The KGB Oracle Forums General Public Discussion (SPECIAL ACCESS) KGB Political Debate Central Boehner - stupid leader of the party of stupid

Uh, anecdote or not, I know quite a lot of single women that are very conservative. Not sure where you get your facts from, but I highly doubt that one is accurate.

edit: I also know a LOT of conservative latinos. You likely label them as non-conservative simply because they often vote Democrat, which is inaccurate. I'd vote Democrat too if I was illegal.

You would find these forums a much more pleasant place if you believed otherwise.



We're talking overall trends for this election. I know gay, vegan conservatives but the trend on how vegans vote is readily apparent. Google single women Obama and the first result is Fox News blaming them for the election.


Actually....

Flordia Cubans - Solidly red. This was a shock to all.

Ohio blue-collar - Would have drifted rightward like all white blue-collars except for the particulars of rust-belt politics.

Latinos - 50/50 until Bush-era politics. Fun fact: It's not Bush's fault. He, like most Texan conservatives, are moderate on immigration.

Single Women - Slightly left until unfortunate comments about rape/binders.

This is not right voting left, or left voting left. This is the better campaign winning the demographics in play.


e: minor grammer

Yes and yes. Exactly.

On your last part regarding GOP... you seem to have the wrong idea of what the GOP *purportedly* stands for. Now, as to what much of the party has stood for in reality? Sure, you are more correct there.

Of course this is the fault of.... the GOP itself. What it stands for on paper is good. What it has stood for under Bush and Hastert and Boehner.... not so good.

I wouldnt toss plutocrat stones at GOP though, I know it seems counter intuitive to liberal leaning folks but the Dems are much better friends to plutocratic class than the GOP. Not to imply that the GOP does not have a huge stable of rent seeking plutocrats.... the Dems just have more.

You also wrote later: "Latinos - 50/50 until Bush-era politics. Fun fact: It's not Bush's fault."

Extremely correct here. Well, it was more 40/60 but still that is a winnable number for GOP. Giving up almost the entire latino vote so elements of the GOP can pander to certain anti immigration elements is absolutely silly... and as much as I loathe Bush, trying to make the Latino immigration situation make sense again was one thing he actually had right.

Wrong. Its the "No True Conservative" fallacy - get it right!

But I get to decide what I consider a true conservative, so its not a fallacy in this case. As held by the general political vernacular , a "true" conservative is synonymous with an older school of conservatism and is diametrically opposed to the "neo" conservative strain which is actually a Trotskyite strain of statism.

It has already been shown here that Romney lost the election by a spread that was less than the people who voting for Ron Paul in the GOP primary. I know from my extensive contacts in the Ron Paul and liberty movements that Romney did NOT get those votes and that includes several states that held primaries after it was apparent Paul had no chance so I would say the effect was understated. I know from contacts in other conservative grassroots movements - especially of the paleocon stripe that Romney lost a lot of votes there as well.

Silver was right... this time. He needs to pull it off a lot more often if he is to be used as a gold standard of justification. Someone is always right after a big event, and they get some limelight for a while but usually cannot keep it up.

I don't see where, other then progressive propaganda , that the Republicans are in dire straits.
Sure they lost the Presidential election but that means nothing.
The House and Senate are the same.

So where is the OMG THE REPUBLICANS ARE DEAD if they don't change coming from.

When Bush won 2 in a row there was no talk that the Democrats need to change.

I have said it before, Democrats are better politicians, and that's not a good thing.

Having some insane progressive keep saying they need to change doesn't make it true.

12/21/12 Apocalypse Update

Forbes got their way. The tea-party caucus blocked this proposal during much confusion, shouting and media coverage. They threw Boehner under the bus. There is a possibility that Boehner will be pissed enough to work with the Democrats. Doubtful.



You called it. Especially about the Norquist tax pledge being more important than the United States to many.



Sure, the Republicans are still very viable electorally. National elections will continue to be 48/48, with the remaining 4 deciding it. Gerrymandering is such that the House will continue to be red until my daughter is an adult.

What we're talking about is the GOP's unwillingness and inability to preform day-to-day governance and meaningful policy debate. This is bad for everyone, regardless of personal politics.

And the democrats did have an identity crisis.



Nate Silver was also right in 2008 and 2010 (though everyone was for this one). He also preformed exemplary work for Baseball Prospectus before that. Regardless, my intention was not to reference him an oracular paragon, but instead to allude to the supremacy of hard, verifiable data over murky correlations. Otherwise, you've been very insightful throughout this thread.

I don't understand what difference it makes. Even if Boehner had managed to get his bill passed Harry Reid said there was no chance the Senate would even consider it.

They are all horrible, nasty, petty people who spend all their time pointing fingers at others so people won't look too closely as what they've done.

Ever seen an episode of pawn stars? Store low balls, customer high balls, and they go back and forth until an agreement. In this case, Obama made his second offer, much more reasonable, and the GOP said "fuck it, I'm out.". Except if the GOP walks out, the OBM predicts a nasty recession. The market did not take kindly to this.

Except that doesn't really work when the GOP's first offer was what Obama asked for before the election. So, who is the greedy one, the person who wants to keep what they earned or the person who attempts to seize every opportunity to get even more than they said they wanted?

This is wrong and you'd know it if you ever stopped listening to Fox hysteria.

If GOP does not negotiate, no amount of gerrymandering is going to save them.

Too bad Boehner is too busy ensuring Obama stays 2-term president to actually save GOP from well-deserved voter wrath, but more importantly to prevent Democrats from getting undeserved super-majorities in both houses..