Recall Elections
10/8/11 07:57![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsThe Republicans retained the State Senate in Wisconsin yesterday:
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.
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.
(no subject)
Date: 10/8/11 16:31 (UTC)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.
(no subject)
Date: 10/8/11 20:29 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/8/11 22:13 (UTC)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.
(no subject)
Date: 11/8/11 00:12 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 11/8/11 00:26 (UTC)DQ!
Date: 10/8/11 22:10 (UTC)^ Somebody please preserve this for posterity. ^
Re: DQ!
Date: 10/8/11 22:25 (UTC)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!
Date: 10/8/11 22:42 (UTC)Re: DQ!
Date: 10/8/11 22:50 (UTC)Re: DQ!
Date: 10/8/11 22:53 (UTC)Re: DQ!
Date: 11/8/11 00:35 (UTC)Re: DQ!
Date: 11/8/11 00:37 (UTC)State your terms.
Re: DQ!
Date: 11/8/11 00:39 (UTC)Re: DQ!
Date: 11/8/11 00:42 (UTC)Likewise define "alternative vote" explain how it addresses the issues you've raised.
Re: DQ!
Date: 11/8/11 03:10 (UTC)As for public funding, do whatever it is they do in Canada and other countries.
(no subject)
From:Re: DQ!
From:Re: DQ!
From:Re: DQ!
From:Re: DQ!
From:Re: DQ!
Date: 11/8/11 00:54 (UTC)Re: DQ!
From:Re: DQ!
From:Re: DQ!
From:Re: DQ!
From:Re: DQ!
Date: 11/8/11 01:40 (UTC)Drop upon drop. Ounce after ounce. Reduce. Repackage. Alter. Change.
Make things better! Progress! Upwards! Onwards! Dispose of the regressive!
Ever sure of that final goal of "better". Always confident that when you lose it's because of the errors of the electorate and when you win because of their brilliance. Never content to believe it's neither inferiority of your argument or strength of theirs. Always others and their failings.
Re: DQ!
Date: 11/8/11 18:42 (UTC)Re: DQ!
Date: 11/8/11 18:43 (UTC)Re: DQ!
Date: 10/8/11 22:52 (UTC)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!
Date: 11/8/11 18:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 10/8/11 22:41 (UTC)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.
(no subject)
Date: 10/8/11 22:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 11/8/11 18:33 (UTC)