Hey so I'm a student in Mass and a new voter. I've lived out of the country for most of my life and mostly only paid attention to Presidential politics. But now, since I'm an actual voter, I figure I should read up on the other levels.
Does anyone have a good article on Warren/Brown's policies? I'm very left leaning, so I'd probably vote for Warren anyway, but I'd like to have a good idea of who these candidates actually are.
That may be a mistake. I've heard several times that Brown is on Obama's speed dial, and that he is constantly in secret meetings with kings and queens. He also was one of the first and only people to see the Osama photos. Pretty important guy.
To add context to this, Death of Rats is joking. The things he mentioned are all bullshit statements Brown has made. Brown has a history of being self-important and basically declaring that he sets the agenda in the senate.
Brown is, as a person, a bit more moderate than Warren would be, but both will toe the party line 99% of the time.
I assumed as much, but not gonna lie it took me a second to get it (somehow)
I want to do with you
What spring does with the cherry trees.
oh that's just miaWAIT A SECOND I WENT TO HIGH SCHOOL WITH THAT KID HOLY SHIT
We ate lunch together
(Joe Saunders, not the old guy)
This is going to happen more and more as the forums get older, we will be the skeletons in local canidates closets. Or in your case, the awkward lunch handy.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Hey so I'm a student in Mass and a new voter. I've lived out of the country for most of my life and mostly only paid attention to Presidential politics. But now, since I'm an actual voter, I figure I should read up on the other levels.
Does anyone have a good article on Warren/Brown's policies? I'm very left leaning, so I'd probably vote for Warren anyway, but I'd like to have a good idea of who these candidates actually are.
That may be a mistake. I've heard several times that Brown is on Obama's speed dial, and that he is constantly in secret meetings with kings and queens. He also was one of the first and only people to see the Osama photos. Pretty important guy.
To add context to this, Death of Rats is joking. The things he mentioned are all bullshit statements Brown has made. Brown has a history of being self-important and basically declaring that he sets the agenda in the senate.
Brown is, as a person, a bit more moderate than Warren would be, but both will toe the party line 99% of the time.
This is misleading as all get out.
Brown is more moderate toward the centre from the right and Warren leans to the left. "More moderate" is meaningless outside of primaries wihtout these qualifiers.
This is also bullshit. Brown is a hard right Republican who talks like he's a moderate.
True, which was actually my point. He is a "moderate" because he has to get elected in Massachusetts, but he's still lock step with the Republican party.
Which as I'm reading back isn't what I said, so thanks for bringing that up!
Unless they start voting to break fillabusters I don't bother to separate moderate or extremist senators anymore. Long as they're on board with paralyzing the government they're all extremists in my book
Unless they start voting to break fillabusters I don't bother to separate moderate or extremist senators anymore. Long as they're on board with paralyzing the government they're all extremists in my book
0
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
That was so important Pete, you needed to say that twice.
0
Options
Just_Bri_ThanksSeething with ragefrom a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPAregular
Nexus works at the Federal Department of Redundancy Department of the U.S.
...and when you are done with that; take a folding
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
So I just realized that Ryan is not only running as VP, but he is also up for reelection as representative of Wisconsin's first congressional district. Any one have odds or polls regarding that race? I would love it of the VP nomination gets him thrown out of congress
So I just realized that Ryan is not only running as VP, but he is also up for reelection as representative of Wisconsin's first congressional district. Any one have odds or polls regarding that race? I would love it of the VP nomination gets him thrown out of congress
If that district elected him in the first place, he's probably pretty safe.
Edit: Yeah, WI-1 has a PVI of R+2, and Ryan has been elected there 7 times already. I don't think he's going anywhere.
So I just realized that Ryan is not only running as VP, but he is also up for reelection as representative of Wisconsin's first congressional district. Any one have odds or polls regarding that race? I would love it of the VP nomination gets him thrown out of congress
If that district elected him in the first place, he's probably pretty safe.
Edit: Yeah, WI-1 has a PVI of R+2, and Ryan has been elected there 7 times already. I don't think he's going anywhere.
So I just realized that Ryan is not only running as VP, but he is also up for reelection as representative of Wisconsin's first congressional district. Any one have odds or polls regarding that race? I would love it of the VP nomination gets him thrown out of congress
So I just realized that Ryan is not only running as VP, but he is also up for reelection as representative of Wisconsin's first congressional district. Any one have odds or polls regarding that race? I would love it of the VP nomination gets him thrown out of congress
If that district elected him in the first place, he's probably pretty safe.
Edit: Yeah, WI-1 has a PVI of R+2, and Ryan has been elected there 7 times already. I don't think he's going anywhere.
John Howard thought that way, too.
Completely different situation. Ryan survived 2006 and 2008, so it's not like there's going to be a sea change in US politics that's going to flip WI-1.
So I just realized that Ryan is not only running as VP, but he is also up for reelection as representative of Wisconsin's first congressional district. Any one have odds or polls regarding that race? I would love it of the VP nomination gets him thrown out of congress
If that district elected him in the first place, he's probably pretty safe.
Edit: Yeah, WI-1 has a PVI of R+2, and Ryan has been elected there 7 times already. I don't think he's going anywhere.
John Howard thought that way, too.
Completely different situation. Ryan survived 2006 and 2008, so it's not like there's going to be a sea change in US politics that's going to flip WI-1.
No, not really. From what I understand, his opponent ran on a "he's forgotten about you" platform that got traction.
Also, the DCCC/DNC has a super stupid policy where they don't run against the Republican leadership. Or they don't try very hard. Because they're the worst.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Is it bad that the first thought I had when I saw the link was "is he running against Maddow again?"
With how much she's been bad mouthing him, I wouldn't be surprised if that dog whistle comes out again. The sad part is, he currently represents her and does not return any of her inquiries.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
So I just realized that Ryan is not only running as VP, but he is also up for reelection as representative of Wisconsin's first congressional district. Any one have odds or polls regarding that race? I would love it of the VP nomination gets him thrown out of congress
If that district elected him in the first place, he's probably pretty safe.
Edit: Yeah, WI-1 has a PVI of R+2, and Ryan has been elected there 7 times already. I don't think he's going anywhere.
John Howard thought that way, too.
Completely different situation. Ryan survived 2006 and 2008, so it's not like there's going to be a sea change in US politics that's going to flip WI-1.
No, not really. From what I understand, his opponent ran on a "he's forgotten about you" platform that got traction.
It was also the same year his party lost control of the parliament. And that attack worked because Howard had been PM for several years at that point. Ryan's opponent doesn't really have anything to point to on that front - if Romney/Ryan loses, then he just returns to the House. His district is (for whatever reason) happy with him being their Rep, and like ebum said, I doubt the DCCC bothered to get a legitimate challenger anyway.
So I just realized that Ryan is not only running as VP, but he is also up for reelection as representative of Wisconsin's first congressional district. Any one have odds or polls regarding that race? I would love it of the VP nomination gets him thrown out of congress
If that district elected him in the first place, he's probably pretty safe.
Edit: Yeah, WI-1 has a PVI of R+2, and Ryan has been elected there 7 times already. I don't think he's going anywhere.
John Howard thought that way, too.
Completely different situation. Ryan survived 2006 and 2008, so it's not like there's going to be a sea change in US politics that's going to flip WI-1.
No, not really. From what I understand, his opponent ran on a "he's forgotten about you" platform that got traction.
It was also the same year his party lost control of the parliament. And that attack worked because Howard had been PM for several years at that point. Ryan's opponent doesn't really have anything to point to on that front - if Romney/Ryan loses, then he just returns to the House. His district is (for whatever reason) happy with him being their Rep, and like ebum said, I doubt the DCCC bothered to get a legitimate challenger anyway.
The district is going to be more competitive than you think. Ryan's opponent has raised over ten times as much money as all of Ryan's previous democratic challengers combined, he has extensive experience in the private sector and has built a couple of successful businesses (unlike Ryan), it's a fairly moderate district, and Ryan's going to be in the spotlight. I think this last will be the most important, how Ryan does in his congressional election will depend on whether he ends up being portrayed as a greedy liar gutting Medicare or a brilliant, charismatic budget wonk. If it's the former, Zerban is in a very good position to exploit it. Ryan has a serious edge, but it's not a guaranteed victory.
0
Options
Captain Ultralow resolution pictures of birdsRegistered Userregular
Eric (I think?) Hovde who's the Tea Party favorite. Then some dude named Neumann and one of the Fitzgerald brothers that run the Wisconsin legislature running fourth.
Tammy Baldwin is the Democratic nominee, who will probably be the subject of this fall's most outrageous campaign ads (as a super badass military veteran).
I'm not sure if I follow. Baldwin isn't a vet. I think you're thinking of Tammy Duckworth. Baldwin would be the nation's first openly gay senator.
Eric (I think?) Hovde who's the Tea Party favorite. Then some dude named Neumann and one of the Fitzgerald brothers that run the Wisconsin legislature running fourth.
Tammy Baldwin is the Democratic nominee, who will probably be the subject of this fall's most outrageous campaign ads (as a super badass military veteran).
I'm not sure if I follow. Baldwin isn't a vet. I think you're thinking of Tammy Duckworth. Baldwin would be the nation's first openly gay senator.
Yeah, I got my Tammys confused.
Duckworth is kicking ass. Hooray.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I'd have no problem with Scott Brown if he didn't vote with the Republicans so often. He's a decent enough fellow.
Heck he'd be a great Republican for some other state that was going to vote R no matter what.
Again completely irrelevant as long as he continues to march lockstep with the filibuster everything movement.
The diehard GOP isn't going to change. The moderate Republicans who continuously back them up in the name of party solidarity need to be put on notice or voted out of office.
Eric (I think?) Hovde who's the Tea Party favorite. Then some dude named Neumann and one of the Fitzgerald brothers that run the Wisconsin legislature running fourth.
Tammy Baldwin is the Democratic nominee, who will probably be the subject of this fall's most outrageous campaign ads (as a super badass military veteran).
I'm not sure if I follow. Baldwin isn't a vet. I think you're thinking of Tammy Duckworth. Baldwin would be the nation's first openly gay senator.
Yeah, I got my Tammys confused.
Duckworth is kicking ass. Hooray.
She's running against Douchebag McDeadbeat. She's busier than a no-legged woman at an ass-kicking contest.
Which, coincidentally, is what that race has become.
Rep. Todd Akin, the Republican nominee for Senate in Missouri who is running against Sen. Claire McCaskill, justified his opposition to abortion rights even in case of rape with a claim that victims of “legitimate rape” have unnamed biological defenses that prevent pregnancy.
“First of all, from what I understand from doctors [pregnancy from rape] is really rare,” Akin told KTVI-TV in an interview posted Sunday. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
Akin said that even in the worst-case scenario — when the supposed natural protections against unwanted pregnancy fail — abortion should still not be a legal option for the rape victim.
“Let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work, or something,” Akin said. “I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”
McCaskill's no prize, but she better win.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Rep. Todd Akin, the Republican nominee for Senate in Missouri who is running against Sen. Claire McCaskill, justified his opposition to abortion rights even in case of rape with a claim that victims of “legitimate rape” have unnamed biological defenses that prevent pregnancy.
“First of all, from what I understand from doctors [pregnancy from rape] is really rare,” Akin told KTVI-TV in an interview posted Sunday. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
Akin said that even in the worst-case scenario — when the supposed natural protections against unwanted pregnancy fail — abortion should still not be a legal option for the rape victim.
“Let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work, or something,” Akin said. “I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”
McCaskill's no prize, but she better win.
Yeah, I just heard about this and was trying to track down his record on abstinence only sex ed, in addition to his position where he supports a ban on emergency contraception.
Holy, mother fuck. How can people be this mindlessly wrongheaded.
Rep. Todd Akin, the Republican nominee for Senate in Missouri who is running against Sen. Claire McCaskill, justified his opposition to abortion rights even in case of rape with a claim that victims of “legitimate rape” have unnamed biological defenses that prevent pregnancy.
“First of all, from what I understand from doctors [pregnancy from rape] is really rare,” Akin told KTVI-TV in an interview posted Sunday. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
Akin said that even in the worst-case scenario — when the supposed natural protections against unwanted pregnancy fail — abortion should still not be a legal option for the rape victim.
“Let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work, or something,” Akin said. “I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”
McCaskill's no prize, but she better win.
Yeah, I just heard about this and was trying to track down his record on abstinence only sex ed, in addition to his position where he supports a ban on emergency contraception.
Holy, mother fuck. How can people be this mindlessly wrongheaded.
