What the "Others" Want

[LeaC]

You'd have to pay me more than a million dollars to get me to live in Texas.

Curious. Most liberals I know live here for far less. Makes me wonder what Starlight thinks Texas is actually like for us common folk.

[carpedm9587]

Robert Francis is so full of himself it's not funny. You'd think the guy was a politician or something.

Robert Francis?

[carpedm9587]

I think your answer is a lot better than Carps. Thanks. And looking at the state legislature, while it is overwhelmingly democratic, there are still a number of republicans there too. I think northern california is still more conservative.

As with most states, rural districts in California are predominantly Republican - and urban districts predominantly Democrat. Suburbs vary. That dynamic is pretty consistent across the country. California, however, has a huge population, most of which is urban...hence the strong blue tint to the state.

Vermont is tiny, but has a similar dynamic. Despite that, we apparently just elected a super Democratic majority to both houses of our legislature, much to the dismay of our Republican governor (who was just re-elected - go figure). This was a solid red state from the dawn of the Republican party in 1854 until 1988. In all those years, only one Democratic president ever won our three electoral votes - Johnson in 1968. In our history, we have had 54 Republican governors and 6 Democrats. But in 1988, the state began to swing to the left. Now it is so blue, we are the favorite vacation spot for smurfs.

Amazing how things can change in a fairly short time...

[Cow Poke]

Robert Francis?

That's Beto's real name - the one that's on the ballot.

[Jedidiah]

Of course...you removed the REST of my post...which explains why the use of hyperbole has changed in the age of Trump.

Was not pertinent to the point I was making.

[carpedm9587]

That's Beto's real name - the one that's on the ballot.

Interesting that "full of yourself" is your response to this person. I have listened to him on multiple occasions, and found myself truly enjoying his straight-but-polite talking. He's the only politician I heard answer some "hot button" questions directly and without dissembling, even when it ran a significant risk of making his very red state occupants unhappy. I'm sure the Beto fan club went to his head to some degree - I'm not sure he would be human if it didn't. But I found him refreshing. If he could get a little experience under his belt, I would consider him a fine presidential candidate - someday. Right now, I think he's a little too green.

His best path may be to run for the other Texas Senate seat in 2020, get a term in the Senate under his belt (assuming he wins), and then run for president in 2024 (maybe too soon) or 2028.

[carpedm9587]

Was not pertinent to the point I was making.

I'm sure. It was, however, the central point in my response. So you basically responded to the generic definition - and not the central point.

[Cow Poke]

Interesting that "full of yourself" is your response to this person. I have listened to him on multiple occasions, and found myself truly enjoying his straight-but-polite talking. He's the only politician I heard answer some "hot button" questions directly and without dissembling, even when it ran a significant risk of making his very red state occupants unhappy. I'm sure the Beto fan club went to his head to some degree - I'm not sure he would be human if it didn't. But I found him refreshing. If he could get a little experience under his belt, I would consider him a fine presidential candidate - someday. Right now, I think he's a little too green.

His best path may be to run for the other Texas Senate seat in 2020, get a term in the Senate under his belt (assuming he wins), and then run for president in 2024 (maybe too soon) or 2028.

You've heard his campaign speeches where he's on his good behavior. I'll try to round up some you-tube video of him being himself. I personally don't think he could stand up to the scrutiny of a serious presidential run.

ETA: But, then again, the world is getting wackier and wackier - he just might be able to pull it off!

[Leonhard]

Check out "Flag of Convenience".

Rich people have loopholes for everything. They ought to be lined up and given a public spanking by all the people from the lower and middle income class.

[Cow Poke]

Rich people have loopholes for everything. They ought to be lined up and given a public spanking by all the people from the lower and middle income class.

The rules really do need to apply equally to all. They do not.

[Starlight]

The rules really do need to apply equally to all. They do not.

Hard to take you seriously when you say this and yet seem to firmly support the political party that exists primarily for the purpose of helping the rich and making sure that the rules don't apply to them.

[Starlight]

I've said this elsewhere, but I would love see the US return to a strict Constitutional Republic with a Federal government no larger than absolutely necessary. National defense, a regulated free-market, and basic infrastructure for the purposes of commerce should be the primary concern of the Feds. Let everything else be the prerogative of state and local governments. That's the broad-strokes version. The particulars are open for debate.

As I look around the world and through history, I can't really see many examples of this working.

In various instances, such as the US itself (civil war etc), attempts to set up a weak central government with powerful state governments have failed reasonably rapidly with the central government ending up taking on more power for itself.

I'm certainly willing to be convinced otherwise, but it seems from the experiences of history that a stronger central government and weaker state governments is simply much more stable in the long term than vice versa. Today, the vast majority of countries have a unitary government without states, and in the vast majority of those that do have states the federal government is substantially more powerful than the state governments.

I suppose you could cite the EU or UN as examples of weak central authorities with strong local governments (i.e. countries)... but there are plenty of problems with both those institutions and I suspect you're not personally a fan of either of them. Possibly Switzerland is the one and only country in the world that actually is an example of what you are wanting where the states are more powerful than the federal government, but I don't know enough about how its government works to say for sure (I do know it's quite fond of direct national ballot initiatives though, which seem contrary to the whole point of splitting a country into states and letting states do as they please).

[Sparko]

Hard to take you seriously when you say this and yet seem to firmly support the political party that exists primarily for the purpose of helping the rich and making sure that the rules don't apply to them.

Hey! CP is not a Democrat!

[carpedm9587]

You've heard his campaign speeches where he's on his good behavior. I'll try to round up some you-tube video of him being himself. I personally don't think he could stand up to the scrutiny of a serious presidential run.

ETA: But, then again, the world is getting wackier and wackier - he just might be able to pull it off!

I would be interested in looking at that video. But I suspect it won't make all that much difference in the long run (well, it might for me - but not for the election process).

If this country can elect a man like Trump...I have to conclude that "things in their background" is no longer a criteria of consequence. After all, we have a president with documented cases of extra-marital affairs, video of claims to sexual abuse, documented cases of racial-bias in his business dealings, extensive examples of outright and repeatedly lying in his statements, grade-school-level name calling, and and the list goes on and on and on. All of them were shrugged off and excused, most notably by evangelicals.

I suspect many (most?) on the left will take the same POV on the next round. This is part of the damage Trump (and his base) have done to our political system that I suspect will never be undone.

[Cow Poke]

Hard to take you seriously when you say this and yet seem to firmly support the political party that exists primarily for the purpose of helping the rich and making sure that the rules don't apply to them.

How can you be so wrong so often? You really blew it on your goofy "CP is so paranoid he has a safe room" babble, and I am disgusted with BOTH parties - which is why I am an independent. You are SUCH a stranger to the truth!