Political Randomness

[Pyperkub]

Hillary would have made similar compromises and been hated by conservatives too.

If she had won in 2008 instead of Obama, you're probably right. But if she wins in 2016 she'll have Obama's presidency as a cautionary tale.

A lot depends on the state of the R Party in the next election cycle -- whether the leadership can regain control or if the inmates are still running the asylum. If it's the latter, there is nobody to negotiate or compromise with, only obstruction to be overcome. I'm sure Hillary is learning from Barry's example.

It would be nice if she did, because 2008 was hers to lose, and she did so. Obama went out and outmaneuvered and out-organized her and eventually out-fundraised her. She ran a presumptive campaign and got schooled. Obama did a masterful job in 2008, but by the time 2009 came around he thought the heavy lifting was done, when it was just beginning.

[Rip]

Making a statement that you think you can reach a deal with a foreign power after having a conversation with their leader on the phone, PRICELESS!



Good thing he has the SS with him all the time, otherwise he might get street swindled out of his watch.

edit: At least it does show he will negotiate with people that blow stuff up, just not if they are blowing up the economy!?

[hepcat]

THANKS OBAMA!

oh...sorry...thought you were Eco.

[Kraken]

I agree about political dynasties, but not about age. Being at the end of one's career and near the end of life is liberating. And I value the experience and hard-won wisdom of elder statesmen. Assuming that she's still healthy and vigorous three years from now, age is an asset, not a drawback. I like to see adults in charge.

It does cast a harsher light on her choice of a running mate, though.

[Apollo]

I just can't see any Democrat beating Hillary if she decides to run (But then I never imagined Obama would beat her when the primaries began either). Furthermore, I don't really see a Republican being able to beat her in the general election either, unless it's Chris Christie, and his chances of winning the Republican primary are pretty slim. After Romney, a relative moderate, lost I imagine GOP party activists will push hard for a "True Conservative" like Marco Rubio or Rand Paul and thus hand Hillary the election. But you never know...

[Apollo]

I just can't see any Democrat beating Hillary if she decides to run (But then I never imagined Obama would beat her when the primaries began either). Furthermore, I don't really see a Republican being able to beat her in the general election either, unless it's Chris Christie, and his chances of winning the Republican primary are pretty slim. After Romney, a relative moderate, lost I imagine GOP party activists will push hard for a "True Conservative" like Marco Rubio or Rand Paul and thus hand Hillary the election. But you never know...

[Captain Caveman]

I just can't see any Democrat beating Hillary if she decides to run (But then I never imagined Obama would beat her when the primaries began either). Furthermore, I don't really see a Republican being able to beat her in the general election either, unless it's Chris Christie, and his chances of winning the Republican primary are pretty slim. After Romney, a relative moderate, lost I imagine GOP party activists will push hard for a "True Conservative" like Marco Rubio or Rand Paul and thus hand Hillary the election. But you never know...

McCain was also a "relative moderate" who won the nomination. When it comes down to it, I think the big money donors get who they want, and are very shrewd about how to placate enough of the rabid base to make them appear to be an acceptable choice... at least during the process. I'd put my money on someone like Christie before someone a tea party type, but we'll see.

[Holman]

Right now, Ted Cruz leads the GOP pack.

The latest survey from Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling released Friday found Cruz as the top choice for 2016 among Republicans nationwide. With 20 percent support, Cruz narrowly edged Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who claimed the support of 17 percent of GOP primary voters. New Jersery Gov. Chris Christie (R) trailed the two junior senators with 14 percent, followed by 11 percent for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R). Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) each picked up 10 percent.

Presumably Cruz's numbers will only rise, since the period of the polling began before his grandstanding pseudo-filibuster.

I can't see them nominating a relative RINO like Christie after Romney's failure. McCain and Romney both had long-standing anointed/next-in-line status, but Christie hasn't earned that yet. It could certainly be Ted Cruz and/or Rand Paul this time.

[Isgrimnur]

The House Republicans aren't real thrilled with Cruz at the moment for him spouting off about how they need to hold the line about this current budget/AMA issue.

[Holman]

That's true. I'm forgetting how much every non-Tea-Partier in the GOP despises Cruz.

There's no way he'll be the nominee. But the question is whether he'll be able to whip up the base and exert pressure on the primaries.

[Exodor]

Romney reflects on his biggest error in 2012

"The largest strategic error was not investing sufficiently, particularly in Hispanic TV and Hispanic outreach to help Hispanic voters understand that ours is the party of opportunity," Romney told CNN’s Jake Tapper of the lesson to be learned for GOP presidential campaigns of the future.

Seems fitting that he thinks his biggest mistake was not throwing enough money at the problem.

[Captain Caveman]

Romney reflects on his biggest error in 2012

"The largest strategic error was not investing sufficiently, particularly in Hispanic TV and Hispanic outreach to help Hispanic voters understand that ours is the party of opportunity," Romney told CNN’s Jake Tapper of the lesson to be learned for GOP presidential campaigns of the future.

Seems fitting that he thinks his biggest mistake was not throwing enough money at the problem.

The money must have self-deported somewhere else.

[LordMortis]

While we're not passing budgets and don't want to cut government jobs or raise taxes I am reading Obama's "warning" to republicans to raise the debt ceiling.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli ... n/2900767/" target="_blank

How do they think they can continue to give away free money to save the economy?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the ... e-graphic/" target="_blank

When do we break? And how bad off are we when the only people claiming to try and fix this shit are the crazy ones?

[hepcat]

[LordMortis]

If I reading this correctly, and I fully expect that I am not, 8 members of Congress were arrested for protesting Congress.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/us/8- ... otest.html" target="_blank

[Fireball]

If I reading this correctly, and I fully expect that I am not, 8 members of Congress were arrested for protesting Congress.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/us/8- ... otest.html" target="_blank

No, that's right.

[Combustible Lemur]

This is fun. Apparently I'm a raging Democrat

[noxiousdog]

This is fun. Apparently I'm a raging Democrat

Seems pretty accurate. Libertarian on most issues, a smattering of others.

[Kraken]

82% Green Party
77% Democrats
60% Socialist
37% Libertarians
05% Republicans

Pretty accurate, I'd say.

[Exodor]

84% Green
78% Democrats
62% Libertarians
54% Socialist
11% Republicans

[Rip]

Republicans 79%
Libertarians 69%
Green Party 34%
Democrats 19%
Socialist 7%

[Daehawk]

I was Green Party wife came out Republican. I count myself Democratic usually.

[hepcat]

Interesting

95% Green Party
94% democrat
74% socialist
58% libertarian
6% republican

Of course, I was too lazy to move the counter that expresses degrees, so almost everything was in the middle.

[Holman]

I come out big Democrat.

Apparently I also agree with the Socialists on everything except socialism.

[Biyobi]

Republicans 79%
Libertarians 69%
Green Party 34%
Democrats 19%
Socialist 7%

19% Dem an 7% Socialist? RINO!!

[gbasden]

78% Democrats
75% Green
70% Socialist
41% Libertarians
12% Republicans

[Apollo]

96% Democrat
93% Green
72% Socialist
24% Libertarian
4% Republican

Say What?! I can't believe I'm 93% "Green". Something must be wrong with that quiz...

[Rip]

Republicans 79%
Libertarians 69%
Green Party 34%
Democrats 19%
Socialist 7%

19% Dem an 7% Socialist? RINO!!

Things like drug laws for one and of course being a heathen that believes in evolution.

[Kraken]

96% Democrat
93% Green
72% Socialist
24% Libertarian
4% Republican

Say What?! I can't believe I'm 93% "Green". Something must be wrong with that quiz...

Based on the results posted here, I smell a definite Green bias. Speaking as someone who actually did vote for Jill Stein. Subjectively speaking, my Socialist rating should have been higher than my Green score.

