A little perspective on 2014 Senate

[JoeB131]

Please quote the "racist shit I say all the time".

Quote with linkbacks intact or apologize, you idiot. I state facts that you may not like, but statistics are not racist. If you insist, I will forward contact information for my (black) 2nd wife. She would be very amused to hear that I've been called racist.

Oh, so you pass your racism off as "Statistics", and that make it okay.

I see.

"Mendacity comes in three forms. Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics" - Benjamin Disraeli.

 

[blackhawk]

If most of us could say we are better off you would not have had the election results you had Tuesday. .

That's not true.

If that were true, then 1986 was a rejection of Reagan. Right. I mean, Reagan lost the Senate in 1986, but did Americans really think they were worse off?

People can claim to be or have been anything on the internet that doesn't make it true if you want to claim you were a Republican fine claim it that's your right it's right to have the opinion that claim is bullshit

Guy, you can believe anything you want. you can believe a magic sky fairy hates gays and Mexicans just as much as you do.

Me, I like to go with FACTS.

Then try using facts instead of opinions and partisan talking points in 1986 Reagan had an approval rating in the high 60s they did drop when Iran/Contra hit but that was near the end of the year and after the midterms so to claim that was a rejection of him is more than silly. Obama on the other hand started off his Presidency with approval ratings in the high 60s and they have dropped ever since ending in the low 40s where they were on Tuesday. So who was really rejected by voters during the two midterms the one with the approval rating in the 60s or the one with them in the 40s? You can spin your fantasy about having been a Republican all you want and post moronic talking points about hating, gays, Mexicans, women, blacks, the poor and any other group you can think of because the people soundly rejected all that bullshit on Tuesday as well.

 

[JoeB131]

Then try using facts instead of opinions and partisan talking points in 1986 Reagan had an approval rating in the high 60s they did drop when Iran/Contra hit but that was near the end of the year and after the midterms so to claim that was a rejection of him is more than silly. Obama on the other hand started off his Presidency with approval ratings in the high 60s and they have dropped ever since ending in the low 40s where they were on Tuesday.

So again, you are missing my point. If you are claiming that losing the Senate is a referendum on a president, then we should reject Reagan's 49 state sweep in 1984 and take his loss of the Senate in 1986 as the change, correct?

Or we could just sensibly conclude that there were local races with local issues. For instance, one of the guys who lost in 1986 was Chuck Percy, who lost to Paul Simon and his Bow Tie. Of course, Percy was never a friend to Reagan, but Jesse Jackson crowed loudly about his defeat.

 

[Ernie S.]

If most of us could say we are better off you would not have had the election results you had Tuesday. .

That's not true.

If that were true, then 1986 was a rejection of Reagan. Right. I mean, Reagan lost the Senate in 1986, but did Americans really think they were worse off?

People can claim to be or have been anything on the internet that doesn't make it true if you want to claim you were a Republican fine claim it that's your right it's right to have the opinion that claim is bullshit

Guy, you can believe anything you want. you can believe a magic sky fairy hates gays and Mexicans just as much as you do.

Me, I like to go with FACTS.

Where the hell do you get that Conservatives hate anyone, much less gays and Mexicans?

We may dislike perversion and open flaunting of deviant behavior, but I do have several close friends who are gay.

I don't "hate" Mexicans or Muslims either. What I dislike is people who enter my home illegally and feel entitled to what I've worked for. I do feel something akin to hate towards those Muslim fanatics that fly planes into buildings and behead infidels.

Hate, Joe, is another one of those words, like "racist" that you progressives toss around trying to dismiss opinion you disagree with. In the process, you corrupt the language and make words that should only be used to describe vile racial haters and people with evil in their hearts, impotent.

I dislike you, Joe. I think you are as useless as tits on a boar and as relevant as a fart in a full gale, but hate you? Please don't flatter yourself. You are of far less concern to me than a pimple on my ass.

