NeverEndingMe
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Posts
- 15,925
being a democrat is of mental retard.
make your own money assholes
make your own money assholes
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/senate-races/223235-national-democrats-cut-ad-buys-for-landrieu
"National Democrats are canceling a portion of their planned advertising buy in Louisiana for Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) runoff battle with Rep. Bill Cassidy (R).
A Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) aide confirmed the committee canceled buys starting Monday and running through Dec. 6, the date of the runoff, in the Lafayette, Baton Rouge and New Orleans markets. It's unclear how much of the committee's initial $2 million-plus reservation remains.
The move underscores, and likely exacerbates, her underdog status in the race. But with Senate control no longer up for grabs, after Republicans gained a 52-seat majority in Tuesday night’s elections, Landrieu’s reelection fight has lost some of its urgency for Democrats.
A handful of Republican groups, meanwhile, have already reserved at least $7 million in airtime over the next month.
DSCC spokesman Justin Barasky said the development doesn’t mean the committee is writing the incumbent off.
“Mary Landrieu is a proven run-off winner and we support her 100 percent. We are going to make ongoing determinations on how best to invest in the race. We made the initial reservation when there were concerns that the rates would skyrocket but they have stabilized, giving us more flexibility to make week-to-week decisions,” he said.
Every recent public poll has shown Landrieu trailing Cassidy in a head-to-head matchup."
Bye, Mary.
Once those hard working Mexican immigrants start making the bucks, they will shift philosophies. You can bet your burrito.
You cannot be everything to everyone all of the time.
Eventually, there will be defections of color among those who feel their 'group' is being slighted in order to favor a larger group of supplicants...
It's already started with Asians, and to some degree with Latinos.
Tiger moms will not have anyone elevated above their sons...
![]()
![]()

As long as they can keep people scared and insecure and angry at people who are different, there will always be a place for their message.
Hard times flush the chumps.
Especially when it comes to getting into the best schools. Fuck affirmative action.![]()

They will succeed in destroying the Democrat brand, now that Obama will be forced to veto bills beneficial to a majority of Americans.
The Pubs have come up with no such bills in the past six years. Why would they start now?
The Pubs have come up with no such bills in the past six years. Why would they start now?
KO and the GrandCyclopsDownSouth are hurting today.
KO and the GrandCyclopsDownSouth are hurting today.
Didn't we hear the GOP was finished in 2008?
http://americanthinker.com/blog/201...9_state_legislative_houses.html#ixzz3ILIHCNbbAnother underreported fact from Tuesday's election is the extraordinary night Republicans had in winning state legislative seats.
The GOP now controls two thirds of state legislative houses – 66 of 99 (Nebraska's legislature is unicameral). They upped the number of states where they control both house and senate to 24 – one more than they had before the election. And according to this article in Vox, they cut the number of Democratic-held legislatures from 14 to 7.
Didn't we hear the GOP was finished in 2008?
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...nn-jenkins-blames-harry-reid-do-nothing-sena/PolitiFact took a look at the statements that there are 352 bills sitting on Harry Reid's desk and that 55 of them were introduced by Democrats. PolitiFact reporter Linda Qiu says Jenkins' claim rates HALF TRUE. Qiu says the issue is a bit more complex than how Rep. Jenkins has made it out to be.
"We took a look at the numbers, and while there were 342 bills that were passed in the House and sent to the Senate, the big thing to remember is that some of these bills are actually in Senate committees, and the committee chair ultimately can decide whether or not to let a bill pass to the next level," Qiu said. "The other complicating part of this is that the Senate may have their own version of the same legislation, so the House bill might just be sitting there while the Senate proceeds on their own."
What about the claim that 55 of the bills that came out of the House and moved on to the Senate were introduced by Democrats? Qiu says that the number is accurate, but that the 55 bills represent only about 16 percent of the bills passed by the House. "If you look at the bills, the substance of the legislation in these bills is pretty mundane," Qiu said. "We're talking about things like names for federal buildings, minor tweaks to legislation, and even the granting of an immigration visa to an individual."
Rep. Jenkins has laid the blame of Washington gridlock at the feet of Sen. Harry Reid, but Reid is not the only person who gatekeeps the bills reaching the Senate floor. PolitiFact rates Rep. Jenkins' claim HALF TRUE.
No. The rules of both houses of Congress are very flexible by design. Anytime a caucus with a simple majority starts out a session saying their hands are tied, they are lying.