[Holman]

I suspect that these quizzes are set up to establish a Democrat-Republican continuum, and the other parties are just kludged in. There aren't enough questions specific to the obsessions of the tiny parties.

I come out (IIRC) 86% Democrat, 79% Green, and 69% Socialist. But there's a special something in real life that makes the Greens green and makes the Socialists socialist, and that something is a much bigger difference than is implied by these numbers. For instance, I can't imagine any circumstances in which I would actually vote for a Socialist Party candidate.

Do you take Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky very, very seriously?

a) No, they are ivory-tower villains and worse than Hitler.
b) No, they creak when they preach.
c) Yes, but I am a college sophomore.
d) Yes, for the people! CHE VIVE!!

[Enough]

In the interest of fairness, let me say that I hated chilling effects born out of Bush policy and I hate it now that it is being born out of Obama policy.

[Apollo]

So, how's that "Truckers for the Constitution" protest going?

[Smoove_B]

So, how's that "Truckers for the Constitution" protest going?

Not surprisingly, USA Today is saying it was a bust.

Only a few dozen independent truckers were spotted on rain-swept highways around the nation's capital Friday morning at the beginning of a purported three-day "Ride for the Constitution" rolling protest seeking to impeach President Obama and pressure Congress.

There were no signs that the trucks were slowing down traffic any more than normal on the congested capital area highway, particularly during steady rain.

Can't blame them. It's Friday, after all, and there was an NFL game last night.

[Gavin]

96% Democrat
93% Green
72% Socialist
24% Libertarian
4% Republican

Say What?! I can't believe I'm 93% "Green". Something must be wrong with that quiz...

Based on the results posted here, I smell a definite Green bias. Speaking as someone who actually did vote for Jill Stein. Subjectively speaking, my Socialist rating should have been higher than my Green score.

If you score highly on the Democrat side you are likely to score very highly on Green. It's one of the problems of having a third party. You can either have two viable parties or sufficiently many to avoid party canibalism (where two parties are close enough to squabble over what could be a majority number of votes while leaving the third party alone to rake up the win).

You'd have to specifically design parties that are just combinations of the existing ones. Like democratic fiscal policy with republican social policy and vice versa. I'm of the opinion that most Americans are somewhere in the middle. A true middle party would likely crush the others if it succeeding in not leaning towards one side or the other (not fully possible in my opinion).

[Kraken]

96% Democrat
93% Green
72% Socialist
24% Libertarian
4% Republican

Say What?! I can't believe I'm 93% "Green". Something must be wrong with that quiz...

Based on the results posted here, I smell a definite Green bias. Speaking as someone who actually did vote for Jill Stein. Subjectively speaking, my Socialist rating should have been higher than my Green score.

If you score highly on the Democrat side you are likely to score very highly on Green. It's one of the problems of having a third party. You can either have two viable parties or sufficiently many to avoid party canibalism (where two parties are close enough to squabble over what could be a majority number of votes while leaving the third party alone to rake up the win).

You'd have to specifically design parties that are just combinations of the existing ones. Like democratic fiscal policy with republican social policy and vice versa. I'm of the opinion that most Americans are somewhere in the middle. A true middle party would likely crush the others if it succeeding in not leaning towards one side or the other (not fully possible in my opinion).

Our winner-take-all elections lead inevitably to a two-party system. Unlike parliamentary governments, there's no prize for coming in second. Of course, only a handful of states are ever in play, so the rest of us have the luxury of casting symbolic votes.

[LordMortis]

Does this go in the shutdown thread?

http://gawker.com/house-stenographer-dr ... socialflow" target="_blank

[Holman]

Does this go in the shutdown thread?

http://gawker.com/house-stenographer-dr ... socialflow" target="_blank

“He [God] will not be mocked,” the stenographer, apparently named Molly, yelled into the microphone as she was dragged off by security. “The greatest deception here is that this is not one nation under God. It never was. It would not have been. The Constitution would not have been written by Freemasons. They go against God. You cannot serve two masters. Praise be to God. Praise be to Jesus.”

