Republicans kick some Democrat butt

[Dad2three]

A libertarian 'think tank' says so? It MUST be true right? After all we can point to MANY successful libertarian economic models such as??????

The Great Society At 50; Yes, It Has Abolished Poverty

Nicholas Eberstadt has an excellent essay about the effects of the Great Society and the War on Poverty and its success over the past 50 years. Entirely contrary to what we’re usually told about it it has indeed succeeded, it has got as close as government work ever will to abolishing poverty. The problem is that we’re still using the wrong methods to measure that success. We are measuring the incomes of the poor, not their consumption possibilities, and we are also measuring those incomes without taking into account the things we do to raise those incomes. When we correct for those two failings we find that there really isn’t any poverty to speak of in the US. We should therefore conclude that the war has been won.
The Great Society At 50 Yes It Has Abolished Poverty - Forbes

Really? After 50 years and TRILLIONS of dollars a poverty rate of 15% or so is considered "abolished"? What the hell are you idiots smoking?

ANOTHER conservative who HATES to read and think. Shocking

We might think that 4% actually living in poverty is too much but it’s pretty good for government work. And it’s also markedly different from the usual poverty numbers that get bandied about of 15% or so


...For we do not count the giving of all of those goods and services, “in kind benefits” as reducing poverty at all.

That’s how come we spend one trillion a year or so on reducing poverty and we seem to have just as much of it as we always did. Simply because we’re not counting the poverty reduction we’re buying with our trillion.

It’s entirely possible that poverty could have been beaten another way, or that it could have been done better or worse. But the truth is that the Great Society did actually abolish poverty, to the extent that we’re probably not going to reach the last few percent under any system at all. Our problem is that we just don’t seem to realise it.

The Great Society At 50 Yes It Has Abolished Poverty - Forbes

"Our problem is that we just don’t seem to realise it."

Meaning that we need to just accept "the new normal".

You aren't real bright pops.

So not only do you not like reading stories linked, you have problems with comprehension of them. Got it

That is a direct quote from your source Dad, and he said it right at the end of the Article......

Yes, AND context BEFORE the quote doesn't matter right *shaking head*

 

[Antares]

go back to eating shit, loser.

I'm a libertarian. It's sad that you have to ask that. Big government is more spending and more regulations. What is it that confuses liberals about that? What else would it be?

My definition of 'big government' is CONSERVATIVES/LIBERTARIANS in charge of it, who don't 'believe in it' therefore it fails, EVERY TIME!

Your version of BIG GOVERNMENT is STALINIST in nature and look how well that worked out for the Russians.

Sure, it's the liberals who favor authoritarian governments *shaking head*

How's that 'free trade' thing with China? Or US relying on Saudi?




Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) is a personality and ideological variable studied in political, social, and personality psychology. Right-wing authoritarians are people who have a high degree of willingness to submit to authorities they perceive as established and legitimate, who adhere to societal conventions and norms, and who are hostile and punitive in their attitudes towards people who don't adhere to them. They value uniformity and are in favour of using group authority, including coercion, to achieve it

Right-wing authoritarianism is measured by the RWA scale. The first scored item on the scale states, "Our country desperately needs a mighty leader who will do what has to be done to destroy the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us." People who strongly agree with this are showing a tendency toward authoritarian submission (Saint Reagan anyone?) (Our country desperately needs a mighty leader), authoritarian aggression (who will do what has to be done to destroy), and conventionalism (the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us).

Right-wing authoritarianism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Bet you are at the top of the ticket for ther GOP in 2016, with all the bla, bla, bla you posit

Last night was tough for you wasn't it?

 

[Antares]

Really? After 50 years and TRILLIONS of dollars a poverty rate of 15% or so is considered "abolished"? What the hell are you idiots smoking?

ANOTHER conservative who HATES to read and think. Shocking

We might think that 4% actually living in poverty is too much but it’s pretty good for government work. And it’s also markedly different from the usual poverty numbers that get bandied about of 15% or so


...For we do not count the giving of all of those goods and services, “in kind benefits” as reducing poverty at all.