The reason the rules are not changed very often is that the political class is aware the public is criminally ignorant of how the institutions of what is supposed to be their representative democracy works. So, if you say enough times that something that makes a Chamber as undemocratic as the Senate even more undemocratic, like, say the filibuster, cannot be easily fixed and you make sure to act accordingly, people will believe it. Mainly because most people do not research things like parliamentary procedure of the United States Senate.
The reason the filibuster stayed in place during the Republican domination of Congress during the height of the Bush years was not because it was hard to change. It was kept so that the kabuki could continue when and if the GOP returned to the minority and also because the Democratic caucus never meaningfully opposed their agenda.
If the Democratic caucus acts like an actual minority caucus--which, unfortunately, I fucking doubt--I would not be surprised if you see the rules amended by the GOP to make everything a 50 + 1 up or down vote.
Keep on spinning, but the fact remains that Obama won election for a four-year term in 2012, and nothing changes that. He will continue to do the job he was elected to do.Let us remember how Obama claimed he heard the 2/3rds who didn't vote, implying had they voted his side would have won, let us then wonder at the fact that 70% of state legislatures are in the hands of the Republicans, along with 60% of the governorships. How could this be?![]()
Republicans made historic gains across the country on Tuesday, including significant progress with minority voters. Republican Tim Scott became the first elected black senator from the South. Mia Love became the first Republican woman of African-American descent to be elected to the House, and the GOP Hispanic Caucus gained new members from West Virginia and Florida. But marquee names aside, the effort Republicans made has to be intensified if they are to become more competitive in higher-turnout presidential-election years.
One of Mitt Romney’s great failures in 2012 was that he won only 29 percent of Latino voters and a pathetic 27 percent among Asian voters — considerably down from the support George W. Bush had won from these groups in 2000 and 2004. This year, the GOP’s share of votes from these Americans improved. In the national exit poll for local House races, Democrats won 64 percent of Latino voters and also won Asian voters — but only with 52 percent. Among African Americans, Republican support ticked up slightly from Romney’s 6 percent of the vote to 10 percent. Native Americans, who make up 1 percent of the national electorate, favored Republicans by 52 to 43 percent.
Part of the Republican improvement can be traced to lower voter turnout, because younger Latinos and Asians simply don’t show up as much in non-presidential years. But black voter participation this year actually went up from the last midterm election, rising to 12 percent of the electorate, compared with 11 percent in 2010. The new GOP strength among non-black minorities was to some extent the product of aggressive outreach in minority communities by the Republican National Committee and various state parties. In Texas, GOP senator John Cornyn carried the Latino vote by a single percentage point, while Greg Abbott, who is married to a Latina, lost it by only ten points in the race for governor. Abbott carried the Asian-American vote 52 to 48 percent.
The most surprising successes for GOP candidates may have come in Kansas and Georgia. Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas lost the Latino vote (6 percent of the total) by only three points. In Georgia, businessman David Perdue won 42 percent of the Latino vote, in part by arguing that he knew how to improve the economic climate. Republicans suffered a disappointment, though, next door in Florida, where incumbent GOP governor Rick Scott’s share of the Hispanic vote fell from 50 percent in 2010 to 38 percent this year. Scott won the election in both 2010 and 2014 by a single point, which makes demographic comparisons easy — and troubling for Republicans. Staunchly anti-Communist Cubans make up about one-third of Florida’s Hispanic community, with the rest largely Puerto Rican and Central American. But the Cuban percentage of the overall Latino vote has been shrinking, and Scott was a more polarizing figure this year as he ran for reelection.
Looking west, Tom Donelson of Americas PAC – which ran advertising efforts to boost minority support for GOP gubernatorial candidates Scott Walker in Wisconsin and Bruce Rauner in Illinois – says his own Election Day surveys show that both men won 38 percent of the Hispanic vote.
California Republicans surprised some observers in this election by mustering enough strength to block Democrats from winning a two-thirds supermajority in the State Senate and Assembly, thus giving their members in those bodies a voice in tax increases and budget matters. An analysis by KPCC Radio found that the accomplishment resulted partially from “the victories of two Republican candidates from Orange County — both women, both Asian American.”
Karthick Ramakrishnan, a University of California at Riverside political scientist, noted that Asian Americans haven’t traditionally been wedded to any one party. But there are signs in Califorina, he said, that they are becoming alienated from Democrats who want to restore the equivalent of a minority quota system for admission to the prestigious University of California; such de facto quotas are widely seen as giving advantages to blacks and Latinos at the expense of Asian students. “Just as the Asian-American vote moved toward the Democratic party over the last two decades, we may be seeing the beginning of a trend where they are moving back closer toward the Republican party,” Ramakrishnan told KPCC.
