Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Politics

Journal pudge's Journal: Wrapup 49

Journal by pudge

It isn't completely over yet, but it looks like it. (This just in: Kerry just now conceded.)

And all the Democrats I know are just making excuses. It's the media's fault, they were unfair. It's Bush's fault, he lied. It's the people's fault, they are stupid for believing the lies, or don't know what is in theirs or the country's best interests.

It's like they are all Yankees fans, trying to explain away how they got beat by the Red Sox. You lost, fair and square. The quicker you own up to that fact, the quicker you can try to fix your obviously broken party. And let me offer you a suggestion: the people of this country don't like your values, and you need to do something about it. And yes, that includes gay marriage and unrestricted abortion, and it includes your view of the Middle East.

And it's not that people are stupid: on the contrary, they are far smarter than you give them credit for, because despite your attempts to cover up your party's far left values, they saw right through it.

I hope the Democrats die because of this. Just like the Republican party of the 1850s, which arose from the ashes of the dominant parties ignoring the key concerns of a great number of people, I hope a new party is formed that is socially moderate and fiscally conservative, like the Democrats used to be. Not that the Republican party doesn't have problems of its own, but there's overwhelming agreement on its platform (if only they would govern according to it!).

In Washington, it looks like the GOP gained the Attorney General as it seemed we would, and the governor's race is just tied, which is far better than any in the media thought the GOP would do. Rossi is leading the Democrat Gregoire by 1,000 votes out of 1.9 million, with over 2/3 of the precincts in. We won't know this one for awhile.

And finally, you may thank me for the GOP victory. All day yesterday I wore my lucky Patriots hat and shirt, that I wore for 21 straight Patriots victories, that I wore for those 8 straight Red Sox victories in the playoffs. I know the Pats lost this past Sunday, because they got blown out in the first half, but guess who wasn't wearing his lucky shirt for the first half of the game?

This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wrapup More

Wrapup

Comments Filter:
  • Just wash that Patriots shit already.
    You got two Super Bowls and a World Series and White House.
    Unless you can get me a new MoBo and CPU, clean it.
    • The shirt gets washed regularly.

      That's why it was not worn in the first half of the game on Sunday. :-(
      • Guess who didn't wear his normal Vikings apparel to the game last Sunday, I feel your pain :(

        (Of course is doesn't help that the Purple just aren't that good).

        I think it's a bit of a stretch to suggest the democratic party needs to disappear because they are out of touch with Americans today. 48% of voting Americans agreed enough with their platform to vote for their guy. That's not a landslide, that's not a mandate. That's one crowd doing the electoral math better than the other crowd.

        The swing in Senat
        • I am not saying it needs to disappear, I am saying it would be better for those it represents if it did.

          And I know they didn't get blown out, but they just keep losing.

          As to mandate, this is pedantic, but the person who wins has a mandate. That's what the word means. I'll stop now. :-)
  • Look at all three of my predictions [slashdot.org]. Pretty spectacular, eh? Got all three right. Looks like the whole 'skins losing at home' was just a fantastic coincidence! :-D
  • Exactly what I was saying over here [slashdot.org], about the republicans anyways...
  • I don't know what Americans really want, but they supported Clinton strongly for eight years. In 2000, Gore won the popular vote. This year, it's a decisive mandate for Bush, but by no means an LBJ-style blowout.

    Nevertheless I share your enthusiasm for the Democratic party to reconstruct and rethink.
    • As to Gore, there is no such thing as a nationwide popular vote in this country. Gore did not win it, because it does not exist for him to win. In order for there to be a meaningful nationwide popular vote, a vote in one state has to mean the same thing as a vote in another state. We know it does not, because in MA people are less likely to vote for President, or more likely to vote a third party, because the Democrats will necessarily win. So you cannot compare a vote in MA to a vote in FL. So you can
  • Democrats stink. And so do Republicans, but they do a much better job of hiding it. They're both open about their platforms - right out there for anyone to see. But take Arnold Schwarzenegger and others like him - very open about their disagreement with parts of the party platform -- but they're still Republican and have their own common ground. You don't see much of that from the Democrats. If 'Compassionate Conservative' was anything more than a label the party would be even larger than it is today.
    • Maybe we'll get the national sales tax implemented. The only group of citizens who I see being hurt are retirees with Roth IRA's since they'll be taxed again when spending their savings. But maybe they'll offer some compensation for that.

