• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

U.S. Politics

Page 90 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 18, 2009
13,318
0
0
VeloCity said:
The more people learn about the ACA, the more they like it, so I'm hoping you are right.

Still stuck on that CBO "lie" thing, I see. Apparently the echo chamber is still functioning.
It's going to be hard for Obamacare to be a major issue with Romney leading the opposition. His criticism will be thrown back in his face.

Knowing Romney, by the time of the general election he will be telling the people that Obamacare does not go far enough. He will promise that Romneycare, ver. 2.0, won't be outdone by the president and will cost even more.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
BroDeal said:
Good ol' Romney continues his push to alienate indpendent voters by saying he will get rid of Planned Parenthood.
Never mind independents, he's alienating the majority of women voters. I'd expect this sort of stupidity from the women-can't-be-trusted-to-make-their-own-decisions Santorum type of theocratic paternalist but I'm a little surprised that Romney would be this blatantly...dumb. Surely he's smart enough to have learned from the contraception debacle that these are not winning issues for Republicans?
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,307
1
0
Mar 18, 2009
13,318
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
The oil speculation is out of control. It is like nobody learned a thing from the previous speculator antics during President Bush's last term.
The expected financial reforms should have fixed the craziness that went on with commodities speculation where the amount of speculation so dwarfed the size of real market for the commodities such that the speculation drove the prices rather than end user demand. Unfortunately there was not any effective reforms, so we are back where we were a few years ago.

When does the real estate bubble start again? I want to get in on the ground floor this time.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
VeloCity said:
The more people learn about the ACA, the more they like it, so I'm hoping you are right.

Still stuck on that CBO "lie" thing, I see. Apparently the echo chamber is still functioning.

Maybe you missed the new cost estimates?
 
BroDeal said:
I am going to label this the hopscotch method of arguing..
Which is why I have not partaken in that debate, and won't. Same thing with another active member who isn't posting much right now.

BroDeal said:
More incompetence from Eric Holder.
As I said here, and on the LA thread, Holder is the worst AG in nearly a century. Just this week, once again the SEC had to do the work he refuses to do. Then there's the UBS situation, where the only person prosecuted so far has been the whistleblower. We're near the end of Obama/Holder's first term, and almost nothing done by the AG's office on the worst fraud in perhaps US history. He's not even going after the obvious crooks. Plus, with that message, there is zero change on Wall Street, judging by Greg Smith, former equity delivery partner at Goldman Sachs stated recently. Richard Thornberg was very business friendly, but came down hard on the S&L cheats, Edwin Meese played favorites, John Mitchell was a crook, but at least they all did the job. Holder is so impotent he makes the passive Alberto Gonzalas look like Bobby Kennedy.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Alpe d'Huez said:
Which is why I have not partaken in that debate, and won't. Same thing with another active member who isn't posting much right now.

Which is why I have not partaken in that debate, and won't. Same thing with another active member who isn't posting much right now.
Wow.

The floor is all yours (and the member who is not currently posting).:)
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Missed this from the Pew poll:

The survey finds that the contentious Republican primary has taken a toll on the image of the leading GOP candidates. In the current survey, just 29% of Americans say they have a favorable view of Romney, while 51% say they have an unfavorable impression. In November, opinions about Romney were more closely divided (36% favorable vs. 42% unfavorable). Santorum’s image has grown much more negative in the past month alone: 27% say they have a favorable view of Santorum, while 44% view him unfavorably. In February, about as many said they had a favorable opinion as an unfavorable one (33% vs. 36%). Obama’s personal image remains much more favorable than either Romney’s or Santorum’s. Currently, 56% of Americans say they have a favorable impression of Obama while 41% have an unfavorable view.
29% of Americans have a favorable view of Romney vs 56% who have a favorable view of Obama. I'd expect Romney's numbers to tick up after the primaries, but that's a pretty rough place to begin going into the general.

As for Ds vs Rs generally:

Just 36% have a favorable opinion of the GOP, compared with 56% who have an unfavorable opinion. That is largely unchanged from January (35% favorable vs. 58% unfavorable). Currently, 49% say they have a favorable impression of the Democratic Party, while 43% view the party unfavorably. In January, 43% viewed the Democratic Party favorably and 51% had an unfavorable impression.
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Which is why I have not partaken in that debate, and won't. Same thing with another active member who isn't posting much right now.


As I said here, and on the LA thread, Holder is the worst AG in nearly a century. Just this week, once again the SEC had to do the work he refuses to do. Then there's the UBS situation, where the only person prosecuted so far has been the whistleblower. We're near the end of Obama/Holder's first term, and almost nothing done by the AG's office on the worst fraud in perhaps US history. He's not even going after the obvious crooks. Plus, with that message, there is zero change on Wall Street, judging by Greg Smith, former equity delivery partner at Goldman Sachs stated recently. Richard Thornberg was very business friendly, but came down hard on the S&L cheats, Edwin Meese played favorites, John Mitchell was a crook, but at least they all did the job. Holder is so impotent he makes the passive Alberto Gonzalas look like Bobby Kennedy.
Lets not forget which party Phil Gramm belongs to..and what kind of extortion program was put in place before Obama was even elected.. Yea vote for those guys again..
 
The Ugly Delusions of the Educated Conservative

http://www.salon.com/2012/02/24/the_ugly_delusions_of_the_educated_conservative/

This article is abstracted from Chris Mooney’s new book The Republican Brain: The Science of Why they Deny Science—and Reality

Yale researcher Dan Kahan and his colleagues set out to study the relationship between political views, scientific knowledge or reasoning abilities, and opinions on contested scientific issues like global warming. In their study, more than 1,500 randomly selected Americans were asked about their political worldviews and their opinions about how dangerous global warming and nuclear power are. But that’s not all: They were also asked standard questions to determine their degree of scientific literacy (e.g, “Antibiotics kill viruses as well as bacteria—true or false?”) as well as their numeracy or capacity for mathematical reasoning (e.g., “If Person A’s chance of getting a disease is 1 in 100 in 10 years, and person B’s risk is double that of A, what is B’s risk?”).

The result was stunning and alarming. The standard view that knowing more science, or being better at mathematical reasoning, ought to make you more accepting of mainstream climate science simply crashed and burned.

Instead, here was the result. If you were already part of a cultural group predisposed to distrust climate science—e.g., a political conservative or “hierarchical-individualist”—then more science knowledge and more skill in mathematical reasoning tended to make you even more dismissive. Precisely the opposite happened with the other group—“egalitarian-communitarians” or liberals—who tended to worry more as they knew more science and math. The result was that, overall, more scientific literacy and mathematical ability led to greater political polarization over climate change—which, of course, is precisely what we see in the polls.
So now the big question: Are liberals also “smart idiots”?

There’s no doubt that more knowledge—or more political engagement—can produce more bias on either side of the aisle. That’s because it forges a stronger bond between our emotions and identities on the one hand, and a particular body of facts on the other.

But there are also reason to think that, with liberals, there is something else going on. Liberals, to quote George Lakoff, subscribe to a view that might be dubbed “Old Enlightenment reason.” They really do seem to like facts; it seems to be part of who they are. And fascinatingly, in Kahan’s study liberals did not act like smart idiots when the question posed was about the safety of nuclear power.

Nuclear power is a classic test case for liberal biases—kind of the flip side of the global warming issue–for the following reason. It’s well known that liberals tend to start out distrustful of nuclear energy: There’s a long history of this on the left. But this impulse puts them at odds with the views of the scientific community on the matter (scientists tend to think nuclear power risks are overblown, especially in light of the dangers of other energy sources, like coal).

So are liberals “smart idiots” on nukes? Not in Kahan’s study. As members of the “egalitarian communitarian” group in the study—people with more liberal values–knew more science and math, they did not become more worried, overall, about the risks of nuclear power. Rather, they moved in the opposite direction from where these initial impulses would have taken them. They become less worried—and, I might add, closer to the opinion of the scientific community on the matter.