I can't even parse this. She's a stenographer who doesn't understand how to use the subjunctive?

Is it possible that this is the government's whole problem?

[$iljanus]

Does this go in the shutdown thread?

http://gawker.com/house-stenographer-dr ... socialflow" target="_blank

“He [God] will not be mocked,” the stenographer, apparently named Molly, yelled into the microphone as she was dragged off by security. “The greatest deception here is that this is not one nation under God. It never was. It would not have been. The Constitution would not have been written by Freemasons. They go against God. You cannot serve two masters. Praise be to God. Praise be to Jesus.”

I can't even parse this. She's a stenographer who doesn't understand how to use the subjunctive?

Is it possible that this is the government's whole problem?

She's been reading a bit too much Dan Brown.

[hepcat]

Went to lunch with some folks in the office this afternoon. I ended up sitting next to a woman who I've never once heard a peep about politics from in all my years here. For some reason, the conversation turned to the affordable care act. After a few discussions and general agreement that our health care system really did need a course correction of some type and that this was a much needed attempt at fixing it, she announced with no small amount of vitriol that Obama was the worst leader in the history of our country and that Obamacare would be repealed immediately after the next election when a republican took office.

...the number of muffled snickers was the best part of that announcement.

[Kraken]

Little Libertarians On the Prairie

Fascinating story worth reading in full. If you don't have time, here's the gist:

A few months after the stock market crash, in the winter of 1930, Laura Ingalls Wilder sat at a small desk in Mansfield, Mo., and began scratching out her life story on a cheap yellow pad. That beginning would lead to a children's book series that would inspire millions of people to follow its simple values of optimistic self-sufficiency in the face of danger and economic struggle.

Wilder was one of the authentic old pioneers who'd grown up rattling in a covered wagon from cabin to sod house to shanty around the upper Midwest. She was the sort of former frontierswoman who at age 63, looked in alarm at the desperate people out of work as the Great Depression settled like a cloud around the central states. There, farmers dealt with lost savings, the drought that would cause the Dust Bowl, and no capital to keep their farms running.

...

I have been studying the Wilder family papers for more than a decade. My analysis of these documents suggests that Wilder's daughter was far more than an editor. Lane turned them from recollections into American fables, changing details where necessary to suit her version of the story. And if those fables sound like a perfect expression of Libertarian ideas -- maximum personal freedom and limited need for the government -- that's no accident. Lane, and to an extent her mother, were affronted by taxes, the New Deal, and what they saw as Americans' growing reliance on Washington.

...

From the start, there was tension between their approaches. Wilder argued for strict accuracy, while Lane, the seasoned commercial writer, injected made-up dialogue, took out stories about criminals and murder, and -- most significant -- recast the stoic, sometimes confused pioneers as optimistic, capable people who achieved success without any government help.

Laura Ingalls Wilder never got used to Lane's heavy rewrites, but the evidence suggests that on the main approach, playing up toughness in adversity, she agreed with her daughter. Both women believed fervently that the nation in the depths of the Depression had become too soft. In shaping the memoirs into novels, Lane consistently left out the kinds of setbacks and behavior that cast doubt on the pioneer enterprise; the family's story became a testament to the possibilities of self-sufficiency rather than its limitations. The last four books, which tell the story of the Ingalls family's attempt to homestead in the future state of South Dakota, are particularly fired by Libertarian themes.

...

The Little House books barely mention the obvious, which is that the impoverished Ingallses never could have gone to Dakota Territory without a government grant: Like most pioneers, their livelihoods relied on the federal Homestead Act, which gave settlers 160 acres for the cost of a $14 filing fee -- one of the largest acts of federal largesse in U.S. history. The homestead law remains a given in the later books, particularly in "By the Shores of Silver Lake," but I believe its part in the stories remains in the background, even when Pa goes to file his claim, telling "Ma," Laura and the rest that he's bet Uncle Sam the filing fee that they can live on the land without starving.