Karl`s PC Help Forums Last active: Never
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

In memory of Karl Davis, founder of this board, who made his final journey 12th June 2007

Post Reply
Who Can Post? All users can post new topics and all users can reply.
Username   Need to register?
Password:   Forgot password?
Subject: (optional)
Icon: [*]
Formatting Mode:
Normal
Advanced
Help

Insert Bold text Insert Italicised text Insert Underlined text Insert Centered text Insert a Hyperlink Insert E-mail Hyperlink Insert an Image Insert Code Formatted text Insert Quoted text Insert List
Message:
HTML is Off
Smilies are On
BB Code is On
[img] Code is On
:) :( :D ;)
:cool: :o shocked_yellow :P
confused2 smokin: waveysmiley waggyfinger
brshteeth nananana lips_sealed kewl_glasses
Show All Smilies

Disable Smilies?
Use signature?
Turn BBCode off?
Receive email on reply?
The file size of the attachment must be under 200K.
Do not preview if you have attached an image.
Attachment:
    

Topic Review
scholar

[*] posted on 17-11-2014 at 12:02
Quote:
Originally posted by delanti
I don't believe either party won or lost.waveysmiley

The Republicans won 8 seats in the Senate, which the Democrats lost. The Republicans won 12 more seats in the House, which the Democrat party who had formerly held them lost. The Republicans picked up two governorships from the Democrats.

How is it that the Republican party didn't win, and the Democrat party didn't lose?
confused2
confused2
delanti

[*] posted on 16-11-2014 at 17:04
I don't believe either party won or lost. I think the American people spoke with one voice that partisan politics need to go and Congress and the President need to start listening to what the voters want. While money may buy a lot of advertizing I find it hard to believe that it really influences peoples votes. To believe that you would have to believe every voter dropped out of school in the 5th grade. I would never vote for one candidate over another based on the garbage ads I have seen on TV. waveysmiley
marymary100

[*] posted on 14-11-2014 at 21:03
Yes, but in the index of ignorance America comes second only to Italy.
scholar

[*] posted on 14-11-2014 at 12:04
Quote:
Originally posted by Redwolf5150
[badimg]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a224/redwolf5150/Whywelost_zpsaadc4917.jpg[/bad img]

Obama's own economic advisers reviewed his stimulus plan's effectiveness and reported the country would have recovered more quickly without it.

Obama's policies delayed and diminished the recovery. He cannot rightly take credit for something he hampered.

And, those who voted have shown they understand this, by putting so many who voted for his policies out of office.
scholar

[*] posted on 14-11-2014 at 02:25
Quote:
Originally posted by Redwolf5150
Quote:
Originally posted by scholar
Walker did win in Wisconsin, and he did win in spite of the union money spent against him.

You're not going to falsely say that union money was not spent against him, are you?

When individuals choose to use their money to support candidates, that is freedom. But, when unions take dues from their members and spend the money to support candidates which some of their members dislike, or to attack candidates their members prefer--how fair is that?


The union money paled in comparison to what the millionaires and billionaires gave him.

You want to argue against unions, start another thread.

I'm not arguing against unions. I'm saying it is unfair for unions to use money from union dues of members to promote or oppose candidates against the wishes of some of the members paying the dues. Hypothetically: if you were a member of a union that spent money in support of Romney in the last presidential election, how would you like it?
Redwolf5150

[*] posted on 12-11-2014 at 03:34
Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
You're going to reap just what you sow.


Yup, when the GOP is done ripping out the rest of the social safety net that has caught Scholar a few times already, he will be singing a different tune when he needs it again.

Or is he praying that religious organizations alone will pick up the slack?

Fat chance, there.
marymary100

[*] posted on 10-11-2014 at 06:52
You're going to reap just what you sow.
Redwolf5150

[*] posted on 10-11-2014 at 02:20
[badimg]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a224/redwolf5150/Whywelost_zpsaadc4917.jpg[/bad img]
Redwolf5150

[*] posted on 10-11-2014 at 01:16
Quote:
Originally posted by scholar
Walker did win in Wisconsin, and he did win in spite of the union money spent against him.

You're not going to falsely say that union money was not spent against him, are you?

When individuals choose to use their money to support candidates, that is freedom. But, when unions take dues from their members and spend the money to support candidates which some of their members dislike, or to attack candidates their members prefer--how fair is that?


The union money paled in comparison to what the millionaires and billionaires gave him.

You want to argue against unions, start another thread.
scholar

[*] posted on 10-11-2014 at 00:23
Walker did win in Wisconsin, and he did win in spite of the union money spent against him.

You're not going to falsely say that union money was not spent against him, are you?

When individuals choose to use their money to support candidates, that is freedom. But, when unions take dues from their members and spend the money to support candidates which some of their members dislike, or to attack candidates their members prefer--how fair is that?
Redwolf5150

[*] posted on 10-11-2014 at 00:02
Quote:
Originally posted by scholar

Republican Scott Walker won in Wisconsin, in spite of the union money spent against him.


You mean he won because of the MILLIONS The Koch Brothers and other millionaires poured into the race through Political Action Committees. Walker outspent Burke by like 10-1 in advertising, most of it paid for by "dark money."

I've said before and I'm saying it now. You know NOTHING about how the political system works in this state. Kindly quit offering half arsed, unintelligent regurgitation of what you hear on Conservative talk radio and FAUX News.

It makes you look like an idiot.
Redwolf5150

[*] posted on 9-11-2014 at 21:18
[badimg]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a224/redwolf5150/Highestbidder_zpsbb6297ba.jpg[/bad img]
scholar

[*] posted on 9-11-2014 at 21:10
Republicans did well in the elections last week, picking up enough seats from Democrats to win the majority (and therefore control) of the Senate. They also picked up enough seats in the House of Representatives to now have 60 more votes than Democrats. And, with respect to executive leadership, the Republicans have 31 state governors, to the 17 held by Democrats.
These results are as reported by Real Clear Politics, which lists some plurality run-offs as if the leader will get the seat, if the lead is large enough
Here is another article by a writer happy with the victories

Republicans won in states normally held by Democrats--like the governorships in Maryland and Illinois.

Republican Scott Walker won in Wisconsin, in spite of the union money spent against him.

One consolation to Democrats--they held on to a Senate seat in Virginia that turned out to be a very close race.