• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

It's always style, not substance eh?

Who cares if he can't cooperate with a bunch of lunatics?


As usual, an unhinged comment.

Ultimately, Jenkins places all the blame on the Democrats and the Senate, but experts agree that it takes two to tango. Both parties and chambers have played a role in creating the current legislative dysfunction. On balance, we rate the claim Half True.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...nn-jenkins-blames-harry-reid-do-nothing-sena/
 
I'm not claiming equivalency LCS. I'm simply stating that there are factions in both parties that serve to seriously undermine any sort of coalition or compromise. Harry Reid's desk was where bills went to die, over 400 of them from what I read. Obama only had to use veto twice because he had Harry Reid cockblocking everything coming out of the house. Don't sit there and tell me the Dems were willing to work with the GOP when the Senate never brought issues to the floor. The GOP in turn was criminally guilty of obstructionism. As I said, Washington is severely broken and unless both parties reign in their extremist wackos it won't get better. The harder job will fall on McConnell and Boehner for sure as they have more of them to deal with.

The "extremist whacko's" language hides a lot of self interest on behalf of ALL politicians. So letting the whackos mouth off deflects and uses up press time that would otherwise be used to scrutinize what they are doing.

I don't have a number but from what I know from a few friends involved in US politics, it seems that they spend most of their time to raise money to be re-elected.
 
The "extremist whacko's" language hides a lot of self interest on behalf of ALL politicians. So letting the whackos mouth off deflects and uses up press time that would otherwise be used to scrutinize what they are doing.

I don't have a number but from what I know from a few friends involved in US politics, it seems that they spend most of their time to raise money to be re-elected.

Well this is the issue with congressmen having to run every two years. From the moment they win they are trying to get reelected. Senators get six years so the need doesn't become necessary until four years into their term.

If you look at that red congressional map you displayed and look to the blue section of south Florida, that's where I live. A republican didn't even run in my district because it has been jerrymandered to be incredibly blue with retired New Yorkers. A GOP candidate would need a warchest of at least $3-4M and would need to have a track record of being moderate to liberal to even have a shot. It's as blue as it gets around here. A monkey could run with a D beside it's name and win.
 
As usual, an unhinged comment.

Even more unhinged is to be whining that dozens of full or partial repeals of your own party's creation are a lion's share of the bills held up.
There's more dysfunction in one single party than there is the entire House and Senate combined.
 
Even more unhinged is to be whining that dozens of full or partial repeals of your own party's creation are a lion's share of the bills held up.
There's more dysfunction in one single party than there is the entire House and Senate combined.

Yeah, bogus argument.

GOP ****ed? Yes.
Congress ****ed? Yes.
America ****ed. Yes.
Silver bullet cure? Nope.
 
Yeah, bogus argument.

GOP ****ed? Yes.
Congress ****ed? Yes.
America ****ed. Yes.
Silver bullet cure? Nope.

There's no silver bullet, to be sure.
Ego, and the need for $$$ to keep the job are the biggest reasons the partisanship is so high and vitriol. You're ****ed until you can remove money as the sole driving force of your government, (because you can't contain ego without voters bothering to show up to vote.)
 
the bottom line is that americans have largely lost faith in their electoral system (some of it justified, some of it unfortunately just a product of a deliberate campaign to undermine government and its ability to regulate corporations), and that's scary. Democracy can't work if you don't think your vote does anything.
 
the bottom line is that americans have largely lost faith in their electoral system (some of it justified, some of it unfortunately just a product of a deliberate campaign to undermine government and its ability to regulate corporations), and that's scary. Democracy can't work if you don't think your vote does anything.
This. So this.

The level of cynicism is off the charts. I'm guilty of it too. People are just so fed up.
 
Well, not really.

The way I see it is the issue has now come to a full head. With one side controlling Congress completely and the other in the executive office. Now we will see just how well, or poorly, the two sides that purportedly represent the country will work together.

I'm not very optimistic.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

Well, there were two Federal byelections yesterday. One was in Alberta, west of Edmonton, which the Conservatives predictably won in a landslide. The other was in Jim Flaherty's old riding in Whitby-Oshawa. The Conservatives held that seat for a win as well, but for me, the final vote break-down in Whitby was the most interesting thing about either election.

First, let's look at the last couple of election results there:

2011 Federal Election:

CPC: 58.42%
LIB: 14.11%
NDP: 22.27%

2008 Federal Election:

CPC: 50.99%
LIB: 25.68%
NDP: 14.26%

...and then here are yesterday's election results:

2014 Byelection:

CPC: 49.2%
LIB: 40.7%
NDP: 8.1%

From those results, it looks like while a marginal amount of support may have drifted from the Conservatives to the Liberals, the NDP vote in the riding collapsed entirely, and almost that entire base of support stampeded over to the Liberal candidate in the riding. If this byelection is a sign of things to come in Ontario in the next federal election, the NDP may be in a world of hurt, and the Conservatives may not be able to count on being the beneficiaries of the kind of significant vote-splitting on the left side of the political spectrum we've seen in recent years in Ontario.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

I think the likely scenario is going back to Conservative minority governments. With that said, the NDP apparently put ZERO effort into this by-election. Why? not sure...seems kind of defeatist to me.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

As an aside, Trudeau might be in a world of bad press this week. As you might remember, he recently kicked out two MP's from the Liberal caucus on non-investigated accusations of sexual harassment.

Turns out the two NDP members that the accusations came from did not want the matter to be public and will not go on record as saying anything. Kinda makes one wonder how serious the allegations are...and whether Trudeau acted harshly in kicking out members with only hearsay.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

Trudeau did the right thing. When one of your MP's is facing serious accusations, they should sit outside of caucus until such time as their names are cleared. And if they're found guilty of any crime, then they should step down immediately. This is pretty much the accepted standard in Federal and provincial politics.

The NDP is clearly playing political games here though, which is pretty distasteful in the context of alleged sexual assault. Their current position is essentially that Trudeau should have booted two of his MP's out of caucus, while giving absolutely no public reason for the move.
 
Well, not really.

The way I see it is the issue has now come to a full head. With one side controlling Congress completely and the other in the executive office. Now we will see just how well, or poorly, the two sides that purportedly represent the country will work together.

I'm not very optimistic.


Now we will see?
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

I definitely disagree. These men were kicked out of caucus, that is a punishment before a crime has been "proven". Now there are two men who have had their names and reputations tarnished despite the veracity of claims being subject to any proof.

He would have been right to investigate more thoroughly, talk to the accusers involved (or ask Mulcair to do so) then apply a response.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

I definitely disagree. These men were kicked out of caucus, that is a punishment before a crime has been "proven". Now there are two men who have had their names and reputations tarnished despite the veracity of claims being subject to any proof.

He would have been right to investigate more thoroughly, talk to the accusers involved (or ask Mulcair to do so) then apply a response.
Well, you disagree with the standard practice in Canadian parliament then. Take Dean Del Mastro, for example. As soon as the charges against him were announced, he was booted out of the Conservative caucus, pending the resolution of his case. Harper's also done the same with other MP's accused of wrong-doing. Off the top of my head, Helena Guergis and Rahim Jaffer are two other examples. Peter Goldring is an example of someone who was booted out of the Conservative caucus and then welcomed back in when he was charged with, and then subsequently acquitted of impaired driving.

And are you really suggesting that Trudeau/the Liberal party should have kept this quiet and investigated themselves, rather than turning this over to an independent third party? I can't even imagine what the caterwauling from the other parties would have been like had Trudeau done that, and it came to light.
 
Back
Top