The top ten reasons not to vote Republican in the midterms

[AmericanFirst]

How is the democratic party more worthy of being called the "racist party of ignorance" than the republicans. Rebublicans continuously try to maintain policies that have unequal outcomes for different races. They also, in many instances, openly deny some of the most prominent research produced by science. If that doesn't constitute "racist" or "ignorant" I don't know what does.

Because smart people see thru the dimwits lies and realize they are the racists.

 

[mudwhistle]

Their slogan should be "If you think America sucks vote Democrat"

 

[frigidweirdo]

Number one, they're part of the system that reduces democracy to almost nothing (the other part being the democrats).

Number two, they've sold out (just like the democrats)

Number three, because you should want Proportional Representation as part of the system for electing the president and congress, and this will never happen as long as it remains democrat and republican control.

Number four. voting either democrat or republican is JUST WRONG.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Their slogan should be "If you think America sucks vote Democrat"

And Republican should be "If American sucks you, vote Republican"?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

US companies are taxed on over-seas income because US companies buy products to sell in the US and deduct the cost of the sale on monies that they never paid tax.

We're the only major economy to tax our corporations on earnings in other jurisdictions.
It's a bad idea. It raises a tiny amount of revenue.

Differed is what you get when your POS MAC-PRO doesn't like your voice program. Should be deferred.

What deferred income?

Who's income is off-shore?

You're whining about Berkshire, so how much of their earnings are from offshore?

Taxing overseas income prevents companies from cheating. I've already presented that.

What is deferred income? Look it up.

I'm not whining about Berkshire, merely making an example.

Taxing overseas income prevents companies from cheating.

How much revenue does it raise?
How much damage does it cause?
It's not worth it. No other major economy does it.
We should stop.

You felt you were making a point about deferred income, so who does it, where and why?
Unless you're making stuff up again?
Make your Berkshire example with real numbers.
That would make you look less stupid.

 

[Discombobulated]

How is the democratic party more worthy of being called the "racist party of ignorance" than the republicans. Rebublicans continuously try to maintain policies that have unequal outcomes for different races. They also, in many instances, openly deny some of the most prominent research produced by science. If that doesn't constitute "racist" or "ignorant" I don't know what does.

Most Republicans are far too rational to believe in science.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Republicans: They don’t do anything

The 113th Congress remains on track to be the least productive in modern history. Just 142 public bills have been enacted into law in the current session, down from the 906 the 80th “Do-Nothing” Congress passed in 1947-48. At this same point in the last Congress, which set the record for the fewest bills passed into public law in the modern era, 151 bills had made it into law.

They're doing a good job of stopping new Obama damage.

 

[mudwhistle]

Their slogan should be "If you think America sucks vote Democrat"

And Republican should be "If American sucks you, vote Republican"?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How is the democratic party more worthy of being called the "racist party of ignorance" than the republicans. Rebublicans continuously try to maintain policies that have unequal outcomes for different races. They also, in many instances, openly deny some of the most prominent research produced by science. If that doesn't constitute "racist" or "ignorant" I don't know what does.

Rebublicans continuously try to maintain policies that have unequal outcomes for different races.

OMG! That's awful!!! What's the percentage of white guys in the NBA again?
I'm glad the Dems are in favor of quotas for the NBA. Can't have an unequal outcome.

They also, in many instances, openly deny some of the most prominent research produced by science.

I know, they're against GMOs and vaccines. Oh, wait, that's the Dems.

1. You didn't refute my points. 2. I wasn't talking about affirmative action. 3. unlike climate change, GMOs are actually a contested topic. 4. All the data linking Dems to the vaccine movement I've read has been theoretically, conceptually, or methodologically flawed. If you have a good source on this I'd love to read it.

1. You didn't refute my points.

I pointed out the ridiculousness of your supposed points.

2. I wasn't talking about affirmative action.

How else do you prevent unequal outcomes?

3. unlike climate change, GMOs are actually a contested topic

Wasting trillions to prevent climate change is contested all the time.
What do you feel is contested about GMOs?
They lead to higher yields, cheaper more plentiful food.
And they reduce the need to constantly expand land under cultivation.

You still haven't explained how the Republicans are less racist than Democrats. Sure, affirmative action is a small part of it, but there are broader structural inequalities such as equal pay, improving schools in poor areas, poverty assistance, etc. And these things aren't necessarily "racial" as they would have a significant impact for whites living in poverty also. But statistically blacks are more likely to live in poverty than whites, and therefore experience more structural disadvantages in things like education, college prep, there being jobs available in their neighborhood, or the financial ability to move from a neighborhood with a lack of jobs.

