Kansas Crimson

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 2:04 pm

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 1:51 pm i'm more of the opinion that so many thought the outcome was a foregone conclusion and just didn't vote

Most people I know weren't big Trump fans, but they were terrified that Dowdy would win, so they went out of their way to vote for Trump and drove all of their friends with them. Some things are an abomination and must be prevented at all costs.

twocoach wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 6:40 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 2:04 pm

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 1:51 pm i'm more of the opinion that so many thought the outcome was a foregone conclusion and just didn't vote

Most people I know weren't big Trump fans, but they were terrified that Dowdy would win, so they went out of their way to vote for Trump and drove all of their friends with them. Some things are an abomination and must be prevented at all costs.

So how will all those people vote when Clinton isn't the Dem nominee?

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 9:28 am

Mjl wrote: ↑Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:58 pm

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 07, 2018 5:06 pm The whole point of the Senate is to fuck up democracy.

Electoral College too.

That's the WHOLE POINT.

Repeal the 17th!

Why? Why is that a good thing to give more power to smaller states? Why do we need both the senate and electoral college to do this? Wouldn't it seem better to only have one that is skewed?

The people -- as you may or may not have seen over the last...oh, say two years -- are crazy, as mobs tend to be. Both institutions were designed to place a check on the people and on the federal government. The problem isn't that there are checks on power in the Constitution; the problem is that the people demand that the federal government be omnipotent and thus they resent the checks.

The accumulation of centralized power is a recipe for tyranny. And while the old Progressives did their best to destroy the protections against such accumulation, these two institutions remain, largely as the only bulwarks against aggressive centralized power.


Shorter version: Wyoming and California have almost nothing in common. Why should the latter have the ability to impose its desires on the former?

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 9:43 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 6:40 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 2:04 pm

Most people I know weren't big Trump fans, but they were terrified that Dowdy would win, so they went out of their way to vote for Trump and drove all of their friends with them. Some things are an abomination and must be prevented at all costs.

So how will all those people vote when Clinton isn't the Dem nominee?

Great question. I think it will come down to two variables: 1) how the economy is doing and 2) who the Dems nominate. If the economy is lagging, I think Joe Biden would give Trump a run for his money. If it is somebody like Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, or that socialist chick with the crazy eyes and no understanding of economics, Trump wins going away.

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 9:43 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 6:40 pm

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 2:04 pm

Most people I know weren't big Trump fans, but they were terrified that Dowdy would win, so they went out of their way to vote for Trump and drove all of their friends with them. Some things are an abomination and must be prevented at all costs.

So how will all those people vote when Clinton isn't the Dem nominee?

Great question. I think it will come down to two variables: 1) how the economy is doing and 2) who the Dems nominate. If the economy is lagging, I think Joe Biden would give Trump a run for his money. If it is somebody like Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, or that socialist chick with the crazy eyes and no understanding of economics, Trump wins going away.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:50 am Biden could be good if he wasn’t already like a bajillion years old.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:41 am

HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 9:43 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Mon Oct 08, 2018 6:40 pm

So how will all those people vote when Clinton isn't the Dem nominee?

Great question. I think it will come down to two variables: 1) how the economy is doing and 2) who the Dems nominate. If the economy is lagging, I think Joe Biden would give Trump a run for his money. If it is somebody like Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, or that socialist chick with the crazy eyes and no understanding of economics, Trump wins going away.

I don't think there's any scenario where the Dems should run Biden. That's the same broken thinking that had them run Hillary again. Harris and Booker are obviously thirsty. Klobuchar, too. I strongly suspect Kirsten Gillibrand is lying in wait.