There is an important caveat--the issues that matter probably change as you age. I suspect few of my students see low interest rates as a problem, but my colleagues who are near retirement certainly do.

so apparently pat toomey voted against the veteran job corps bill despite helping to write it? dick

Corbett got ripped apart last night at a town hall event in Philly. Yikes. Some of the ugliest video I have seen for a politican... ever. Starts to get bad around the 13 minute mark.

that was productive

Starting to think Obama's bounce didn't recede after all.

Soren wrote:that was productive

yeah really

Is the administration lying to us about Libya? Sure seems like it!

Find out after you decide whether or not to reelect Obama

The notion that voters get more conservative/Republican as they age seems to me based in the idea that as you acquire more wealth, you're more open to the arguments of the party that has a more sympathetic view toward protecting the assets and prerogatives of the wealthy. This isn't illogical, but it overlooks the finding of voluminous research (Paul and jh can substantiate, I'm sure) that people don't strictly vote their economic self-interest. Hence the cultural elites supporting liberals and lower middle class whites voting Republican.

I suspect it also might be an artifact from a time when the parties weren't as far apart as they are now. Someone born in, say, 1915 could have very comfortably voted for FDR, Ike, LBJ and Nixon without feeling s/he'd changed views. Their disagreements were mostly matters of degree; now it's basic philosophical digression.

dajafi wrote: the finding of voluminous research (Paul and jh can substantiate, I'm sure) that people don't strictly vote their economic self-interest.

This is the argument of EVERY IRL person who tries to convince me to vote for Romney. It's off-putting.

City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant lot

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/ci ... 22350.html

do we have a local politics thread? guess we won't need one so much in December

jerseyhoya wrote:

Is the administration lying to us about Libya? Sure seems like it!

Find out after you decide whether or not to reelect Obama

Next they'll be claiming the Libyans have WMD and starting a war right before an election! No, no. No administration would be so irresponsible and craven.

Some Texas Republican has "lynched" a chair.

Just the kind of enthusiasm from the base that Romney needs!

JFLNYC wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

Is the administration lying to us about Libya? Sure seems like it!

Find out after you decide whether or not to reelect Obama

Next they'll be claiming the Libyans have WMD and starting a war right before an election! No, no. No administration would be so irresponsible and craven.

1) So you're OK with this administration lying to you about an attack on our consulate because of how the previous administration handled Iraq?
2) The Iraq War was launched in March 2003, so unless you're talking about a couple gubernatorial primaries in the South, it wasn't right before an election.

how do i read silver blog posts after nytimes shuts me out?

JFLNYC wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

Is the administration lying to us about Libya? Sure seems like it!

Find out after you decide whether or not to reelect Obama

Next they'll be claiming the Libyans have WMD and starting a war right before an election! No, no. No administration would be so irresponsible and craven.

Serious question jersey - why do you think the Obama camapign would lie about this if it were a coordinated attack? Obama could just have turned it around and looked presidential and used it to rally the country around himself a la 9/11. No serious person can claim that Obama has been in any way "soft" on terrorism, so it's not like an attack on a U.S. Embassy could be legitimately painted to be the result of Obama trying to appease terrorists.

CalvinBall wrote:how do i read silver blog posts after nytimes shuts me out?

Access them through your Twitter account; if you click on any link Nate Silver posts it doesn't "count" against your limit.

The Republicans forced an up or down vote on the Iraq war authorization in 2002 right before the elections.

The Nightman Cometh wrote:Starting to think Obama's bounce didn't recede after all.

Starting to think that all you ever do is read Nate Silver and then try to pass off his articles as your own conclusions.

Editing to say that there is nothing wrong with reading Nate Silver and finding his arguments and statistics convincing, I certainly do. I just find it odd that you continually make pronouncements that he makes but write it in a way to suggest that it is the result of some deep and independent analysis of your own.

its the fucking echo chamber