You may or may not support nuclear power personally, but let’s face it: This is not the “smart idiot” effect. It looks a lot more like open-mindedness.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,307
1
0
redtreviso said:
Lets not forget which party Phil Gramm belongs to..and what kind of extortion program was put in place before Obama was even elected.. Yea vote for those guys again..
Please tell how this (or he) is relevant?
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
My point is .... he is to BLAME not something or someone to move forward with. Thanks for proving my point that NOW is not the time to be digging up relics....like Grammmmmms.
Right!!! Now's the time for Romney to say he'd do away with the barely enacted Dodd/Franks bill.. So he wants the permanent enabling of what made all this mess to start with..
 
Ahhh, come on. Even Eliot Spitzer says Dodd-Frank is severely flawed. It goes too strongly after some small fish, while hardly pursuing some large fish.

I do agree though that eliminating most regulations in banking like some in the GOP are suggesting will take us not only back to where we were in 2008, but worse. When you hear the word regulations tossed about like this, think "laws". Though some would have you think it means Soviet style communism.

Graham is one of many to blame, yes, we can throw eggs at him all day and he'd deserve it, but let's talk about solutions.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
Ahhh, come on. Even Eliot Spitzer says Dodd-Frank is severely flawed. It goes too strongly after some small fish, while hardly pursuing some large fish.

I do agree though that eliminating most regulations in banking like some in the GOP are suggesting will take us not only back to where we were in 2008, but worse. When you hear the word regulations tossed about like this, think "laws". Though some would have you think it means Soviet style communism.

Graham is one of many to blame, yes, we can throw eggs at him all day and he'd deserve it, but let's talk about solutions.
Ahh, solutions. But what legislative body is going to pass laws to curb the appetites of the banks and the speculators, when they can't even enact restrictions on the power of lobbying or the obscenity of campaign financing? Any more than they would be willing to pass anti-corruption laws that would jeapordize the security of their own political offices.

The only "solutions" have been of the deregulatory kind, which have transformed the Washington establishment and the democracy itself into minions of finance.
 
May 18, 2009
3,492
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Ahhh, come on. Even Eliot Spitzer says Dodd-Frank is severely flawed. It goes too strongly after some small fish, while hardly pursuing some large fish.
.....
But Spitzer got caught with a prostitute. That means what he says doesn't matter. :rolleyes:
 
May 18, 2009
3,492
0
0
rhubroma said:
Ahh, solutions. But what legislative body is going to pass laws to curb the appetites of the banks and the speculators, when they can't even enact restrictions on the power of lobbying or the obscenity of campaign financing? Any more than they would be willing to pass anti-corruption laws that would jeapordize the security of their own political offices.

The only "solutions" have been of the deregulatory kind, which have transformed the Washington establishment and the democracy itself into minions of finance.
Why would they enact legislationt to restrict lobbying and campaign finance laws? They are cutting their own throat. They can't even do away with the stupid electoral college much less that. Plus, the supreme court will take care of any "rules" restricting "free speech" lol.

The long term impact of Kerry losing in 2004 to that idiot is the supreme court.
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Ahhh, come on. Even Eliot Spitzer says Dodd-Frank is severely flawed. It goes too strongly after some small fish, while hardly pursuing some large fish.

I do agree though that eliminating most regulations in banking like some in the GOP are suggesting will take us not only back to where we were in 2008, but worse. When you hear the word regulations tossed about like this, think "laws". Though some would have you think it means Soviet style communism.

Graham is one of many to blame, yes, we can throw eggs at him all day and he'd deserve it, but let's talk about solutions.
Well ..first thing is stop pretending and s-ing up to the scotties saying that Gramm is just the other side of the same coin. These randite traitors intentionally rigged the banking industry to ruin the global economy saving the dregs for themselves..Romney is not criticizing Dodd-Frank as flawed, he wants things to stay exactly as they are..Why wouldn't he? When he proposes repealing GLB I will consider that he might not be just a pathological liar...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS