Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Not a fvckin' one of 'em!

Well, there's ONE Democrat I'd vote for for POTUS, but she's in the Cali Assembly and is not even envisioning anything beyond that right now.

I keep telling myself that I could vote Democrat in the next election. Then I think of Obama. And Hillary. And from there, I know I am not a Democrat and could not vote for one (on the Federal level, I actually think Democrats are able to run state governments more effectively because they are inherently limited in power of taxation)

youngterrier wrote:I keep telling myself that I could vote Democrat in the next election. Then I think of Obama. And Hillary. And from there, I know I am not a Democrat and could not vote for one (on the Federal level, I actually think Democrats are able to run state governments more effectively because they are inherently limited in power of taxation)

That may be true back East or even just in general, but in NO way are the Democrats running the Cali government "more" effectively. Jerry Brown is ruining California with his inability to communicate with EITHER party. That's not to say that Arnold Schwarzenegger was any better. He demonstrably was not. People who don't know any better are blaming the Legislature for kicking back and doing NOTHING about the budget when their hands are legally tied on 80% of the budget by funding levels prescribed in the state Constitution via the initiative process over the last 80 years or so. We have the most bloated state Constitution in the nation (and perhaps the world), yet people who don't care to find out for themselves would rather blame the Legislature. That's not going to change until we have a Constitutional Convention to start from ground zero. But there's about zero chance of that happening, not the least of which because LA and SF skew the votes from the Central Valley and SD.

Louisiana has similar problems to California. The budget is fixed and the only two areas that can be cut without a constitutional convention are in Healthcare and Education...Of course, back when all that got set up, we were a Democrat state. Figures...

SuperHornet wrote:

youngterrier wrote:I keep telling myself that I could vote Democrat in the next election. Then I think of Obama. And Hillary. And from there, I know I am not a Democrat and could not vote for one (on the Federal level, I actually think Democrats are able to run state governments more effectively because they are inherently limited in power of taxation)

That may be true back East or even just in general, but in NO way are the Democrats running the Cali government "more" effectively. Jerry Brown is ruining California with his inability to communicate with EITHER party. That's not to say that Arnold Schwarzenegger was any better. He demonstrably was not. People who don't know any better are blaming the Legislature for kicking back and doing NOTHING about the budget when their hands are legally tied on 80% of the budget by funding levels prescribed in the state Constitution via the initiative process over the last 80 years or so. We have the most bloated state Constitution in the nation (and perhaps the world), yet people who don't care to find out for themselves would rather blame the Legislature. That's not going to change until we have a Constitutional Convention to start from ground zero. But there's about zero chance of that happening, not the least of which because LA and SF skew the votes from the Central Valley and SD.

If only a female were governor...

youngterrier wrote:I keep telling myself that I could vote Democrat in the next election. Then I think of Obama. And Hillary. And from there, I know I am not a Democrat and could not vote for one (on the Federal level, I actually think Democrats are able to run state governments more effectively because they are inherently limited in power of taxation)

Not just north of you in NC....frigging eastwen Dems have run this state into the ground....Hunt>Easly>Perdue...

you got to remember though....I live in SC

youngterrier wrote:you got to remember though....I live in SC

Agree, but you stated Dems could run states better and I'm pointing out the proximity of contrary proof....they may be able to run SC better...

Appaholic wrote:

youngterrier wrote:you got to remember though....I live in SC

Agree, but you stated Dems could run states better and I'm pointing out the proximity of contrary proof....they may be able to run SC better...

They tax like crazy in Charleston...but we have a lot of improvements to show for it.

ASUMountaineer wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:
That may be true back East or even just in general, but in NO way are the Democrats running the Cali government "more" effectively. Jerry Brown is ruining California with his inability to communicate with EITHER party. That's not to say that Arnold Schwarzenegger was any better. He demonstrably was not. People who don't know any better are blaming the Legislature for kicking back and doing NOTHING about the budget when their hands are legally tied on 80% of the budget by funding levels prescribed in the state Constitution via the initiative process over the last 80 years or so. We have the most bloated state Constitution in the nation (and perhaps the world), yet people who don't care to find out for themselves would rather blame the Legislature. That's not going to change until we have a Constitutional Convention to start from ground zero. But there's about zero chance of that happening, not the least of which because LA and SF skew the votes from the Central Valley and SD.

If only a female were governor...

Kinda depends on who it is. I was gangbusters for Meg Whitman. But if, say, Nancy Pelosi were to run, I'd be speaking out against that 'til the cows come home.

youngterrier wrote: ... I actually think Democrats are able to run state governments more effectively because they are inherently limited in power of taxation...