      Gahhhhh! Say it isn't so! National sales tax! Of course, may be I am too libertarian to be acepting of that idea. This would kill the competative advantage of states by their ability to set guidelines like having a sales tax and how much.

      I'm not sure how a national s
      • A national sales tax would ideally replace income tax, which is a very libertarian idea, since it gives the taxpayer more power to control what he pays in taxes. Additionally, it would augment, not replace, state income taxes.

        And it affects anything that is income tax deferred etc., because that advantage is lost. The point of such investments is that you don't pay income tax on the gains, but now you don't pay income tax at all, and so you pay more tax on the original investment with a sales tax than yo
        • I see... I thought the idea was in addition to all the already existing taxes... I agree that if it were to replace / phase out the Fed income tax that would be better. And yes I do see how it would affect the IRAs and 401(k)s. But that money would be controlable by the person by what the buy, as opposed to be taking off the top of their income.

          jason
        • The going 'FairTax' proposal includes the repeal of the income tax.

          It has some impact on investments that are tax deferred. Traditional IRA's trade tax savings now for taxes later - but your effective tax rate on distributions is probably lower than when you were young and working. People with traditional IRA's are similar or maybe a little worse off under a sales tax, since they'll be taxed on that money either way -- but there would no longer have to be any penalty for taking the money out early since

  • Oddly the issue that seems to have motivated voters was gay marriage. If it hadn't been an issue then perhaps Kerry would have won. Of course we'll never know, but it certainly didn't help matters for the democrats and it obviously motivated a lot of republicans to get out and vote. Unlike the war in Iraq it was an issue that didn't have to come up this year. Perhaps the MA SJC forced it a bit, but if the activists had just held off for a year Kerry might be headed to the white house right now.

    The dem

    • I remember when the SCOTUS outlawed anti-sodomy laws, and I was thinking, this is good, but if the gay activists push too fast, too far, the rest of the country will push back. I won't criticize their desire to get gay marriage rights, but the way they went about it really hurt them and the Democrat party.

      It's like Lincoln. He said he would not push to abolish slavery, until the country was ready for it. You can't try to push the country farther than it is willing to go. I oppose Constitutional amendme
    • Yeah... I think gay panic brought out the vote.

      Bush won. Good for him, he mobilized his forces and neocons are happy right now. Having won the house and senate and being able to put some judges in place, they don't have any excuses. All the glory and all the crap will lay at their feet.

      Congrats to them, they have a terrific opportunity to make the world a better place.

      Will that happen? I doubt it. My prediction, Look for massive debt (re: the reagan years), more war (re: Lyndon Johnson), and more re
      • Will that happen? I doubt it. My prediction, Look for massive debt (re: the reagan years), more war (re: Lyndon Johnson), and more restrictions of individual liberties (patriot 2 has been in the wings and will most undoubtedly win) and terrible things for the environment.

        I predict decreased debt as the deficit comes down and economic activity continues to get stronger. I predict that Patriot 2 will never happen in its original form, because there is a reason it did not happen in the first place. I predi
        • I predict decreased debt as the deficit comes down

          As long as we are running a deficit we are increase the debt. It might increase slower than it has, but deficit spending leads to debt.

          But I predict that in decades, the Middle East will be drastically transformed for the better, and we will give Bush the credit for it.

          You have higher hopes for the region than I do, though I hope that you are right. In the long term I think that our best bet is to invest in alternative energy sources and get out

          • In the long term I think that our best bet is to invest in alternative energy sources and get out of the middle east.

            That won't help. The Middle East will continue to produce terrorists who continue to kill non-Muslims as long as they are desperate.
            • If we weren't there and left them to themselves then we would be far less involved in their politics and far less of a target. We need to get off oil eventually anyhow, Muslim terrorist provide a great excuse to do it sooner. It would be good for the environment to boot!
            • Oh, I dunno. I can see the disruption in their funding helping us. Though I can see them getting desperate, too, as you say, and while their main money source would be gone (or would it?), they'd still have plenty left for a little while.

              Meanwhile, they're a market, for more than just oil. It wouldn't be like us to pass up a market for regular trade.

              This is tough juju.
        • As I said before, I hope you're right. What I have seen thus far leads me to think that's true, because those things usually happen soon after something happens, not later, and I have seen more dejection than anger, but it's early yet.

