Where on the political spectrum are you?

[Subcommander R.]

Yup, same as me being of mixed-asian/european ethnicity makes me a potential Terrorist

(Hides behind a shield) I think Barack Obama is a brilliant guy, he's easy to relate to, is a genuinely nice guy and acts like he actually cares, furthermore he's helping to bridge the gap between African-Americans and Caucasians, I actually think Barack Obama could be the key to ending this stupid racial discrimination that still goes on in the World. Sure he's having problems at the moment, but what Political Leader doesn't? I think a lot of people had a high expectation of him and because of a couple of false starts, he gets a shitload of criticism, call me an optimist, but I really think Barack Obama is going to do a lot of good for not just the USA but the World in time

I like Obama too, but the only thing I learned from his election is this country is still very much racist. Whites have done him so wrong these last two years. I can understand if there are LEGITIMATE policy differences, but most of the stuff coming from the teabaggers/repubs is straight up hatred of the man and it is obvious it is because he is black.

I don't think it's because he's black as much as it's because he's a Dem. I definately think there is still racism and I know people who refused to vote for Obama only because he was black. I wouldn't say most, but some of the tea baggers are racist. The thing about the tea baggers is that they do have some good ideas and are just misinformed or uneducated. Some of those people are just hard core conservative republicans by another name. They just hate Obama because he's a Dem. If it were a Republican president doing these things they would be fine with it. I'm not a tea bagger or anything, i'm just saying don't judge all of them based on Sarah Palin and Dick Army and Christine O'Donell.

+1. You summed up everything I could think of adding.

 

[T'Girl]

... a good amount of the Tea Party [snip] are Democrats disenchanted with the direction the Liberals/"Progressives" (such as Obama) have taken the party.

And to be fair Rush, a considerable number of Tea Party supporters are disenchanted Republicans. Meaning disenchanted with main stream Republicans politicians. Hopefully they will stand fast and vote as a caucus and not be absorbed, also hopefully in two years we'll repeat the last election and pick up several more conservatives in both houses.

 

[Thestral]

whether he's an honest-to-goodness Leftist (which I believe)...

 

[Rush Limborg]

The exact opposite would happen, because States would become irrelevant and candidates would have to campaign for all the people equally.

Ah...no.

The fact is, without the College, candidates would campaign in larger population centers, and leave the smaller centers alone. Thus, those in more "rural" areas woudl be ignored, while the Big Cities would effectively choose our presidents.

They would have no reason to do so, since all votes count equally; and, as far as reaching voters goes, most campaigning is done remotely in this century.

Not at all. In order to save time, a politician need only, again, focus in high-population areas. A way of saving time and resources.

 

[Rush Limborg]

... a good amount of the Tea Party [snip] are Democrats disenchanted with the direction the Liberals/"Progressives" (such as Obama) have taken the party.

And to be fair Rush, a considerable number of Tea Party supporters are disenchanted Republicans. Meaning disenchanted with main stream Republicans politicians. Hopefully they will stand fast and vote as a caucus and not be absorbed, also hopefully in two years we'll repeat the last election and pick up several more conservatives in both houses.

I know--and I agree. I'm just saying--it's erroneous to label the Tea Party as "a GOP movement".

 

[Locutus of Bored]

And...it's worth noting that there is a good amount of the Tea Party (not "tea baggers"--that is a derogatory term, with an unfortunate innuendo) are Democrats disenchanted with the direction the Liberals/"Progressives" (such as Obama) have taken the party. Check the polls.

Okay.

According to three national polls by the Winston Group, a Republican-leaning firm that conducted the surveys on behalf of an education advocacy group:

* The national breakdown of the Tea Party composition is 57 percent Republican, 28 percent Independent and 13 percent Democrat.

* Two-thirds of the group call themselves conservative, 26 are moderate and 8 percent say they are liberal.

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/tea-party-poll-democrats/2010/04/04/id/354703

While tea party activists have described themselves as political free agents disgusted with both parties, a new poll by Quinnipiac University shows that a majority have a close connection to the GOP.

Almost three quarters of those who identified themselves as part of the tea party movement – 74 percent – also identified themselves as Republicans or independents who lean Republican, according to the poll. Only 16 percent of tea partiers said they are Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents.

Put another way, more than one fifth – 21 percent - of those who described themselves as Republicans said they also considered themselves part of the tea party movement, compared to 15 percent of independents and 5 percent of Democrats.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34913.html

I think it's kind of a stretch to call it a "good amount," even though that's so vague and subjective it could easily be used to backtrack to pretty much any number you want.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Ah...no.

The fact is, without the College, candidates would campaign in larger population centers, and leave the smaller centers alone. Thus, those in more "rural" areas woudl be ignored, while the Big Cities would effectively choose our presidents.

They would have no reason to do so, since all votes count equally; and, as far as reaching voters goes, most campaigning is done remotely in this century.