 

[JoeB131]

Where the hell do you get that Conservatives hate anyone, much less gays and Mexicans?

We may dislike perversion and open flaunting of deviant behavior, but I do have several close friends who are gay.

I think you just answered your own question. "Some of my best friends are..." is usually the sign of a bigot...

I don't "hate" Mexicans or Muslims either. What I dislike is people who enter my home illegally and feel entitled to what I've worked for. I do feel something akin to hate towards those Muslim fanatics that fly planes into buildings and behead infidels.

So "I've got mine, **** you." Here's the thing. I'm not thrilled with crime. I've had my home broken into, and frankly, it's pretty shitty when it happens. I just don't racially stereotype when it happens.

Hate, Joe, is another one of those words, like "racist" that you progressives toss around trying to dismiss opinion you disagree with. In the process, you corrupt the language and make words that should only be used to describe vile racial haters and people with evil in their hearts, impotent.

No, guy, having read enough of your posts, I see a lot of animus towards people who are less fortunate than you are. You kind of lack compassion. I think, "how can we help that person who feels he needs to steal to survive" while you think, "Man, I wish I was home so I could have shot that ******* N****r!"

 

[Ernie S.]

A final nail in the coffin on those who claim tuesday was a "Mandate".

In 2012, 100% (or close enough) knew Barack Obama was president. So any votes in the 2012 Presidential election were a mandate on his presidency, as was those who chose to stay home. And of some 130 million Americans who voted, 66 million voted for him.

That's a Mandate.

The Tuesday Election only involved 9 states that flipped. Less than 5 million votes were cast for winning Candidates, less than Romney got in the same states in 2012. No Minds were changed.

Now on top of that, 51% of Americans cannot name ONE senator from their state and only 25% can name both.

Guess what percentage of Americans can t name even one of their U.S. Senators Clermont Tea Party



So are you really trying to pass what happened Tuesday as an "informed" choice?

In those nine states, GOP candidates got roughly 80% of the number of votes that Romney got while Democrat candidates got roughly 60%. Sounds like a firm ass kicking to me.

 

[Antares]

A final nail in the coffin on those who claim tuesday was a "Mandate".

In 2012, 100% (or close enough) knew Barack Obama was president. So any votes in the 2012 Presidential election were a mandate on his presidency, as was those who chose to stay home. And of some 130 million Americans who voted, 66 million voted for him.

That's a Mandate.

The Tuesday Election only involved 9 states that flipped. Less than 5 million votes were cast for winning Candidates, less than Romney got in the same states in 2012. No Minds were changed.

Now on top of that, 51% of Americans cannot name ONE senator from their state and only 25% can name both.

Guess what percentage of Americans can t name even one of their U.S. Senators Clermont Tea Party



So are you really trying to pass what happened Tuesday as an "informed" choice?

In those nine states, GOP candidates got roughly 80% of the number of votes that Romney got while Democrat candidates got roughly 60%. Sounds like a firm ass kicking to me.

Don't worry about Joe, he ran his own family off.

 

[Ernie S.]

Please quote the "racist shit I say all the time".

Quote with linkbacks intact or apologize, you idiot. I state facts that you may not like, but statistics are not racist. If you insist, I will forward contact information for my (black) 2nd wife. She would be very amused to hear that I've been called racist.

Oh, so you pass your racism off as "Statistics", and that make it okay.

I see.

"Mendacity comes in three forms. Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Quote a racist statement or apologize, Joe. No more diversion. No more unsubstantiated claims. No more obfuscation. I want quotes or I want you to STFU, OK?

 

[Ernie S.]

A final nail in the coffin on those who claim tuesday was a "Mandate".

In 2012, 100% (or close enough) knew Barack Obama was president. So any votes in the 2012 Presidential election were a mandate on his presidency, as was those who chose to stay home. And of some 130 million Americans who voted, 66 million voted for him.

That's a Mandate.

The Tuesday Election only involved 9 states that flipped. Less than 5 million votes were cast for winning Candidates, less than Romney got in the same states in 2012. No Minds were changed.

Now on top of that, 51% of Americans cannot name ONE senator from their state and only 25% can name both.

Guess what percentage of Americans can t name even one of their U.S. Senators Clermont Tea Party



So are you really trying to pass what happened Tuesday as an "informed" choice?

In those nine states, GOP candidates got roughly 80% of the number of votes that Romney got while Democrat candidates got roughly 60%. Sounds like a firm ass kicking to me.

Don't worry about Joe, he ran his own family off.

I can't blame them.

 

[Ernie S.]

Where the hell do you get that Conservatives hate anyone, much less gays and Mexicans?

We may dislike perversion and open flaunting of deviant behavior, but I do have several close friends who are gay.

I think you just answered your own question. "Some of my best friends are..." is usually the sign of a bigot...

I don't "hate" Mexicans or Muslims either. What I dislike is people who enter my home illegally and feel entitled to what I've worked for. I do feel something akin to hate towards those Muslim fanatics that fly planes into buildings and behead infidels.

So "I've got mine, **** you." Here's the thing. I'm not thrilled with crime. I've had my home broken into, and frankly, it's pretty shitty when it happens. I just don't racially stereotype when it happens.

Hate, Joe, is another one of those words, like "racist" that you progressives toss around trying to dismiss opinion you disagree with. In the process, you corrupt the language and make words that should only be used to describe vile racial haters and people with evil in their hearts, impotent.

No, guy, having read enough of your posts, I see a lot of animus towards people who are less fortunate than you are. You kind of lack compassion. I think, "how can we help that person who feels he needs to steal to survive" while you think, "Man, I wish I was home so I could have shot that ******* N****r!"

Quotes?

I am always willing to help those less fortunate BEFORE they steal from me.
I gave, yes GAVE my previous house in Florida to a struggling couple with an autistic child.
I've lived here for nearly 5 years now. For about 4 of those years, give or take a couple months, I have had people with no place to stay, live in my guest cottage until they got on their feet. My latest "project" a 30 year old woman who escaped from an abusive relationship has managed to pay rent and security on a house here in Foley and will be moving out next week. My first "project" moved out into a rental and has recently bought a house with her fiance`. Project #2 in now managing a small resort hotel in Utah and will be returning to the Gulf Coast for the winter. Project #3 now has a job, his legal problems are resolved and it looks like he will win custody of his daughters from his ex.

These people all stayed in the cottage rent free. They did pay the increased utilities and some cut the grass and did a few odd jobs, but I would guess I have 10 grand invested in them.

What do you do besides chiding Conservatives to do more?

 

[blackhawk]

Then try using facts instead of opinions and partisan talking points in 1986 Reagan had an approval rating in the high 60s they did drop when Iran/Contra hit but that was near the end of the year and after the midterms so to claim that was a rejection of him is more than silly. Obama on the other hand started off his Presidency with approval ratings in the high 60s and they have dropped ever since ending in the low 40s where they were on Tuesday.

So again, you are missing my point. If you are claiming that losing the Senate is a referendum on a president, then we should reject Reagan's 49 state sweep in 1984 and take his loss of the Senate in 1986 as the change, correct?

Or we could just sensibly conclude that there were local races with local issues. For instance, one of the guys who lost in 1986 was Chuck Percy, who lost to Paul Simon and his Bow Tie. Of course, Percy was never a friend to Reagan, but Jesse Jackson crowed loudly about his defeat.

I'm not missing anything an unpopular President and his party just got their collective ass kicked and your trying to spin and rationalize this fact away.

 

[Ernie S.]

Please quote the "racist shit I say all the time".

Quote with linkbacks intact or apologize, you idiot. I state facts that you may not like, but statistics are not racist. If you insist, I will forward contact information for my (black) 2nd wife. She would be very amused to hear that I've been called racist.

Oh, so you pass your racism off as "Statistics", and that make it okay.

I see.

"Mendacity comes in three forms. Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Quote a racist statement or apologize, Joe. No more diversion. No more unsubstantiated claims. No more obfuscation. I want quotes or I want you to STFU, OK?

No quotes huh?

Whodathunk that shutting you up wold be so easy?

 

[Rotagilla]

this has nothing to do with me. Your latency is leaking through by using homosexual terms to describe other people...that's projecting.... Fly that rainbow flag. Be proud.

It has everything to do with you. I truly understand your embarrassment at being called a teabagger. I would be embarrassed if Democrats chose such a stupid name to. If you don't like being reminded about it, why don't you back off on your vile remarks. You can't expect to be so hateful and never receive any push back.

I can always tell when I'm right in our discussions.

You call me names.

You keep thinking that if it helps you live with yourself. I've got grownup stuff to do now, so ya'll get together and figure out why I just won't cooperate and be as upset as you think I should be.

that's brilliant!...pretend you're above it all, bail out and run for cover.

Great debate tactic.

You call me laughing at teabaggers who are calling me a cumguzzler debate? I guess it might be in your circles.

I didn't call you anything, son. Focus.

 

[Rotagilla]

I'm a Conservative. I am registered as a Republican, though I am rarely happy with my party's presidential nominee. I have attended quite a few TEA Party rallies, but I'm not a card carrying member.

If you want to put me on some kind of a scale, think 2 steps right of Rush Limbaugh and one left of Mike Huckaby.

And yes, some here claim to be Liberal or Progressive, but not both.

That puts you square in the middle of teabagger territory. I won't ask you to go back and find examples of someone who claims to be only liberal but denies being progressive, or the other way around, but if you ever see it again, please let me know. I'm not calling you a liar, but I'm pretty sure you are mistaken. Even if you do find one (which I doubt) it's certainly not the widespread way it is for teabaggers.

what is all this "teabagger" stuff?..you a homosexual or something?
We don't want to hear about your sex life in here, man.

I've said it hundreds of times. I didn't chose that name for you. Your bunch did. You want to call all democrats lazy, traitorous, communist, socialists, etc. etc. on a regular basis and see nothing unusual about that, but you think it's out of line to call you a name chosen by you? That's crazy.

You can say it a thousand times still will never be true,The tea baggers as you call them,started out by calling themselves the tea party,it people like yourself that changed it to tea baggers,after a sexual act,rather pathetic

you're a teabagger. Admit it. You'll feel better if you embrace the shame.

Latency leaking, again.

 

[Rotagilla]

cRuShEd

That's pretty juvenile..you set up false "goals" that the republicans have to accomplish.
The object isn't to send him bills that please him so he can sign them....america is tired of what obama wants..people are more interested in what's good for the country.

At this point the goal st to try to prevent further damage due to illegal immigration and open borders...and to dismantle ACA.

Except the establishment in your own party

.and there is your first mistake.
I'm a dedicated anarchist. I know the real score...you hyperpartisans can call each other names and post fake charts and funny cartoons...useful idiots...

wants an Amnesty deal on immigration. and they really stopped talking about "dismantling' the ACA (notice you are calling it the ACA now) and instead "fixing" it.

I know...both parties suck, joe... but the border will have to get closed eventually or there will be trouble...and ACA is unsustainable fiscally and now that people are beginning to see the actual results rather than the platitudes of how great it would be...a majority of americans rejects ACA

So they'll pass a few things around the edges and Obama walks out in 2017 being able to say he reformed health care.

ACA won't survive..and I doubt he'll pull this amnesty he keeps threatening..his own party is going to chill him out on that one...america doesn't want open borders or
for illegals to bypass the legal immigration system that has been in place and worked for over 200 years.

Just a question for you. The right wing is full of different things they call themselves because they are embarrassed to just admit they are teabagger/Gop dittoheads. Libertarian, Conservative, Independent, some of the silly ones call themselves even more off the wall things , like anarchist. An anarchist wouldn't be voting anyway. My question is, what exactly is the difference in all those silly names when every one of them vote exactly the same way? If I were to look at your ballot, exactly how would I tell the difference between it or any other teabaggers ballot? I truly understand your embarrassment to admit you are the same as all the others listed, but what exactly is the difference?

man what a brainwashed parrot of DNC talking points. what a shame

You have a little picture that says Obamacide, and you call me a parrot? Tebagger logic I guess.

"teabagger"?
Your latency is leaking through again.

 

[Politico]

Translation:

We didn't LOSE The Republicans just won by a small margin

so chin up you sheep in the Democrat party. It really really wasn't your all's fault the, DEMOCRATS GOT their asses handed to them

Did I get that translation right Joey? lol

Translation- we didn't lose. You won backwaters that really shouldn't count, and the country still has a negative opinion of you.

And once you start snatching food from the mouths of children like you normally do, people will remember why they voted you out the first time.

Please Joey stop the whining...

Boner and dickhead McConnell will make sure you keep getting your welfare check, section 8 allotment, and those wonderful food stamps you can use to buy your meth.

How did you miss the part where he said certain parts of our population don't have a right to representation?

Just promise you won't miss when he tries to spin it.

 

[JoeB131]

In those nine states, GOP candidates got roughly 80% of the number of votes that Romney got while Democrat candidates got roughly 60%. Sounds like a firm ass kicking to me.

dueling apathy is not a mandate.

 

[JoeB131]

Quote a racist statement or apologize, Joe. No more diversion. No more unsubstantiated claims. No more obfuscation. I want quotes or I want you to STFU, OK?

Guy, I'm not going to plow through your hundreds of posts on Trayvon or Mike Brown where you release your inner Archie Bunker.

Because even if I did, you'd be saying "You took that out of context" or pretend you didn't see it.

That's why I don't do the "link" game. I provide a link when I feel like it, not when you do.

 

[Freewill]

Watching all the insane crowing about an off year election, you have to consider the following.

President Obama got 69 Million votes in 2008 and 66 million in 2012. These are STILL the two highest vote totals ever achieved by ANYONE in the history of the United states.

So how many votes were expended to send knuckle-draggers to the Senate in nine states?

NC	Tillis	1,413,269
CO	Garner	965,496
LA	Cassidy	602,439
IA	Ernst	586,921
AR	Cotton	476,309
WV	Capito	280,123
MT	Daines	210,863
SD	Rounds	140,721
AK	Sullivan	110,203

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Grand total of all the seats that flipped?

4,786,344

Yup. less than 8% of what Obama got in 2012.

You remind me of the videos of a kid riding a bicycle and trying to ride the rail down a flight of steps. The bike goes out from under him and he does a split over the rail. He then proceeds to run around holding his crotch crying it ain't so bad I just need to run it off.

 

[JoeB131]

I am always willing to help those less fortunate BEFORE they steal from me....

What do you do besides chiding Conservatives to do more?

what is this brain damage you Wingnuts have that you think the fact that once in your life you did a decent thing excuses your support for the status quo?

The problem is not that you didn't do something nice. We all do something nice. And sometimes we do nice thing for people who take advantage of our good nature.

Point is, there are millions of people who are unfortunate, and most of us can't take care of them all.

But what we CAN do and SHOULD do is change society to give them oppurtunities.

You see, I don't support liberalism today because I'm a 'bleeding heart' who weeps for people. I have little patience for people who can help themselves and won't.

I support liberalism because the conservative answers which I did believe in for decades clearly don't work. We've tried trickle down, faith-based iniatives for 30 years now. They don't work. The rich have gotten richer and the poor have gotten poorer.