Also just addressing general attitutudes towards race in both parties:

Are White Republicans More Racist Than White Democrats FiveThirtyEight

As for GMO's, a comparative look at policy differences between the US and the EU is enough to show their safetly is contested. And all GMOs aren't banned in Europe, but a lot of the GMOs being consumed by the American public and a lot of the techniques used in the American aggricultural industry are. Biotech has a lot of potential, but certainly needs more regulation until more data is produced on the long-term effects of different methods.

Climate change isn't contested. People's willingness to act upon scientific data surrounding climate change is. There's a difference.

You also didn't point me to that research linking Dems to anti-vaccines. Like I said, I'd be really curious reading it if the data is good.

You still haven't explained how the Republicans are less racist than Democrats.

You're right, Sharpton, Jackson, Holder and Obama aren't racist. LOL!

As for GMO's, a comparative look at policy differences between the US and the EU is enough to show their safetly is contested.

It's true, liberals in Europe are just as anti-science as liberals in America.

 

[Justin Davis]

How is the democratic party more worthy of being called the "racist party of ignorance" than the republicans. Rebublicans continuously try to maintain policies that have unequal outcomes for different races. They also, in many instances, openly deny some of the most prominent research produced by science. If that doesn't constitute "racist" or "ignorant" I don't know what does.

And there we have it again. Everything's about race. Freedom is racism. Socialism is bliss.

 

[saveliberty]

...and should the Senate become a Republican majority, Democrats will become the party of no and veto.

Lets hope so. The middle class can't afford to be butt-fucked anymore by Republicans, corporate America, and wall street.

So it is okay when Democrats do it? Hypocrite.

Never has a party endangered future generations like the Democrats in the past six years.

 

[JoeNormal]

The fact that some people make more money than others has become a major issue with Democrats. Republicans accept this because it's only common-sense. We all can't be totally equal. We can have equal opportunities, but can't be guaranteed equal results. Democrats claim that you should be able to make the same as somebody else regardless of your time on the job, or your natural work progression because of your sex. Doesn't matter if a woman spends half of the year home sick for one reason or another. According to the Left, she deserved to progress the same way men do. So in their drive to force equality they instead favor one group over another.

This has to be the premier conservative straw man of our time. Nobody is asking for equal results. That's clearly unattainable and undesirable. There has to be some incentive to excel. But if you can't see that the levels of inequality are rising and unsustainable, I don't know how to make it more obvious. Wealth inequality has reached such epic proportions that it's not even about excelling any longer. It's about crushing the people under you for personal gain.

 

[peach174]

Republicans: They don’t do anything

The 113th Congress remains on track to be the least productive in modern history. Just 142 public bills have been enacted into law in the current session, down from the 906 the 80th “Do-Nothing” Congress passed in 1947-48. At this same point in the last Congress, which set the record for the fewest bills passed into public law in the modern era, 151 bills had made it into law.

That because the ones that passed the house are sitting in the senate and Harry Reid won't let them come up to be voted on.
Has the U.S. House passed zero bills in past 3 years Fact Checker

Fact Checker searched for all bills “passed/agreed to in House” that were introduced during the three years from Oct. 7, 2010 through this past Monday (Oct. 2013)
The results? During the past three years, the U.S. House of Representatives has not passed “no bills.” In fact, the current session of the House alone has passed 269. If we add in the two previous sessions of Congress — still just covering bills introduced in the past three years — the House has passed a total of 1,203 bills.

This does not even include the bills that passed the house for 2014.

 

[saveliberty]

The fact that some people make more money than others has become a major issue with Democrats. Republicans accept this because it's only common-sense. We all can't be totally equal. We can have equal opportunities, but can't be guaranteed equal results. Democrats claim that you should be able to make the same as somebody else regardless of your time on the job, or your natural work progression because of your sex. Doesn't matter if a woman spends half of the year home sick for one reason or another. According to the Left, she deserved to progress the same way men do. So in their drive to force equality they instead favor one group over another.

This has to be the premier conservative straw man of our time. Nobody is asking for equal results. That's clearly unattainable and undesirable. There has to be some incentive to excel. But if you can't see that the levels of inequality are rising and unsustainable, I don't know how to make it more obvious. Wealth inequality has reached such epic proportions that it's not even about excelling any longer. It's about crushing the people under you for personal gain.

Really? You are barred from purchasing stock? Investing in oil or gold? Owning a home or car?
Received a decrease in pay from your employer?

Wealth building requires risk and savings. Have you been willing to do either?

