Is There A BETTER Day to Start the New Politics Thread?

by **drsmooth** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:25:57

I didn't think so

by **dajafi** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:32:11

I locked the old one.

So maybe Crist should run as an independent... though if he won, I think he'd quickly become the most universally loathed guy in American politics. Which party would he caucus with? Would the Republicans even take him?

by **jerseyhoya** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:56:58

Tea Party whatever endorsed Walt Minnick (conservative Dem from Idaho) today among their Tax Day endorsements. Interesting that they're showing a vague sense of political awareness.

by **Houshphandzadeh** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:57:48

Tea Party Rydaz

by **jerseyhoya** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:06:53

Today is the first ever televised prime minster debate in the UK

First we gave you McDonald's, now have our lame campaign structure!

by **dajafi** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:17:21

jerseyhoya wrote:Tea Party whatever endorsed Walt Minnick (conservative Dem from Idaho) today among their Tax Day endorsements. Interesting that they're showing a vague sense of political awareness.

Yet they targeted Barney Frank--a guy they have no chance to defeat, and whose Wall Street reform views should be agreeable to them (if, y'know, they remotely cared about actual policy substance). Wonder what that's about.

by **Werthless** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:35:39

dajafi wrote:
jerseyhoya wrote:Tea Party whatever endorsed Walt Minnick (conservative Dem from Idaho) today among their Tax Day endorsements. Interesting that they're showing a vague sense of political awareness.

Yet they targeted Barney Frank--a guy they have no chance to defeat, and whose Wall Street reform views should be agreeable to them (if, y'know, they remotely cared about actual policy substance). Wonder what that's about.

He's perceived as being beholden to Fannie and Freddie. He was partnered with a Fannie executive through the 90s, has received tens of thousands of contributions from members of these 2 companies, and resisted changes to the regulatory framework in 2003. There's some damning youtube videos of him from that time.

He's pretty libertarian though, as far as Dems go. I know nothing about Minnick, who could very well be more aligned with tea party views.

by **jerseyhoya** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:47:01

I'm going to go out on a limb and say Frank getting targeted by the Tea Party people has more to do with his role as the primary architect of the bailout as Chair of the House Financial Services Committee than him being gay.

Perhaps they're also targeting Harry Reid because he's a Mormon, and not because he's the Senate Majority Leader?

by **Werthless** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:55:50

Oops, I forgot about the one unifying issue for tea partiers: the bailout of wall street.

by **TenuredVulture** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:26:25

I think it makes more sense to talk about Tea Parties and Tea Partiers than The Tea Party or even The Tea Party Movement.

by **dajafi** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:31:51

jerseyhoya wrote:I'm going to go out on a limb and say Frank getting targeted by the Tea Party people has more to do with his role as the primary architect of the bailout as Chair of the House Financial Services Committee than him being gay.

I guess it depends on how much credit one gives them for knowing anything about anything. That most of them think taxes have gone up when they haven'tkind of calls this into question for me.

by **Werthless** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 13:09:39

dajafi wrote:
jerseyhoya wrote:I'm going to go out on a limb and say Frank getting targeted by the Tea Party people has more to do with his role as the primary architect of the bailout as Chair of the House Financial Services Committee than him being gay.

I guess it depends on how much credit one gives them for knowing anything about anything. That most of them think taxes have gone up when they haven'tkind of calls this into question for me.

Most of them think the taxes that they pay are fair.

(By the way, your link cites 2 polls that show that Americans on a whole - not just tea partiers - are also uniformed about this issue, but to a lesser extent.)

by **jeff2sf** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 13:38:59

So what's the deal, werthless, are you a tea party guy? Just a guy that thinks they have gotten a bad rap? What?

by **drsmooth** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 13:55:32

Werthless wrote:
(.... your link cites 2 polls that show that Americans on a whole - not just tea partiers - are also uniformed about this issue, but to a lesser extent.)

NYTimes own summary of the poll results bends over backward to avoid saying, basically, that the whiter, older, maler, wealthier, better-educated TP'ers polled are like the rest of us in attitudes towards fairness of taxes, merits of soc.sec./medicare, but are notably more racist.

by **dajafi** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 14:07:43

Werthless wrote:
dajafi wrote:
jerseyhoya wrote:I'm going to go out on a limb and say Frank getting targeted by the Tea Party people has more to do with his role as the primary architect of the bailout as Chair of the House Financial Services Committee than him being gay.

I guess it depends on how much credit one gives them for knowing anything about anything. That most of them think taxes have gone up when they haven'tkind of calls this into question for me.

Most of them think the taxes that they pay are fair.

(By the way, your link cites 2 polls that show that Americans on a whole - not just tea partiers - are also uniformed about this issue, but to a lesser extent.)

They make a distinction between "supporters" and "activists" that blurs the findings a bit. But I doubt it's a distinction either of us find all that interesting.

by **drsmooth** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 14:12:51

I should note that my own meagre anecdotal evidence is that the NYTimes finding (of a dismaying strand of racism in the mix) has substance.

by **Wizlah** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 17:37:05

so we had our first ever televised debate of political leaders in an election. I listened on the radio and tried not to punch all three of the useless fuckers.

I don't know how y'all coped with that for all this time. I would not deem it a useful addition to the election rigmarole.

Interestingly, when the chancellor was up against the two shadow chancellors, that was a lot more palateable.

by **TenuredVulture** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 18:17:19

Debates fucking suck. Only douchebags and the League of Women Voters take them seriously. And Gwen Ifill. Who might be in the League.

by **phdave** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 19:02:54

drsmooth wrote:
Werthless wrote:
(.... your link cites 2 polls that show that Americans on a whole - not just tea partiers - are also uniformed about this issue, but to a lesser extent.)

NYTimes own summary of the poll results bends over backward to avoid saying, basically, that the whiter, older, maler, wealthier, better-educated TP'ers polled are like the rest of us in attitudes towards fairness of taxes, merits of soc.sec./medicare, but are notably more racist.

And nearly three-quarters of those who favor smaller government said they would prefer it even if it meant spending on domestic programs would be cut.

But in follow-up interviews, Tea Party supporters said they did not want to cut Medicare or Social Security — the biggest domestic programs, suggesting instead a focus on “waste.”

Some defended being on Social Security while fighting big government by saying that since they had paid into the system, they deserved the benefits.

Others could not explain the contradiction.

“That’s a conundrum, isn’t it?” asked Jodine White, 62, of Rocklin, Calif. “I don’t know what to say. Maybe I don’t want smaller government. I guess I want smaller government and my Social Security.” She added, “I didn’t look at it from the perspective of losing things I need. I think I’ve changed my mind.”

by **jerseyhoya** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 19:11:21

phdave is EastFallowfield :q:

http://philliesphans.com/viewtopic.php_f=1&t=42202&start=2325.html

Archived

Is There A BETTER Day to Start the New Politics Thread?

Is There A BETTER Day to Start the New Politics Thread?