Congressman Ed Royce, a Republican who represents much of Orange County, is optimistic about the GOP’s ability to appeal to Asian Americans. “Asian populations here are hard-working, law-abiding, respectful of authority, and highly entrepreneurial,” he told me. “We can do very well with them if they understand that conservative values overlap with their traditions.”
Persuading minorities to abandon what in some cases are decades of allegiance to the Democratic party is a tall order. Republicans all too often approach voters only at election time, having failed to build lasting relationships in minority communities. But as this latest midterm shows, where Republicans did make legitimate and genuine outreach efforts, they began to gain votes from groups that some within the GOP had written off for good. Nothing is permanent in politics, unless you fatalistically believe that voters are a static commodity rather than people who can be appealed to on an individual basis.
Some observations on the election:
1) This was a wave, folks. It will be a benchmark for judging waves, for either party, for years.
2) In seriously contested races, Republican candidates were generally younger, more vigorous, more sunny and optimistic than Democrats. The contrast was sharpest in Colorado and Iowa, which voted twice for President Obama. Cory Gardner and Joni Ernst seemed to be looking forward to the future. Their opponents grimly championed the stale causes of feminists and trial lawyers of the past.
Democrats see themselves as the party of the future. But their policies are antique. The federal minimum wage dates to 1938, equal pay for women to 1963, access to contraceptives to 1965. Raising these issues now is campaign gimmickry, not serious policymaking.
Democratic leading lights have been around a long time. The party’s two congressional leaders are in their 70s. The governors of the two largest Democratic states are sons of former governors who won their first statewide elections in 1950 and 1978.
This has implications for 2016. Hillary Clinton, the likely Democratic nominee, worked in her first campaign in 1970. She has been a national figure since 1991. The Clintons’ theme song, “Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow,” was released in 1977. That will be 39 years ago in 2016.
3) The combination of Obama’s low job approval and Harry Reid’s virtual shutdown of the Senate ensured a Republican Senate majority. Reid prevented amendments — Mark Begich of Alaska never got to introduce one — that could have helped them in campaigns.
Votes were blocked on issues with clear Senate majorities — such as the Keystone XL pipeline, medical-device tax repeal, and the bipartisan patent-reform bill backed by Judiciary chairman Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.0.
That left Democrats running for reelection stuck with 95-plus percent Obama voting records. It left them with no independent votes or initiatives to point to. Reid kept Democratic candidates well stocked with money. But not with winning issues.
4) Democratic territory has been reduced to the bastions of two core groups — black voters and gentry liberals. Democrats win New York City and the San Francisco Bay area by overwhelming margins but are outvoted in almost all the territory in between — including, this year, Obama’s Illinois. Governor Jerry Brown ran well behind in California’s Central Valley, and Governor Andrew Cuomo lost most of upstate New York.
Democratic margins have shrunk among Hispanics and, almost to the vanishing point, among young voters. Liberal Democrats raised money to “turn Texas blue.” But it voted Republican by wider-than-usual margins this year.
Under Obama, the Democratic base has shrunk numerically and demographically. With superior organization, he was able to stitch together a 51 percent majority in 2012. But like other Democratic majority coalitions — Woodrow Wilson’s, Lyndon Johnson’s, even Franklin Roosevelt’s — it has proved to be fragile and subject to fragmentation.
5) In many states — including many carried twice by Obama — Republicans have been governing successfully, at least in the estimation of their voters. Governor Scott Walker has won his third victory in four years in Wisconsin against the frantic efforts of public-employee unions.
Governor John Kasich won a landslide victory against a flawed opponent in Ohio, and Governor Rick Snyder won solidly in Michigan after signing a right-to-work law hated by private-sector unions. In Florida, Governor Rick Scott’s second consecutive one-point victory means that Republicans will be in control for 20 years in what is now the nation’s third-largest state.
Democratic governance, in contrast, was rebuked by the voters in Massachusetts, in Maryland (with the nation’s fourth-highest black population in percentage terms), and in Obama’s home state of Illinois.
(6) The Obama Democrats labor under the illusion that a beleaguered people hunger for an ever-bigger government. The polls and the election results suggest, not so gently, otherwise.
The fiasco of HealthCare.gov, the misdeeds of the IRS, the improvisatory warnings of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — all undermine confidence in the capacity of big government. Looking back over the last half-century, we can see that the highest levels of trust in government came, interestingly, during the administration of Ronald Reagan.
7) This election was a repudiation of the big-government policies of the Obama Democrats. It was not so much an endorsement of Republicans as it was an invitation to them to come up with better alternative policies.
In the states, some Republicans have. At the national level, they are just getting started. We’ll see how they do.