Will miss rand. Was nice to have someone in the field that believes civil liberties include things beyond gun ownership and isn't bought into the war machine. guy is only 53 so expect we see him again, just not sure he fits in the GOP.
POLL: POLL: Bench Warmers Republican Primary
- Thread starter sal02
- Start date
If he doesn't believe in these things (or at least fakes believe in them) he should run as a Democrat.
Rand is a cross between a paleoconservative and a libertarian. I don't know if that's a good thing.
I care about the plight of the inner city poor. I don't care about white people who pretend to be black nationalists on an inet newsgroup.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
Rick Santorum endorsed Marco Rubio tonight! That's fantastic and both Santorum supporters may now vote for Rubio.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
Try and sell stuff (Santorum coffee mugs) on Sarah Palin's show to pay for his campaign debt.
Just caught a bit of the dem town hall. The GOP is going to have a very hard time connecting to a majority of Americans with their ongoing bitter whining and hate filled rhetoric. Seriously...good luck adp with finding a winner in that group.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
Adp,
Is it good for business to have a republican congress and democrat president or vice versa? Seems like there's more opportunity for lobbying when everyone disagrees on the direction of the nation.
Is it good for business to have a republican congress and democrat president or vice versa? Seems like there's more opportunity for lobbying when everyone disagrees on the direction of the nation.
Hillary would be best for business. Gridlock in Congress bad.GOP will control the House and Senate will be a slim margin. Dems are best for business, activist government.
Kmil, I don't understand your post. You watched a Dem town hall and that provided an opinion on the GOP? I'm confused.
Kmil, I don't understand your post. You watched a Dem town hall and that provided an opinion on the GOP? I'm confused.
Last edited:
I watched part of the replay and Bernie was great. HRC was her usual shrill self stumbling all over herself a lot trying to cover her multitude of positions on a multitude of topics.
I'm not sure the GOP can have a conversation where they just talk about the issues and the specific ideological differences with either themselves or the Democrats, without spewing out red meat that is completely outlandish. (like "Obama is destroying our country" or "Obama is ruining the military"). Just talk about the issues. But I don't think that is possible with Trump or Cruz on the stage.
Red meat like Wall Street is to blame, the system is rigged and class warfare/inequality. One man's red meat is another's pork. You don't even know your own bias. You missed the part last night where Sanders and HRC talked about how Obama failed progressives and they discussed who was more anti-Wall Street as they shamed HRC for taking almost $700K from Goldman in speaking fees. But hey, that's different right because we're standing up for the little guy.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
Are the best for business because they propose all sorts of socialist legislation and regulation that BIG BUSINESS then needs to lobby against?
Maybe it's the way its all presented. Sanders said it best: He will call out differences on the issues he believes in, but not attack any other candidate personally. That resonates particularly when you compare the way the GOP candidates do things. Not sure how you can't see the difference.
Not really. Think someone who does healthcare/transportation. Dems love to spend money = good for transportation. Dems love to give people free healthcare = good for healthcare interests. The idea that Dems aren't the party of big business is so lost in how things actually work. Don't get me wrong, Wall Street doesn't like the rhetoric but are they scared of Hillary Clinton President and Chuck Schumer, their boy, as majority leader? C'mon. Think about yourself. The nature of your question demonstrates that line of thinking Dems are bad for business so we need to stop stuff.
I'm not a tax guy so those are the areas where there is obviously a bias towards the GOP. However, in reality we haven't done a wholesale corporate tax bill since 1986. The only way that happens is on a bi-partisan basis. One of the best years for lobbyists was Obama's first year with Dem control of everything (including 60 in the Senate until Kennedy died). You had the stimulus, the GM bailouts and then Obamacare.Go look at the lobbying spending in those years. It was huge. Now if you're an energy interest you are paying people to stop things and leveraging the Hill. However, this is where the EPA does stuff through regulation. That's where those guys get screwed and thus business gets hurt. So in that case, yes, those business interests would prefer one party over the other. For instance, if you're "clean" energy you like what Obama's doing. Don't kid yourself, that's still big business but it's not the Koch brothers so it doesn't fit the talking points. Bottom line, everyone has interests and they do what they can to protect them. For independent guys the more Congress does the more business opportunities. Or in terms of Obamacare, the implementation is the key. That bill will put a lot of kids through college.The tea party guys are the worst for most bottom lines. So America probably likes them a little more if they are bad for lobbyists.
I'm not a tax guy so those are the areas where there is obviously a bias towards the GOP. However, in reality we haven't done a wholesale corporate tax bill since 1986. The only way that happens is on a bi-partisan basis. One of the best years for lobbyists was Obama's first year with Dem control of everything (including 60 in the Senate until Kennedy died). You had the stimulus, the GM bailouts and then Obamacare.Go look at the lobbying spending in those years. It was huge. Now if you're an energy interest you are paying people to stop things and leveraging the Hill. However, this is where the EPA does stuff through regulation. That's where those guys get screwed and thus business gets hurt. So in that case, yes, those business interests would prefer one party over the other. For instance, if you're "clean" energy you like what Obama's doing. Don't kid yourself, that's still big business but it's not the Koch brothers so it doesn't fit the talking points. Bottom line, everyone has interests and they do what they can to protect them. For independent guys the more Congress does the more business opportunities. Or in terms of Obamacare, the implementation is the key. That bill will put a lot of kids through college.The tea party guys are the worst for most bottom lines. So America probably likes them a little more if they are bad for lobbyists.
"We are always wary of guiding for mean reversion. But, if we are wrong and high margins manage to endure for the next few years (particularly when global demand growth is below trend), there are broader questions to be asked about the efficacy of capitalism."
He's attacking big banks, who single-handedly destroyed the world's economy in 2007. The idea of a free market economy sounds great, but in actual practice just doesn't work. Every time barriers/regulations are removed from the equation, people fck it up.
NickleDimer
Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
I now understand why you think the Dems are debating the issues and the Repubs are throwing red meat.
So it was just the banks. Clueless. How about congress, small banks, lenders, regulators, and lastly the idiots who all thought they were the next Donald Trump. No personal responsibility. I'm all for hammering the banks but this was systemic failure. Question, wad lending money to people who could not afford it in the name of equality a good idea? Bernie sanders and barney frank thought it was. Nothing to see here, we had no role it was the evil big banks. Ignorant on every level.
No, effective regulation is the key. We had plenty of entities who were responsible to oversee this stuff and they all failed. What good is more regulation if it doesn't work. Part of the problem was more regulation and mandating/inducing lending to people who shouldn't have been buying a house. This was some of the stuff the Maxine Waters and Barney Frank's of the world pushed. We have sold two false dreams in this country: everyone should own a home and go to college. Some people have no business owning a home. Some people have no business in college and should learn a trade. However, if we say that we are somehow disadvantaging or descriminating against individuals or groups. It helped fed the problem. However, don't kid yourself. It was a systemic failure led by greed (lenders and those accepting the loads), stupidity and failure to enforce the regulations/checks the system had in place. However, it's easier to just blame the banks, ignore reality and say we need "more regulation". Whatever the heck that means.