2018 Midterm Elections

[demi-conservative]

I think it means that we are seeing Democrats that are moving more to the center, and learning lessons from 2016. Meanwhile, republican candidates appear to be moving more to the right.

Lesson: to win, be more like Trump. Is that what you really want??

We need to see both Dems and Reps running Trump style, libs all over will cry!

[carpedm9587]

We shall indeed see...

[carpedm9587]

From your comments I was expecting inoffensive and vague platitudes.

However I got as far as the first line of the preamble:

We believe in American exceptionalism.

I don't agree.

Oh my - my eyes bleeped right over that!

I agree (with you) - I do not agree (with American exceptionalism)!

Reading further through the 1.5 page preamble, I would generally say that I agree with none of the beliefs and principles they outline in it.

I don't object to those statements phrased that way. I think it's somewhat naive to believe Republicans actually support those things or act on them. The Republican congress under Trump has created one of the most unbalanced budgets the US has seen in a long time. Next on their hit-list for this year appears to be cutting Medicaid and Medicare.

I don't buy that the goals are actually the same. I think if you make the goals vague enough and add enough PR spin to them you can make it look like they might be the same to a naive person.

But once you boil it down to the level of actual laws or policies passed... I don't recall ever seeing a single (non-bipartisan) Republican policy I agreed with.

Yep.

I regard myself as a centrist on immigration. I think countries should vigorously control their borders and set immigration quotas that please the population and are based on rational assessments of incoming immigrants. Their moral obligations extend to taking on their fair share of refugees, and treating immigrants with respect and human rights. IMO if they want to accept a very high rate of immigrants like my country does, or a very low rate of immigrants like Japan does, that is their business. And I think it's totally valid for a country to prioritize culturally similar immigration, because such people integrate faster and cause less social disruption.

Given that view, I find neither the Republican nor Democratic policies acceptable on immigration. My immigration priorities would be:
1. Beefing up deportation proceedings against anyone illegally within the country or overstaying within the first 3 years of their illegal overstay. Focus resources on getting these illegal immigrants and overstayers out rapidly before they put down roots. To the extent that it's rational to try to prevent such people entering the country in the first place, do so (e.g. by tightening border security, however since most enter by airplane with visitor visas and then simply don't leave when they expire, spending large amounts of money on border security seems unproductive).
2. Recognizing that once a family has been in the country for a decade, throwing them out is unreasonable, so automatic amnesty and path to citizenship for anyone resident >10 years.
3. Possible slight decrease in the total immigration rate, as that seems to be what the overall population wants (I would set the total rate as fluctuating based on continuous polling as to whether the people wanted it to get higher or lower).
4. Increased refugee quotas (refugees would still only comprise a small proportion of total immigrants) especially from areas of the world where the US has had a direct hand in causing destabilization.
5. A very serious attempt to help and stabilize Mexico to decrease the motivation for floods of immigrants to come from them. This would likely include the legalization of particular drugs in order to cause the drug cartels in Mexico to collapse by removing overnight all US demand for their products.
6. Replace the US's currently messy immigration system with the clearer points-based systems used in Canada, NZ etc. Where points are awarded for things like ability to speak English, qualifications, age, etc, as a measure of the likely level of contribution that the potential immigrant will make to the country should they be allowed in. Thus the policy will filter the potential immigrants for "the best people" (as Trump would put it). I think it is totally reasonable for something like "cultural similarity to the US" to give points as well, and a map of the globe could be created where each country was given a scaling (e.g. Canada 100%, Congo 0%), and thus the immigrant's origin would give them some points as well as a measure of how well they were likely to integrate quickly into US society.

I agree with most of what you say here about immigration, except for #2. 10 years is a long time. If our immigration policies have been so weak that someone was able to come into the country and stay for 10 years, I think they've established roots and we should be looking at a path to citizenship. Indeed, it is my opinion that we should announce, "effective today - if you are in the country illegally but have not had any criminal activity (and a speeding ticket is not "criminal activity), you can approach the INS and get on a path to citizenship. Also effective today, anyon else entering this country illegally can expect to be deported the moment they are discovered, businesses will pay stiff fines if they employ an illigal immigrant that is NOT on a path to citizenship, and our border security will be beefed up (with something a bit more intelligent than a fence/wall).

[carpedm9587]

Loretta Lynn and Tony Bennett are not making our laws.

No - they're not - but I don't think a person's ability to make laws is governed by their age - it should be governed by their ability. I agree with term limits. But I think a person's ability to work should be judged by their ability to work - not by an arbitrary age number.

[rogue06]

Lesson: to win, be more like Trump. Is that what you really want??

We need to see both Dems and Reps running Trump style, libs all over will cry!

It does seem that, in order to win, Democrats have to pretend to be in favor of many if not most of Trump's proposals.

[carpedm9587]

It does seem that, in order to win, Democrats have to pretend to be in favor of many if not most of Trump's proposals.

I rarely do the "I fixed that" thing (usually only in a humorous exchange), but I think what you are missing in your statement is "in deeply red districts." It is also not clear to me that they need to pretend. If they wish to win AND retain the seat in deeply red districts, they are going to need to take positions that reflect what the people in that district want. That will tend to align them more to the right than to the left. Frankly, I think it will be good for the Democratic party to have a broader breadth of membership, stretching from the right to the left. Now if the Republican party would ALSO embrace a broader breadth of membership, instead of continually skewing further and further to the right, we might have some overlap and a littlle more "working across the aisle."

[demi-conservative]

It is also not clear to me that they need to pretend. If they wish to win AND retain the seat in deeply red districts, they are going to need to take positions that reflect what the people in that district want. That will tend to align them more to the right than to the left.

I agree!!, big question is when will Dems get behind 'build yuge tall wall!!!!'?

That will be big Triumph of Trump, dragging RINOs and Dems to support 'racist' 'bigoted', also 'how can anyone educated support this???' policies of his.

Progs will cry!

[JimL]

It does seem that, in order to win, Democrats have to pretend to be in favor of many if not most of Trump's proposals.

Lamb didn't support Trumps tax cuts. He didn't support Trumps bid to repeal the ACA, He supports stricter gun regulations, He supports a womans right to choice, he supports unions, and they supported him. He supports tariffs, but of course most republicans are against Trumps tariff policy. So what are the many, or most of Trumps proposals, that Lamb supported? This is what happens when you believe everything that's spun out of the echo chamber you listen to.

[demi-conservative]

Lamb didn't support Trumps tax cuts. He didn't support Trumps bid to repeal the ACA, He supports stricter gun regulations, He supports a womans right to choice, he supports unions, and they supported him. He supports tariffs, but of course most republicans are against Trumps tariff policy. So what are the many, or most of Trumps proposals, that Lamb supported? This is what happens when you believe everything that's spun out of the echo chamber you listen to.

He loves guns, supposed devout Catholic who is personally against abortion, Marine captain. Agreed with Trump about tariffs, also opioid epidemic, need for infrastructure bill. Very good position, moderate in current climate, not bad!

On one hand Repubs are still mostly RINOs and not going Trump-style, so will cost them like we saw! On other hand how many masculine white male moderates does Dem party have that can do Trump style but leftist, like this guy???

If you progs weren't desperate for win, would already tear into this white male anti-abortion devout Christian Marine gun-lover. Might still happen! Sad!!!

[JimL]

He loves guns,

So what, so do many democrats like guns, but that has nothing to do the gun policy they support.

supposed devout Catholic who is personally against abortion,

Again, so what? Many democrats are devout catholics and personally against abortion. But like many of them, he doesn't try to foist his personal beliefs on everyone else.

Marine captain.

Again, so what. What are you, a complete idiot?

Agreed with Trump about tariffs,

Yeah, and republicans disagree with Trump on tariffs.

also opioid epidemic,

Yeah, so does every democrat. Probably better way to say it is: Trump agrees with democrats on opiod abuse. But of course Trump, like many republicans, is a sociopath, so in reality he couldn't care any less about opiod abuse.

need for infrastructure bill. Very good position,

Then why hasn't he done anything about, Bozo. He's all talk. His constituency doesn't want to pay for infrastructure, they want big tax cuts instead, and Trump saw to it that they got them.

moderate in current climate, not bad!

Which Trump isn't. You should give up while you're behind, demi-dunce.

On one hand Repubs are still mostly RINOs and not going Trump-style, so will cost them like we saw! On other hand how many masculine white male moderates does Dem party have that can do Trump style but leftist, like this guy???

This is a democracy demitard, the great majority of us aren't racists, as apparently you are, and we really don't want an American Putin leading our Country. Sure, there is a small minority who, like you, admire that type of sociopathic character in their President. We call them the basket of deplorables.

If you progs weren't desperate for win, would already tear into this white male anti-abortion devout Christian Marine gun-lover. Might still happen! Sad!!!

Huh! You're so funny demi. Republicans went all out, spending millions, sending in all the troops, including Trump himself to stump for their candidate in a district that Trump won by 20 points in a desperate attempt to avoid being completely embarrassed again. And progs are desperate? Republicans are desperate to stop the bleeding thats been going on since Trump was elected.

[demi-conservative]

Sounds like JimL is in higher than normal triggered!!! Pervert!

So what, so do many democrats like guns, but that has nothing to do the gun policy they support.



Again, so what? Many democrats are devout catholics and personally against abortion. But like many of them, he doesn't try to foist his personal beliefs on everyone else.


Again, so what. What are you, a complete idiot?

Like demi said, he is religious anti-abortion gun-loving masculine white male soldier that current Dem party loves to hate. Hint hint, it was how you lost that place 20% before, also how Trump flipped states. Sad!

Now desperate, Dems try big reversal but will probably get Lamb sooner anyway for being racist, bigoted, 'how can you be against abortion? be gunlover??? check privilege!!!!!'

Yeah, and republicans disagree with Trump on tariffs.

Demi has talked about RINOs before.

Yeah, so does every democrat. Probably better way to say it is: Trump agrees with democrats on opiod abuse. But of course Trump, like many republicans, is a sociopath, so in reality he couldn't care any less about opiod abuse.

More like sociopath libs (like you) keep borders open, let drugs, murderers, rapists in, don't actually care. Sad!

Then why hasn't he done anything about, Bozo. He's all talk. His constituency doesn't want to pay for infrastructure, they want big tax cuts instead, and Trump saw to it that they got them.

Most important to build is Yuuuuuge Wall, coming right up!!!

Which Trump isn't. You should give up while you're behind, demi-dunce.

Trump got evangelical vote, also flipping ex-hardcore Dem voting working class. Great moderate!!!

This is a democracy demitard, the great majority of us aren't racists, as apparently you are, and we really don't want an American Putin leading our Country. Sure, there is a small minority who, like you, admire that type of sociopathic character in their President. We call them the basket of deplorables.

Libtard, libtard Hillary ignored advice of husband, abandoned working class whites and lost cos they went for Trump

Keep attacking them and fall, like Hillary in India ! Or learn, also try to woo them back, like this Lamb guy.

Huh! You're so funny demi. Republicans went all out, spending millions, sending in all the troops, including Trump himself to stump for their candidate in a district that Trump won by 20 points in a desperate attempt to avoid being completely embarrassed again.

Dems have been doing 'spend more and bus them all in' strategy for special elections, sounds like it actually paid off big...when candidate is hated masculine white male gun-lover Christian. Yuge irony!!!

And progs are desperate? Republicans are desperate to stop the bleeding thats been going on since Trump was elected.

Demi doesn't mind if RINOs lose and masculine white male gun-lover Christian etc etc wins, doubt Trump minds all that much too!!!

[JimL]

Sounds like JimL is in higher than normal triggered!!! Pervert!



Like demi said, he is religious anti-abortion gun-loving masculine white male soldier that current Dem party loves to hate. Hint hint, it was how you lost that place 20% before, also how Trump flipped states. Sad!

Now desperate, Dems try big reversal but will probably get Lamb sooner anyway for being racist, bigoted, 'how can you be against abortion? be gunlover??? check privilege!!!!!'



Demi has talked about RINOs before.



More like sociopath libs (like you) keep borders open, let drugs, murderers, rapists in, don't actually care. Sad!



Most important to build is Yuuuuuge Wall, coming right up!!!



Trump got evangelical vote, also flipping ex-hardcore Dem voting working class. Great moderate!!!



Libtard, libtard Hillary ignored advice of husband, abandoned working class whites and lost cos they went for Trump

Keep attacking them and fall, like Hillary in India ! Or learn, also try to woo them back, like this Lamb guy.



Dems have been doing 'spend more and bus them all in' strategy for special elections, sounds like it actually paid off big...when candidate is hated masculine white male gun-lover Christian. Yuge irony!!!



Demi doesn't mind if RINOs lose and masculine white male gun-lover Christian etc etc wins, doubt Trump minds all that much too!!!

Demi is a dope! nough said.

[demi-conservative]

Demi is a dope! nough said.

Stomping off already? Sad!

[Starlight]

I agree with most of what you say here about immigration, except for #2. 10 years is a long time. If our immigration policies have been so weak that someone was able to come into the country and stay for 10 years, I think they've established roots and we should be looking at a path to citizenship.

That was what I thought I was saying. Did you read it differently?

Why am I not surprised?

Because you know I'm not stupid, and hence you know I wouldn't believe a crazy idea like American Exceptionalism?

I see there are a lot of different definitions of American Exceptionalism. If there exists a version you hold to, that isn't self-evidently false like nearly all versions of it I've seen are, then please do put forth your definition here.

As you do, please remember that Canada, Australia, and New Zealand were all settled by predominantly English-speaking peoples of British and mixed European descent like the US was. If you are going to claim that the US is exceptional, you will need something that distinguishes it from those.

My own country of New Zealand, being the last of those countries to be colonized, attempted to learn from the lessons and histories of those other colonies, and as a result the process went a lot smoother in general here, with much less genociding of the natives, and the UK granting us a status of self-governing democracy from the beginning. We were subsequently the first country to give women the vote, the first western country where the government provided healthcare to all our people (Soviet Union beat us to it), now get pretty consistently ranked the least corrupt country in the world, and consistently rank in the top-10 of happiest countries in the world (unlike the US) along with Canada and Australia and the Scandinavian nations in the annual UN World Happiness reports.

So please do tell about how you think the US is 'exceptional'...? It isn't the happiest, it isn't the least corrupt, it isn't the greatest land mass, it isn't the most populous or the densest or most sparsely populated, it isn't the most religious, it isn't the oldest or the youngest, it doesn't have the most or least rights for its people, it currently happens to have the biggest military but that was far from true earlier in its history, it currently has the biggest economy (though not if the comparable EU is included) but that was also far from true earlier in its history, it is vastly far from the only country to have a constitution and IMO has a very out of date constitution that urgently needs replacing, it is far from the only country to have a democracy (and IMO it's level of democracy is questionable - NZ, Australia, Canada, and the Scandinavian countries are ranked significantly ahead on the Democracy Index)... etc.

Overall I would say it's a decent country with a lot of issues, but I wouldn't say it makes the top ten for overall best country in the world (I would tend to rank it around 20th). I am certainly hard pressed to imagine how you'd claim it was exceptional.

[Tassman]

That was what I thought I was saying. Did you read it differently?


Because you know I'm not stupid, and hence you know I wouldn't believe a crazy idea like American Exceptionalism?

I see there are a lot of different definitions of American Exceptionalism. If there exists a version you hold to, that isn't self-evidently false like nearly all versions of it I've seen are, then please do put forth your definition here.

As you do, please remember that Canada, Australia, and New Zealand were all settled by predominantly English-speaking peoples of British and mixed European descent like the US was. If you are going to claim that the US is exceptional, you will need something that distinguishes it from those.

My own country of New Zealand, being the last of those countries to be colonized, attempted to learn from the lessons and histories of those other colonies, and as a result the process went a lot smoother in general here, with much less genociding of the natives, and the UK granting us a status of self-governing democracy from the beginning. We were subsequently the first country to give women the vote, the first western country where the government provided healthcare to all our people (Soviet Union beat us to it), now get pretty consistently ranked the least corrupt country in the world, and consistently rank in the top-10 of happiest countries in the world (unlike the US) along with Canada and Australia and the Scandinavian nations in the annual UN World Happiness reports.

So please do tell about how you think the US is 'exceptional'...? It isn't the happiest, it isn't the least corrupt, it isn't the greatest land mass, it isn't the most populous or the densest or most sparsely populated, it isn't the most religious, it isn't the oldest or the youngest, it doesn't have the most or least rights for its people, it currently happens to have the biggest military but that was far from true earlier in its history, it currently has the biggest economy (though not if the comparable EU is included) but that was also far from true earlier in its history, it is vastly far from the only country to have a constitution and IMO has a very out of date constitution that urgently needs replacing, it is far from the only country to have a democracy (and IMO it's level of democracy is questionable - NZ, Australia, Canada, and the Scandinavian countries are ranked significantly ahead on the Democracy Index)... etc.

Overall I would say it's a decent country with a lot of issues, but I wouldn't say it makes the top ten for overall best country in the world (I would tend to rank it around 20th). I am certainly hard pressed to imagine how you'd claim it was exceptional.

You're close. The USA ranks 19th on the Human Development Index (Australia is 3rd). And NZ at 8th tops Australia in the UN Happiness Index with Australia ranking 10th.

https://edition.cnn.com/travel/artic...018/index.html