Not at all. In order to save time, a politician need only, again, focus in high-population areas. A way of saving time and resources.

That would be stupid then, because there are people everywhere and without the Electoral College a majority of the popular vote would be required to win. And, again, we have television and Internet now.

 

[Roger Wilco]

I think that's a strange argument anyway, since campaigning in rural areas doesn't happen much in US presidential election now with the way the EC is set up. In fact, in recent elections the candidates tend to ignore most states almost entirely, rural and urban areas (the wikipedia articles have good illustrations of that); specifically those states that almost certainly vote for one one party - neither Obama nor McCain did much campaigning at all in California or Oklahoma.
Also I'm pretty sure most big rallies in those states where campaigning even takes place are also done in urban areas already (which isn't surprising considering according to the CIA factbook, 82% of US-Americans live in urban areas...), I don't see how that would change in any way.

And additionally, the question of keeping the EC or abolishing it if what you care about is concern for rural areas is only a question of how unfair you want to make the elections, since it already is adjusted according to census data. If you really mean that, you should go all in and demand electing your president similar to the US Senate by giving each state the same voting power instead of each individual citizen. Then you'd have candidates campaigning in Nebraska and Maine for the first time.

 

[Rush Limborg]

And...it's worth noting that there is a good amount of the Tea Party (not "tea baggers"--that is a derogatory term, with an unfortunate innuendo) are Democrats disenchanted with the direction the Liberals/"Progressives" (such as Obama) have taken the party. Check the polls.

Okay.

According to three national polls by the Winston Group, a Republican-leaning firm that conducted the surveys on behalf of an education advocacy group:

* The national breakdown of the Tea Party composition is 57 percent Republican, 28 percent Independent and 13 percent Democrat.

* Two-thirds of the group call themselves conservative, 26 are moderate and 8 percent say they are liberal.

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/tea-party-poll-democrats/2010/04/04/id/354703

While tea party activists have described themselves as political free agents disgusted with both parties, a new poll by Quinnipiac University shows that a majority have a close connection to the GOP.

Almost three quarters of those who identified themselves as part of the tea party movement – 74 percent – also identified themselves as Republicans or independents who lean Republican, according to the poll. Only 16 percent of tea partiers said they are Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents.

Put another way, more than one fifth – 21 percent - of those who described themselves as Republicans said they also considered themselves part of the tea party movement, compared to 15 percent of independents and 5 percent of Democrats.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34913.html

I think it's kind of a stretch to call it a "good amount," even though that's so vague and subjective it could easily be used to backtrack to pretty much any number you want.

13% is a significant number--as is the 28% being Independent.

The fact is...only slightly more than half of the Tea Party is Republican, as the poll proves quite nicely.

 

[sidious618]

So in other words it's primarily a Republican movement. Thanks.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

We need a counter-movement.

 

[iguana_tonante]

I agree. Yo have nothing to lose, but your chains.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

13% is a significant number--as is the 28% being Independent.

The fact is...only slightly more than half of the Tea Party is Republican, as the poll proves quite nicely.

While only 57% identified as Republican, 74% identified as Republican or Republican-leaning independent. Remember the sudden groundswell of libertarianism by Republicans embarrassed by George W. Bush? Lot of that going on there. Roughly 66% identified as conservative, who would most likely overwhelmingly vote Republican as well.

It's a conservative-libertarian who will vote Republican (the Tea Party candidates mostly ran as Republicans for a reason) and Republican heavy movement. I'm not sure why you'd even want to deny that.

 

[RJDiogenes]

I think that's a strange argument anyway, since campaigning in rural areas doesn't happen much in US presidential election now with the way the EC is set up. In fact, in recent elections the candidates tend to ignore most states almost entirely, rural and urban areas (the wikipedia articles have good illustrations of that); specifically those states that almost certainly vote for one one party - neither Obama nor McCain did much campaigning at all in California or Oklahoma.
Also I'm pretty sure most big rallies in those states where campaigning even takes place are also done in urban areas already (which isn't surprising considering according to the CIA factbook, 82% of US-Americans live in urban areas...), I don't see how that would change in any way.

And additionally, the question of keeping the EC or abolishing it if what you care about is concern for rural areas is only a question of how unfair you want to make the elections, since it already is adjusted according to census data. If you really mean that, you should go all in and demand electing your president similar to the US Senate by giving each state the same voting power instead of each individual citizen. Then you'd have candidates campaigning in Nebraska and Maine for the first time.

Exactly. The only way to maybe get the Electoral College to work the way people think it does is to give all States equal votes; better to just do away with it so that each person's vote counts.

 

[Rush Limborg]

13% is a significant number--as is the 28% being Independent.

The fact is...only slightly more than half of the Tea Party is Republican, as the poll proves quite nicely.

