US Politics Thread |OT| THE DARKEST TIMELINE

[Am_I_Anonymous]

Served at a Fed Reserve bank? Can't co-sign that shit.

Still would make a good :ufup2 emote, tho.

(Image removed from quote.)

imo

[Joe Molotov]

Served at a Fed Reserve bank? Can't co-sign that shit.

Still would make a good :ufup2 emote, tho.

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.) imo

Yeah, that one probably works even better.

:ufupleft

[Am_I_Anonymous]

I honestly had to double take, I thought she had a swastika on her neck for a minute.

[Steve Contra]

I honestly had to double take, I thought she had a swastika on her neck for a minute.

#liberalsaretherealracists

[Am_I_Anonymous]

I honestly had to double take, I thought she had a swastika on her neck for a minute.

#liberalsaretherealracists

Only against cacs tho....

[Steve Contra]

I honestly had to double take, I thought she had a swastika on her neck for a minute.

#liberalsaretherealracists

Only against cacs tho....

(Image removed from quote.)

Someone needs to add that emoticon

[Brehvolution]

I honestly had to double take, I thought she had a swastika on her neck for a minute.

#liberalsaretherealracists

Only against cacs tho....

(Image removed from quote.)

Oh my

[Am_I_Anonymous]

I honestly had to double take, I thought she had a swastika on her neck for a minute.

#liberalsaretherealracists

Only against cacs tho....

(Image removed from quote.)

Oh my (Image removed from quote.)

[Human Snorenado]

The SC is not going to overturn subsidies. The plain language of the law makes the federal exchange equivalent.

Like that shit matters to those fucking cunts

[Brehvolution]

I honestly had to double take, I thought she had a swastika on her neck for a minute.

#liberalsaretherealracists

Only against cacs tho....

(Image removed from quote.)

Oh my (Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

[Am_I_Anonymous]

I honestly had to double take, I thought she had a swastika on her neck for a minute.

#liberalsaretherealracists

Only against cacs tho....

(Image removed from quote.)

Oh my (Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

[Steve Contra]

I honestly had to double take, I thought she had a swastika on her neck for a minute.

#liberalsaretherealracists

Only against cacs tho....

(Image removed from quote.)

Oh my (Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

Rick Scott looking more struggle every day :'(

[Phoenix Dark]

The SC is not going to overturn subsidies. The plain language of the law makes the federal exchange equivalent.

The fact that four justices voted to bring  King v. Burwell to the SC tells me that the subsidies are either going to get shitcanned or narrowly survive a 5-4 ruling.
http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/the-supreme-court-will-hear-king-thats-bad-news-for-the-aca/

It's worth noting states can handle this simply by making their own damn sites. But that will cost money, and there will be multiple red states that refuse.

[Human Snorenado]

Scalia, Alito, and Thomas are obviously 3 of the 4 that voted to hear it. I'm guessing Kennedy is the other.

What's interesting is- will Roberts vote to uphold the ACA again? He already said the IRS could levy "taxes" to pay for the subsidies. You could try to extrapolate that to mean that he thought the federal govt. could set up exchanges, but who knows with that fucker.

[Human Snorenado]

Fair and equal representation!

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/chart-why-dems-cant-win-house

[benjipwns]

Ben Carson announced he's going for 2016.

better is how:

Carson, a famous pediatric neurosurgeon and conservative political star, will air a nearly 40 minute-long ad introducing himself to the American people this weekend, an aide to Carson confirms to ABC News.

The documentary titled “A Breath of Fresh Air: A New Prescription for America” will air in 22 states and Washington, DC. The paid video will detail some of his biography and family life, including his rise from being born to a single mother with a poor childhood in Detroit to director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins for almost 40 years, known for his work separating conjoined twins, to potential 2016 presidential candidate.

[benjipwns]

#liberalsaretherealracists

why her name gotta be lynch tho

[Kara]

Fair and equal representation!

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/chart-why-dems-cant-win-house

(Image removed from quote.)

Well we are talking about a political system that by design isn't supposed to be very representative.

[Kara]

"A taxpayer's reason for disagreeing must come within the scope of the tax laws. For example, a taxpayer cannot appeal a case based only on moral, religious, political, constitutional, conscientious, or similar grounds."

The IRS doesn't recognize the Constitution alone.

[Joe Molotov]

"A taxpayer's reason for disagreeing must come within the scope of the tax laws. For example, a taxpayer cannot appeal a case based only on moral, religious, political, constitutional, conscientious, or similar grounds."

The IRS doesn't recognize the Constitution alone.

Alex Jones was right!

[Kara]

The IRS is kinda infamous for not recognizing other branches of the federal government. They even get to decide whether or not they'll "acquiesce" to rulings by tax court.

[Dickie Dee]

lol

[Great Rumbler]

A completely different person.

Also, white.

[Joe Molotov]

But a great point, if it were true.

[Phoenix Dark]

Conservative journalism, ladies and gentlemen. It would take what, 15 minutes to confirm that. I bet the author just did a variety of google searches (Loretta Lynch Muslim, Loretta Lynch race, Loretta Lynch Rezko, etc) until he got a hit with Clinton.

[benjipwns]

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120170/valerie-jarrett-obama-whisperer

Even at this late date in the Obama presidency, there is no surer way to elicit paranoid whispers or armchair psychoanalysis from Democrats than to mention the name Valerie Jarrett. Party operatives, administration officials—they are shocked by her sheer longevity and marvel at her influence. When I asked a longtime source who left the Obama White House years ago for his impressions of Jarrett, he confessed that he was too fearful to speak with me, even off the record.

This is not as irrational as it sounds. Obama has said he consults Jarrett on every major decision, something current and former aides corroborate. “Her role since she has been at the White House is one of the broadest and most expansive roles that I think has ever existed in the West Wing,” says Anita Dunn, Obama’s former communications director. Broader, even, than the role of running the West Wing. This summer, the call to send Attorney General Eric Holder on a risky visit to Ferguson, Missouri, was made by exactly three people: Holder himself, the president, and Jarrett, who were vacationing together on Martha’s Vineyard. When I asked Holder if Denis McDonough, the chief of staff, was part of the conversation, he thought for a moment and said, “He was not there.” (Holder hastened to add that “someone had spoken to him.”)

Jarrett holds a key vote on Cabinet picks (she opposed Larry Summers at Treasury and was among the first Obama aides to come around on Hillary Clinton at State) and has an outsize say on ambassadorships and judgeships. She helps determine who gets invited to the First Lady’s Box for the State of the Union, who attends state dinners and bill-signing ceremonies, and who sits where at any of the above. She has placed friends and former employees in important positions across the administration—“you can be my person over there,” is a common refrain.

And Jarrett has been known to enjoy the perks of high office herself. When administration aides plan “bilats,” the term of art for meetings of two countries’ top officials, they realize that whatever size meeting they negotiate—nine by nine, eight by eight, etc.—our side will typically include one less foreign policy hand, because Jarrett has a standing seat at any table that includes the president.

Not surprisingly, all this influence has won Jarrett legions of detractors. They complain that she has too much control over who sees the president. That she skews his decision-making with her after-hours visits. That she is an incorrigible yes-woman. That she has, in effect, become the chief architect of his very prominent and occasionally suffocating bubble.

There is an element of truth to this critique. While aboard Air Force One at the end of the 2012 campaign, Jarrett turned to Obama and told him, “Mr. President, I don’t understand how you’re not getting eighty-five percent of the vote.” The other Obama aides in the cabin looked around in disbelief before concluding that she’d been earnest.

Noam Scheiber is going to be found in Fort Marcy Park isn't he?

[Great Rumbler]

Don't vote for Ted Cruz for anything ever:

"Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet; the Internet should not operate at the speed of government.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ted-cruz-net-neutrality-obamacare

[Phoenix Dark]

So fucking stupid.


I wonder what Hillary's position on this will be in 1-2 years...

[Phoenix Dark]

Gotta say it's amazing how big democrats fucked up over the last 6 years. They'll still win in 2016 due to demographics, but the fundamentals of the party are busted. Nobody important believes the party is fighting for the common man. The difference between the GOP and democrats is that the GOP would let all the wolves into the sheep herd, whereas democrats will let in a few wolves but keep x amount at bay. So you get a variety of half measures or nothing but lip service.

There's more money in the anti net neutrality game but I'd rather do the right thing, get some money from big donors, and acquire support from voters.

[Am_I_Anonymous]

Y'all crack me up sometimes.

[sarslip]

even hillary's about to lose

[Phoenix Dark]

AiA:

1. you thought Obama was toast after the 2010 elections, didn't you

2. you thought Romney was going to beat Obama, didn't you

[Am_I_Anonymous]

AiA:

1. you thought Obama was toast after the 2010 elections, didn't you

2. you thought Romney was going to beat Obama, didn't you

1) No

2) Hell no, Obama did a good job rustling up the middle class and above white 20 somethings that found it trendy/cool to vote Obama. It was well played.... I knew better.

[Phoenix Dark]

So why do you doubt Hillary Clinton won't be able to do nearly the same thing? She won't excite black and Hispanic votes as much but it won't matter since she'll do better among white voters than Obama. She won't win whites, but she should perform 3-6% better than Obama.

[Am_I_Anonymous]

So why do you doubt Hillary Clinton won't be able to do nearly the same thing? She won't excite black and Hispanic votes as much but it won't matter since she'll do better among white voters than Obama. She won't win whites, but she should perform 3-6% better than Obama.

I believe I already said Hilary will win next election. Then that'll be the end of democrats for 16 years...Cycle repeats......

[Am_I_Anonymous]

The only chance the GOP has in presidential elections is to successfully present female and/or minority candidates that aren't tier, and they can't manage that for the time being.

Maybe when the oldies die out.

After Clinton y'all are hit too. Nobody is waiting in the wings because you guys seem to spend most of your freetime bashing each other.

[Am_I_Anonymous]

Truth is you're extremely lucky to have Clinton as she has a lot of fans and holdovers from Bill. Without her this next election would be 50-50. With her it's clearly 70-30 in your favor.

[Phoenix Dark]

So why do you doubt Hillary Clinton won't be able to do nearly the same thing? She won't excite black and Hispanic votes as much but it won't matter since she'll do better among white voters than Obama. She won't win whites, but she should perform 3-6% better than Obama.

I believe I already said Hilary will win next election. Then that'll be the end of democrats for 16 years...Cycle repeats......

ah my bad breh

I disagree. This is a great website: http://www.270towin.com/

Pick 2004. The problem today for the GOP boils down to demographics. Bush won with 286 EVs thanks to high Hispanic support in NV, CO, and NM. Today all three states have trended blue due to an enormous shift in Hispanic support. Bush out performed the previous GOP performance amongst Hispanics because he supported immigration reform, wasn't a bad Texan governor with respect to Hispanic issues, etc. Since then the party has shifted hard right on those issues.

If you take those three states away, the GOP is left with 267 EVs. Now take away Virginia, which has shifted blue due to an influx of black and Hispanic voters in N VA. Now look at 2012. Obama could have lost Ohio and Florida and still won the presidency. There simply isn't a viable EV path to victory for the current GOP.

Now look further into the future: Georgia's black vote is slowly beginning to catch up. It will be a purple state soon. Demographics could turn Arizona blue as well. Bottom line: the current GOP is fucked, just as democrats were fucked post 1964 due to demographics. It's going to take republicans time to react to this. They'll control the House for the next decade IMO, which means they'll continue to fuck over immigration reform thanks to hardcore conservatives in lily white districts. And the more they do that, the worse they'll do in states that determine the presidency.

Republicans need another financial disaster to win IMO. I thought it was gonna happen in 2012 but the economy improved. I could see another crash happening under Hillary, who will be another corporate dem. The fed is propping up the stock market, capitol is limited, meanwhile investors are once again propping up junk mortgages thanks to the housing rebound...

[Am_I_Anonymous]

So why do you doubt Hillary Clinton won't be able to do nearly the same thing? She won't excite black and Hispanic votes as much but it won't matter since she'll do better among white voters than Obama. She won't win whites, but she should perform 3-6% better than Obama.

