Thread: GOP: now & in the future

^ That map was retracted:

Update: There is a lot that is not correct with this map, including the absence of several major cities and what appear to be misplaced locations. It's our policy not to remove posts once they're up, but feel free to ignore this one.

U.S. Economic Activity, Split in Half and Mapped

I believe that the original author admitted that he left out a bunch of cities in order to make the 50/50 split. If he had used more urban areas (e.g. Atlanta) the split would be more lopsided. I also think he admitted that he had a bias towards the North East megaregion, for purely aesthetic reasons.

Originally Posted by quimbian corholla

^ That map was retracted:

Update: There is a lot that is not correct with this map, including the absence of several major cities and what appear to be misplaced locations. It's our policy not to remove posts once they're up, but feel free to ignore this one.

U.S. Economic Activity, Split in Half and Mapped

I believe that the original author admitted that he left out a bunch of cities in order to make the 50/50 split. If he had used more urban areas (e.g. Atlanta) the split would be more lopsided. I also think he admitted that he had a bias towards the North East megaregion, for purely aesthetic reasons.

I was wondering why Silicon Valley was so small, and also why, despite the fact that the Dixie states are tax leeches, Atlanta and NoLa aren't on there.

He made a new one, here; is the midwest outside St. Louis really that dead?:

Where is the GOP headed? Continuing downward if rogue nutcases like this are actually runing under the Repub name.

GOP candidate claims disabled children are God’s punishment for abortion
April 11, 2014 By Michael Stone

Christian conservative and Republican congressional candidate Bob Marshall claims that disabled children are God’s punishment for women who have an abortion.

Marshall, a Virginia GOP state delegate and congressional candidate, is standing by his obnoxious, irresponsible and baseless claim about the supposed “divine” link between abortion and disabled children, according to a report issued by Right Wing Watch.

Marshall says that “Nature takes its vengeance on subsequent children,” and that “Christians would suggest,” “It’s a special punishment.”

Back in 2010, at an event calling for an end to state funding for Planned Parenthood, Marshall originally suggested a divine connection between abortion and disabled children, claiming that women who have abortions are more likely to face “vengeance” from “nature” in children with a greater likelihood of having developmental disabilities.

The Wire reports Marshall is “the Culture War’s Four Star General.” And he has the outrageous, Christian conservative credentials to rate such a rank.

Marshall has repeatedly defended his stance against abortion in all cases, even in the case of rape and incest.

Marshall explained in an interview with the Boston Globe in 1989 that he wouldn’t make exceptions for abortions, even in the case of rape and incest, stating: “What if incest is voluntary? Sometimes it is.”

About abortion in the case of rape, Marshall said: “[T]he woman becomes a sin-bearer of the crime, because the right of a child predominates over the embarrassment of the woman.”

Marshall also questioned the sexuality of Supreme Court Justice Kennedy after
Kennedy ruled in favor of marriage equality: “For all I know, Kennedy’s a homosexual,” he said. “You can’t be doing some of these things without this kind of conclusion.”

Entire: GOP candidate claims disabled children are God

Originally Posted by barbaro

rogue nutcases like this are actually runing under the Repub name

not so much "rogue"....

more like republican mainstream!

Originally Posted by barbaro

I see the GOP in control of the House and/or Senate after the next election cycle - meaning that it's obviously possible.

They were going to hammer the Dems on Obamacare, that's gone.

What will they use instead? Unemployment?

That's on the wane.



Benghazi?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by barbaro

I see the GOP in control of the House and/or Senate after the next election cycle - meaning that it's obviously possible.

They were going to hammer the Dems on Obamacare, that's gone.

What will they use instead? Unemployment?

That's on the wane.

Benghazi?

Neither of these issues are "election" material - although I assume you're joking.

Split tickets are very common in the US. Meaning, Executive is from one party and the House and/or Senate is of the other party.

It's general policies.

This thread is worthy enough as the Presidential, Congressional, and Senatorial elections are coming up soon.

Any changes coming, or is it koolaid time again?

Originally Posted by Pound Hound

Originally Posted by barbaro

rogue nutcases like this are actually runing under the Repub name

not so much "rogue"....

more like republican mainstream!

Who does he think he is, nicking Glenn Hoddle's material!

What Causes Poor Uneducated White People Vote Republican? - LiberalAmerica.org

"According to a recent article by Quite Mike.org, Republicans like to claim they are all about liberty. Then, they support the recent SCOTUS decision where five conservative appointed judges took responsibility away from citizens and placed it in the hands of the corporation.

Their politicians lie to get our country into a war with these nonexistent weapons of mass destruction and now are trying to blame the current situation in Iraq on Obama. The Republicans advocate cutting food stamps, unemployment, education, and health care while cutting taxes for the wealthy. The GOP has a long history of demonizing poor people. The relatively new Tea Party crowd and their pals, the libertarians, have been on record with “go fend for yourself,” type attitudes towards the poor".

Rest of article is in the link.

Jeb Bush speaks in Spanish about Speaking in English

What a Maroon...

The future is grim. The end is nigh for repubtards. They have gerrymandered the entire south and are always loosing the overall popular vote.

Even the right tilted Supreme court has sided against the inherent racist voter suppression. See here for the truth;

https://teakdoor.com/speakers-corner/...-decision.html

I think most (?) posters are aware of this. Does the GOP have a chance in 2016?

IMO, not really.

Originally Posted by Black Heart

Does the GOP have a chance in 2016?

My hope is that Hillary flames out and Bernie is left as the nominee. His message galvanizes. The right has no answer for this. Not one of their candidates could beat Bernie.

Originally Posted by bsnub

Originally Posted by Black Heart

Does the GOP have a chance in 2016?

My hope is that Hillary flames out and Bernie is left as the nominee. His message galvanizes. The right has no answer for this. Not one of their candidates could beat Bernie.

Except the money will dry up. He'd need at least a billion from the rich and the corporations, and he ain't getting that is he?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by bsnub

Originally Posted by Black Heart

Does the GOP have a chance in 2016?

My hope is that Hillary flames out and Bernie is left as the nominee. His message galvanizes. The right has no answer for this. Not one of their candidates could beat Bernie.

Except the money will dry up. He'd need at least a billion from the rich and the corporations, and he ain't getting that is he?

That is what they will have to deal with.

Grassroots, I assume.

Getting his message directly out - and getting people to the polls.

And with the Supreme Court ruling on unlimited money one person or organization can spend, I assume their will be expensive, highly produced TV ads - but there is a catch IMO - many states will be blue states (actually ARE blue states).

As the video I posted above ^^^ notes, New Hampshire, Georgia and Virginia are blue leaners.

These blue state get 250 electoral votes to the Dem - assuming a Dem nominee does not implode.

And look at the possible GOP nominees. Not a great field, IMO.


*note: I have been wrong before.

^ It's not good and just encourages more belligerence from the Tea Party types. Which in turn will likely cause Republican politicians to be even more anti-intellectual in their desire to win conservative votes.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

^ It's not good and just encourages more belligerence from the Tea Party types. Which in turn will likely cause Republican politicians to be even more anti-intellectual in their desire to win conservative votes.

Anti-intelluctual?

Support for the Constitution is now considered anti-intelluctual?

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

^ It's not good and just encourages more belligerence from the Tea Party types. Which in turn will likely cause Republican politicians to be even more anti-intellectual in their desire to win conservative votes.

Anti-intelluctual?

Support for the Constitution is now considered anti-intelluctual?

I'm going to use your boy Ted Cruz as an example ... Obviously the most polished and well spoken of all the Republican candidates but that doesn't appear to be what TeaBag voters want this time around.

^^Hey, aren't you for changing the constitution? The 14th amendment in particular.