• 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!

RED WAVE? Poll Shows Republicans Could Pick Up 9 Senate Seats

Rogue Valley said:
Midterms have hardly ever been kind to the sitting presidents party. Particularly a president with such historically bad approval numbers.

Trumps economy is nowhere near the 4+% of GDP that he predicted. Middle America will remember GOP tax cuts for the wealthy. A recession cannot be avoided.

They'll also remember the GOPs horrific healthcare legislation, threatened tariffs, and deficit/debt numbers that will balloon.

They are also aware (particularly the 25% senior vote) of GOP stated threats to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

They'll also remember GOP silence on Trumps attacks on our intelligence community, the FBI, the media, and Gold Star families.

And who can forget Trumps love of dictators, of Putin/Russia, the Russian collusion investigation, Roy Moore, and unprotected sex with prostitutes.

Perhaps most damaging of all, the Congressional GOP has surrendered its integrity and has totally ignored multiple administration scandals.
Click to expand...

All good points, except the usual lie,

And who can forget Trumps love of dictators,

I don't think that it is beyond any USian to conveniently forget the USA's love of dictators when it comes to voting for their lily white prez.
 
Born Free said:
Yea, OK the rich have to pay for it. With liberals it's always the rich you go after to pay for everything, for all the rest it's free. Forgot you get a government job if you want it, no questions asked, just show up and stand around the rich will pay you.
Click to expand...

Meme city, USA!!
 
jimbo said:
Irrelevant to this thread or my post.
Click to expand...

Hardly. Your response simply illustrates how conservatives think they have the right to control the speech in their alternate realities.
 
Lovebug said:
Don't gloat, the results aren't in. Even then, don't gloat. First and foremost we should cheer what is good for this country, not how many Rs or Ds win, nor should anyone, on either side, snicker and point.
I am paying attention to those who distance themselves from Pelosi and the likes. It seems they are reading the writing on the wall and not all hope is lost.
Click to expand...

What specifically is it about Nancy that you hate?
 
Kal'Stang said:
If you really think that there's going to be 9 wins and no losses for conservatives then you're letting partisanship blind ya. History shows that democrats will more than likely gain ground this election season.
Click to expand...

The democrats may make gains in the House though I think they will end up with net losses in the Senate. They just have too many vulnerable seats at play.
 
Born Free said:
Yea, OK the rich have to pay for it. With liberals it's always the rich you go after to pay for everything, for all the rest it's free. Forgot you get a government job if you want it, no questions asked, just show up and stand around the rich will pay you.
Click to expand...

Your point collides with the Federal Reserve 2016 wealth distribution report informing us
that 297 million people own only 22.6 percent of U..S. wealth in private hands and 33 million
own 77.4 percent and that crisis level wealth distribution imbalance was ignored in fashioning
the recently legislated wealthcentric and corporate tax relief. Since the wealthiest 33 million
also own 80 percent of the stock shares and bonds which represent segments of ownership of
the corporations enjoying recent tax relief, at least 77.4 percent of new tax relief is enjoyed by
these 33 million and not by the 297 million who own only 22.6 of U.S. assets.

The purpose of one man one vote is to maintain tax policy that results in adequate revenue to
meet the taxing entitiy's obligations and discourage acute wealth imbalance. Your opinion
supports neither of those goals, from any data driven standpoint.
 
Last edited:
Born Free said:
Yea, OK the rich have to pay for it. With liberals it's always the rich you go after to pay for everything, for all the rest it's free. Forgot you get a government job if you want it, no questions asked, just show up and stand around the rich will pay you.
Click to expand...

:lamo

I thought I'd get tired of the kneejerk reactions by now, but they're still entertaining. So how exactly do you think healthcare is made affordable to employees currently? You think employer provided healthcare is free? Without this benefit healthcare would be unaffordable to many, so the private sector is already paying a massive amount toward an inefficient system. The origins of employer provided healthcare was for companies to compete for employees by offering these kind of perks. In that same spirit, one can argue that what is being funded for healthcare, education etc. is for the private sector to invest in the country's people which ultimately benefits them in the form of a healthy, educated workforce. In the current "dog eat dog" paradigm, the profit model is used to profit from these services which of course makes it exploitative versus it being an investment. If healthcare is unaffordable to many then the workforce suffers. If education means scores of people saddled with debt right after they graduate college then that affects the economy in other ways. All of these things are paid for in one form or another, the question is deciding on what the most efficient way.
 
ElChupacabra said:
Sure, but they're not out there making that statement effectively. I don't know if they're going to start ramping up soon, but it's been pretty quiet and the clock is ticking.
Click to expand...

Actually, they are making the statements, and effectively. However, it is not being reported much, since in the current environment if it does not involve porn stars, nukes, or Trumps outrage for the week, it is mostly not a top story. It is also early in the process, so there are not alot of ads yet, not alot of emphasis on the campaigns and campaigning.

By the way, your username makes me think of this:

 
Redress said:
Actually, they are making the statements, and effectively. However, it is not being reported much, since in the current environment if it does not involve porn stars, nukes, or Trumps outrage for the week, it is mostly not a top story. It is also early in the process, so there are not alot of ads yet, not alot of emphasis on the campaigns and campaigning.

By the way, your username makes me think of this:

Click to expand...


Sigh. The Japanese never get it right.
 
ElChupacabra said:
Sigh. The Japanese never get it right.
Click to expand...

That is actually the point. Hard to explain in a couple sentences though, but it is not supposed to be accurate. I strongly recommend Sakura Quest(the show the clip is from).
 
post said:
Your point collides with the Federal Reserve 2016 wealth distribution report informing us
that 297 million people own only 22.6 percent of U..S. wealth in private hands and 33 million
own 77.4 percent and that crisis level wealth distribution imbalance was ignored in fashioning
the recently legislated wealthcentric and corporate tax relief. Since the wealthiest 33 million
also own 80 percent of the stock shares and bonds which represent segments of ownership of
the corporations enjoying recent tax relief, at least 77.4 percent of new tax relief is enjoyed by
these 33 million and not by the 297 million who own only 22.6 of U.S. assets.

The purpose of one man one vote is to maintain tax policy that results in adequate revenue to
meet the taxing entitiy's obligations and discourage acute wealth imbalance. Your opinion
supports neither of those goals, from any data driven standpoint.
Click to expand...

You need to bitch to congress, we don't have a one man, one vote system.

Further under your beloved Obama for 8 years the wealth gap between the rich and middle class widened under his watch. Maybe you forgot.
 
ElChupacabra said:
:lamo

I thought I'd get tired of the kneejerk reactions by now, but they're still entertaining. So how exactly do you think healthcare is made affordable to employees currently? You think employer provided healthcare is free? Without this benefit healthcare would be unaffordable to many, so the private sector is already paying a massive amount toward an inefficient system. The origins of employer provided healthcare was for companies to compete for employees by offering these kind of perks. In that same spirit, one can argue that what is being funded for healthcare, education etc. is for the private sector to invest in the country's people which ultimately benefits them in the form of a healthy, educated workforce. In the current "dog eat dog" paradigm, the profit model is used to profit from these services which of course makes it exploitative versus it being an investment. If healthcare is unaffordable to many then the workforce suffers. If education means scores of people saddled with debt right after they graduate college then that affects the economy in other ways. All of these things are paid for in one form or another, the question is deciding on what the most efficient way.
Click to expand...

You can continue to keep adding freebies until the cows come home, but the truth is we're over 20 trillion in debt and you can keep pulling money from the rich until you take it all. Then what. Further it was your beloved Obama that increased our national debt by 10 trillion in just 8 yrs more than all the presidents before him combined.
 
Born Free said:
You can continue to keep adding freebies until the cows come home, but the truth is we're over 20 trillion in debt and you can keep pulling money from the rich until you take it all. Then what. Further it was your beloved Obama that increased our national debt by 10 trillion in just 8 yrs more than all the presidents before him combined.
Click to expand...