I believe I already said Hilary will win next election. Then that'll be the end of democrats for 16 years...Cycle repeats......

ah my bad breh

I disagree. This is a great website: http://www.270towin.com/

Pick 2004. The problem today for the GOP boils down to demographics. Bush won with 286 EVs thanks to high Hispanic support in NV, CO, and NM. Today all three states have trended blue due to an enormous shift in Hispanic support. Bush out performed the previous GOP performance amongst Hispanics because he supported immigration reform, wasn't a bad Texan governor with respect to Hispanic issues, etc. Since then the party has shifted hard right on those issues.

If you take those three states away, the GOP is left with 267 EVs. Now take away Virginia, which has shifted blue due to an influx of black and Hispanic voters in N VA. Now look at 2012. Obama could have lost Ohio and Florida and still won the presidency. There simply isn't a viable EV path to victory for the current GOP.

Now look further into the future: Georgia's black vote is slowly beginning to catch up. It will be a purple state soon. Demographics could turn Arizona blue as well. Bottom line: the current GOP is fucked, just as democrats were fucked post 1964 due to demographics. It's going to take republicans time to react to this. They'll control the House for the next decade IMO, which means they'll continue to fuck over immigration reform thanks to hardcore conservatives in lily white districts. And the more they do that, the worse they'll do in states that determine the presidency.

Republicans need another financial disaster to win IMO. I thought it was gonna happen in 2012 but the economy improved. I could see another crash happening under Hillary, who will be another corporate dem. The fed is propping up the stock market, capitol is limited, meanwhile investors are once again propping up junk mortgages thanks to the housing rebound...

That website doesn't account for the numerous minorities of all sizes that believe that Obama lied to them "I am not the black's President" he said something along those lines...that's gonna hurt.

It also does not take into account the millions of mid 20's votes who can't find APPROPRIATE level work and blame him for it since he said he'd "handle that"

Master's degree kids mowing lawns ain't voting blue.

Hilary will win, but it won't be a landslide....in 2020.....I think she's going to face an uphill battle.

[TakingBackSunday]

AiA:

1. you thought Obama was toast after the 2010 elections, didn't you

2. you thought Romney was going to beat Obama, didn't you

1) No

2) Hell no, Obama did a good job rustling up the middle class and above white 20 somethings that found it trendy/cool to vote Obama. It was well played.... I knew better.

did you now?  Pray tell, what did you know better?

[Himu]

PRE-EMPTIVE REMINDER: I DID NOT VOTE FOR TED CRUZ.

[Brehvolution]

Master's degree kids mowing lawns ain't voting blue.

They are still going to be mowing if demand isn't there. It won't matter who is in office. Unless you feel that the demand is there, but it is being artificially suppressed because there is a dem in the WH.

[Himu]

Lol @ pd wondering Hilary fucking Clinton's views on NET NEUTRALITY.

[Am_I_Anonymous]

Master's degree kids mowing lawns ain't voting blue.

They are still going to be mowing if demand isn't there. It won't matter who is in office. Unless you feel that the demand is there, but it is being artificially suppressed because there is a dem in the WH.

I do indeed.

[Dickie Dee]

Master's degree kids mowing lawns ain't voting blue.

They are still going to be mowing if demand isn't there. It won't matter who is in office. Unless you feel that the demand is there, but it is being artificially suppressed because there is a dem in the WH.

I do indeed.

getthefuckoutyouserious?

Please walk me through if so, np if just trolling tho

[Phoenix Dark]

So why do you doubt Hillary Clinton won't be able to do nearly the same thing? She won't excite black and Hispanic votes as much but it won't matter since she'll do better among white voters than Obama. She won't win whites, but she should perform 3-6% better than Obama.

I believe I already said Hilary will win next election. Then that'll be the end of democrats for 16 years...Cycle repeats......

ah my bad breh

I disagree. This is a great website: http://www.270towin.com/

Pick 2004. The problem today for the GOP boils down to demographics. Bush won with 286 EVs thanks to high Hispanic support in NV, CO, and NM. Today all three states have trended blue due to an enormous shift in Hispanic support. Bush out performed the previous GOP performance amongst Hispanics because he supported immigration reform, wasn't a bad Texan governor with respect to Hispanic issues, etc. Since then the party has shifted hard right on those issues.

