Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

by **The Nightman Cometh** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 12:28:44

TenuredVulture wrote:
The Nightman Cometh wrote:I have absolutely no idea what you are saying with that post TV.

The NJ Dem machine is unpopular and ineffective. The only thing that keeps it going is patronage and the lack of a credible alternative. They aren't going to have Corzine's money anymore Booker's problem at taking on the Dem establishment, I suspect, was going to be the fact that he is an "urban" politician in a suburban state. But the hero angle may overcome a lot of that.

I disagree that Booker is independent of the machine.

by **jerseyhoya** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 12:30:48

TenuredVulture wrote:
The Nightman Cometh wrote:I have absolutely no idea what you are saying with that post TV.

The NJ Dem machine is unpopular and ineffective. The only thing that keeps it going is patronage and the lack of a credible alternative. They aren't going to have Corzine's money anymore Booker's problem at taking on the Dem establishment, I suspect, was going to be the fact that he is an "urban" politician in a suburban state. But the hero angle may overcome a lot of that.

Booker has more than just the machines to overcome though in a Dem primary. He's been vocal in his support of school choice so the NJEA will train their fire on him. And he has been aggressive in criticizing the public safety unions in Newark for being unreasonable. He'll have to cobble together enough minority voters willing to vote off the line with upper middle class good government liberals. Not sure that gets you to a majority in a Dem primary. He might need it to be a three way race with the other candidates splitting organizational and union support.

by **TenuredVulture** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 12:31:09

What's missed of course is the more interesting issue that the idea of judicial review and an independent judiciary as being liberal is really an anomaly. "Liberal judicial activists" may have described the Warren Court, but really historically the court has been an agent of conservatism.

Anyway, if railing against unelected judges worked for the right in the 70s and 80s, there's no reason why it can't work for the left.

by **MoBettle** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 12:42:41

drsmooth wrote:What flabbergasts me is the gullibility - no, the willful philistinism - of people who insist this guy, who while human and flawed is incontrovertibly smart and specifically well-schooled in the field, would somehow not be aware of the supreme court's capacity to overturn legislation. This isn't Gerry Ford we're talking about.

Seriously. What's more likely? That a guy that graduated from one of the top law school in the country then went on to be a professor at another top 5 law school, and presumably has some of the most highly qualified lawyers in the world working for him, doesn't understand the bedrock judicial ruling of the supreme court that we all learn in highschool? Or that people with partisan axes to grind chose to interpret what he wrote that way?

by **swishnicholson** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 13:10:43

TenuredVulture wrote:
The Nightman Cometh wrote:I have absolutely no idea what you are saying with that post TV.

The NJ Dem machine is unpopular and ineffective. The only thing that keeps it going is patronage and the lack of a credible alternative. They aren't going to have Corzine's money anymore Booker's problem at taking on the Dem establishment, I suspect, was going to be the fact that he is an "urban" politician in a suburban state. But the hero angle may overcome a lot of that.

I think both your and jh's comments are on the money. Booker may actually have the standing to draw on money from outside the state which may be able to overcome opposition of the Dem establishment.

by **The Nightman Cometh** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 13:38:21

There's a feeling in South Jersey at least that running against Christie is a stupid career move. I'd bet my life that Sweeney is not in this race, he's going after Lautenberg in 2014.

I don't think the establishment is going to be pushing as much big money into this race as you guys do. Not sure who else would even run that is a bigger name than Booker. Andrews maybe? Doubt it.

by **jerseyhoya** » Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:44:11

jmartpolitico ‏ @jmartpolitico
RT @Lindsey_CBSNJ: Newt just showed us a cut on his finger, said a penguin bit him at the St. Louis Zoo yesterday

by **Bucky** » Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:53:58

If booker runs will "96 tears" be his theme song

by **dajafi** » Sat Apr 14, 2012 13:47:56

jerseyhoya wrote:
jmartpolitico ‏ @jmartpolitico
RT @Lindsey_CBSNJ: Newt just showed us a cut on his finger, said a penguin bit him at the St. Louis Zoo yesterday

And with that, he's officially rendered The Onion redundant.

by **thephan** » Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:01:51

Paid my taxes the other day with out complaint because I get roads, got a public education, am assured safe water, receive emergency services, have been participate in rehabilitating America's hero who serve for my benefit, travel safely through US ports, confidently eat food governed by safety guidelines, take prescription drugs I understand are relatively safe and many more benefits that I take for granted. On the way to the post office to mail my check I listened to political pundit chirping and barking about taxation and its many flaws, of which there assuredly are, but who would not even think about walking up to a microphone if they were paid like a first year teacher or a guy with a shovel working to fix a water main break. I was appalled that uniformly the topic was that the rich should be free to contribute a lower percentage because they likely supply a larger amount of total funding and that this is somehow fair within this very system that allowed these very people to prosper. As I reached to silence the noise I though of B. Franklin, Printer, who published these words, "We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately." If we do not work together to find solutions to the divided problems facing this country, which may well be among the most diverse since the founding of the country, we could conceivably falter as a union and find an end to our greatest experiment as a democracy.

by **pacino** » Mon Apr 16, 2012 21:24:14

"Majority votes for Buffet Rule; It fails".