So you care about deficits now; no objection to the latest one? When it pays for itself you can tell me you told me so, until then it's vaporware. "My beloved Obama" :lamo It is funny that your thinking is limited to binary mode. I don't worship or glorify leaders, and since they're as flawed as anyone else, we should always be critical of what they do regardless of whether we agree with their agenda or not. Blind support of anyone isn't something rational thinkers do. Again, nothing is free so the question is how do we pay for it as a collective; the intention being investing in the country's people which of course is a huge resource. You may advocate for people sorting themselves out, but those who can't then become a drain on the country through having to subsidize their food etc. I'd much rather pay to make sure people have the ability to become productive than paying for their safety net. Some folks like to talk about investing in the US, but it's always about things and not its people.
 
Born Free said:
You need to bitch to congress, we don't have a one man, one vote system.
Click to expand...

Oligarchies rarely do, and when they do it's all just for show.

Further under your beloved Obama for 8 years the wealth gap between the rich and middle class widened under his watch. Maybe you forgot.
Click to expand...

More likely, you've remembered your Fox, Breitbart, other wacko right wing sites' memes.

In a report released Friday, the president’s Council of Economic Advisers argued that the Obama administration’s policies on taxes, health care and other issues were responsible for “a historic achievement in reducing inequality.”

“Everyone talks about income inequality these days,” CEA Chairman Jason Furman, one of the president’s top economic advisers, wrote in an op-ed article accompanying the report’s release. “President Obama has actually done something about it.”

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-income-gap-began-to-narrow-under-obama/
Click to expand...
 
FINGERS CROSSED, but seriously guys, please, we need to actually get out and vote instead of making chit chat!
 
Born Free said:
You can continue to keep adding freebies until the cows come home, but the truth is we're over 20 trillion in debt and you can keep pulling money from the rich until you take it all. Then what. Further it was your beloved Obama that increased our national debt by 10 trillion in just 8 yrs more than all the presidents before him combined.
Click to expand...

The concern you express make no sense, (opposite where reality indicates they ought to be.) so why do you do it? A year ago, privately held U.S. assets were reported as $94.8 trillion.
3,300,000 Americans own 38.6 percent of that total, $36.6 trillion, an amount nearly twice the national debt total.
29,700,000 Americans own 38.5 percent of that total, $36.5 trillion.
297,000,000 Americans own the remainder, $21.7 trillion.

Republican presidential administrations have mismanaged the tax vs spend dynamic and democratic administrations have predictably reversed the republican debt acceleration.

US Household Wealth Ticks Up $2.3 Trillion to $94.8T - But This Is ...
https://www.forbes.com/.../us-household-wealth-ticks-up-2-3-trillion-to-94-8t-but-this...
Jun 8, 2017 - The Federal Reserve has issued its usual report upon changes in US household wealth, showing a small rise of $2.3T to a total of $94.8 trillion. As long as we understand what this number is it's fine, just fine, it's the measure of net financial assets held by US households. But if we want to try to use it as a ...
Click to expand...

https://www.federalreserve.gov/publ...s-in-us-family-finances-from-2013-to-2016.htm
FederalReserveWealthDistribution2016.jpg


post said:
Since Presidents TR and Taft, that is, since March, 1913, what has voting and supporting republican presidential and house and U.S. senate candidates
resulted in, related to promoting the general welfare? I cannot think of anything, but I believe I am asking a reasonable question and would
prefer to be persuaded there have been some republican positive accomplishments/results I may have missed.

I am asking whether history indicates voting in republican governance in Washington, DC has ever actually been worth the bother?
For starters, fiscally, the answer is NO.

There are still 4 months and 20 days remaining in the current fiscal year....and the debt increase, so far this first fiscal year under VOTUS Trump?
https://www.debatepolitics.com/gene...a-collusion-witch-hunt-13.html#post1068394133
09/29/17 ($20,244,900,016,053) thru 05/03/18 ($21,033,707,724,786) = $788 billion, since last October 1, about $112 billion monthly debt increase, vs. $56 billion monthly increase in last Obama admin. fiscal year.

https://www.debatepolitics.com/gene...a-collusion-witch-hunt-12.html#post1068394082
09/30/81: Last day of last Carter fiscal year. National debt: $997 billion (Debt increase, final year (1980-81): $90 billion)
09/28/89: Last day of last Reagan fiscal year. National debt: $2,857 billion (Debt increase, final year (1988-89): $255 billion)
09/30/93: Last day of last GHW Bush fiscal year. National debt: $4,411 billion (Debt increase, final year (1992-93): $347 billion)
09/30/01: Last day of last Clinton fiscal year. National debt: $5,807 billion (Debt increase, final year (2000-01): $133 billion)
09/30/09: Last day of last GW Bush fiscal year. National debt: $11,909 billion (Debt increase, final year (2008-9): $1,988 billion)
09/29/17: Last day of last Obama fiscal year. National debt: $20,244 billion (Debt increase, final year (2016-17): $671 billion)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Born Free said:
You need to bitch to congress, we don't have a one man, one vote system.