If you take those three states away, the GOP is left with 267 EVs. Now take away Virginia, which has shifted blue due to an influx of black and Hispanic voters in N VA. Now look at 2012. Obama could have lost Ohio and Florida and still won the presidency. There simply isn't a viable EV path to victory for the current GOP.

Now look further into the future: Georgia's black vote is slowly beginning to catch up. It will be a purple state soon. Demographics could turn Arizona blue as well. Bottom line: the current GOP is fucked, just as democrats were fucked post 1964 due to demographics. It's going to take republicans time to react to this. They'll control the House for the next decade IMO, which means they'll continue to fuck over immigration reform thanks to hardcore conservatives in lily white districts. And the more they do that, the worse they'll do in states that determine the presidency.

Republicans need another financial disaster to win IMO. I thought it was gonna happen in 2012 but the economy improved. I could see another crash happening under Hillary, who will be another corporate dem. The fed is propping up the stock market, capitol is limited, meanwhile investors are once again propping up junk mortgages thanks to the housing rebound...

That website doesn't account for the numerous minorities of all sizes that believe that Obama lied to them "I am not the black's President" he said something along those lines...that's gonna hurt.

It also does not take into account the millions of mid 20's votes who can't find APPROPRIATE level work and blame him for it since he said he'd "handle that"

Master's degree kids mowing lawns ain't voting blue.

Hilary will win, but it won't be a landslide....in 2020.....I think she's going to face an uphill battle.

dems won the youth vote by 10 points in the midterms despite low turnout ensuring fewer liberals showed up brehs. That group isn't voting for republicans anytime soon.

Black people still support Obama, that won't change unless cheats on Michelle with some fat white chick.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

or will it

[close]

[Phoenix Dark]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bruce-springsteen-conservatives-veterans-fortunate-son

[Joe Molotov]

I don't think you get it PD. To be anti-war is to be anti-America. To hold reservations about any of America's actions is to be anti-America.

But it's also pretty anti-American to hate Bruce Springsteen and John Fogerty, so it's all very confusing.

[TakingBackSunday]

Ok, this article has been posted by all my conservafriends the last few days:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2014/11/10/aca-architect-the-stupidity-of-the-american-voter-led-us-to-hide-obamacares-tax-hikes-and-subsidies-from-the-public/

It's a Forbes article so I really don't think it should be taken without salt.

[Steve Contra]

He basically saying that if Obama had sat down and explained to people how insurance works they wouldn't have gone for it.

[Phoenix Dark]

isn't this the second time he's said some off brand shit about ACA? this dude really needs to shut the fuck up...

[benjipwns]

“In less than a year Jonathan Gruber has gone from being cited [by Obama administration supporters] as an outstanding expert on health reform modeling to being downplayed as ‘a private citizen’ who misspoke,” notes Breitbart.com’s John Sexton. The evidence Sexton cites is striking.

In March, a group of left-leaning “economics scholars,” including Gruber himself, filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case of King v. Sebelius, then under consideration by the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. (Last week the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal of the case, now styled King v. Burwell.) The March brief appealed to Gruber’s authority:

Economist and MIT Professor Jonathan Gruber has developed a sophisticated economic model that allows for a robust prediction of outcomes in the health care system, depending on various policy changes. The Gruber Microsimulation Model (“GMSIM”) utilizes two primary sets of data: (1) Fixed information on individuals, derived from 2011 Current Population Survey data and updated to 2013 and later years; and (2) varying information on policy parameters, which inform the changes in price and eligibility of various forms of insurance. . . . The GMSIM has been cited as one of the leading options for modeling health insurance reforms such as the ACA [the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act].

...

in July, Gruber himself had asserted on multiple occasions that it was Congress’s intention to limit the subsidies to state-established exchanges. In that view, Congress’s intent was to make it so attractive to set up an exchange that no state would refuse.

Last week, the day before Election Day, 18 Democratic state attorneys general, led by Virginia’s Mark Herring, filed a brief with the D.C. Circuit, arguing that the full court should reverse the panel’s decision in Halbig. According to them, Gruber is no authority at all:

The best that Appellants and their amici come up with are YouTube videos of Professor Jonathan Gruber, a private citizen at non-governmental meetings in January 2012, years after the ACA was enacted. But Appellants fail to demonstrate that Professor Gruber’s message was disseminated to the State officials responsible for determining whether to build their own Exchange. In any event, Gruber later corrected himself, calling his earlier statements a mistake.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/09/obamacare-architect-lack-of-transparency-was-key-because-stupidity-of-the-american-voter-would-have-killed-obamacare/

Gruber, speaking on an October 2013 panel at the University of Pennsylvania. Said he:

This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO [Congressional Budget Office] did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. Okay, so it’s written to do that. In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in—you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed. . . . Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical for the thing to pass. . . . Look, I wish Mark [another panelist] was right that we could make it all transparent, but I’d rather have this law than not.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/11/yet-another-video-emerges-of-obamacare-architect-calling-americans-stupid-video/

brief clip in which Gruber asserts “that a part of the ObamaCare [law] passed because ‘the American people are too stupid to understand the difference.’ ” That was part of an October 2013 lecture at Washington University of St. Louis.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/11/gruber-now-accusing-gop-of-trying-to-confuse-people-about-obamacare/

Gruber appeared on WGBH-TV, the PBS station in Boston, where he had this to say about the Halbig and King cases: “I think this comes to the master strategy of the Republican Party, which is to confuse people enough about the law so that they don’t understand the subsidies they’re getting are because of the law.”

Fast and Gruberghazigate is going to bring down this administration.

[TakingBackSunday]

He basically saying that if Obama had sat down and explained to people how insurance works they wouldn't have gone for it.

well, yeah.  It's still better than what we had.

[benjipwns]

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/11/12/internal-memos-detail-davis-campaign-dysfunction/

“The campaign is in disarray and is in danger of being embarrassed,” Cari and Dougherty wrote in a lengthy memorandum on Jan. 6. “The level of dysfunction was understandable in July and August, when we had no infrastructure in place — but it doesn’t seem to be getting better.”

Addressed to then-Campaign Manager Karin Johanson, the memo warned that the Davis campaign had “lurched to the left,” was failing to communicate a positive message and offered virtually nothing to the swing voters the senator would need to win statewide.

“There is not a model where a candidate who appears this liberal and culturally out of touch gets elected statewide anywhere in the south — much less in Texas — without some inoculation,” the consultants said.

...

But the media strategists complained that they and other consultants who had been involved in her past races, and who knew her strengths and background, were being sidelined and had been unable to communicate directly with Davis.

In a telephone interview with the Tribune, Dougherty said she and her business partner wrote the memo in a last-ditch attempt to right a listing campaign ship. She said she often did not know about major campaign developments until she read them in the news.

“Thank God for Google alerts, because I wouldn’t know what was going on this campaign without them,” she said.

...

The Prism consultants concluded that the campaign was either desperately broken or that the hierarchy had decided to portray Davis not as a Texas moderate but rather a “national Democrat, appealing to liberal donors in the mistaken belief that there is a hidden liberal base in Texas that will turn out to vote if they have a liberal candidate to support.”

“Either scenario means that real changes need to be made, and quickly,” they wrote.

...

They wrote that the campaign was failing to portray Davis “like a Texan” and had turned her into a generic Democrat who would only have a chance in a state with a recent history of electing Democrats. The party hasn’t won a statewide election in Texas since 1994.

“Running Wendy Davis as a generic national Democrat is not only the quickest path to 38 percent, it’s also a huge disservice to Wendy, her record and the brand she has built,” they wrote. Davis got 38.9 percent of the vote, compared with the 59.3 percent of voters who cast ballots for Abbott.

Given the national wave that swamped Democrats around the country, including in governor races that Republicans won in traditionally blue states like Maryland and Massachusetts, it’s highly unlikely that any political strategy would have ushered Davis into the Texas Governor’s Mansion.

But Dougherty said it didn’t have to be such a rout.

“It’s possible to lose and still look good,” she said in the phone interview. “Our worry in January was it was setting Wendy up for embarrassment throughout the course of the campaign. I think the way the campaign played out was far, far worse than it should have been.”

