Rough week for Democrats

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

So that's a scientific, peer-reviewed article establishing a causative link between California's economic demise the plebiscite laws of California?

Yes, people complain about the initiative formula of California but I truly doubt it's the main factor in California's economic demise. However, spending too much sure sounds much more plausible. And for that, it doesn't take a regression analysis. If you spend more than you take in over a long enough time, when it's time to pay it back, you won't have enough. Seems simple enough.

Go ahead, fish for boogey-men elsewhere.

Sorry- did you present a scientific peer reviewed article supporting your argument it is all the Dems fault, or were you just "fishing for boogey-men?"

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Sorry- did you present a scientific peer reviewed article supporting your argument it is all the Dems fault, or were you just "fishing for boogey-men?"

I don't have to.

Democrats have controlled the Legislature in California for as long as can be remembered. If Republicans have no control, how could one blame anybody but those in control?

The public fisc is running huge deficits.

It doesn't take a study to link the two.

Democrats have not controlled spending in California.

For you to dissuade me from the obvious, a loose argument is insufficient. But, Mike is correct, Obama will give California a multi trillion dollar bailout, arguing we can't afford for California to go more bankrupt without California fixing its fiscal problems.

Yes public spending is a blessing not a curse. Go ahead stick to the sinking ship of California.

[MikeWaters]

Californians have 1) elected liberals, 2) have huge spending on immigrants, many of them illegal, 3) vote for every government program that sounds half-helpful, usually unfunded.

At the same time, largely though voter initiatives, have limited the amount they have to pay in tax.

Huge spending + inability to have huge taxes = fiscal irresponsibility. And unlike the federal govt. they can't print money, and their credit sucks.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Californians have 1) elected liberals, 2) have huge spending on immigrants, many of them illegal, 3) vote for every government program that sounds half-helpful, usually unfunded.

At the same time, largely though voter initiatives, have limited the amount they have to pay in tax.

Huge spending + inability to have huge taxes = fiscal irresponsibility. And unlike the federal govt. they can't print money, and their credit sucks.

Cali's predictable response is, the initiatives limit the amount of money which can be raised through taxes, and therefore, it's not the spending which is the problem but the silly citizens who don't want increased taxes.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I don't have to.

Democrats have controlled the Legislature in California for as long as can be remembered. If Republicans have no control, how could one blame anybody but those in control?

The public fisc is running huge deficits.

It doesn't take a study to link the two.

Democrats have not controlled spending in California.

For you to dissuade me from the obvious, a loose argument is insufficient. But, Mike is correct, Obama will give California a multi trillion dollar bailout, arguing we can't afford for California to go more bankrupt without California fixing its fiscal problems.

Yes public spending is a blessing not a curse. Go ahead stick to the sinking ship of California.

Silly me, I thought the legislature needed the approval of the Republican executive in California. Is that not the case anymore?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Silly me, I thought the legislature needed the approval of the Republican executive in California. Is that not the case anymore?

Arnold is not a Republican and in many instances he became a rubber stamp for the California legislature. There is virtually no influence of limited government or Republican principles outside of Orange County or San Diego County.

It is a Democratically dominated and controlled Legislature which dictates to the Governor. There really is no balance in California, so no, you can't punt that way.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

It is actually a really good time for Dems. The one issue they have wanted to see pass for 30 years now is going to pass in the next month (Coakley isn't going to lose, Tex).

Republicans have no plan, no focus, no anything (other than Steele, the Dems not so secret weapon, leading their counterattack), and all the passion of the Republican base is being directed at eliminating moderate Republican candidates in the primaries who can't win in the general election.

With health care almost done, we can focus on a jobs bill followed quickly by an energy bill.

Who are you referring to?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Who are you referring to?

Scozzafava, Rubio, Patrick Hughes (to beat Kirk), Mike Lee to beat Bennett, etc.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Tex

Scott Brown (R) has made an unlikely resurgence (or maybe just "surgence") in Massachusetts, raising $1.3 million dollars in a single day in small money donations (avg donation: $77). Martha Coakley (D) has been forced to actual campaign, turning in a sub-par debate performance, running a misleading attack ad with the name of her own state misspelled, and even paying Brown-supporting union workers to hold up campaign signs.

Coakley sounded the warning horn at a swanky DC fundraiser, begging for money, and it's estimated the DNC may have to pour in as much as $1 million of its own dollars to combat Brown's grassroots uprising. And in the (still) unlikely event he ends up winning, the Dems in the Senate are threatening to delay his swearing-in to avoid his filibuster-breaking 41st vote on health care, further angering the electorate.

This is Ted Kennedy's former seat, folks. This is Massachusetts.

And then, of course, we have the Democrat leadership's outrageous display of racism. Harry Reid refers to "light-skinned ... Negro dialect" and Bill Clinton says, "A few years ago Obama would've been getting us coffee." This is the party that blacks voted for by a 90% margin in 2000. Of course the Dems, including the racist "black leadership" (Bond, Jackson, Sharpton), are in full circle-the-wagons mode.

It's a great way to kick off 2010. May it continue.

This is January. If we're having this discussion in November, then I'll be pleased but until then, I'm not betting on it.

And it's not surprising. The party not in power can say all the right things. However, the Republicans don't have a clear message which resonates with voters. In the last election, the Dems had a message, whether it was achievable or simply fluff is another matter, but they had one. Now that the Dems have ignored the economy and rammed insurance reform for health care down our throats, many have strep throat. The remaining question is dependent upon the resolution of the strep, does it clear up or morph into mono.