http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ling-to-raising-taxes-its-not-the-first-time/
Holyshit does this mean the rats are leaving a sinking ship???
Holyshit does this mean the rats are leaving a sinking ship???
WOW Bill Kristol says raise taxes on the rich!
- Thread starter Ausm
- Start date
I really enjoyed listening to Mark Levin tear into him last night, lol. Also Karl Rove and Steve Schmidt.
Let the GOP Iran-Iraq War begin!
Let the GOP Iran-Iraq War begin!
He is just being a sane republican is all. He can see Obama holds the cards since the tax cuts and spending cuts end if he does nothing. He sees it would be stupid and foolish to try and block tax cuts on the middle class and poor to protect millionaires. Especially since the president has the pulpit to get his message out.
zsdersw
Lifer
- Oct 29, 2003
- 10,505
- 2
- 0
Nonsense... any Republican who doesn't suck Grover Norquist's cock is a RINO and must be purged!
Pr0d1gy
Diamond Member
- Jan 30, 2005
- 7,774
- 0
- 76
I've expressed that opinion for years on this forum. Looks like I'm a man ahead of my time.
Not only that, but you were correct. Facts have proven that lower taxes on the wealthy do not create more jobs, at all.
I listened to some of Levin last night for the first time in a long time. Was just shocked at how crazy the guy has gotten. I also listened to some Rush this week and he has gone over the deep end. Blaming Scott Brown's for losing the election and not mentioning his buddies Akin and Mourdock.
buckshot24
Diamond Member
- Nov 3, 2009
- 9,916
- 85
- 91
Way to misrepresent what he said.
He was responding to the charge that tea party wackos are losing elections therefore we should nominate establishment candidates. But Brown lost, Thompson lost, Hoekstra lost but all anybody talks about are the Murdocks and Akins while ignoring the Rubios, Cruz's, Paul's, Toomey's that are all tea party backed candidates who won while fighting the establishment.
So yes, the tea party props up some losers. However they have also propped up some of our best talent.
One can easily argue that Brown and Thompson lost in large part due to Mourdock and Akin.
Brown was very close with Warren and started to go downhill once people saw the crazies come out of the woodwork.
Add to that three giveaway losses in 2010 and the "tea party" is the main reason the GOP doesn't control the senate.
Levin, like others in the "tea party", is in abject denial.
Brown was very close with Warren and started to go downhill once people saw the crazies come out of the woodwork.
Add to that three giveaway losses in 2010 and the "tea party" is the main reason the GOP doesn't control the senate.
Levin, like others in the "tea party", is in abject denial.
buckshot24
Diamond Member
- Nov 3, 2009
- 9,916
- 85
- 91
That doesn't make it true.
This is your opinion.
What about all of the establishment losses? You aren't including Nevada as a give away are you? She was up in all of the polls. She didn't lose because of being a tea party candidate.
And Delaware hasn't had a Republican senator since the early seventies. O'Donnell was in over her head and a bad candidate but don't act like it was in the bag for the Republicans.
Who else? McMahon? Connecticut hasn't had a Republican senator since the early sixties.
Last edited:
No, but your inability to provide a cogent counterargument certainly isn't going to convince anyone that it's false.
She lost because she was a vile nutcase. And she was only the nominee because she was in the "tea party".
A solid mainstream Republican would have beaten Reid.
You're either bullshitting or you didn't follow the races in 2010. Castle was polling well ahead of Coons, but the "tea party" wanted witchie nut lady, and she got destroyed.
buckshot24
Diamond Member
- Nov 3, 2009
- 9,916
- 85
- 91
You didn't even make an argument! Why should I knock it down?
Ok, thanks for the opinion.
Ok, thanks again for your opinion but why should it matter to anybody else? Angle was ahead in all of the polling but Reid's machine blew the Republican's away.
What about the other two examples? Was I right in the McMahon guess as a throwaway? My point is not to defend O'Donnell because I agree that she was a bad candidate. But in singling her out as some sort of tea party deficiency while ignoring the tea party candidates that won senate seats is cherry picking. I thought you didn't like cherry picking?
Also do you really think 2010 would have been so bloody for the Democrats without the tea party?
zsdersw
Lifer
- Oct 29, 2003
- 10,505
- 2
- 0
I doubt it, but without the Tea Party 2012 wouldn't have been so bloody for the Republicans. The GOP would've probably taken the Senate.
halik
Lifer
- Oct 10, 2000
- 25,696
- 1
- 0
buckshot24
Diamond Member
- Nov 3, 2009
- 9,916
- 85
- 91
The argument is that the behavior of its worst elements, such as Akin and Mourdock, poisoned people against even the more moderate Republicans such as Brown. He went down in the polls at around the same time AKin did.
It was the opinion of the voters.
It's not just my opinion, it was written about heavily in 2010. Reid was in serious trouble before Angle.
What cherry picking? There are at least five seats the GOP flatly gave away due to picking tea party losers in their primaries: Alaska, Nevada, Delaware, Missouri and Indiana. Add in the possibility of keeping Mass and one or two others, and they could be in control of the senate right now.
Probably not. But they still could have taken the House.
sm625
Diamond Member
- May 6, 2011
- 8,172
- 137
- 106
The free money that the governemnt hands them comes directly from the deficit. All that borrowing and spending just to give it to those for whom Kristol shills. These guys have stolen so much money in the last 20 years they dont need to care about taxes. Let the top marginal rates revert to historical levels, invest in capital, grow a business, and just let it grow for 20 years while taxes are high. It's a cycle. At some point you have to give back a little, or the host that these parasites are sucking off of will die.
zsdersw
Lifer
- Oct 29, 2003
- 10,505
- 2
- 0
Yes. You should know that the rape comments by those two senate candidates affected more than just those two senate races.
Well it cost them both races and tainted many in the GOP. The democrats set 2 traps for the GOP this election cycle. First was the war on women and the second was Romney being a rich guy who does not care about the average person. How did the GOP respond? They fell for the trap hook line and sinker. The rape comments could of not played more into the war on women trap. The GOP lost women badly on election day. The 47% comment was like a dream come true for the democrats. The GOP turned what should of been a big win on election day into large defeat. The odds were very heavy in the GOPs favor to win back the senate at the beginning of the year. Instead they lost ground in the senate. The president was not in very good shape for re-election because of the economy. The president ended up with a large victory in the electoral college. This election was a slam dunk but the extreme right wing could not help themselves.
You can talk about the Romney surge after the first debate. Well if the extreme right wing would of not fell for the traps that surge would of been Romney cementing a lead and winning election day. The surge just helped him pull even instead of icing the election like it would have if extreme right wing had not fell for the traps and put Romney behind.
buckshot24
Diamond Member
- Nov 3, 2009
- 9,916
- 85
- 91
No doubt that there has been some bad picks for senate races but it isn't like the establishment candidates are doing much better. We need to pick better candidates and I'm sure going forward we can get that done but the idea that its just the tea party that is fucking this up just doesn't line up with the facts. Our "deep bench" for 2016 has a few that were backed by the tea party.
If you don't want the O'Donnell's of the world are you willing to throw away the Rubio's or the Rand Paul's to avoid candidates like her in the future? I'm not.
If you don't want the O'Donnell's of the world are you willing to throw away the Rubio's or the Rand Paul's to avoid candidates like her in the future? I'm not.
buckshot24
Diamond Member
- Nov 3, 2009
- 9,916
- 85
- 91
zsdersw
Lifer
- Oct 29, 2003
- 10,505
- 2
- 0
Yes, by all means, deflect attention away from your failures.
How about getting the social conservative idiots out of the mix?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 358
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter