• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Specter rejected by Pa. Dems in bid for 6th term

Bassman said:
so would you relegate the entire country to the same crappy conditions that have enslaved my home city of Buffalo?? Because that is what will happen with permanent Democrat rule!
Click to expand...

The nation is not a city.
 
Bassman said:
Doesn't matter. You Liberals don't give a rat's ass about the private sector. The more people on welfare the better, seems to be the goal of all Democrats.
Click to expand...

None of that is true.
 
Bassman said:
So you would make everyone prisoners in crappy cities like Detroit, Buffalo, boston, LA, NYC and so forth??
Click to expand...

That just shows Democrats are better at handling larger populations. There may be some bad cities handled by Democratic mayors or the like but the worst states are ruined ,I mean ran, by Republicans.
 
pro-bipartisan said:
That just shows Democrats are better at handling larger populations. There may be some bad cities handled by Democratic mayors or the like but the worst states are ruined ,I mean ran, by Republicans.
Click to expand...

Actually it shows selective data. Pick big cities doing bad now that are democratic, use them to prove that democrats are bad.
 
Bassman said:
Really?? Who is it that opposes any welfare reform?? Democrats and Republicans, depends on what kind.
Who is it who wants to punish successful producers?? No one
Who is it with a neverending desire to expanding government?? Democrats! So Bush was a Democrat?
Click to expand...

Here, I fixed it for you.
 
Redress said:
Actually it shows selective data. Pick big cities doing bad now that are democratic, use them to prove that democrats are bad.
Click to expand...

Selective? How is the averge income selective? I don't know about you but I would prefer the party who runs more prosperous states.
 
pro-bipartisan said:
Selective? How is the averge income selective? I don't know about you but I would prefer the party who runs more prosperous states.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the idea that a few cities in bad shape now represent an indication that democrats run smaller groups less well. You could pick a bunch of republican run cities that are not doing well now as well to prove that republicans do not run cities well. Using your data, they do not run states any better.

Edit: also, it confuses cause and effect. Many industrial cities are democratic, since the working class has historically tended to be democratic, and industrial cities have been hit especially hard by the recession. The cause is not that they are democratic led, but that they are manufacturing bases.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
I was referring to the idea that a few cities in bad shape now represent an indication that democrats run smaller groups less well. You could pick a bunch of republican run cities that are not doing well now as well to prove that republicans do not run cities well. Using your data, they do not run states any better.
Click to expand...

I'm not picking some poorly run states, I picked the worst states in the United States, who are run by Republican governors. it's not selective when nothing is worse.
 
pro-bipartisan said:
I'm not picking some poorly run states, I picked the worst states in the United States, who are run by Republican governors. it's not selective when nothing is worse.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am not complaining about your data, but about Bassman's concept. I was trying to expand on what you where saying, not disagreeing with it. Doing a poor job of it apparently, sorry.
 
for those who like trends (and who doesn't?):

Obama Approval Index History - Rasmussen Reports

for the record, rasmussen, founder of espn, was found by fordham to be the most accurate pollster in the nation in november 08

it's emprical, you'd have to argue with arabic numerals

(arguments are for girls, anyway)

scott said 52-46, america said 53-46 sixteen miserable months ago

plus the first exec producer of sportscenter was remarkably stable, steady, he had the numbers right for weeks

furthermore, mr rasmussen nailed 04, bush/kerry, once again best in the land

the pollster who's banned from msnbc predicted, 50.2-48.5

the actual tally turned out, 50.7-48.3

in 06 senate races, he got 24 of 25 right, missing ms mccaskill in mri

Election 2006: Final Senate Results - Rasmussen Reports

in 25 predictions he averaged 3.5% difference from actuality

in 17 of them he came within 3, eleven times off by 2 or less

it is what it is

someone was talking about trends

if this one continues obama will be at MINUS A HUNDRED AND TWENTY by midsummer
 
Last edited:
Bassman said:
So you would make everyone prisoners in crappy cities like Detroit, Buffalo, boston, LA, NYC and so forth??
Click to expand...

you forgot the king of corruption, chicago, city of big shoulders

ask blago, burris, giannoulias, cohen...

how 'bout new york---patterson, rangel, massa, spitzer, hevesi...

it is what it is

filthy
 
Specter is just another spineless politician who would vote for anything if it met boosting his poll numbers (a lot even for a politician). The man said that the GOP left him. If that was true, I could've respected his decision, but Arlen was pretty quick to go in line with his former rivals. I'd rather have Toomey or Sestak. The Commonwealth is better off without him in office.
 
The Prof said:
you forgot the king of corruption, chicago, city of big shoulders

ask blago, burris, giannoulias, cohen...

how 'bout new york---patterson, rangel, massa, spitzer, hevesi...

it is what it is

filthy
Click to expand...
Or how about That Son-of-a-Cuomo Andrew??
 
Ill post the same thing here i posted in a similar thread

"Yeah Im not getting the Righties joy in Specter being gone. I mean in reality what that does is now make way for a guy to beat them that is even more left than Specter? Not saying im for this one way or another just saying i dont see what the point is?


I guess maybe its good they lost a foe that has a name but it only opens up the door to still lose to someone even less on your side?

Of course if Sestak loses then I guess all is good but that hasnt happened yet?
Its like they dont get if Sestak wins then they lose even bigger then if specter would have stayed and won?

I guess when news is bad you turn anything into good news you can.
 
a lot of folks on my side don't really care who won the dem primary in pennsyvlania

but obama sure does

cuz he LOVES benedict arlen
 
The Prof said:
a lot of folks on my side don't really care who won the dem primary in pennsyvlania

but obama sure does

cuz he LOVES benedict arlen
Click to expand...

really?
its possible but i just think he reached out to him cause he switched parties, and he wanted to show support I dont think he really loved him in any great fashion, he used to vote dem a lot anyway

also not sure this would bother Obama, i mean people not on obama side cry he is so far left and Sestack is further left than arlen so im not seeing him caring to much
 
The Prof said:
RealClearPolitics - Video - Obama In Radio Ad: "I Love Arlen Specter"

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Obama stars in new Specter ad - Blogs from CNN.com

Democrats weigh value of an Obama endorsement - Yahoo! News

Sen. Arlen Specter's primary loss continues bad 2010 for President Obama, Democrats
Click to expand...

all "pretty" stories but if sestak wins again its meaningless LMAO

theres still no real logic behind celebrating specters loss until sestak loses also, its not rocket science

its like this a guy reps didnt like and was 5 on the lefty scale lost to a guy who is a 9. So why would righties be happy about now maybe having there issues decided by a person who is a 9 even FURTHER from their views over a 5 regardless if obama supported the 5? LMAO

im looking for logic behind the "good news" sounds like fluff to me because quite frankly it is
 
why celebrate specter's loss?

obama, tho, is crying over it

cuz, like he said---LOVE

and, as ap put it, he's 0 for 4

congrats, admiral!

good luck in november

you might want to take a hint from mr critz, y'know, in the general

OPPOSE HEALTH CARE!
 
The Prof said:
why celebrate specter's loss?

obama, tho, is crying over it

cuz, like he said---LOVE

and, as ap put it, he's 0 for 4

congrats, admiral!

good luck in november

you might want to take a hint from mr critz, y'know, in the general

OPPOSE HEALTH CARE!
Click to expand...

obama is crying over it? LMAO

ok so we agree its just empty hope right now and fluff to help people feel better but in the end it could change absolutely nothing or possible get worse per their perspectives, ok great LOL

ill wait to theres something REAL to celebrate instead of fantasy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom