View Full Version : No wonder republican men are afraid
They're projecting onto democrats exactly what they would, and apparently did, try to do.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/robert-mueller-smear-failed_us_5bd363f4e4b055bc948bad9d
It's kind of sad that the republicans have turned into a clown car with no actual ideas and just a lot of chicanery. But I guess if you don't have any ideas or plans for how to make people's lives better or fairer or anything then you have no choice but to spend all your time trying to suppress votes, gerrymander districts, and toss BS like false sexual misconduct allegations at your political opponents and inconvenient government officials if you hope to remain in power.
Ultralight
10-31-18, 6:20am
I don't think they are afraid. I think they are confident. Why? Republicans know how to win. They work together and whip Dem ass nearly every time.
The same thing will likely happen next week.
I meant that they are afraid of young men fearing being falsely accused of sexual misconduct. Not the election. Because you may well be right that they will succeed at stealing it.
Ultralight
10-31-18, 7:14am
I meant that they are afraid of young men fearing being falsely accused of sexual misconduct. Explain...
http://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?16789-Trump-Is-Right-About-One-Thing-In-My-Book
I’m thinking at this point the Dems will lose 1-2 Senate seats and gain a narrow (12-15) majority in the House. You can all mock me for how wrong I got it next week.
My reasoning against a mighty blue wave is that the GOP got two substantial in-kind donations from the Dems. Pushing so hard and so nastily on the unprovable allegations against a SCOTUS nominee tended to increase the outrage-driven enthusiasm level of their opponents, which had been waning. The current freakout over how shabbily we will treat the approaching Honduran horde, will, I think, not have the desired effect on a voting public who generally likes the idea of exercising some control over who can cross our borders.
On the plus side for the Democrats, the realization seems to have dawned on some of them that local politics actually matters; and that actually working at the local level may be more effective than advancing conspiracy theories about voter suppression and Russian internet rumor-mongering.
iris lilies
10-31-18, 1:28pm
We have 3 marijuana initiatives on the ballot, some with conflict with each other. I will vote NO on all since ballot initiatives are a poor way to govern, and I have lost track if these are binding or not.
Iris, coming from a legal pot state I would read those carefully as well. We thought that the tax money would be going directly to schools and to teachers but it is screwed up in the system. Some things are in pretty good shape, but wait until they get it sorted out first in a coherent manner.
ToomuchStuff
11-1-18, 10:15am
Iris, coming from a legal pot state I would read those carefully as well. We thought that the tax money would be going directly to schools and to teachers but it is screwed up in the system. Some things are in pretty good shape, but wait until they get it sorted out first in a coherent manner.
In those cases where they say money is going towards schools, typically is does, by law. What they do not say is it will go in, in addition to the normal money, which they instead pull back to the general fund.
Yes TMS, I cannot quite track it as well as you can specifically. I do know that some pain in the a** grants were created from pot money for healthy living programs. Basically forcing after school students to do healthy living programs so they will say no to the things their parents are buying to fund it. Some is going to building repairs that I have seen, mostly it was unclear and I have a hard time following it.
Maryland just put in a constitutional question about having the gambling money be dedicated to schools as additional funding, not in place of state funding. It was promised to go to schools when the gambling bill passed, but was instead put in the general fund. I voted yes to a dedicated fund. They did that with transportation and the gas taxes too...not dedicated. Kind of like Congress with Social Security I think.
catherine
11-1-18, 12:11pm
On the plus side for the Democrats, the realization seems to have dawned on some of them that local politics actually matters; and that actually working at the local level may be more effective than advancing conspiracy theories about voter suppression and Russian internet rumor-mongering.
Really? Dems aren't into politics at the grassroots level? I didn't know that.
And I wasn't aware that they owned conspiracy-mongering. That strategy has definitely been a two-way street, amplified and perfected by our current GOP Commander-In-Chief
Teacher Terry
11-1-18, 12:15pm
Pot is legal here and since it’s no worse than alcohol I think it’s a good thing. Now people with medical issues don’t have to buy it illegally.
frugal-one
11-1-18, 1:47pm
I don't think they are afraid. I think they are confident. Why? Republicans know how to win. They work together and whip Dem ass nearly every time.
The same thing will likely happen next week.
Interesting that you are in favor of Republicans. They represent big business. The tax cut recently was to the wealthy. None of these apply to you. What is your rationale?
Really? Dems aren't into politics at the grassroots level? I didn't know that.
I would have thought losing all those State and local offices since the turn of the century would have spoken for itself.
“Grassroots” protests over national issues are fine, and I’m sure cathartic, but at some point you have to dirty your hands running for offices at the ground level. A lot of the smarter Democrat pundits have been saying this for some years now, and people are finally starting to get it.
One consequence is the thin bench of potential candidates at the national level. Old rich white people mostly. A guy like O’Rourke in Texas comes along, and they think he’s the second coming. There’s so little depth there.
I would have thought losing all those State and local offices since the turn of the century would have spoken for itself.
“Grassroots” protests over national issues are fine, and I’m sure cathartic, but at some point you have to dirty your hands running for offices at the ground level. A lot of the smarter Democrat pundits have been saying this for some years now, and people are finally starting to get it.
One consequence is the thin bench of potential candidates at the national level. Old rich white people mostly. A guy like O’Rourke in Texas comes along, and they think he’s the second coming. There’s so little depth there.
I guess my perception was skewed for a couple of reasons, but mostly because of my long tenure in Blue states: NJ has two Democratic senators and 7 out of 12 congressional districts have Democratic congresspeople. Interestingly, we not infrequently wind up voting for Republican governors.
Here's an interesting analysis of your point in The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/the-ideological-reasons-why-democrats-have-neglected-local-politics/512024/
I would have thought losing all those State and local offices since the turn of the century would have spoken for itself.
“Grassroots” protests over national issues are fine, and I’m sure cathartic, but at some point you have to dirty your hands running for offices at the ground level. A lot of the smarter Democrat pundits have been saying this for some years now, and people are finally starting to get it.
One consequence is the thin bench of potential candidates at the national level. Old rich white people mostly. A guy like O’Rourke in Texas comes along, and they think he’s the second coming. There’s so little depth there.
I'm seeing all kinds of depth and new blood: Dillum*, Abrams. O'Roarke, Gabbard, Ammar Campa-Najjar, the many young veterans who are running, Kamala Harris...I'm very much impressed by the Parkland survivors and all the others who are spurning Big Money and running to better their country, which sorely needs them.
That would be Gillum. Duh.
I'm seeing all kinds of depth and new blood: Dillum, Abrams. O'Roarke, Gabbard, Ammar Campa-Najjar, the many young veterans who are running, Kamala Harris...I'm very much impressed by the Parkland survivors and all the others who are spurning Big Money and running to better their country, which sorely needs them.
That’s my point. There’s a sort of lost generation of Democrats between this current crop of Trump-inspired youngsters and the septuagenarians in the higher offices. Neglecting local politics for so long led to a dearth of experienced minor leaguers ready to move up to the majors. This was especially true during the Obama years when all eyes were on the glamorous Sun King and nobody bothered tilling the soil and something like a thousand State legislative seats and governors were lost.
If that’s changing now, the Democrats should thank Trump for rejuvenating their party.
I see a lot of middle-aged strivers in local politics, but it wouldn't break my heart if younger people took the reins out of the hands of the living fossils in power and charged forward. Isn't that the way it's supposed to work?
I see a lot of middle-aged strivers in local politics,
You don’t see as many as you would have twenty years ago.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.