I'm still trying to understand what a legitimate rape is. Is the other form illegitimate rape? Because neither of those terms make any sense.
Rep. Todd Akin, the Republican nominee for Senate in Missouri who is running against Sen. Claire McCaskill, justified his opposition to abortion rights even in case of rape with a claim that victims of “legitimate rape” have unnamed biological defenses that prevent pregnancy.
“First of all, from what I understand from doctors [pregnancy from rape] is really rare,” Akin told KTVI-TV in an interview posted Sunday. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
Akin said that even in the worst-case scenario — when the supposed natural protections against unwanted pregnancy fail — abortion should still not be a legal option for the rape victim.
“Let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work, or something,” Akin said. “I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”
McCaskill's no prize, but she better win.
Yeah, I just heard about this and was trying to track down his record on abstinence only sex ed, in addition to his position where he supports a ban on emergency contraception.
Holy, mother fuck. How can people be this mindlessly wrongheaded.
I'm still trying to understand what a legitimate rape is. Is the other form illegitimate rape? Because neither of those terms make any sense.
Presumably the same thing as "forcible rape" that assholes like Paul Ryan tried to redefine in the House last year.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Rep. Todd Akin, the Republican nominee for Senate in Missouri who is running against Sen. Claire McCaskill, justified his opposition to abortion rights even in case of rape with a claim that victims of “legitimate rape” have unnamed biological defenses that prevent pregnancy.
“First of all, from what I understand from doctors [pregnancy from rape] is really rare,” Akin told KTVI-TV in an interview posted Sunday. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
Akin said that even in the worst-case scenario — when the supposed natural protections against unwanted pregnancy fail — abortion should still not be a legal option for the rape victim.
“Let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work, or something,” Akin said. “I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”
McCaskill's no prize, but she better win.
Yeah, I just heard about this and was trying to track down his record on abstinence only sex ed, in addition to his position where he supports a ban on emergency contraception.
Holy, mother fuck. How can people be this mindlessly wrongheaded.
I'm still trying to understand what a legitimate rape is. Is the other form illegitimate rape? Because neither of those terms make any sense.
Presumably the same thing as "forcible rape" that assholes like Paul Ryan tried to redefine in the House last year.
This guy co-sponsored the "forcible rape" bill with Ryan.
Rep. Todd Akin, the Republican nominee for Senate in Missouri who is running against Sen. Claire McCaskill, justified his opposition to abortion rights even in case of rape with a claim that victims of “legitimate rape” have unnamed biological defenses that prevent pregnancy.
“First of all, from what I understand from doctors [pregnancy from rape] is really rare,” Akin told KTVI-TV in an interview posted Sunday. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
Akin said that even in the worst-case scenario — when the supposed natural protections against unwanted pregnancy fail — abortion should still not be a legal option for the rape victim.
“Let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work, or something,” Akin said. “I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”
McCaskill's no prize, but she better win.
Yeah, I just heard about this and was trying to track down his record on abstinence only sex ed, in addition to his position where he supports a ban on emergency contraception.
Holy, mother fuck. How can people be this mindlessly wrongheaded.
I'm still trying to understand what a legitimate rape is. Is the other form illegitimate rape? Because neither of those terms make any sense.
"Legitimate rapes" are the sort that should not be confused with the ones where the victim really wanted it.
Rep. Todd Akin, the Republican nominee for Senate in Missouri who is running against Sen. Claire McCaskill, justified his opposition to abortion rights even in case of rape with a claim that victims of “legitimate rape” have unnamed biological defenses that prevent pregnancy.
“First of all, from what I understand from doctors [pregnancy from rape] is really rare,” Akin told KTVI-TV in an interview posted Sunday. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
Akin said that even in the worst-case scenario — when the supposed natural protections against unwanted pregnancy fail — abortion should still not be a legal option for the rape victim.
“Let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work, or something,” Akin said. “I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”
McCaskill's no prize, but she better win.
Yeah, I just heard about this and was trying to track down his record on abstinence only sex ed, in addition to his position where he supports a ban on emergency contraception.
Holy, mother fuck. How can people be this mindlessly wrongheaded.
I'm still trying to understand what a legitimate rape is. Is the other form illegitimate rape? Because neither of those terms make any sense.
"Legitimate rapes" are the sort that should not be confused with the ones where the victim really wanted it.
Overall, his response to this is making it worse. How do you claim you misspoke for a good 30 seconds? And he waited from Friday until Sunday when it aired to say he misspoke.
Akin has until Tuesday to step down, or else the GOP is stuck with him. But if they couldn't get rid of Christine O'Donnell and Sharon Angle, I doubt this guy is going anywhere.
Posts
What spring does with the cherry trees.
No, you may not get out of The Hole.
oh that's just miaWAIT A SECOND I WENT TO HIGH SCHOOL WITH THAT KID HOLY SHIT
We ate lunch together
(Joe Saunders, not the old guy)
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
This is going to happen more and more as the forums get older, we will be the skeletons in local canidates closets. Or in your case, the awkward lunch handy.
pleasepaypreacher.net
True, which was actually my point. He is a "moderate" because he has to get elected in Massachusetts, but he's still lock step with the Republican party.
Which as I'm reading back isn't what I said, so thanks for bringing that up!
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
I think you mean the United States Federal Department of Redundancy Department of the United States.
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
Edit: Yeah, WI-1 has a PVI of R+2, and Ryan has been elected there 7 times already. I don't think he's going anywhere.
John Howard thought that way, too.
Rob Zerban is running against him.
Completely different situation. Ryan survived 2006 and 2008, so it's not like there's going to be a sea change in US politics that's going to flip WI-1.
No, not really. From what I understand, his opponent ran on a "he's forgotten about you" platform that got traction.
Oh Scott Brown you failure.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Is it bad that the first thought I had when I saw the link was "is he running against Maddow again?"
With how much she's been bad mouthing him, I wouldn't be surprised if that dog whistle comes out again. The sad part is, he currently represents her and does not return any of her inquiries.
pleasepaypreacher.net
It was also the same year his party lost control of the parliament. And that attack worked because Howard had been PM for several years at that point. Ryan's opponent doesn't really have anything to point to on that front - if Romney/Ryan loses, then he just returns to the House. His district is (for whatever reason) happy with him being their Rep, and like ebum said, I doubt the DCCC bothered to get a legitimate challenger anyway.
Heck he'd be a great Republican for some other state that was going to vote R no matter what.
Nah. In such a state he would tack harder to the right to avoid a primary challenge.
He would be if he wasn't a Republican.
The district is going to be more competitive than you think. Ryan's opponent has raised over ten times as much money as all of Ryan's previous democratic challengers combined, he has extensive experience in the private sector and has built a couple of successful businesses (unlike Ryan), it's a fairly moderate district, and Ryan's going to be in the spotlight. I think this last will be the most important, how Ryan does in his congressional election will depend on whether he ends up being portrayed as a greedy liar gutting Medicare or a brilliant, charismatic budget wonk. If it's the former, Zerban is in a very good position to exploit it. Ryan has a serious edge, but it's not a guaranteed victory.
I'm not sure if I follow. Baldwin isn't a vet. I think you're thinking of Tammy Duckworth. Baldwin would be the nation's first openly gay senator.
Yeah, I got my Tammys confused.
Duckworth is kicking ass. Hooray.
Again completely irrelevant as long as he continues to march lockstep with the filibuster everything movement.
The diehard GOP isn't going to change. The moderate Republicans who continuously back them up in the name of party solidarity need to be put on notice or voted out of office.
She's running against Douchebag McDeadbeat. She's busier than a no-legged woman at an ass-kicking contest.
Which, coincidentally, is what that race has become.
McCaskill's no prize, but she better win.
Yeah, I just heard about this and was trying to track down his record on abstinence only sex ed, in addition to his position where he supports a ban on emergency contraception.
Holy, mother fuck. How can people be this mindlessly wrongheaded.
Steam | Twitter
I'm still trying to understand what a legitimate rape is. Is the other form illegitimate rape? Because neither of those terms make any sense.
Presumably the same thing as "forcible rape" that assholes like Paul Ryan tried to redefine in the House last year.
This guy co-sponsored the "forcible rape" bill with Ryan.
"Legitimate rapes" are the sort that should not be confused with the ones where the victim really wanted it.
It's the ultimate Randian ideal.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Akin has until Tuesday to step down, or else the GOP is stuck with him. But if they couldn't get rid of Christine O'Donnell and Sharon Angle, I doubt this guy is going anywhere.