That’s how come we spend one trillion a year or so on reducing poverty and we seem to have just as much of it as we always did. Simply because we’re not counting the poverty reduction we’re buying with our trillion.

It’s entirely possible that poverty could have been beaten another way, or that it could have been done better or worse. But the truth is that the Great Society did actually abolish poverty, to the extent that we’re probably not going to reach the last few percent under any system at all. Our problem is that we just don’t seem to realise it.

The Great Society At 50 Yes It Has Abolished Poverty - Forbes

"Our problem is that we just don’t seem to realise it."

Meaning that we need to just accept "the new normal".

You aren't real bright pops.

So not only do you not like reading stories linked, you have problems with comprehension of them. Got it

That is a direct quote from your source Dad, and he said it right at the end of the Article......

Yes, AND context BEFORE the quote doesn't matter right *shaking head*

You do realize that your Obama set the entire ACA up AROUND the "poverty" level don't you?

 

[Dad2three]

A libertarian 'think tank' says so? It MUST be true right? After all we can point to MANY successful libertarian economic models such as??????

The Great Society At 50; Yes, It Has Abolished Poverty

Nicholas Eberstadt has an excellent essay about the effects of the Great Society and the War on Poverty and its success over the past 50 years. Entirely contrary to what we’re usually told about it it has indeed succeeded, it has got as close as government work ever will to abolishing poverty. The problem is that we’re still using the wrong methods to measure that success. We are measuring the incomes of the poor, not their consumption possibilities, and we are also measuring those incomes without taking into account the things we do to raise those incomes. When we correct for those two failings we find that there really isn’t any poverty to speak of in the US. We should therefore conclude that the war has been won.
The Great Society At 50 Yes It Has Abolished Poverty - Forbes

Poverty is gone eh?

Don't like to read huh?

I read it son
So if I went and got a Fox News article that said Bammy was "progressive" you'd buy it?

PLEASE get it from a MODERATE who worked on Carter, Clinton or Obama's staff? Pretty please?

You do realize that your approval of a source isn't needed?

Sure, BUT seeming how Bruce Bartlkett worked for Reagan, and Ronn Paul, kinda thought him being a MODERATE might get to you? Just saying

 

[Antares]

Poverty is gone eh?

Don't like to read huh?

I read it son
So if I went and got a Fox News article that said Bammy was "progressive" you'd buy it?

PLEASE get it from a MODERATE who worked on Carter, Clinton or Obama's staff? Pretty please?

You do realize that your approval of a source isn't needed?

Sure, BUT seeming how Bruce Bartlkett worked for Reagan, and Ronn Paul, kinda thought him being a MODERATE might get to you? Just saying

Once again the Left thinks that ALL righties are in lockstep like they are.

Why don't YOU point out a Conservative Policy Bammy has put forward?

 

[Dad2three]

It boils down to getting rid of the Oligarchy Club in both parties and Mitch is very much one of them in that elite's club.
I don't see that happening in just 2 years.
The people themselves need to vote them all out or we will never have true reform that will be for the people rather than for the few who control everything.

It would help if the middle class would stop voting against their own best interest.

The net worth of the middle class has gone DOWN under Obama. Thus they WERE voting for their best interests.

Now name the p[olicies that did that? I can. Hint DUBYA./GOP 'HOME OWNERSHIP' SOCIETY WITHOUT REGULATORS ON THE BEAT!

Dubya ALLOWED and cheer-led for US households to DOUBLE their debt in the first 7 years in office. OOOPS

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Dad2three]

go back to eating shit, loser.

My definition of 'big government' is CONSERVATIVES/LIBERTARIANS in charge of it, who don't 'believe in it' therefore it fails, EVERY TIME!

Your version of BIG GOVERNMENT is STALINIST in nature and look how well that worked out for the Russians.

Sure, it's the liberals who favor authoritarian governments *shaking head*

How's that 'free trade' thing with China? Or US relying on Saudi?




Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) is a personality and ideological variable studied in political, social, and personality psychology. Right-wing authoritarians are people who have a high degree of willingness to submit to authorities they perceive as established and legitimate, who adhere to societal conventions and norms, and who are hostile and punitive in their attitudes towards people who don't adhere to them. They value uniformity and are in favour of using group authority, including coercion, to achieve it

Right-wing authoritarianism is measured by the RWA scale. The first scored item on the scale states, "Our country desperately needs a mighty leader who will do what has to be done to destroy the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us." People who strongly agree with this are showing a tendency toward authoritarian submission (Saint Reagan anyone?) (Our country desperately needs a mighty leader), authoritarian aggression (who will do what has to be done to destroy), and conventionalism (the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us).

Right-wing authoritarianism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Bet you are at the top of the ticket for ther GOP in 2016, with all the bla, bla, bla you posit

Last night was tough for you wasn't it?

Nah, used to stupid people voting against their own interests, generally they are red staters

 

[1776]

FYI....you scum lost yesterday.

go back to eating shit, loser.

I'm a libertarian. It's sad that you have to ask that. Big government is more spending and more regulations. What is it that confuses liberals about that? What else would it be?

My definition of 'big government' is CONSERVATIVES/LIBERTARIANS in charge of it, who don't 'believe in it' therefore it fails, EVERY TIME!

Your version of BIG GOVERNMENT is STALINIST in nature and look how well that worked out for the Russians.

Sure, it's the liberals who favor authoritarian governments *shaking head*

How's that 'free trade' thing with China? Or US relying on Saudi?




Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) is a personality and ideological variable studied in political, social, and personality psychology. Right-wing authoritarians are people who have a high degree of willingness to submit to authorities they perceive as established and legitimate, who adhere to societal conventions and norms, and who are hostile and punitive in their attitudes towards people who don't adhere to them. They value uniformity and are in favour of using group authority, including coercion, to achieve it

Right-wing authoritarianism is measured by the RWA scale. The first scored item on the scale states, "Our country desperately needs a mighty leader who will do what has to be done to destroy the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us." People who strongly agree with this are showing a tendency toward authoritarian submission (Saint Reagan anyone?) (Our country desperately needs a mighty leader), authoritarian aggression (who will do what has to be done to destroy), and conventionalism (the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us).

Right-wing authoritarianism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Bet you are at the top of the ticket for ther GOP in 2016, with all the bla, bla, bla you posit

 

[kaz]

Yes, the Republicans suck. Which is why I always say the Republicans suck. That doesn't remotely address the question, which is about Obama, not W.

I'm trying to figure out what exactly "big government" means to a right winger. I lean left on most issues, but to me, big oppressive government is big intrusive government agencies that spy on their own citizens. Big spending, to me, is wasting trillions of dollars on useless unnecessary wars. Just trying to break the code.

Well, then you should ask a right winger. Stopped reading here since the question wasn't for me.

Libertarians are FARRRRRRR right wingers Bubba, especially on economics!

Actually, we are moderates. We want government to be a referee, not a kindergarten teacher.

 

[kaz]

Yes, the Republicans suck. Which is why I always say the Republicans suck. That doesn't remotely address the question, which is about Obama, not W.

I'm trying to figure out what exactly "big government" means to a right winger. I lean left on most issues, but to me, big oppressive government is big intrusive government agencies that spy on their own citizens. Big spending, to me, is wasting trillions of dollars on useless unnecessary wars. Just trying to break the code.

Well, then you should ask a right winger. Stopped reading here since the question wasn't for me.

Sorry. I had you pegged as one. But what is "big government" to you?

I'm a libertarian. It's sad that you have to ask that. Big government is more spending and more regulations. What is it that confuses liberals about that? What else would it be?

My definition of 'big government' is CONSERVATIVES/LIBERTARIANS in charge of it, who don't 'believe in it' therefore it fails, EVERY TIME!

Putting libertarians in charge of government is "big government?" What a moron. Just as stupid as all your posts.

Bipartisanship is to you:

Democrats: 60/60 vote yes.

Republicans: 40/40 vote no.

This word, "bipartisan." I do not think it means what you think it means...

 

[kaz]

Obamacare isn't specific? That's both massive spending and massive legislation. You seriously need me to show you that Obama wants to spend lots and lots of money? You don't know that? And he is expanding regulations over energy, financial services and business in general. You're thinking he's a small government socialist?

Taxpayer monies to pay for the uninsured ISN'T massive spending?

Um...I said it is, what are you talking about?

 

[Dad2three]

ANOTHER conservative who HATES to read and think. Shocking

We might think that 4% actually living in poverty is too much but it’s pretty good for government work. And it’s also markedly different from the usual poverty numbers that get bandied about of 15% or so


...For we do not count the giving of all of those goods and services, “in kind benefits” as reducing poverty at all.

That’s how come we spend one trillion a year or so on reducing poverty and we seem to have just as much of it as we always did. Simply because we’re not counting the poverty reduction we’re buying with our trillion.

It’s entirely possible that poverty could have been beaten another way, or that it could have been done better or worse. But the truth is that the Great Society did actually abolish poverty, to the extent that we’re probably not going to reach the last few percent under any system at all. Our problem is that we just don’t seem to realise it.

The Great Society At 50 Yes It Has Abolished Poverty - Forbes

"Our problem is that we just don’t seem to realise it."

Meaning that we need to just accept "the new normal".

You aren't real bright pops.

So not only do you not like reading stories linked, you have problems with comprehension of them. Got it

That is a direct quote from your source Dad, and he said it right at the end of the Article......

Yes, AND context BEFORE the quote doesn't matter right *shaking head*

You do realize that your Obama set the entire ACA up AROUND the "poverty" level don't you?

Weird, so even Obamacares is helping to defeat the little remaining poverty in the US

 

[Antares]

"Our problem is that we just don’t seem to realise it."

Meaning that we need to just accept "the new normal".

You aren't real bright pops.

So not only do you not like reading stories linked, you have problems with comprehension of them. Got it

That is a direct quote from your source Dad, and he said it right at the end of the Article......

Yes, AND context BEFORE the quote doesn't matter right *shaking head*

You do realize that your Obama set the entire ACA up AROUND the "poverty" level don't you?

Weird, so even Obamacares is helping to defeat the little remaining poverty in the US

You are brain washed pop.
I hope your kids are more intelligent than you are.
How many people have qualified for the subsidies?

 

[Dad2three]

Don't like to read huh?

I read it son
So if I went and got a Fox News article that said Bammy was "progressive" you'd buy it?

PLEASE get it from a MODERATE who worked on Carter, Clinton or Obama's staff? Pretty please?

You do realize that your approval of a source isn't needed?

Sure, BUT seeming how Bruce Bartlkett worked for Reagan, and Ronn Paul, kinda thought him being a MODERATE might get to you? Just saying

Once again the Left thinks that ALL righties are in lockstep like they are.

Why don't YOU point out a Conservative Policy Bammy has put forward?

ACA

FLASHBACK: Heritage Touted RomneyCare, Key Elements Of Health Reform Heritage Now Opposes

Heritage On Romney’s Individual Mandate: “Not an unreasonable position, and one that is clearly consistent with conservative values.” [Heritage, 1/28/06]
– Heritage On President Obama’s Individual Mandate: “Both unprecedented and unconstitutional.” [Heritage, 12/9/09]

– Heritage On Romney’s Insurance Exchange: An “innovative mechanism to promote real consumer choice.” [Heritage, 4/20/06]

– Heritage On President Obama’s Insurance Exchange: Creates a “de facto public option” by “grow[ing]” government control over healthcare.” [Heritage, 3/30/10]

– Heritage On Romney’s Medicaid Expansion: Reduced “the total cost to taxpayers” by taking people out of the “uncompensated care pool.” [Heritage, 1/28/06]

– Heritage On President Obama’s Medicaid Expansion: Expands a “broken entitlement program,” providing a “low-quality, poorly functioning program.” [Heritage, 3/30/10]

In fact, in 2007, Heritage again boasted that Romney’s plan is “already showing progress.” That same year, Heritage proudly posted a video of Romney gloating that Heritage officials had supported him in creating “ultimate conservatism” with the Massachusetts health plan. Watch it:

STIMULUS 40% TAX CUTS/CREDITS?