Love it. Democracy, folks.

by **lethal** » Mon Apr 16, 2012 21:28:29

Romney's limitation of deductions for higher income taxpayers seems like a decent idea.

by **jerseyhoya** » Mon Apr 16, 2012 23:51:20

Obama declares US neutrality in the UK-Argentina dispute over the Falklands rather than standing with our best ally and the people who live there for whatever reason. Also calls them the Maldives, in an absolutely epic "if Bush had said that" moment. Embarrassing all around.

In other Argentina news, they're moving to nationalize the largest oil company in the country. They've had huge discoveries of shale oil recently and were attracting investment from countries abroad with expertise in accessing the fuel, and now they're nationalizing a Spanish oil company. Good way to kill off foreign direct investment. Spain is freaking out, with good reason. Argentina has price controls on oil, so remarkably enough production was declining. Rather than addressing the root of the problem, the state goes to seize the biggest oil company. Kirchner is a real gem. Glad Barack is neutral between her and the UK.

by **TenuredVulture** » Mon Apr 16, 2012 23:55:02

So Obama is following Jeanne Kirkpatrick's lead. He's revealing his true neo-con colors.

by **drsmooth** » Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:00:52

jerseyhoya wrote:Obama declares US neutrality in the UK-Argentina dispute over the Falklands .... blah, blah, blah .... her and the UK.

what's with republicans & their hangup with the falklands? You'd think we still had a king

by **td11** » Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:23:23

drsmooth wrote:
jerseyhoya wrote:Obama declares US neutrality in the UK-Argentina dispute over the Falklands .... blah, blah, blah .... her and the UK.

what's with republicans & their hangup with the falklands? You'd think we still had a king

But they won't be our bffs now =(

by **jerseyhoya** » Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:47:40

drsmooth wrote:
jerseyhoya wrote:Obama declares US neutrality in the UK-Argentina dispute over the Falklands .... blah, blah, blah .... her and the UK.

what's with republicans & their hangup with the falklands? You'd think we still had a king

The people who live in the Falkland Islands want to remain a British overseas territory. They have their own government. If they want to choose to become part of Argentina or to declare independence from Britain, then they can make that decision themselves. Argentina hasn't ruled the islands for 180 years. The people there speak English. The islands are 300 miles from Argentina. It's not like they're in their territorial waters. Why is this something we should be neutral about?

by **jeff2sf** » Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:59:48

JH,
Couldn't you say the same sort of thing about Palestine? Yet we sort of support Israel and sort of support the idea of a 2-state solution. What about Taiwan/China? China's freaking certain that the island belongs to them despite it not actually belonging to them. And we basically stay out of those issues.

by **The Nightman Cometh** » Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:00:40

Obama is trying to repair our relationship with South America. Not piss them off over a none issue.

by **jerseyhoya** » Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:21:48

jeff2sf wrote:JH,
Couldn't you say the same sort of thing about Palestine? Yet we sort of support Israel and sort of support the idea of a 2-state solution. What about Taiwan/China? China's freaking certain that the island belongs to them despite it not actually belonging to them. And we basically stay out of those issues.

Falklanders don't blow up Argentinian buses or lob missiles into Cordoba and Buenos Aires. They don't question Argentina's right to exist as a state. There aren't overlapping settlements, and one does not have to pass through Argentina to get from one part of the Falkland Islands to the other. The islands are separated from Argentina by hundreds of miles of ocean. Those key differences to the side, I'm not even sure what you're trying to get at with them being similar. We let Israel control parts of Palestine so we shouldn't care if Argentina wants to reclaim the Falklands? Even though, as you note, it has been the policy of the last few administrations to support a two state solution in the Middle East.

Taiwan's security is largely due to US guarantees that we would support Taiwan if China attempted to invade. So that seems to be a completely different sort of thing. Like the opposite sort of thing.

Archived

Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread

Re: Is It November Yet? Politics Thread