While only 57% identified as Republican, 74% identified as Republican or Republican-leaning independent. Remember the sudden groundswell of libertarianism by Republicans embarrassed by George W. Bush? Lot of that going on there. Roughly 66% identified as conservative, who would most likely overwhelmingly vote Republican as well.

It's a conservative-libertarian who will vote Republican (the Tea Party candidates mostly ran as Republicans for a reason) and Republican heavy movement. I'm not sure why you'd even want to deny that.

I don't. I'm simply saying that it is not strictly GOP in its composition.

 

[M'Sharak]

13% is a significant number--as is the 28% being Independent.

The fact is...only slightly more than half of the Tea Party is Republican, as the poll proves quite nicely.

While only 57% identified as Republican, 74% identified as Republican or Republican-leaning independent. Remember the sudden groundswell of libertarianism by Republicans embarrassed by George W. Bush? Lot of that going on there. Roughly 66% identified as conservative, who would most likely overwhelmingly vote Republican as well.

It's a conservative-libertarian who will vote Republican (the Tea Party candidates mostly ran as Republicans for a reason) and Republican heavy movement. I'm not sure why you'd even want to deny that.

I don't. I'm simply saying that it is not strictly GOP in its composition.

That the Tea Party group is strictly GOP in its makeup is a claim which no one in this thread was making, strangely enough.

 

[Rush Limborg]

^Not in so many words, no. However....

Yup, same as me being of mixed-asian/european ethnicity makes me a potential Terrorist

(Hides behind a shield) I think Barack Obama is a brilliant guy, he's easy to relate to, is a genuinely nice guy and acts like he actually cares, furthermore he's helping to bridge the gap between African-Americans and Caucasians, I actually think Barack Obama could be the key to ending this stupid racial discrimination that still goes on in the World. Sure he's having problems at the moment, but what Political Leader doesn't? I think a lot of people had a high expectation of him and because of a couple of false starts, he gets a shitload of criticism, call me an optimist, but I really think Barack Obama is going to do a lot of good for not just the USA but the World in time

I like Obama too, but the only thing I learned from his election is this country is still very much racist. Whites have done him so wrong these last two years. I can understand if there are LEGITIMATE policy differences, but most of the stuff coming from the teabaggers/repubs is straight up hatred of the man and it is obvious it is because he is black.

I don't think it's because he's black as much as it's because he's a Dem. I definately think there is still racism and I know people who refused to vote for Obama only because he was black. I wouldn't say most, but some of the tea baggers are racist. The thing about the tea baggers is that they do have some good ideas and are just misinformed or uneducated. Some of those people are just hard core conservative republicans by another name. They just hate Obama because he's a Dem. If it were a Republican president doing these things they would be fine with it. I'm not a tea bagger or anything, i'm just saying don't judge all of them based on Sarah Palin and Dick Army and Christine O'Donell.

As you can see, by going back a page or two, I brought it up to contest the claim that the Tea Party was just against Obama because he's a Democrat.

Y'know, the "Where Were You When Bush Was President?" tripe.

 

[M'Sharak]

^Not in so many words, no. However....

I like Obama too, but the only thing I learned from his election is this country is still very much racist. Whites have done him so wrong these last two years. I can understand if there are LEGITIMATE policy differences, but most of the stuff coming from the teabaggers/repubs is straight up hatred of the man and it is obvious it is because he is black.

I don't think it's because he's black as much as it's because he's a Dem. I definately think there is still racism and I know people who refused to vote for Obama only because he was black. I wouldn't say most, but some of the tea baggers are racist. The thing about the tea baggers is that they do have some good ideas and are just misinformed or uneducated. Some of those people are just hard core conservative republicans by another name. They just hate Obama because he's a Dem. If it were a Republican president doing these things they would be fine with it. I'm not a tea bagger or anything, i'm just saying don't judge all of them based on Sarah Palin and Dick Army and Christine O'Donell.

As you can see, by going back a page or two, I brought it up to contest the claim that the Tea Party was just against Obama because he's a Democrat.

What for? There's nothing in what you've quoted here which suggests or implies a belief on anyone's part that the Tea Party is strictly GOP in its makeup (though, in your place, I'd have been tempted to take at least some of it with a grain of salt and taken a little time to judge how much really demanded any response at all.) In any case, your defense was still one made against an argument no one was actually advancing.

Y'know, the "Where Were You When Bush Was President?" tripe.

I'm not sure where you're going with this, so I'll just leave it alone and be on my way.

 

[Rush Limborg]

Well...I don't see how one could not see the argument I was refuting in the comments I highlighted. But, like you, I suppose I will have to agree to disagree with you. After all, it's my neck if I start debating a mod.

 

[I am Surak]

I - Surak - was found to be 100% Anarchist and 0% Democrat.
I find the outcome of this quiz agreeable.