Followed Dubya's exit plan on Iraq. Oh right, DIDN'T follow the GOP 'plan' on Bin Laden, but tracked his ass down a took caree of him

NEED MORE?

 

[Dad2three]

FYI....you scum lost yesterday.

Sure at or near record low turnouts and the GOP carried mostly red states Shocking they take the 6th year of the Prez 8 year turn, THAT never happens, right? lol

go back to eating shit, loser.

My definition of 'big government' is CONSERVATIVES/LIBERTARIANS in charge of it, who don't 'believe in it' therefore it fails, EVERY TIME!

Your version of BIG GOVERNMENT is STALINIST in nature and look how well that worked out for the Russians.

Sure, it's the liberals who favor authoritarian governments *shaking head*

How's that 'free trade' thing with China? Or US relying on Saudi?




Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) is a personality and ideological variable studied in political, social, and personality psychology. Right-wing authoritarians are people who have a high degree of willingness to submit to authorities they perceive as established and legitimate, who adhere to societal conventions and norms, and who are hostile and punitive in their attitudes towards people who don't adhere to them. They value uniformity and are in favour of using group authority, including coercion, to achieve it

Right-wing authoritarianism is measured by the RWA scale. The first scored item on the scale states, "Our country desperately needs a mighty leader who will do what has to be done to destroy the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us." People who strongly agree with this are showing a tendency toward authoritarian submission (Saint Reagan anyone?) (Our country desperately needs a mighty leader), authoritarian aggression (who will do what has to be done to destroy), and conventionalism (the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us).

Right-wing authoritarianism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Bet you are at the top of the ticket for ther GOP in 2016, with all the bla, bla, bla you posit

Sure at or near record low turnouts and the GOP carried mostly red states Shocking they take the 6th year of the Prez 8 year turn, THAT never happens, right? lol

 

[Redfish]

I read it son
So if I went and got a Fox News article that said Bammy was "progressive" you'd buy it?

PLEASE get it from a MODERATE who worked on Carter, Clinton or Obama's staff? Pretty please?

You do realize that your approval of a source isn't needed?

Sure, BUT seeming how Bruce Bartlkett worked for Reagan, and Ronn Paul, kinda thought him being a MODERATE might get to you? Just saying

Once again the Left thinks that ALL righties are in lockstep like they are.

Why don't YOU point out a Conservative Policy Bammy has put forward?

ACA

FLASHBACK: Heritage Touted RomneyCare, Key Elements Of Health Reform Heritage Now Opposes

Heritage On Romney’s Individual Mandate: “Not an unreasonable position, and one that is clearly consistent with conservative values.” [Heritage, 1/28/06]
– Heritage On President Obama’s Individual Mandate: “Both unprecedented and unconstitutional.” [Heritage, 12/9/09]

– Heritage On Romney’s Insurance Exchange: An “innovative mechanism to promote real consumer choice.” [Heritage, 4/20/06]

– Heritage On President Obama’s Insurance Exchange: Creates a “de facto public option” by “grow[ing]” government control over healthcare.” [Heritage, 3/30/10]

– Heritage On Romney’s Medicaid Expansion: Reduced “the total cost to taxpayers” by taking people out of the “uncompensated care pool.” [Heritage, 1/28/06]

– Heritage On President Obama’s Medicaid Expansion: Expands a “broken entitlement program,” providing a “low-quality, poorly functioning program.” [Heritage, 3/30/10]

In fact, in 2007, Heritage again boasted that Romney’s plan is “already showing progress.” That same year, Heritage proudly posted a video of Romney gloating that Heritage officials had supported him in creating “ultimate conservatism” with the Massachusetts health plan. Watch it:

STIMULUS 40% TAX CUTS/CREDITS?


Followed Dubya's exit plan on Iraq. Oh right, DIDN'T follow the GOP 'plan' on Bin Laden, but tracked his ass down a took caree of him

NEED MORE?

we get it, your head is up obama's ass. thankfully a majority of american voters have their heads up and eyes open.

Liberalism has failed, obama has set the dem party back for the next 30 years, but you guys got the first half black president and thats all that matters, right?

 

[Dad2three]

Yes, the Republicans suck. Which is why I always say the Republicans suck. That doesn't remotely address the question, which is about Obama, not W.

I'm trying to figure out what exactly "big government" means to a right winger. I lean left on most issues, but to me, big oppressive government is big intrusive government agencies that spy on their own citizens. Big spending, to me, is wasting trillions of dollars on useless unnecessary wars. Just trying to break the code.

Well, then you should ask a right winger. Stopped reading here since the question wasn't for me.

Libertarians are FARRRRRRR right wingers Bubba, especially on economics!

Actually, we are moderates. We want government to be a referee, not a kindergarten teacher.

YOU are a moderate? LMAOROG


Bubba, you are soooo extreme even Rove is laughing his ass off at you and your type

 

[Antares]

I read it son
So if I went and got a Fox News article that said Bammy was "progressive" you'd buy it?

PLEASE get it from a MODERATE who worked on Carter, Clinton or Obama's staff? Pretty please?

You do realize that your approval of a source isn't needed?

Sure, BUT seeming how Bruce Bartlkett worked for Reagan, and Ronn Paul, kinda thought him being a MODERATE might get to you? Just saying

Once again the Left thinks that ALL righties are in lockstep like they are.

Why don't YOU point out a Conservative Policy Bammy has put forward?

ACA

FLASHBACK: Heritage Touted RomneyCare, Key Elements Of Health Reform Heritage Now Opposes

Heritage On Romney’s Individual Mandate: “Not an unreasonable position, and one that is clearly consistent with conservative values.” [Heritage, 1/28/06]
– Heritage On President Obama’s Individual Mandate: “Both unprecedented and unconstitutional.” [Heritage, 12/9/09]

– Heritage On Romney’s Insurance Exchange: An “innovative mechanism to promote real consumer choice.” [Heritage, 4/20/06]

– Heritage On President Obama’s Insurance Exchange: Creates a “de facto public option” by “grow[ing]” government control over healthcare.” [Heritage, 3/30/10]

– Heritage On Romney’s Medicaid Expansion: Reduced “the total cost to taxpayers” by taking people out of the “uncompensated care pool.” [Heritage, 1/28/06]

– Heritage On President Obama’s Medicaid Expansion: Expands a “broken entitlement program,” providing a “low-quality, poorly functioning program.” [Heritage, 3/30/10]

In fact, in 2007, Heritage again boasted that Romney’s plan is “already showing progress.” That same year, Heritage proudly posted a video of Romney gloating that Heritage officials had supported him in creating “ultimate conservatism” with the Massachusetts health plan. Watch it:

STIMULUS 40% TAX CUTS/CREDITS?


Followed Dubya's exit plan on Iraq. Oh right, DIDN'T follow the GOP 'plan' on Bin Laden, but tracked his ass down a took caree of him

NEED MORE?

We didn't support the ACA, we still don't.
Again you assume that ALL "conservatives" are just like you, lockstep with your king.

Neither Romneycare nor oBamacare are "conservative" ideas, sorry.

 

[Dad2three]

I'm trying to figure out what exactly "big government" means to a right winger. I lean left on most issues, but to me, big oppressive government is big intrusive government agencies that spy on their own citizens. Big spending, to me, is wasting trillions of dollars on useless unnecessary wars. Just trying to break the code.

Well, then you should ask a right winger. Stopped reading here since the question wasn't for me.

Sorry. I had you pegged as one. But what is "big government" to you?

I'm a libertarian. It's sad that you have to ask that. Big government is more spending and more regulations. What is it that confuses liberals about that? What else would it be?

My definition of 'big government' is CONSERVATIVES/LIBERTARIANS in charge of it, who don't 'believe in it' therefore it fails, EVERY TIME!

Putting libertarians in charge of government is "big government?" What a moron. Just as stupid as all your posts.

Bipartisanship is to you:

Democrats: 60/60 vote yes.

Republicans: 40/40 vote no.

This word, "bipartisan." I do not think it means what you think it means...

Libertarian failure at EVERY turn? Yes, that's 'big Gov't, or more likely failed Gov't, what you Klowns have wet dreams about!

 

[Antares]

Yes, the Republicans suck. Which is why I always say the Republicans suck. That doesn't remotely address the question, which is about Obama, not W.

I'm trying to figure out what exactly "big government" means to a right winger. I lean left on most issues, but to me, big oppressive government is big intrusive government agencies that spy on their own citizens. Big spending, to me, is wasting trillions of dollars on useless unnecessary wars. Just trying to break the code.

Well, then you should ask a right winger. Stopped reading here since the question wasn't for me.

Libertarians are FARRRRRRR right wingers Bubba, especially on economics!

Actually, we are moderates. We want government to be a referee, not a kindergarten teacher.

YOU are a moderate? LMAOROG


Bubba, you are soooo extreme even Rove is laughing his ass off at you and your type

The funny part of this is that you don't even know what a stupid comment this was.

We rejected Rove, he is NOT a Conservative.

 

[kiwiman127]

Here's a couple of articles that explain what I see as a positive move for the GOP.

Why the GOP Blowout Is So Scary for Democrats
It's not just that the GOP won key races across the board. It's that the party showed a new hunger to cross over to moderates and win.
<snip>
In 2008 and 2012, Republicans couldn’t pull this off. Party elites backed John McCain and Mitt Romney, both of whom had records of bipartisan achievement and ideological independence that might have made them attractive to swing voters. But McCain and Romney faced so much hostility from the GOP’s conservative base that in order to win the nomination, and then ensure a decent base turnout in November, they had to repudiate the very aspects of their political identity that might have impressed independents. McCain, who had once called Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson “agents of intolerance,” made another such agent, Sarah Palin, his running mate. Romney, who given his druthers would likely have supported comprehensive immigration reform, instead demonized illegal immigrants to curry favor with the GOP base.
This year has been different: GOP activists have given their candidates more space to craft the centrist personas they need to win. First, in senate races in North Carolina, South Carolina, Kentucky, Alaska, Tennessee, Georgia, Kansas and Texas, comparatively moderate Republicans triumphed over Tea Party-backed challengers. Then many of those Republicans downplayed their opposition to gay marriage and highlighted their support for greater access to contraception in an effort to win over the young and women voters who in past elections spurned the GOP as too extreme. “On social issues,” wrote Slate’s Will Saletan, “Republicans are mumbling, cringing, and ducking. They don’t want the election to be about these issues, even in red states.”
Why the GOP Blowout Is So Scary for Democrats - The Atlantic

The sobering message for Obama
<snip>
Conservatives will likely disagree, but one takeaway for Republicans is that they were well served this year by recruiting conservatives whom voters saw as less hard right than the tea party. Look at Cory Gardner of Colorado: The GOP establishment intentionally promoted him as an alternative in Colorado who -- unlike Ken Buck, a tea partyer who lost a few years ago (but won the conservative 4th Congressional District this year) -- would appeal to moderates as well as conservatives. Even The Denver Post endorsed him -- just as The Boston Globe endorsed Republican Charlie Baker, who wrested the Massachusetts State House from Democrats.
Midterms The sobering message for Obama Opinion - CNN.com
========================================================
This sure makes a lot of sense. The Tea Party had very little influence on this election. "The Establishment' of the GOP made efforts to broaden the appeal for the GOP label by attracting more moderate/centralist candidates and the Tea Party challengers didn't fare well in the primaries.
The Democrats really didn't offer up many moderately liberal candidates and stayed hard left. On the other hand the GOP moved somewhat more to the center and attracted voters they had been losing when the GOP veered too far to the right.

"The Democrats really didn't offer up many moderately liberal candidates and stayed hard left"


PLEASE list five for me?

Certainly,
Yvette Clarke
Lacy Clay
Danny Davis
Donna Edwards
Mike Honda
Barbara Lee
Jim McGovern
How's that for starters?