Whine all you want about folks doing better than yourself. It just shows your greed and poorly placed belief you are entitled to something another has.

 

[peach174]

The fact that some people make more money than others has become a major issue with Democrats. Republicans accept this because it's only common-sense. We all can't be totally equal. We can have equal opportunities, but can't be guaranteed equal results. Democrats claim that you should be able to make the same as somebody else regardless of your time on the job, or your natural work progression because of your sex. Doesn't matter if a woman spends half of the year home sick for one reason or another. According to the Left, she deserved to progress the same way men do. So in their drive to force equality they instead favor one group over another.

This has to be the premier conservative straw man of our time. Nobody is asking for equal results. That's clearly unattainable and undesirable. There has to be some incentive to excel. But if you can't see that the levels of inequality are rising and unsustainable, I don't know how to make it more obvious. Wealth inequality has reached such epic proportions that it's not even about excelling any longer. It's about crushing the people under you for personal gain.

It is the Democrats Social Programs that are the cause of it.
Growth of Welfare Entitlements Principles of Reform and the Next Steps

The growth of welfare spending is unsustainable and will drive the United States into bankruptcy if allowed to continue. President Barack Obama’s fiscal year 2011 budget request would increase total welfare spending to $953 billion—a 42 percent increase over welfare spending in FY 2008, the last full year of the Bush Administration.
The federal government runs over 70 different means-tested anti-poverty programs that provide cash, food, housing, medical care, and social services to poor and low-income persons. These means-tested programs—including food stamps, public housing, low-income energy assistance, and Medicaid—pay the bills and meet the physical needs of tens of millions of low-income families. However, these programs do not help the recipients move from a position of dependence on the government to being able to provide for themselves.

As government spending on means-tested welfare approaches $1 trillion per year, it is time to reboot the other poverty programs to control costs and promote greater self-reliance. In addition, efforts to rebuild marriage in low-income communities would improve the well-being of children, parents, and communities.

That is 1 Trillion taken from every working American that they themselves need. It takes 1 trillion out of the spending that makes this economy work.
Wake up Lefties it is the Dem's Social Programs that are bankrupting the workers of America.

 

[mudwhistle]

The fact that some people make more money than others has become a major issue with Democrats. Republicans accept this because it's only common-sense. We all can't be totally equal. We can have equal opportunities, but can't be guaranteed equal results. Democrats claim that you should be able to make the same as somebody else regardless of your time on the job, or your natural work progression because of your sex. Doesn't matter if a woman spends half of the year home sick for one reason or another. According to the Left, she deserved to progress the same way men do. So in their drive to force equality they instead favor one group over another.

This has to be the premier conservative straw man of our time. Nobody is asking for equal results. That's clearly unattainable and undesirable. There has to be some incentive to excel. But if you can't see that the levels of inequality are rising and unsustainable, I don't know how to make it more obvious. Wealth inequality has reached such epic proportions that it's not even about excelling any longer. It's about crushing the people under you for personal gain.

Yeah, how's that hope & change working?

 

[JoeNormal]

The fact that some people make more money than others has become a major issue with Democrats. Republicans accept this because it's only common-sense. We all can't be totally equal. We can have equal opportunities, but can't be guaranteed equal results. Democrats claim that you should be able to make the same as somebody else regardless of your time on the job, or your natural work progression because of your sex. Doesn't matter if a woman spends half of the year home sick for one reason or another. According to the Left, she deserved to progress the same way men do. So in their drive to force equality they instead favor one group over another.

This has to be the premier conservative straw man of our time. Nobody is asking for equal results. That's clearly unattainable and undesirable. There has to be some incentive to excel. But if you can't see that the levels of inequality are rising and unsustainable, I don't know how to make it more obvious. Wealth inequality has reached such epic proportions that it's not even about excelling any longer. It's about crushing the people under you for personal gain.

Really? You are barred from purchasing stock? Investing in oil or gold? Owning a home or car?
Received a decrease in pay from your employer?

Wealth building requires risk and savings. Have you been willing to do either?

Whine all you want about folks doing better than yourself. It just shows your greed and poorly placed belief you are entitled to something another has.

Yes, I have stocks and a 401k and a paid-off house and all the trappings of American success. But I'm not the average American. When our major corporations and financial system have been allowed to ransack the country for the benefit of a very few to the point of making it impossible for the average guy to even participate in the system, it's not hard to see that we're in for a fall. And I'm not so well off that I'll be able to escape it. I would guess that nobody on this forum is.

 

[JoeNormal]

The fact that some people make more money than others has become a major issue with Democrats. Republicans accept this because it's only common-sense. We all can't be totally equal. We can have equal opportunities, but can't be guaranteed equal results. Democrats claim that you should be able to make the same as somebody else regardless of your time on the job, or your natural work progression because of your sex. Doesn't matter if a woman spends half of the year home sick for one reason or another. According to the Left, she deserved to progress the same way men do. So in their drive to force equality they instead favor one group over another.

This has to be the premier conservative straw man of our time. Nobody is asking for equal results. That's clearly unattainable and undesirable. There has to be some incentive to excel. But if you can't see that the levels of inequality are rising and unsustainable, I don't know how to make it more obvious. Wealth inequality has reached such epic proportions that it's not even about excelling any longer. It's about crushing the people under you for personal gain.

Yeah, how's that hope & change working?

Not very well but I'm certain it's better than the republican alternative.

 

[JoeNormal]

The fact that some people make more money than others has become a major issue with Democrats. Republicans accept this because it's only common-sense. We all can't be totally equal. We can have equal opportunities, but can't be guaranteed equal results. Democrats claim that you should be able to make the same as somebody else regardless of your time on the job, or your natural work progression because of your sex. Doesn't matter if a woman spends half of the year home sick for one reason or another. According to the Left, she deserved to progress the same way men do. So in their drive to force equality they instead favor one group over another.

This has to be the premier conservative straw man of our time. Nobody is asking for equal results. That's clearly unattainable and undesirable. There has to be some incentive to excel. But if you can't see that the levels of inequality are rising and unsustainable, I don't know how to make it more obvious. Wealth inequality has reached such epic proportions that it's not even about excelling any longer. It's about crushing the people under you for personal gain.

It is the Democrats Social Programs that are the cause of it.
Growth of Welfare Entitlements Principles of Reform and the Next Steps

The growth of welfare spending is unsustainable and will drive the United States into bankruptcy if allowed to continue. President Barack Obama’s fiscal year 2011 budget request would increase total welfare spending to $953 billion—a 42 percent increase over welfare spending in FY 2008, the last full year of the Bush Administration.
The federal government runs over 70 different means-tested anti-poverty programs that provide cash, food, housing, medical care, and social services to poor and low-income persons. These means-tested programs—including food stamps, public housing, low-income energy assistance, and Medicaid—pay the bills and meet the physical needs of tens of millions of low-income families. However, these programs do not help the recipients move from a position of dependence on the government to being able to provide for themselves.

As government spending on means-tested welfare approaches $1 trillion per year, it is time to reboot the other poverty programs to control costs and promote greater self-reliance. In addition, efforts to rebuild marriage in low-income communities would improve the well-being of children, parents, and communities.

That is 1 Trillion taken from every working American that they themselves need. It takes 1 trillion out of the spending that makes this economy work.
Wake up Lefties it is the Dem's Social Programs that are bankrupting the workers of America.

So tell me why you think welfare spending is up. Average Americans are a bunch of lazy freeloaders?

 

[mudwhistle]

The fact that some people make more money than others has become a major issue with Democrats. Republicans accept this because it's only common-sense. We all can't be totally equal. We can have equal opportunities, but can't be guaranteed equal results. Democrats claim that you should be able to make the same as somebody else regardless of your time on the job, or your natural work progression because of your sex. Doesn't matter if a woman spends half of the year home sick for one reason or another. According to the Left, she deserved to progress the same way men do. So in their drive to force equality they instead favor one group over another.

This has to be the premier conservative straw man of our time. Nobody is asking for equal results. That's clearly unattainable and undesirable. There has to be some incentive to excel. But if you can't see that the levels of inequality are rising and unsustainable, I don't know how to make it more obvious. Wealth inequality has reached such epic proportions that it's not even about excelling any longer. It's about crushing the people under you for personal gain.

Really? You are barred from purchasing stock? Investing in oil or gold? Owning a home or car?
Received a decrease in pay from your employer?

Wealth building requires risk and savings. Have you been willing to do either?

Whine all you want about folks doing better than yourself. It just shows your greed and poorly placed belief you are entitled to something another has.

Yes, I have stocks and a 401k and a paid-off house and all the trappings of American success. But I'm not the average American. When our major corporations and financial system have been allowed to ransack the country for the benefit of a very few to the point of making it impossible for the average guy to even participate in the system, it's not hard to see that we're in for a fall. And I'm not so well off that I'll be able to escape it. I would guess that nobody on this forum is.

Yup, and the Democrats had nothing to do with any of this.