Recall Elections

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

The Republicans retained the State Senate in Wisconsin yesterday:

Democrats won two state Senate seats in Tuesday's historic recall elections, but failed to capture a third seat that would have given them control of the chamber.

By keeping a majority in the Senate, Republicans retained their monopoly on state government because they also hold the Assembly and governor's office. Tuesday's elections narrowed their majority - at least for now - from 19-14 to a razor-thin 17-16.

Consider me very surprised, as I assumed we'd see at least 3-4 switch over. Of the losses, one was from a Republican in Democratic territory, and the other was immersed in a number of scandals.

What does this say about Walker and the Republicans in Wisconsin? About the local impact of the changes in how the public sector deals with unions? Heck, about the popularity of the arguments put forth about the unions at all?

There are two recall elections for next week for Democratic incumbents, as well. I haven't seen polling for them yet.

Comments

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Either that or it's not really against their interests (or, even if it is, they sincerely believe it's not).

If they believe it's not despite the facts, they're misinformed.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/18/tea-party-ignorant-taxes-opinions-columnists-bruce-bartlett.html

If politicians ARE saying reasonable things, they're just lying and doing whatever they want no matter what the reasons they used for election.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/20/us/politics/20freshmen.html

But, hey man... if you want to do away with vast amounts of governmental control because the system itself propagates corruption and malfeasance, then I'm with you.

No, I don't want to do do away with 'vast amounts of government control'. I want to end the 2-party system so we can get some real, non-corporate owned politicians into office. Public finance, alternative vote system, and real progressive candidates that have a shot to get elected. This country still has a shot of keeping its status as a superpower, but sooner or later income inequality will be so high that we will become a third world nation.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

We're discussing whatever it is I want to discuss. If I say that people are retarded and being exploited, then tough luck. They are. Voting to cut your own services is a symptom of buying into a rhetoric of fear and ignorance.

Your only argument is applying logical fallacies to me which only work when you invent my position every single fucking time.

Go ahead and reply. But this is the last time I entertain your stupid charade. You're beyond hopeless, delusional and part of the problem.

Good day.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Hilarious comment, thanks. Now I can go to lunch suitably entertained.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

I'm just sick of it, y'know. Talking to that guy gets me nowhere every single time. It doesn't matter what I'm talking about, he's just going to change the subject and gear the conversation to whatever it is he wants to talk about. The best part is, he never actually has a point. All he does is try to deconstruct my point by injecting as many irrelevant topics as possible.

Or his insane leaps of logic "Cars can kill you. Should we outlaw cars too?" "Do you think the population would remain the same after a century?" Or better yet, when he INVENTS your position instead of arguing against your real position, like if you support public education it must mean you think it's impossible to have a system without it, or if you support food regulation you must think our current system is perfect, these absolute statements that get you to defend current systems even though they have nothing to do with your original point, forcing you to do all the legwork to disprove his stupid argument while he never, ever provides evidence of his own.

Or he just moves goal posts and says that I don't understand the bigger picture or moves goal posts because that wasn't what he was really talking about, further diverting from whatever the original commenter was talking about and forcing them to justify their viewpoints by comparing them to completely unrelated things via absurd analogies.

That's why every attempt to reason with him turns into a billion goddamn replies. Eventually he just flounces without conceding a single point no matter how wrong he is or how faulty his logic is, or he just insults you by essentially calling you stupid in a backhanded passive aggressive way.

He pretty much fails every single part of that "how to have a discussion diagram", and I'm not putting up with it anymore. If you want to keep this place civil I suggest everyone else do the same.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Um, I was laughing at you, not with you.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Of course you were. Birds of a feather stick together.

DQ!

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

If I say that people are retarded and being exploited, then tough luck. They are.

^ Somebody please preserve this for posterity. ^

Re: DQ!

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

I'm convinced from the political process that people in this country aren't fit to govern themselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NutFkykjmbM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjxzmaXAg9E

Corporations have hijacked this bought Congress using fear on Evangelical Christians and ignorance on them and everyone else to paint a picture of the world that doesn't actually represent reality. These people have no idea how the world works and let their emotions, not their wisdom, guide them toward the polls. Democracy has failed in this country.

We need the party of Teddy Roosevelt back. We need to remind people that this country used to protect them, not exploit them.

Re: DQ!

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Re: DQ!

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

What a weird thing to post.

Re: DQ!

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

Well if the people are not fit to govern themselves, who is?

Re: DQ!

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

OK, a dead white dude thought this. What does Bogey think? Can Bogey in fact have views of his own as opposed to that of dead people?

Re: DQ!

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

These people have no idea how the world works and let their emotions, not their wisdom, guide them toward the polls.

And I could say the exact same thing about many on the left. It isn't a partisan trait, it is a human one.

Re: DQ!

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

That would be Teddy Roosevelt of Great White Fleet fame and one of the most notorious jingoistic militaristic racist bastards of the modern era? Why exactly is bringing *that* back an improvement?

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

'Your only argument is applying logical fallacies to me which only work when you invent my position every single fucking time.'

Well to be fair, you argue against your own interests. That is it's in your best interest to entertain logic and make proper decisions.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Choo choo, all aboard the crazy train!

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Just let's calm down a bit, shall we?

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

And you/forbes are supremely qualified to determine what is or is not in the voters' interest?

I call bullshit (http://talk-politics.livejournal.com/495398.html).

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

That's a pretty good topic, because most your comments completely disagree with you.

"If you want to sell National Health-Care to an Economic-Conservative drop the sob-story about "how billy needs this operation but the greedy HMO turned him down." and start talking about how you're going to pay for it."

Yeah, I have tried that. The response is generally, "Oh, yeah, sure." ...dude, it says this is how it works HERE. "Yeah, it says that but that's not how it's going to work." Ok, so how does it work? "IT DOESN'T!" OH. Right. I forgot. It's all lies. This Congressional report on exactly how it impacts our district, this forecast that it cuts the deficit, these figures over here that show the amount of waste that will be eliminated. LIES. ALL LIES.

Actually, last time I argued it with a super-conservative (who, mind you, is only thus because she's a Christian and was told you have to be both) I was told that she hated liberals. When I said that was a rather un-Christian thing to say and I was disappointed, I was then attacked for being an atheist with no respect for religion. Then it went into how everything I was posting was wrong, "And I don't care what you say," was the final post I received before being ignored. - lux_angelis

meus_ovatio's reply is the best: Eh? We pay for it with taxes. Taxes are bad. Taxes are theft even. End of discussion.

sputtersputtersputter

In short, some people can't be reasoned with. And the question you posit of how you are going to pay for it proves it, because the answer is clearly taxation, yet the same people you claim are rational will assert that taxation is theft, and there's no arguing with them. That's what they will think for the rest of time. That the Founding Fathers cackled and rubbed their hands together when they put in the right to tax in the Constitution.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

...And the question you posit of how you are going to pay for it proves it, because the answer is clearly taxation.

So let us follow the bouncing ball...

Let us assume for the moment that Universal healthcare is good and that taxes are bad.

The question thus becomes "does the good likely to be achived outwheigh the corisponding proportion of bad?"

In regards to you specific assertaion that people vote against thier interests I will re-iterate my position that you are in no position to make that distinction.

For example; I like collecting collecting VA benefits but if the choice is between VA benefits and balancing the budget I'll balance the budget because I care more about long term stability than I do short-term gain.

Another Example; If you're a Boeing employee any policy that helps Boeing means job security and a hefty pension for you. Who's to say that the "Corporate interests" are not your own.

Final example; the Democratic party has stated its intention to fuck-over the rural lower/middle classes. So a vote against them (even if it favors those evil corporatists) is a vote in support of "The People".

Befor you ask "When did that happen?" consider Cap and Trade when viewed from a rural american point of view.

Caps on energy production result in fewer jobs and higher prices. When your job involves driving a truck or tractor $4.00+ a gallon hits you a lot harder than it does urban commuters. Because modern industrial farming is an energy intensive activity food prices will climb accordingly. The push for more public transportation does little to benefit those effected because it's limited to major population centers. The rich will continue to get rich and the poor will get even poorer all in the name of saving the planet.

The message many on the left have embraced seems to be "who give's a fuck about those ignorant slope-heads in the flyover states?"

Telling the left "Go fuck your selves!" is an entirely predictable (and logical) reply.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Let us assume for the moment that Universal healthcare is good and that taxes are bad.

Disregarding the rest of this because I do not accept this premise.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

So it is your position that taxes are universally a good thing?

They have no negative reprecussions what so ever?

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Taxes are just the representation of the social contract, and the easiest way to facilitate it without forcing people into performing labor against their will.

Some taxes are good, some are bad, it depends on the context- What is being taxed and what is the money being used for? For example, sin taxes. I would consider these 'bad' taxes, because even though they go toward a good cause (for example, cigarette taxes go toward health care), they're a regressive tax. It's one of those things that produces less and less revenue and now the program that it's being paid for doesn't have enough funding. There's even been proposed an increase in the federal cigarette tax because it isn't pulling in enough revenue anymore.

Sin taxes don't socially engineer bad habits away, they just make the users destitute. This usually disproportionally affects poor people because they tend to rely on these things just so they're not completely miserable.

There are good taxes as well, and they're usually progressive. Your premise is too black-and-white to be taken seriously.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

Some taxes are good, some are bad, it depends on the context- What is being taxed and what is the money being used for?

But you just rejected the idea that taxes could be bad out of hand, which is it?

Sin taxes don't socially engineer bad habits away, they just make the users destitute. This usually disproportionally affects poor people because they tend to rely on these things just so they're not completely miserable.

Exactly ^ but making people destitute and miserable is just fine as long as it's in the name of the greater good correct?

Go back and read the whole reply with this in mind.