2018 Senate (& House)

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Joe Fan, Mar 22, 2017.

  1. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    John Bel Edwards reelected governor of Louisiana. Link. Of course, he's rabidly conservative for a Democrat, but it's still not a good sign.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. BrntOrngStmpeDe

    BrntOrngStmpeDe 1,000+ Posts

    I don't know politics in every state in the union but trending is not good and this is why Trump's rhetoric and tactics matter. If he doesn't help the team win, then who cares how good of individual player he is. (and I don't even think he's that good of an individual player). But I really think he's doing a VERY POOR job of helping the team win.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. Horn6721

    Horn6721 Half of seeming clever is keeping your mouth shut.

    For some context for almost 120 years since about 1900 of the 25 La Govs all but 2 were Dem.ALL but 2 in 120 years
    and all incumbents were reelected Except Roehmer who switched from Dem to GOP and lost reelection
     
  4. Garmel

    Garmel 2,500+ Posts

    I guess Trump was the cause of Edwards winning a few years ago as well. Blaming Trump for this is ridiculous.
     
  5. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Trump sure as hell doesn't help. However, the main reason Edwards wins is that he's an excellent candidate and miles away from the national Democrats.
     
  6. Garmel

    Garmel 2,500+ Posts

    I don't think he hurt either. Trump had nothing to do with this election. This was all on Edwards then and now.
     
  7. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Whatever you have to tell yourself, Princess. Lol
     
  8. Garmel

    Garmel 2,500+ Posts

    TDS is a terrible thing, princess. ;)
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. Horn6721

    Horn6721 Half of seeming clever is keeping your mouth shut.

    So an incumbent Gov , a Dem in a state where going back 120 years have voted Dems for Gov 99.2% . Where at least since 1900 incumbents have been reelected. Edwards would be shunned by most Dems.

    The GOP candidate was not well known and first time running for office.
    And this is somehow a statement about Trump?
    How close was the vote?
    I read that the GOP candidate had a small lead until the urban districts near Baton Rouge came in for Edwards.

    Why is it that the dem districts are always late in reporting? Same thing happened in Kentucky.
     
  10. ShAArk92

    ShAArk92 1,000+ Posts

    what is "the team"

    If you say republican or democrat ... THAT is the problem.

    I understand using the labels as a base reference for a policy/philosophy starting point, but helping The Party? NAH. could not care less.
     
  11. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    So if a bunch of liberal Democrats take control of Congress and shutdown the conservative agenda, you don't care?
     
  12. ShAArk92

    ShAArk92 1,000+ Posts

    Of course I care ... why would I accept a bunch of "liberal" (sic) democrats for anything but a circus entertainment? (given where we've gone the last 10 years with what is liberal and what's leftist ... I'd take liberal, at least they can issue a coherent thought, even if it's not quite correct)

    My point is ... this MY TEAM your Team thing has gotten out of control ... beyond, as my aforementioned, reference points from which to address issues.

    I could not care less about the RNC and DNC. They have FAR too much power in our government and elections (see the democrat primary buffoonery on multiple elections)
     
  13. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    It's not about the "team." It's about advancing a conservative policy agenda. If Democrats did that, I wouldn't care if they won. However, handing them a majority just so we can talk **** isn't worthwhile.
     
  14. ShAArk92

    ShAArk92 1,000+ Posts

    I don't understand.

    If this "my team" thing isn't a reference to the parties; RNC/DNC ... then what is it?

    I was hoping it was a reference to Team USA ... and restoring our Fed to a Constitutional Government ... mandated by a people who seek freedom over anything else.

    But we don't and haven't for a very long time. Hence the reason the democrat party/platform has become more radical left in the last decade.
     
  15. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    You're diminishing the importance of who's in charge. If Democrats run the House, it certainly makes a difference. Every policy priority you get will come with major compromises, and on social issues, you'll get nothing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. ShAArk92

    ShAArk92 1,000+ Posts

    i suppose I still expect the Fed to operate IAW the Constitution which means The People is in charge.

    OK OK ... get off the floor.

    is "team" then ... Congress ... vs People?
     
  17. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    You're too hung up on this team issue. I want the conservative political party to control Congress, because it's more likely to enact conservative policy than the liberal party is. It's really not any more complicated than that.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Monahorns

    Monahorns 2,500+ Posts

    Republicans aren't really that conservative anymore. Pro tariffs. Pro welfare state. Pro deficit spending.

    Rs are just fighting Ds to have power over the huge federal government we have.

    Yes Rs change things a little slower. A little. But they by and large protect progressive policy once it is enacted. They are for the ACA. They are for banking bailouts.
     
  19. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Yes, that's true. The Paul Ryan approach on those issues has lost and been replaced by the Trump approach.

    The big difference is on social issues. To bring up a recent concern of yours, the problem is trannies swinging their nuts in toddlers' faces is far more likely to fester with Democrats in charge.
     
  20. ShAArk92

    ShAArk92 1,000+ Posts

    I didn't use the term. I asked for clarification on what the "teams" identity is.
     
  21. ShAArk92

    ShAArk92 1,000+ Posts

    this is true ...

    but my obsessive objection disorder ...

    Stop blanket blasting tariffs. They can be abused ... but given what our businesses must contend ... competing with countries and entire continents ... tariffs are a reasonable action and are actually intended to be the primary source of revenue for the Federal Government. (I know I know ... again, get off the floor ... but it's true)

    It used to be one of the only issues the democrats had the proper perspective, but now that a "republican" (see @Mr. Deez there's that "team" thing again) is promoting them ... tariffs are suddenly bad.
     
  22. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    I know you didn't. BOSDe did. He can speak for himself on what the team is. However, at this point the main team that Trump is helping to win is liberal Democrats. They're doing great since Trump took office.
     
  23. Monahorns

    Monahorns 2,500+ Posts

    Yes and giving political power to people who want to continue to lacerate our society into ever smaller factions. But Republicans will probably be for it too, in the long run. We just get to the destination more slowly.
     
  24. Monahorns

    Monahorns 2,500+ Posts

    I am for tariffs if we get rid of income, payroll, and sales taxes.

    At this point the US consumer is being harmed by a policy that is sold by saying it helps us. It doesn't.
     
  25. ShAArk92

    ShAArk92 1,000+ Posts

    there is no point at which the underselling by a subsidized company of their home government/continent isn't defending our own economy.

    the choice is simple. Play fair or have a tariff applied ... yes we get to determine what's fair as our market is the freest. (so far, give the dems a few more years and perhaps it won't be)
     
  26. ShAArk92

    ShAArk92 1,000+ Posts

    The dems have been growing for a long time ... and getting more radical. Trump's election is a result of the ingenious ECC ... but segmented in the population/districts ... we are getting more leftist as a nation. We the People are not nearly as free as we once were.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  27. Monahorns

    Monahorns 2,500+ Posts

    I see this issue from 180 degrees of you.

    If a government of another country subsidizes an export that we buy, then it is a great deal for us. We are getting the citizens of another country to pay part of the price of a good for us.

    Subsidies come from money taxed out of their pockets. Tariffs come from money taxed out of our pockets.
     
  28. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    They actually had been doing poorly before Trump. They hadn't won control of the House since 2008 and had lost Senate seats in 2 out of 3 elections (including a net 13 seat loss between 2010 and 2014).
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2019
  29. ShAArk92

    ShAArk92 1,000+ Posts

    In statewide elections, they sure have. We actually danced with the possibility a guy like Beeto would be the US Senator from Texas (Fed, I know) ... and the Barbie chick Wendy Davis might actually be governor.

    and (almost) half of the voting population voted for bigger government in spite of the DNC nominee's lack of office fitness ... or physical fitness for that matter. That's democrats getting bigger before Trump was POTUS.

    In more murky validation ... the republicans are not nearly as conservative as they once were.

    So ... in that "everything is relative" is relevant.

    Trump isn't why the Dems won the House. Actually in a number of recent examples, one or both parts of Congress flip from the current POTUS.

    So ... yeah ... the nation is getting more leftist. Been to SFO lately? As Kaly goes ... so goes the nation. There are good folks there but the moonbats are increasing in number and in degree of moonbatism.
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2019
  30. ShAArk92

    ShAArk92 1,000+ Posts

    right ... we buy those nike shoes at $150/pair ... and those who actually made 'em earned how much of that?

    Meanwhile, the domestic producer can't ... CANNOT ... beat that. It's not a free nor fair market. It's dealing in slavery, really.

    We can't directly impact what another country does, but putting goods in our market when it's not a legitimate price means ... we don't have a legitimate economy.

    Odd that these tariffs have been imposed (not all but some) ... hasn't really hurt our economy much.

    nevermind tariffs are what is supposed to fund our Fed ... not this endless array of taxes on the people, but I recognize that horse left the barn years ago.

    Tariffs are NOT necessarily a 4-letter word (does that still convey Bad anymore?)
     

Share This Page