Have you lost your mind, YT?

native wrote:

youngterrier wrote: ... I actually think Democrats are able to run state governments more effectively because they are inherently limited in power of taxation...

Have you lost your mind, YT?

Montana has had a Dem governor since 2005, and our budget is more balanced than most.

Grizalltheway wrote:

native wrote:
Have you lost your mind, YT?

Montana has had a Dem governor since 2005, and our budget is more balanced than most.

Anecdotal evidence.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:
Montana has had a Dem governor since 2005, and our budget is more balanced than most.

Anecdotal evidence.

As opposed to what nativist offered...?

Jim Trafficant.

Grizalltheway wrote:

native wrote:
Have you lost your mind, YT?

Montana has had a Dem governor since 2005, and our budget is more balanced than most.

Point taken, but do you really consider your home grown Dems to have much in common with those on the national stage?

Grizalltheway wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Anecdotal evidence.

As opposed to what nativist offered...?

Since 2009, Republican controlled Texas has created more jobs than any other two states combined - 47% of all jobs created nationally in this current "recovery."

http://www.timesrecordnews.com/news/201 ... -creation/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... el_opinion" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

native wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:
Montana has had a Dem governor since 2005, and our budget is more balanced than most.

Point taken, but do you really consider your home grown Dems to have much in common with those on the national stage?

Was YT not referring to Dems at the state level?

native wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:
As opposed to what nativist offered...?

Since 2009, Republican controlled Texas has created more jobs than any other two states combined - 47% of all jobs created inthis current "recovery."

http://www.timesrecordnews.com/news/201 ... -creation/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... el_opinion" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He also turned a budget surplus left behind by the previous (Dem) governor into a deficit, accepted the largest amount of federal stimulus $$, and Texas has the highest percentage of minimum wage jobs of any state in the country.

Grizalltheway wrote:

native wrote:
Since 2009, Republican controlled Texas has created more jobs than any other two states combined - 47% of all jobs created inthis current "recovery."

http://www.timesrecordnews.com/news/201 ... -creation/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... el_opinion" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He also turned a budget surplus left behind by the previous (Dem) governor into a deficit, accepted the largest amount of federal stimulus $$, and Texas has the highest percentage of minimum wage jobs of any state in the country.

Don't forget he was threatening to secede from the same country he now wants to run...

Grizalltheway wrote:

native wrote:
Since 2009, Republican controlled Texas has created more jobs than any other two states combined - 47% of all jobs created inthis current "recovery."

http://www.timesrecordnews.com/news/201 ... -creation/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... el_opinion" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He also turned a budget surplus left behind by the previous (Dem) governor into a deficit, accepted the largest amount of federal stimulus $$, and Texas has the highest percentage of minimum wage jobs of any state in the country.

Perry did not inherit anything from a Democrat governor in 2009. Texas' incumbent Republican governor, Rick Perry, was first inaugurated in 2000, when his predecessor, George W. Bush, was elected President.

native wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:
He also turned a budget surplus left behind by the previous (Dem) governor into a deficit, accepted the largest amount of federal stimulus $$, and Texas has the highest percentage of minimum wage jobs of any state in the country.

Perry did not inherit anything from a Democrat governor in 2009. Texas' incumbent Republican governor, Rick Perry, was first inaugurated in 2000, when his predecessor, George W. Bush, was elected President.

Facts, they be a biatch.

Grizalltheway wrote:

native wrote:
Point taken, but do you really consider your home grown Dems to have much in common with those on the national stage?

Was YT not referring to Dems at the state level?

I took YT's point about state level Democrats, but even among state Dems, Montana and her governor are the exception, not the rule. Cases in point include Illinois, California* and New York, three Dem states with overbearing, big spending governments, high taxes, Greek-level deficits and out of control public employee unions.

*Arnold is a RINO and faced nearly 2/3 majority Dem legislatures.

native wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:
Was YT not referring to Dems at the state level?

I took YT's point about state level Democrats, but even among state Dems, Montana and her governor are the exception, not the rule. Cases in point include Illinois, California* and New York, three Dem states with overbearing, big spending governments, high taxes, Greek-level deficits and out of control public employee unions.

*Arnold is a RINO and faced nearly 2/3 majority Dem legislatures.

Red States could use some blue leaders as Blue States could use some Red leaders. In SC, our education system is grossly underfunded (despite comprising of 56% of the budget, to put in perspective how little spending there is), but Lord know's it's the 8th Deadly Sin to raise taxes to pay for anything.