• Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.

    However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.

    We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

U.S. Politics: The Biggest Trade in WNBA History

BigLutz

Banned
He was her second husband, they have a special type of joint custody, and if you must know her complete life story, why don't you read it here.

As a Texan I am well versed with her life story, I am also versed in how she left her second husband and dumped him with the kids, one of which isn't even his after he college bills were paid.

Again I ask, what did Rand Paul say that was so racist?
 

Maedar

Banned
Last edited:

BigLutz

Banned
This:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/19/rand-paul-nsa_n_4994953.html

Bad choice of words, Rand. In fact, bad choice of topic.

Umm what is racist about that again?

""The first African-American president ought to be a little more conscious of the fact of what has happened with the abuses of domestic spying," Paul told Times reporter Jeremy Peters. "Martin Luther King was spied upon, civil rights leaders were spied upon, Muhammad Ali was spied upon, antiwar protesters were spied upon.""

He is right, blacks in the civil rights movement were heavily spied upon by the Kennedy and Johnson administration, you would think the first African American President would take the lessons of the Civil Rights era to show how dangerous it is to spy on fellow Americans. Especially since he likes to talk about that era so much.

Why? Name one thing he's actually done with his "knowledge and smarts" that everyone claims he has.

His ability to understand economic issues and craft plans to take care of them, you may not agree with his plans, but that does not mean he is not incredibly smart.
 
Last edited:

John Madden

resident policy guy
Can you show me the problem here? Hes simply speaking out against the NSA. Nothing wrong with that.

yeah if this was literally any other topic i'd be criticizing him, but as it stands...

His ability to understand economic issues and craft plans to take care of them, you may not agree with his plans, but that does not mean he is not incredibly smart.

this would be a valid point if Ryan's plans actually appreciably took care of any problems instead of exacerbating them, like how it redirects government spending that lessens the effects of wealth inequality into the military-industrial complex (where it's significantly less efficient at everything in general), or how it slashes discretionary spending based on the outdated gold-standard-era belief that deficits matter more than restoring the economy to its full-employment capacity (or near enough to it that labor markets are substantially healthier than they are now)

or the fact that it overturns the cost-cutting measures in the ACA with no real indication of how to replace them beyond voucherizing medicare, in spite of the fact that health care expenditures by non-elderly people are the single biggest driver of the debt projections he's using to justify his budgets

his budget'll possibly get him through the GOP primaries, but nowhere near a general election win.
 

WizardTrubbish

much more beastly
So I created a chart on my predictions for the 2014 governor and senate races, and I know it may be early, but I also have my ridiculously early 2016 and 2014 predictions.

Senate Predictions
Governor Predictions

Tossup means I think both sides have an even chance of winning, lean means I think it can go either way, but one side has a slight advantage, likely means one side has a clear advantage, but an upset is possible, and safe means one side is guaranteed a victory. I'm counting the two independent senators as Democrats. Underlined means that the election already happened and I was right. Also, I accidentally left off the 2014 Oregon Senate Race. That should be Safe D. Also, I accidentally placed the Texas governor's race in Likely R, should be Safe

Most of these are pretty obvious, but I'll explain of few of my more unusual choices:

2014 Mississippi Senate (Likely R): Mississippi is certainly a very conservative state and Thad Cochran is extremely popular, so why do I have this as competitive? Cochran is very vulnerable to a primary challenge from Chris McDaniel, and the two of them are neck and neck. McDaniel is a far-right, controversial, neo-confederate candidate, and could potentially turn out to be the Todd Akin of this race. Additionally, the Democrats have a very strong candidate in Childers. Childers vs. Cochran would be Safe R, while McDaniel vs. Childers is Lean R.
2014 Alaska Senate Race (Lean D): Most people have this race as a tossup, but I think that Begich has a better than even chance of winning for a couple of reasons. Of all the red-state democrats running for reelection this year, Begich has clearly run the best campaign and has had a small lead in polling. If only one Red-state democrat survives 2014, it'd be Begich.
2014 Virginia Senate Race (Safe D): Virginia may be a swing state, but Warner is one of the most popular senators in the country, and despite the media's obsession with the race, there's no indication suggesting that he's at all vulnerable.
2014 New Hampshire Senate Race (Safe D): This is by far the most overrated race of this cycle. No, Scott Brown does not have a chance of going back to the senate. A Massachusetts senator with a -10 approval rating is not going to be an incumbent with a +15 approval rating who's actually from New Hampshire. Sorry media, but there's no chance for Scott Brown here.
2016 Utah Senate Race (Likely R): After his role in shutting down the government, Lee's approval rating collapsed. He's probably more vulnerable to a primary from a moderate Republican than he is from a Democrat (which would be poetic justice, because primarying a more moderate Republican was how he got into the Senate in the first place), but I'll keep this as Likely R for now.
2016 Kentucky, Arkansas, and Missouri Senate Races (Likely R): These three states have one thing in common: they have popular Democratic governor's whose terms expire by 2016. If any of these governors were to make a run, they could make these races competitive
2014 Hawaii Governor Race (Likely D): Neil Abercrombie has terrible approval ratings, is facing a tough primary, and polling seems to indicate that he's vulnerable. Hawaii is notoriously difficult to poll, making this a hard prediction, so I just picked the safest option and made this Likely D, even if he is running in the most liberal state in the country.
 