[benjipwns]

spoiler (click to show/hide)

gotta wait on the popular vote, I think they might have beat the 1.6%/1.7% records and possibly even cracked 2%

[close]

Unofficial results calculated by the party, Libertarians got 2.2-2.3% of the popular vote!


ronpaulitshappening.gif

[Brehvolution]

He basically saying that if Obama had sat down and explained to people how insurance works they wouldn't have gone for it.

well, yeah.  It's still better than what we had.

Which is also what he said, but that doesn't resonate as much for some reason.

[Am_I_Anonymous]

How are you all explaining away net neutrality?

Just curious if that's for the good of the people.

[Great Rumbler]

With net neutrality:

ISP: Here is your bandwith, which you may use as you please.

Without net neutrality:

ISP: Here's your bandwidth. By the way, we throttled all your favorite websites to a snail's pace because they couldn't afford to pay us.

Obviously, there's a bit more nuance to it than that, but the basic idea is that ISPs, as a provider of utilities, should not have a say in how the end consumer chooses to use that utility. The water company isn't going to throttle my water supply because I use a Kohler sink. The electric company isn't going to throttle my supply of electricity because I use Amana appliances. And that's without getting into the very real possibility that ISPs could use an internet free of net neutrality to strangle websites that they don't like.

[Phoenix Dark]

How are you all explaining away net neutrality?

Just curious if that's for the good of the people.

Seems like an issue most competent, semi tech savvy people can agree on. The internet should exist as it is now - not as a tiered system that allows companies to throttle or block access because you don't buy/use their shit.

Ted Cruz is literally a piece of shit. Alas I think that attack can stick, given how shitty Obama is at discussing things simply for simple Americans. The argument will also probably sound a lot like "if you like your internet you can keep your internet" and lord knows how that worked last time.

[Phoenix Dark]

Source: Obama to announce 10-point immigration plan via exec action as early as next week

EXCLUSIVE: President Obama is planning to unveil a 10-part plan for overhauling U.S. immigration policy via executive action -- including suspending deportations for millions -- as early as next Friday, a source close to the White House told Fox News.

The president's plans were contained in a draft proposal from a U.S. government agency. The source said the plan could be announced as early as Nov. 21, though the date might slip a few days pending final White House approval.

Obama was briefed at the White House by Homeland Security officials before leaving on his Asia-Pacific trip last week, Fox News has learned.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters traveling with Obama in Burma Thursday that the president had not made a final decision on any executive actions concerning immigration and would not announce any until he returned to Washington.

The draft plan, though, contains 10 initiatives that span everything from boosting border security to improving pay for immigration officers.

But the most controversial pertain to the millions who could get a deportation reprieve under what is known as "deferred action."

The plan calls for expanding deferred action for illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children -- but also for the parents of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents.

The latter could allow upwards of 4.5 million illegal immigrant adults with U.S.-born children to stay, according to estimates.

Critics in the Senate say those who receive deferred action, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, receive work authorization in the United States, Social Security numbers and government-issued IDs.

Another portion that is sure to cause consternation among anti-"amnesty" lawmakers is a plan to expand deferred action for young people. In June 2012, Obama created such a program for illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children, entered before June 2007 and were under 31 as of June 2012. The change would expand that to cover anyone who entered before they were 16, and change the cut-off from June 2007 to Jan. 1, 2010. This is estimated to make nearly 300,000 illegal immigrants eligible.

One of the architects for the president's planned executive actions at DHS is Esther Olavarria, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy's former top immigration lawyer.

Under the changes, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers also would see a pay raise in order to "increase morale" within the ICE workforce.

DHS also is planning to "promote" the new naturalization process by giving a 50 percent discount on the first 10,000 applicants who come forward, with the exception of those who have income levels above 200 percent of the poverty level.

Tech jobs though a State Department immigrant visa program would offer another half-million immigrants a path to citizenship. This would include their spouses as well.

The other measures include calls to revise removal priorities to target serious criminals for deportation and end the program known as "Secure Communities" and start a new program.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11/13/source-obama-to-announce-10-point-immigration-plan-via-exec-action-as-early-as/


Here we go fellas.