GOP insiders really that out of touch

Post Reply New Topic

But Republicans are believers and not just the Christian right fanatics. Republicans truly believe "trickle down" is a valid economic policy. Republicans also believe that if one repeats something over and over and over that it is true.

Prior to the Civil War and for some time after it, the U.S. had a good approximation to a capitalist economy. Trickle down in those days worked pretty well.

ruveyn

I'll build you a time machine then. You can go back and live in the good old days. There's no guarantee the captains of industry will let you into their club though. You may very well end up slaving away your entire life as a lowly railroad prole.

Or starting your own business out West as many did. Having an open frontier promoting a certain flexibility in the economy. Once the frontier was closed and sealed upward mobility suffered. There was little effort to organized labor unions until the 1880s when vertically integrated business firms began to behave in an anti-social fashion.

ruveyn

Racist, yes. But don't forget un-American, too. I mean, when it comes to taking away people's legitimate right to vote, and all in the name of supposedly preventing people who don't legitimately have the right to vote from voting, the ends do not justify the means. And when the real reason this is done is not to prevent illegitimate voters from voting, but rather for pure political gain, that's about as undemocratic as you can get.



"Class warfare" is a phrase that the right wing utters with venom as if its the second coming of satan. Why? Because, in a democracy, in a war between the classes, the larger class will always win. Considering that the right wing truely only represents one class of people - the wealthy - and that that class of people is vastly smaller than the other classes, they can not hope to politically survive if there is true, open and declared class warfare. The problem is, the wealthy have been carrying out an undeclared, secret class warfare against everyone else for decades now. That's why we have incredibly low tax rates for the rich, huge tax loopholes for them to exploit, economic suppression disguised as social and moral policies (anti-abortion, anti-education policies keep people poor) - and complete and utter outrage over any suggestion that the government should ever do anything for anyone other than them, ever. But if the masses ever get wise to this fact, the wealthy will be in big, big trouble, which is why they want us to think that they are not engaging in class warfare against us, and want us to think the entire idea of class warfare is evil - even the idea of us engaging in class warfare against them, when we're guaranteed to win by sheer numbers if we only unite, instead of letting them divide and conquer us.

The late 19th century was recession prone due to the termination of the high exuberance brought on by the railroad boom. When the inevitable recession hits is when the working class is truly punished. That's when things always get dicey.

The presidential election went about as expected from polling but I don't think anybody foresaw what happened in the senate, the polling certainly didn't suggest that. To be fair to Romney's staff tho, history suggested that Obama was in trouble, by all intents and purposes he should of lost.

But Romney's staff hadn't taken into account how much of the American people actually like Obama (and didn't like Romney at all), or that people realized getting us out of this mess would take time. That, and people knew things were getting balled up in DC because of Republican obstructionism. Romney's staff seemed to think the American people would expect immediate results - and failing that, turn on Obama - but it seems we're not that shallow after all.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Why is the popular vote close and the electoral vote not? (50.1% to 48.4%) Why is the House still in Republican hands? Congressmen have to stand for re-election every two years.

ruveyn

Well, okay, just over half of Americans like Obama - but that was more than enough.
And as far as the congress is concerned - Americans b***h about the congress, except for their own representatives who they keep sending back to Washington DC.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I've read that, strangely, Democratic house candidates ended up with more votes in total than Republican house candidates did. As with the electoral college, its not how many votes in total for each party, but how they're divided up geographically - by state for the college, by congressional district for Congress.

Of course, for Congress a lot of the answer lies in how districts are drawn up - which is often subject to gerrymandering.

I'd be interested to see what the average margin of victory was for Congressional candidates of both parties.

Gerrymandering. That is when the candidate you oppose happens to win.

ruveyn

Ah, yes, so gerrymandering never has anything to do with which side wins, right?

These aren't those days. Trickle down economics are a failure, and for the exact same reason as communism, human nature. The rich spend more, but proportionally less. They gather and hoard wealth, leading to the whole 1% versus 99% deal that's going around endlessly these days.

And how do they hoard?

Linda McMahon spent roughly $100 million of her own money trying to win a CT Senate seat in 2012 and 2010--she lost both times--neither race was close.