Pretty good listing. In regards to my home state, Louisiana i think the governor's race should be moved over to safely Republican. The Democratic Party continues to weaken in the state despite Jindal's antics. At the moment the primary candidates are Jay Dardenne (Lt. Gov.) and David Vitter (disgusting). The democratic pool is fairly limited, as it has been the past few election cycles. I do agree with your prediction as well. Although i'd like to see Mary Landrieu unseated, she is renowned across the state for her work with the oil companies, which has recently led to more wealthier supporters on the Republican side to support her. Bill Cassidy is a worthy challenger though, having never lost a race in his political career, but i still see Landrieu squeaking by. Probably will come down to turnout of New Orleans / Baton Rouge like most of the close elections do.
 

WizardTrubbish

much more beastly
Pretty good listing. In regards to my home state, Louisiana i think the governor's race should be moved over to safely Republican. The Democratic Party continues to weaken in the state despite Jindal's antics. At the moment the primary candidates are Jay Dardenne (Lt. Gov.) and David Vitter (disgusting). The democratic pool is fairly limited, as it has been the past few election cycles.
My Likely R rating is based almost entirely on whether New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu run. I could see a Landrieu/Vitter race becoming extremely close, and Jindal's lousy approval ratings aren't going to be very helpful to the GOP.
 

WizardTrubbish

much more beastly
If there's anything that would get conservatives angry at Rand Paul, it's his foreign policy views.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/15/rand-paul-conservatives_n_5155883.html

Speaking of conservatives lashing out at Rand Paul...

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewi...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Rep. Peter King (R-NY), who has made it clear he's no fan of Sen. Rand Paul's (R-KY) foreign policy views, said Wednesday that a hypothetical Paul presidency would be "disastrous."

Appearing on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," King was asked whether he would be comfortable with Paul as commander-in-chief.

“No I wouldn’t. I think his views would be disastrous," King said. "I think he appeals to the lowest common denominator."

The New York Republican said Paul represents an "isolationist wing from the 1930s" and is bringing debate on national security to a "hysterical level."

Why is it that anyone who doesn't think the United States should be at war with every country in the world an isolationist?
 

BigLutz

Banned
I can understand that we do not need a John McCain foreign policy and invade every nation that Russia attacks but as Obama found out with his first daily briefing and I would hope Rand Paul would realize with his if he wins: there are some terrible people in this world that will cause problems for us and other nations if America does not have some sort of military power to swing
 

WizardTrubbish

much more beastly
There's talk that Kathleen Sebelius might run for Senate

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/17/u...ml?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-thecaucus&_r=2

Several Democrats said this week that Ms. Sebelius had been mentioned with growing frequency as someone who could wage a serious challenge to Mr. Roberts, 77, who is running for a fourth term and is considered vulnerable. One person who spoke directly to Ms. Sebelius said that she was thinking about it, but added that it was too soon to say how seriously she was taking the idea.

It was only last week, after all, that Ms. Sebelius, 65, said that she would step down from her cabinet job.

Even if Ms. Sebelius had not presided over the Department of Health and Human Services at a time of turmoil and self-inflicted distress — and while carrying out a law that inspires such anger on the right — her candidacy would be a tough sell in Kansas. Democrats have not held a Senate seat in the state since 1939. And even before the president’s popularity started to take a steep slide last year, he fared especially poorly in Kansas, winning only 38 percent of the vote there in 2012.

Yeah, there's no chance of a Sebelius victory here. Sebelius is toxic right now, and Kansas is about as deep red as it gets. If she does run, it'd probably end up looking like New Hampshire: A safe incumbent running against a deeply flawed but well-known opponent who the media falls in love with and pretends has a chance.
 

Silver Soul

Well-Known Member
I'm not a Rand Paul fan because of his association with the Tea Party faction, but if you want to knock him, you might want to find something from a site that's somewhat credible. Huffington Post is a joke.

There's a reason why Ron Paul was practically shelved by the GOP and the media itself in the 2012 elections you know.
 
Never said there wasn't, but if you wanted to be taken seriously you might want to use a less polarizing source.
 

Silver Soul

Well-Known Member
Never said there wasn't, but if you wanted to be taken seriously you might want to use a less polarizing source.

Fine then. Then for those who are still opposing ACA I'm afraid I got some BAD NEWZ! As Gallup reports about the uninsured rate dropping in states that accepted the ACA.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/168539/uninsured-rates-drop-states-embracing-health-law.aspx

Not to mention that the Premiums in the ACA are LOWER than the federal government expected as the CBO reported.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/45231-ACA_Estimates.pdf
 
Last edited:

BigLutz

Banned
Fine then. Then for those who are still opposing ACA I'm afraid I got some BAD NEWZ! As Gallup reports about the uninsured rate dropping in states that accepted the ACA.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/168539/uninsured-rates-drop-states-embracing-health-law.aspx

Not to mention that the Premiums in the ACA are LOWER than the federal government expected as the CBO reported.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/45231-ACA_Estimates.pdf

You do relize the reason the CBO reported that is because they expected more choices and benefits available, with fewer choices and benefits now available to customers the premiums are lower.... Until this fall when the 2015 rates come out

Edit

A crucial factor in the current revision was an analysis of the characteristics of plans offered through the exchanges in 2014. Previously, CBO and JTC had expected that those plans’ characteristics would closely resemble the characteristics of employment-based plans throughout the projection period. However, the plans being offered through the exchanges this year appear to have, in general, lower payment rates for providers, narrower networks of providers, and tighter management of their subscribers’ use of health care than employment-based plans do. …

The lower exchange premiums and revisions to the other characteristics of insurance plans that are incorporated into CBO and JCT’s current estimates have small effects on the agencies’ projections of exchange enrollment. Although lower premiums will tend to increase enrollment, narrower networks and more tightly managed benefits will tend to reduce the attractiveness of plans and thereby decrease enrollment. The net effect on projected enrollment in the exchanges is small.

http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/45231-ACA_Estimates.pdf
 
Last edited:
Top