Since 2010 Republicans have controlled most of government

[buckshot24]

Wasn't there a thread a week or so ago about Trump inheriting the best economy since 1776 or something?

You remember that too? When you're in meltdown mode consistency isn't high on the list of priorities.

 

[Genx87]

State Legislatures, Congress, Governorships and maybe even stuff on the municipal level.

So why isn't everything pretty wonderful by now? Blame Obama for everything?

This election saw an extremely critical populace who literally felt America needed to be made great again. She had faltered the last 8 years, and not just a little, but a lot. Well the Republicans controlled most of it during that time.

How did they fail so miserably? And even more puzzling, maintain control in this election in addition with the Presidency. I thought the liberal media was in cahoots with Dems all across the board, how did they not regain back some control based upon those facts?

I find it amusing the GOP was declared dead by many on this board a decade ago. They convinced themselves further after 2012. But the reality is quite different.

 

[agent00f]

I posted this in a Breitbart comments thread and one guy responded twice with basically: Obama. and then Obama is a dictator.

eg:

Thanks, Obama!

Lotta racists really mad a black guy is pres.

Wasn't there a thread a week or so ago about Trump inheriting the best economy since 1776 or something?

Yet the racially resentful believe otherwise. Why they do is the question being asked, and imo the answer is pretty obvious. I think you can at least acknowledge that you understand that, unlike someone of this sort:

You remember that too? When you're in meltdown mode consistency isn't high on the list of priorities.

 

[agent00f]

I find it amusing the GOP was declared dead by many on this board a decade ago. They convinced themselves further after 2012. But the reality is quite different.

That's based on the demographics of the country, which is evident going by the popular vote. Unfortunately the EC and gerrymandering in general ensures that a minority can still rule in a supposed democratic system.

 

[Exterous]

How is that working out for them? I know Cali is doing pretty well now that we got a Democrat super-majority.

Perhaps they can turn California into the same wonderland they turned Detroit into during their half century of control.

 

[Jhhnn]

Perhaps they can turn California into the same wonderland they turned Detroit into during their half century of control.

Please. Detroit's problems are the result of the migratory nature of the free market job creators. There were a lot of reasons to move on to greener pastures so that's what they did. Repub governance probably wouldn't have changed that one bit.

 

[Puffnstuff]

How quickly people forget that it was the Republicans that have been waging a war against the working class in the first place since the 1800's. When Gov. Walker enacted Act 10 in WI and stripped the teachers of their collective bargaining rights and the contract that was negotiated in good faith it tells you a lot about how the Republican party views workers and values honestly along with contractual obligations. This is the same mentality that is being applied to all of their campaign promises along with all of their actions to be that will continue to demonstrate that they don't give a damn about the working people in this country as long as their rich party leaders continue to prosper off their backs.

I will continue to state that it was my law studies that opened my eyes to the bigger picture. I didn't need anyone to guide me to where the truth took me as I learned more and put the pieces together for myself through research of scholarly data. Thank you education as you forced me to perform a rhetorical analysis of all of my own beliefs and when I realized where I actually stood in comparison I couldn't change parties fast enough.

I'm also tired of Republicans and religious fanatics claiming that our education system it too liberal. My textbooks are filled with ethics to force students to consider more angles and they are also filled with biblical principles to give people a moral compass from which to operate from since church is not so welcoming these days. This is exactly why they oppose common core in the name of conservatism, they don't even know what it means, and don't want to make education more accessible to poor people which would increase critical thinking in this country which is a biblical principle (Hosea 4:6). Most of them are so blinded by their hatred of others who do not hold their particular views combined with their other biases that no matter how much truth you put before them they refuse to accept anything that is contrary to their beliefs.

 

[theeedude]

Perhaps they can turn California into the same wonderland they turned Detroit into during their half century of control.

California is a high value add state, unlike flyover country competing for factory jobs in a never ending race to the bottom, only to be automated away by California's tech industry.

 

[Exterous]

Please. Detroit's problems are the result of the migratory nature of the free market job creators. There were a lot of reasons to move on to greener pastures so that's what they did. Repub governance probably wouldn't have changed that one bit.

While many of Detroits issues are migratory in nature many were a result of legislative mismanagement. To argue Detroit hasn't suffered at the hands of elected politicians is to ignore the well documented realities of history.

It was under Republican governance that Detroit exited bankruptcy in far better circumstances than most thought possible. That path was hotly contested by Democrats.

This is not to say Republicans > Democrats just that neither party has all the answers and both have cases where they were actual impediments to progress

California is a high value add state, unlike flyover country competing for factory jobs in a never ending race to the bottom, only to be automated away by California's tech industry.

So is the argument that Democrats only do well when the state has a lot already going for it? Oddly enough once Michigan switched to a more mixed party government the 'never ending race to the bottom' ended and then reversed.

 

[buckshot24]

I find it amusing the GOP was declared dead by many on this board a decade ago. They convinced themselves further after 2012. But the reality is quite different.

It is pretty funny.

 

[trenchfoot]

I find it amusing the GOP was declared dead by many on this board a decade ago. They convinced themselves further after 2012. But the reality is quite different.

IMO, the reality being quite different is a result of one very boisterous megalomaniac hawking promises that he's either walking back on or have no intention of keeping.

Such is the power of suggestion being put in the wrong hands and such is the power of wishful thinking being put into the minds of the hopeful.

 

[agent00f]

Perhaps they can turn California into the same wonderland they turned Detroit into during their half century of control.

The worthless and still mouthy red states would stop voting to steal CA's tax money if they had any morale principles.

 

[theeedude]

So is the argument that Democrats only do well when the state has a lot already going for it? Oddly enough once Michigan switched to a more mixed party government the 'never ending race to the bottom' ended and then reversed.

Democrat control correlates with state doing well.

You can pick your favorite explanation as to why. It's not Democrat states who are complaining that recovery has passed them by.

 

[Exterous]

Democrat control correlates with state doing well.

You are confusing states doing well with merely a few counties doing well.
http://www.citylab.com/politics/201...recovery-due-to-geographic-inequality/483989/

If your claim is that democratic control correlates to states doing well why are the democrats concentrating their benefits in only about 2% of the state they control? Is it that they don't care about the other 98% of the state? Or they can't figure out how to help people living in the other 98%?

If you look at counties with significant job growth the numbers tell a different story:

"D state": 31
"R state": 42

While there are more R counties the top 10 counties are evenly split between R and D states.

Obviously both R and D states can have this issue but to say that D states are doing well is to ignore a large swath of the state that is still doing worse than before the recession. I suspect that many of these feel left out of the recovery that passed them by and don't want a D president to continue the path of having the economy pass them by. (That doesn't mean that I think Trump will benefit them just that they likely saw Clinton as more of the same - which hand't benefited them at all). There are also cases like Michigan and Illinois where D control hasn't gone so well for them

 

[agent00f]

You are confusing states doing well with merely a few counties doing well.
http://www.citylab.com/politics/201...recovery-due-to-geographic-inequality/483989/

If your claim is that democratic control correlates to states doing well why are the democrats concentrating their benefits in only about 2% of the state they control? Is it that they don't care about the other 98% of the state? Or they can't figure out how to help people living in the other 98%?

If you look at counties with significant job growth the numbers tell a different story:

"D state": 31
"R state": 42

While there are more R counties the top 10 counties are evenly split between R and D states.

Obviously both R and D states can have this issue but to say that D states are doing well is to ignore a large swath of the state that is still doing worse than before the recession. I suspect that many of these feel left out of the recovery that passed them by and don't want a D president to continue the path of having the economy pass them by. (That doesn't mean that I think Trump will benefit them just that they likely saw Clinton as more of the same - which hand't benefited them at all). There are also cases like Michigan and Illinois where D control hasn't gone so well for them

It's not a great surprise that smart people do better in more free societies, and it's similarly expected that dummies want to drag everyone else down with them.

Also you seem to be fixated on geographic area rather than the actual people/population, for pretty obvious reasons. It's no mystery why your sort only want to consider 2% of the country smarter than you, and not a pretty good amount.

 

[Exterous]

Also you seem to be fixated on geographic area

Odd that you say that since I did not bring up geographical areas but was merely replying to someone who did. Perhaps your post would be better directed towards the person who brought it up. And, out of curiosity, what is 'my sort'?

 

[Atreus21]

Odd that you say that since I did not bring up geographical areas but was merely replying to someone who did. Perhaps your post would be better directed towards the person who brought it up. And, out of curiosity, what is 'my sort'?

Anyone who doesn't reinforce his opinion of his towering intellect.

 

[agent00f]

Odd that you say that since I did not bring up geographical areas but was merely replying to someone who did. Perhaps your post would be better directed towards the person who brought it up. And, out of curiosity, what is 'my sort'?

He claimed that democratic control correlates with places doing well, which is undeniably true. Instead of focusing on the people part of this which you know to be true, you choose to argue about meaningless ratios of county counts.

Your sort is the kind who naturally believe they're equals of betters when that is not in evidence. Case in point:

Anyone who doesn't reinforce his opinion of his towering intellect.

 

[Jhhnn]

[

If your claim is that democratic control correlates to states doing well why are the democrats concentrating their benefits in only about 2% of the state they control? Is it that they don't care about the other 98% of the state? Or they can't figure out how to help people living in the other 98%?

Because we're playing by Job Creator rules. Republican rules. The same economic forces have been in play since the end of WW1 with some respite in the era of the New Deal. It's called urbanization. It's also business moving to higher levels of organization- Walmart, Home Depot, Amazon, Banking & you name it. More efficient. More automation. More profit per man hour.

Dems have been saddled with low tax revenues & deferred maintenance from periods of Repub governance in many places. In CO, we have the Tabor amendment, for example. States are also hampered by lack of fund sharing from the Feds, as well.

Thresholds for assistance of most sorts are correspondingly high. In other words, the people yelling the loudest make too much money for the govt to help them out other than indirectly. Dems would do a lot more of that if we had the funding.

What we can't do is turn back the clock on the economic changes wrought by our infatuation with deregulated financialized multinational Capitalism in a low tax environment. Trump & the Repubs engage in the cruelest of deceptions in claiming that will happen. It's Repub policy driving the whole thing, after all.

 

[Exterous]

He claimed that democratic control correlates with places doing well, which is undeniably true.

When broken down by a selection of geographical area that ignores large swaths of the land under their control. Hence his statement was in regards to geographical area. So again any comments about geographical fixation needs to start there

Instead of focusing on the people part of this which you know to be true, you choose to argue about meaningless ratios of county counts.

I specifically addressed people by pointing out the major population (which is people) areas that benefitted. Is it a meaningless ratio that the top 10 population centers are evenly split between R and D?

Your sort is the kind who naturally believe they're equals of betters when that is not in evidence.

Who do you claim to be my betters and what criteria do you base that on? Seems odd that you can't seem to have an intellectual discussion without resorting to denegration and making baseless claims.

[


Because we're playing by Job Creator rules. Republican rules. The same economic forces have been in play since the end of WW1 with some respite in the era of the New Deal. It's called urbanization. It's also business moving to higher levels of organization- Walmart, Home Depot, Amazon, Banking & you name it. More efficient. More automation. More profit per man hour.

Dems have been saddled with low tax revenues & deferred maintenance from periods of Repub governance in many places. In CO, we have the Tabor amendment, for example. States are also hampered by lack of fund sharing from the Feds, as well.

Thresholds for assistance of most sorts are correspondingly high. In other words, the people yelling the loudest make too much money for the govt to help them out other than indirectly. Dems would do a lot more of that if we had the funding.

What we can't do is turn back the clock on the economic changes wrought by our infatuation with deregulated financialized multinational Capitalism in a low tax environment. Trump & the Repubs engage in the cruelest of deceptions in claiming that will happen. It's Repub policy driving the whole thing, after all.

If you look at centralization trends they are based across far more cities than the economic growth cities so that's a half answer at best. Further if you look at the establishment growth counties in the link a large percentage are outside major metropolitan areas weakening your argument further.

Claiming Democrats are saddled with low tax revenue as a result of Republican policies runs into issues when faced with example cities like Detroit

Finally there is strong research showing the huge push for college education for the masses (huge backing by democrats) is unnecessarily inflating the job markets in areas that can sustain multiple degree granting institutions at the expense of rural areas. To say Republicans are driving the whole thing is ignoring a big part of the issue.

Each side needs to stop placing the blame on the other and realize both are actively contributing to the issie

 

[agent00f]

When broken down by a selection of geographical area that ignores large swaths of the land under their control. Hence his statement was in regards to geographical area. So again any comments about geographical fixation needs to start there

We both know empty land is irrelevant and the only reason you bring it up is due to intellectual dishonesty.

I specifically addressed people by pointing out the major population (which is people) areas that benefitted. Is it a meaningless ratio that the top 10 population centers are evenly split between R and D?

Just like the dummies in the 1k jobs thread claiming Indiana doing so well when 1/3 of their state coffers are filled from federal (read: blue state) money. It's simply a matter of fact that all the areas with a future, ie high tech/science/bidness jobs are blue. This is hardly a coincidence given the strong inescapable correlation between high edu attainment and political affiliation. Weaseling with the numbers to force some other conclusion is just that.

Who do you claim to be my betters and what criteria do you base that on? Seems odd that you can't seem to have an intellectual discussion without resorting to denegration and making baseless claims.

Due to the very simple fact I don't need to sacrifice ethnics to easily win the argument.

 

[raildogg]

I find it amusing the GOP was declared dead by many on this board a decade ago. They convinced themselves further after 2012. But the reality is quite different.

The GOP is the same party that started the mass murder of innocent Iraqis, Afghanis and many other people because they wanted to supposedly kill America's enemies.

Are innocent Iraqis and Afghanis the enemies of America?

Also, your GOP talks about family values and religion. In what way do they apply family values and religion to their policies?

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Is this part of the thread where Trump is about to inherit the strongest economy in almost 10 years? So it's good to know that the Republican control is why we have such a strong economy ?
https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...rongest-economy-weve-seen-in-decades.2492168/
So obviously we can all thank Republican control for this awesome economy we are all enjoying? Or is it more every bad thing in the country is due to Republicans and all the good things in the country are due to Democrats? Kind of a simplistic way to look at politics isn't it?

 

[MrSquished]

Is this part of the thread where Trump is about to inherit the strongest economy in almost 10 years? So it's good to know that the Republican control is why we have such a strong economy ?
https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...rongest-economy-weve-seen-in-decades.2492168/
So obviously we can all thank Republican control for this awesome economy we are all enjoying? Or is it more every bad thing in the country is due to Republicans and all the good things in the country are due to Democrats? Kind of a simplistic way to look at politics isn't it?

It's the Republicans saying the system is fucked right now. Seems they are basically saying Obama, bad, look what happens. You should talk to your fellow Republicans and see why they want to give Obama credit for everything.

 

[Exterous]

We both know empty land is irrelevant and the only reason you bring it up is due to intellectual dishonesty.

We both know that the land is not, in fact empty, making your accusations of intellectual dishonesty all the more ironic. Over 100 million americans live outside urban areas in your so called 'empty lands'

It's simply a matter of fact that all the areas with a future, ie high tech/science/bidness jobs are blue.

Actual evidence and facts prove otherwise given that cities like Wichita and Provo-Orem make lists like Time's Top 15 cities with the most high tech jobs. (Not to mention the impressive year over year growth in general employment)

Due to the very simple fact I don't need to sacrifice ethnics to easily win the argument.

No, instead you make things up like 'the land is empty' and 'its a fact that all areas with a future ie high tech/science/bidness jobs are blue.' while the actual evidence is clearly to the contrary. I guess fact checking or correct use of absolutes is beyond you