          Democrats are decent people too.

  • Rossi hasn't *quite* won :-D

    *going back to incense and burnt offerings*

  • Revenge was so sweet when the Steelers beat the Patriots last Sunday! During the beginning of the season, I was a little skeptical of Big Beg [typepad.com], but those feelings have are long gone. I hope our teams meet again in the playoffs, though. Feel like another upset? :-)

    • The chances of the Steelers beating the Pats again are slight. :-) You better hope we don't make it to the playoffs and meet you. Unless, of course, the Pats injuries keep up ... ugh.

      Speaking of which, screw the Steelers and their damned field. Ty Law has a broken foot because of what a sorry shape it is in.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • All of these claims, without the patronising, are true

      No, none of it is remotely true. The media was not unfairly weighted toward Bush at all. Bush did not lie any more than Kerry, to be kind to Kerry. And the people voted according to their actual and true beliefs, if the exit polls are to be remotely believed.

      Further, had Bush lost, I think you'd be whining exactly the same thing.

      Not remotely true.

      You've already argued the media is biased against the Right.

      When?

      You've already argued that Ke
  • You're wrong about gay marriage, and about the middle east.

    If you don't see it, you're doing something wrong. I won't call it stupid if you don't like the term, but you're wrong, plain and simple. I won't explain myself here, because its your own job to open your eyes.

    I don't care what your interpretation of the results are. I'm not callously hoping your party dies though. Jeez, what a jerk!

    I'm done w/ you.
    • You're wrong about gay marriage, and about the middle east. ... I won't explain myself here, because its your own job to open your eyes.

      All I said is that the majority of people disagree with the values of the Democratic Party. I would think the election results were self-evident proof of that ... if you disagree, it's incumbent upon you to say why.

      I'm not callously hoping your party dies though. Jeez, what a jerk!

      What's callous about it? I am hoping it for the sake of the members of the party, that
      • if you disagree, it's incumbent upon you to say why.

        if you're genuinely interested, you can see the latest post on my own blog (even if it isn't thoroughly discussed). Lately, I haven't been at all impressed w/ your rhetoric. I don't think you have any honest respect for opinions that would be a threat to the party that elected you. It appears that your previous respect was more of a charade.
        • if you're genuinely interested, you can see the latest post on my own blog (even if it isn't thoroughly discussed).

          Ah, so you didn't get it. You think I said gay marriage was wrong. No, I said gay marriage is part of why the Democrats lost. You have issues with reading.

          I don't think you have any honest respect for opinions that would be a threat to the party that elected you.

          I don't think you can read.

          It appears that your previous respect was more of a charade.

          I have no respect for straw man at
          • I said gay marriage is part of why the Democrats lost. You have issues with reading.

            I understood what you wrote, and I agree it was carefully phrased. However, you defend those who have that opinion, and suggest that we switch our platform (apparently, to gain their vote).For example: And let me offer you a suggestion: the people of this country don't like your values, and you need to do something about it. And yes, that includes gay marriage...

            Which of course, is not quite the same as saying "you ne
            • However, you defend those who have that opinion

              I defend people who have the opposite opinion, too (that we should have gay marriage). And I agree with neither opinion!

              and suggest that we switch our platform (apparently, to gain their vote).

              Not per se, no, I didn't. I said to gain their votes, you need to understand they don't like your platform. That doesn't necessarily require changing it, there are other options. Not sure what they are ...

              I don't necessarily think we need to appeal to biggots
              • You attack me for not having "any honest respect for opinions," and you say people who disagree with you are bigots.

                Aaahh, but now you misunderstood me. My claim was that I don't trust you as I used to. I believe, now, that you aren't being fair to differing opinions... that you're serving your platform rather than honest logical discourse. Conversely, I think I could logically defend my claim that people who believe in heterosexual's right to marriage, but not in homosexual's, are bigoted.

                You really
                • I believe, now, that you aren't being fair to differing opinions.

                  And I believe I am being far more fair than you are.

                  Conversely, I think I could logically defend my claim that people who believe in heterosexual's right to marriage, but not in homosexual's, are bigoted.

                  And I could logically defend all the claims I made. Yawn.

                  I fully admit it is a personal distrust.

                  One we know is based in large part on your incorrect interpretation on what I wrote.

Slashdot Top Deals

The University of California Statistics Department; where mean is normal, and deviation standard.

Close