I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

by **thephan** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 09:09:06

WaPo has an article about brides maid Pawlenty.

If Ryan is picked, it just opens up a new avenue of attack to team Obama. article - one of many

BTW - VP has to be one of the worst jobs ever.

by **drsmooth** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 09:43:52

thephan wrote:WaPo has an article about brides maid Pawlenty.

If Ryan is picked, it just opens up a new avenue of attack to team Obama. article - one of many

BTW - VP has to be one of the worst jobs ever.

you didn't enjoy your time in office then

by **dajafi** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 09:50:56

I was trying to think which VP choices most likely swung presidential elections. The only one I could really come up with was LBJ, without whom Kennedy probably wouldn't have won Texas and who possibly was the difference in a couple other southern states as well.

I think Gore helped Clinton in '92--oddly, Gore was a good #2 for some of the same reasons he was a crappy nominee--and Bush 41 probably helped Reagan in '80. But I doubt either was decisive; Clinton and Reagan were the two best politicians of the era. Similarly I think Quayle hurt Bush in 1992, particularly by contrast with Gore.

As a counterfactual, and putting aside how much I loathed him then and now, I wonder if gephardt might have swung Missouri for Kerry in 2004, or Bob Graham (whom I did like) Florida.

The job of VP used to be awful. Now I think it's probably pretty good--as the presidency expanded, the idle Veep became an unaffordable luxury. There hasn't been a weak and pointless one since Quayle.

by **pacino** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:14:32

yes, pick paul ryan. it'd be cool to win 48 states.

Website · by **Wolfgang622** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 14:29:06

dajafi wrote:As a counterfactual, and putting aside how much I loathed him then and now, I wonder if gephardt might have swung Missouri for Kerry in 2004, or Bob Graham (whom I did like) Florida.

Bush won Missouri by a margin of 53-46, or 196,542 votes.

So, no, Gephardt would not have made a difference.

Bush won Florida by a margin of 52-47, or 380,978 votes.

So Graham wouldn't have done the job either.

Website · by **Wolfgang622** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 14:35:02

pacino wrote:yes, pick paul ryan. it'd be cool to win 48 states.

Under ideal economic circumstances, I think the upper, upper limit on the number of states the IDEAL Democratic candidate could win, given the current political make-up of the country, would not exceed 39, and that makes some generous assumptions about what a white male Democratic governor could manage in the midwest (winning Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and West Virginia) and South (Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, and Texas), and the West (winning Arizona and Montana).

I don't think Jesus Christ could win Alaska, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, or Alabama if he ran as a Democrat. MAYBE one of the Dakotas. Maybe.

by **phdave** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 15:00:24

mozartpc27 wrote:
pacino wrote:yes, pick paul ryan. it'd be cool to win 48 states.

Under ideal economic circumstances, I think the upper, upper limit on the number of states the IDEAL Democratic candidate could win, given the current political make-up of the country, would not exceed 39, and that makes some generous assumptions about what a white male Democratic governor could manage in the midwest (winning Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and West Virginia) and South (Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, and Texas), and the West (winning Arizona and Montana).

I don't think Jesus Christ could win Alaska, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, or Alabama if he ran as a Democrat. MAYBE one of the Dakotas. Maybe.

Jesus Christ wouldn't win a Republican primary in those places. Too liberal.

by **jerseyhoya** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 17:43:46

pacino wrote:yes, pick paul ryan. it'd be cool to win 48 states.

Hope that goes as well as the DCCC tying GOP house candidates who supported Ryan's Road Map to America to hold the House in 2010

by **MoBettle** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 20:06:31

woah zarkaria got suspended for a month by time and cnn for plagiarism.

by **drsmooth** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 22:11:21

breaking: Boss Mitt spells fiscal responsibility "fidoucheyary"

by **drsmooth** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 22:33:17

MoBettle wrote:woah zarkaria got suspended for a month by time and cnn for plagiarism.

NYTimes ran a comparison of the plagiarized texts:

NYTimes wrote:Time Magazine Suspends Fareed Zakaria a Month Over Plagiarized Parts of Column

An example of the repetition of Ms. Lepore’s work in Mr. Zakaria’s column follows:

Mr. Zakaria:

Adam Winkler, a professor of constitutional law at UCLA, documents the actual history in Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. Guns were regulated in the U.S. from the earliest years of the Republic. Laws that banned the carrying of concealed weapons were passed in Kentucky and Louisiana in 1813. Other states soon followed: Indiana in 1820, Tennessee and Virginia in 1838, Alabama in 1839 and Ohio in 1859. Similar laws were passed in Texas, Florida and Oklahoma. As the governor of Texas (Texas!) explained in 1893, the “mission of the concealed deadly weapon is murder. To check it is the duty of every self-respecting, law-abiding man.

Ms. Lepore:

As Adam Winkler, a constitutional-law scholar at U.C.L.A., demonstrates in a remarkably nuanced new book, “Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America,” firearms have been regulated in the United States from the start. Laws banning the carrying of concealed weapons were passed in Kentucky and Louisiana in 1813, and other states soon followed: Indiana (1820), Tennessee and Virginia (1838), Alabama (1839), and Ohio (1859). Similar laws were passed in Texas, Florida, and Oklahoma. As the governor of Texas explained in 1893, the “mission of the concealed deadly weapon is murder. To check it is the duty of every self-respecting, law-abiding man.”

How many here have never 'paraphrased' in this fashion?

by **jerseyhoya** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 23:17:27

VP announcement 8:45 tomorrow

by **jerseyhoya** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 23:21:53

Never say this board never broke anything. Man, Paul Ryan

by **momadance** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 23:25:21

jerseyhoya wrote:Never say this board never broke anything. Man, Paul Ryan

Would he announce Paul Ryan over McDonnell in Norfolk?

by **jerseyhoya** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 23:29:23

Apparently the ship is the USS Wisconsin

by **drsmooth** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 23:34:52

jerseyhoya wrote:VP announcement 8:45 tomorrow

gonna say something snide about smilin' Joe Biden is all

by **drsmooth** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 23:37:11

jerseyhoya wrote:Apparently the ship is the USS Wisconsin

the Wisconsin is a retired vessel

Ryan's all about slashing programs for retirees

and from Wisconsin

it all fits

by **momadance** » Fri Aug 10, 2012 23:44:02

Yeah. The Wisconsin is right in downright Norfolk and is a naval museum. Unfortunately, l used to live in that shithole town. Forgot about that ship. It's not near the naval base.

by **MoBettle** » Sat Aug 11, 2012 00:13:23

would be first combo with last name starting with the same letter elected since buchanan/breckinridge importantfacts

by **jerseyhoya** » Sat Aug 11, 2012 00:36:09

Guys I'm really happy

Archived

I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread

Re: I hope you RECALL that this is the POLITICS thread