really populist economically. It was populist as like, a campaign structure. And Warren did only win a blue state by single digits so it wasn't obvious the whole party should take her message.
Though I still agree. Democrats respond to all elections by moving right.
Oh, YEC, that segment of the GOP liberals like to hate on but can never seem to find any Republicans of any influence who hold it.
All I care about as it pertains to climate change "solutions" is the economic cost. Because that's the only effect that can be measured with any certainty. Usually, the economic effects are completely terrible.
PM me with yours if you add me
Over the counter medicine isn't covered by insurance, so it's increasing the cost of women's health care.
Is...is it wrong to want those things? I didn't really see anything wrong with those things. If you talked about specific policies this might translate to, maybe I would see how some of it could be walked back, but as a general statement of intent it didn't look bad to me...
edit: damn, massive code fail...still can't figure out what I did
Wii: 4521 1146 5179 1333 Pearl: 3394 4642 8367 HG: 1849 3913 3132
And over the counter stuff is a good thing. It increases access for those without insurance. It solves an intermediary problem Obamacare isn't. Because for all those signed up for Obamacare, not that many were previously uninsured.
PM me with yours if you add me
That's the dumbest idea I've ever heard. Major hormone therapy treatments as an over the counter drug?
Yeah Obama ran as a populist but has been ruling as a technocrat in a political environment very unsuited to that style of rule.
I would prefer a slow and measured approach as well. But the merry band of teapers have been dropping hints for a few weeks now about how this is the time to make big changes, and that they aren't going to allow establishment republicans to go weak kneed. I'm pretty sure Rand Paul will tow the line when it comes down to it, but Ted Cruz will burn the whole thing down if he feels so inclined, and I don't think he'll ever fall into line, he's too damn full of himself.