Further under your beloved Obama for 8 years the wealth gap between the rich and middle class widened under his watch. Maybe you forgot.
Click to expand...
So Obama didn’t soak the rich, eh?
 
I am offering 10:1 odds in forum donations that the GOP will not have a supermajority after 2018. Is OP brave enough to take it?
 
zimmer said:
PROJECTILE VOMIT ALERT!!!​


ROTFLOL... 25 senate seats up for grabs.

The Document the above is based upon:


I guess Russian Collusion... errr... Obstruction... errr... Mueller’s Kangaroo Court... isn’t working out as planned.

Thanks Hillary.

Thanks Schiff.

Thanks Comey.

Thanks Mueller.

Thanks Strzok.

Thanks Paige... Page.

Thanks McCabe.

Thanks Ohr... Mr & Ms.

Thanks Rosenstein.
###

PS. 9-wins and no loses = Super Majority.
Click to expand...

Lol.

Good times.
 
zimmer said:
PROJECTILE VOMIT ALERT!!!​


ROTFLOL... 25 senate seats up for grabs.

The Document the above is based upon:


I guess Russian Collusion... errr... Obstruction... errr... Mueller’s Kangaroo Court... isn’t working out as planned.

Thanks Hillary.

Thanks Schiff.

Thanks Comey.

Thanks Mueller.

Thanks Strzok.

Thanks Paige... Page.

Thanks McCabe.

Thanks Ohr... Mr & Ms.

Thanks Rosenstein.
###

PS. 9-wins and no loses = Super Majority.
Click to expand...

Fascinating! Of course, this defies every election result we have had since 2016, which consistently show a pronounced and significant swing from red to blue; it defies American history, which shows the party of the POTUS losing large in interim elections; it defies substantially all polls; and it simply defies common sense....and, of course, we are discussing something in non-MSM, so of course its going to be a bit off-the-wall. Yes, this is a very interesting fantasy.

Next round is on me....
 
post said:
The concern you express make no sense, (opposite where reality indicates they ought to be.) so why do you do it? A year ago, privately held U.S. assets were reported as $94.8 trillion.
3,300,000 Americans own 38.6 percent of that total, $36.6 trillion, an amount nearly twice the national debt total.
29,700,000 Americans own 38.5 percent of that total, $36.5 trillion.
297,000,000 Americans own the remainder, $21.7 trillion.

Republican presidential administrations have mismanaged the tax vs spend dynamic and democratic administrations have predictably reversed the republican debt acceleration.



https://www.federalreserve.gov/publ...s-in-us-family-finances-from-2013-to-2016.htm
FederalReserveWealthDistribution2016.jpg
Click to expand...

Reagan almost tripled the national debt.

So did W.

Obama saved us from the ultimate recession and he never got close to what Reagan and W did. In fact, in the end, annual budget shortfalls were much smaller than they were when he took office.

Carter' s worst deficit was approx 60 billion. Clinton ran multiple budget surpluses.

Democrats are better stewards of the nation's finances than Republicans.

Thanks for listening.
 
zimmer said:
PS. 9-wins and no loses = Super Majority.
Click to expand...

A couple of notes from FiveThirtyEight.com:

1. "Morning Consult" is a consistently right-skewed poll.
2. "Morning Consult" is an online-only poll...and online polls are notoriously inaccurate.

In other words, you saw something that told you what you wanted to hear, and so you desperately wanted to believe it. But in the real world, there's a very, very good reason why so many Republicans in Congress are retiring or simply choosing not to run for reelection - they know a blue wave when they see it...because that's what's been happening with the great majority of the special elections across the country, even in very red districts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom