Ossoff is at 55% with half the vote in/Georgia special election

[logger]

Originally Posted by Argumemnon

Logger, slavery was an American institution that lasted from its inception and for a hundred years. Are you in favour of slavery or not? And if not, why are you against American institutions?

See if you can figure that out on your own?

[logger]

Originally Posted by CapelDodger

I think we can depend on logger to keep us apprised of that.

I've already said, it won't be personal with him, it will be about his extreme leftism. Besides it will be the left that keeps us informed on this one. They're the ones pinning the last hopes they have on this one insignificant win. Which they will lose, why, because that is what they do, lose!

[Tony Stark]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

And you still haven't figured out why.

I know exactly why. They don't care about Trump being a rich NYC celebrity with no government experience because he's Republican. If he was a Democrat, they would have a problem with it.

[logger]

Originally Posted by Tony Stark

I know exactly why. They don't care about Trump being a rich NYC celebrity with no government experience because he's Republican. If he was a Democrat, they would have a problem with it.

Yeah, outraged by it! Lol

[Trebuchet]

Originally Posted by CapelDodger

Just out of interest, has anything else astounded you recently?

Probably, but nothing is coming to mind at the moment.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Tony Stark

I know exactly why. They don't care about Trump being a rich NYC celebrity with no government experience because he's Republican. If he was a Democrat, they would have a problem with it.

As I expected, you're wrong. They don't care because he doesn't look down on them. Hillary and Obama do.

[Tony Stark]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

As I expected, you're wrong. They don't care because he doesn't look down on them. Hillary and Obama do.

Of course he looks down on them. Con man don't respect their marks. When he pulled his Trump University scam, do you think he respected the marks? Obviously not. He saw them as gullible morons he could con into giving him money.

Same thing with his campaign/presidency. He spews all kinds of outrageous bs because he thinks his followers are stupid enough to believe him. What kind of guy claims he knows more about ISIS than the generals even though he obviously doesn't? Or claims that he had the biggest inauguration crowd ever even though he obviously didn't? Or claims he lost the popular vote because millions of people voted illegally, despite having no evidence whatsoever? Someone who believes that the people he's talking to are morons who will believe anything.

So yeah, it is very obvious that Trump looks down on his followers. But evidently a billionaire celebrity who lives in a huge gold covered penthouse in a NYC skyscraper that's named after him can convince Republican voters that he's not an elitist who looks down on them even as he cons them. As long as he's a Republican.

[cmikes]

Originally Posted by dudalb

For a Dem to do that well in a Solidly red district is a victory in itself for the Dems,though not as big a one as a outright win should have been,and is no doubt causing a massive amount of concern in the GOP.though of course they will say otherwise.

I don't know that spending 8.3 million dollars in one Congressional district to go from Hillary Clinton's 46.8 percent to Ossoff's 48.1 percent is really something to cheer about.

Can even the Democratic warchest afford many more victories like that?

Here's a piece from Politico about some of the challenges that Democrats are facing. When even a pro-Democrat website like Politico can't spin it into a Democratic victory, you know things are grim.

Politico

[NoahFence]

Originally Posted by logger

See if you can figure that out on your own?

Don't have the courage of your convictions?

[NoahFence]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

As I expected, you're wrong. They don't care because he doesn't look down on them. Hillary and Obama do.

Are you serious?

Jesus *********** Christ.

Blinders. Wow.

[logger]

Originally Posted by NoahFence

Don't have the courage of your convictions?

I'd rather deal with serious questions.

[cmikes]

Originally Posted by Tony Stark

Of course he looks down on them. Con man don't respect their marks. When he pulled his Trump University scam, do you think he respected the marks? Obviously not. He saw them as gullible morons he could con into giving him money.

Same thing with his campaign/presidency. He spews all kinds of outrageous bs because he thinks his followers are stupid enough to believe him. What kind of guy claims he knows more about ISIS than the generals even though he obviously doesn't? Or claims that he had the biggest inauguration crowd ever even though he obviously didn't? Or claims he lost the popular vote because millions of people voted illegally, despite having no evidence whatsoever? Someone who believes that the people he's talking to are morons who will believe anything.

So yeah, it is very obvious that Trump looks down on his followers. But evidently a billionaire celebrity who lives in a huge gold covered penthouse in a NYC skyscraper that's named after him can convince Republican voters that he's not an elitist who looks down on them even as he cons them. As long as he's a Republican.

Good luck. I've been trying to tell people that Trump is the Republican version of Obama since he started running.

[Tony Stark]

Originally Posted by cmikes

Good luck. I've been trying to tell people that Trump is the Republican version of Obama since he started running.

No. Obama graduated magna cum laude from Harvard law school, was the editor of the law review, taught constitutional law, had experience in government, wasn't born rich, and didn't spew outrageous crap like "I know more about ISIS than the generals, believe me", and "Mexico will pay for the wall".

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by NoahFence

Are you serious?

Jesus *********** Christ.

Blinders. Wow.

No kidding. Trump pretends to be your best friend, but it's so clearly a con. But even if that wasn't true, he bad mouths everyone except the people who are cheering him at the moment.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Tony Stark

No. Obama graduated magna cum laude from Harvard law school, was the editor of the law review, taught constitutional law, had experience in government, wasn't born rich, and didn't spew outrageous crap like "I know more about ISIS than the generals, believe me", and "Mexico will pay for the wall".

Another mind boggling disconnect to think Trump and Obama are anything alike.

[cmikes]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Another mind boggling disconnect to think Trump and Obama are anything alike.

It's the whole cult of personality "my guy could never do anything wrong" attitude that people have about both. At least we haven't had to put up with people calling Trump "The One", a Lightbringer, "The One we've all been waiting for", or hearing about how the oceans were going to listen to Obama and stop rising.

No matter what side of the aisle you're on, it's a terrible attitude to have. No politician is a savior and treating them like one is only going to lead to disappointment.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by cmikes

It's the whole cult of personality "my guy could never do anything wrong" attitude that people have about both. At least we haven't had to put up with people calling Trump "The One", a Lightbringer, "The One we've all been waiting for", or hearing about how the oceans were going to listen to Obama and stop rising.

No matter what side of the aisle you're on, it's a terrible attitude to have. No politician is a savior and treating them like one is only going to lead to disappointment.

I think you are misstating how a lot of us Progressives viewed Obama. I don't know anyone calling him perfect. But at least he was competent for the job. Trump, not so much.

[Roger Ramjets]

Originally Posted by Tony Stark

As long as he's a Republican.

QFT.

Winning is the only thing that matters!

And if Ossoff wins that proves nothing about his worth, only that the State is trending left - ie. is full of 'leftists'.

[PhantomWolf]

Originally Posted by cmikes

I don't know that spending 8.3 million dollars in one Congressional district to go from Hillary Clinton's 46.8 percent to Ossoff's 48.1 percent is really something to cheer about.

Can even the Democratic warchest afford many more victories like that?

Here's a piece from Politico about some of the challenges that Democrats are facing. When even a pro-Democrat website like Politico can't spin it into a Democratic victory, you know things are grim.

Politico

The thing is that the contests so far have been in what was deep red territory. The Dems shouldn't even have a chance. Getting to 48% is a minor miracle, especially when a lot of people on the right are still enamored with Trump.

Yes his popularity with GOP supporters is dropping, but it's still up in the high 70s. What these results do say to voters though is that they now have a chance to have their voices heard. How many voters in Georgia 6 who would have liked to vote Democrat but never bothered to vote at all because they believed it wouldn't matter might now think that actually it might matter.

The same in Kansas, Montana and elsewhere, By having strong showing in places where last time there were losing by 15-20 points helps to convince voters that were of the belief that their vote wouldn't matter because the race was a foregone conclusion that it actually does matter. It also may convince people that might have considered voting Democrat but always went with the flow to go with the new trend instead. The reversal isn't going to happen overnight, but rather increments over time, and 2018, 2020 has to be the goal for the Democrats.

Right now it's just time to show that GOP and the public, that they are strong enough to be in the fight and deserve to be backed.

[Roger Ramjets]

Originally Posted by cmikes

It's the whole cult of personality "my guy could never do anything wrong" attitude that people have

It's not a cult of personality, but of party. The reason Trump can't do anything wrong is that he's a Republican - nothing more.

This attitude does not exist to the same extent on the 'other side' - liberals had no qualms about dissing Obama for things they didn't like. In fact many 'progressives' were bitterly disappointed to find out that he wasn't as far left as they wanted (though it was a relief for some of us).

But the question is, why do conservatives and liberals have these different attitudes?

The answer is simple - their brains are 'wired' differently.

Conservatives are driven by fear. They are afraid that social change will lead to the destruction of their wealth, their culture, even their lives. So they must support whoever the Republican leader is no matter what, because anything less risks the country being taken over by 'leftists' who will murder them in their beds.

Liberals don't fear change - they want it. They think that 'progress' will make our lives better, despite the uncertainty it brings. Liberals will openly criticize their leaders or withhold support for the party if they think things should be done differently. In the current political environment that puts them at a disadvantage to conservatives, who know that winning is far more important.

Another difference is empathy - liberals generally have more of it. This is one reason why rich liberals don't mind paying higher taxes to support social programs that help people less fortunate than themselves, whereas conservatives tend to see them as bloodsucking 'losers' who don't deserve anything (and then change their minds when they need help).

You can't reason people out of these attitudes because it's programmed into their brain chemistry. So no matter how outrageous Trump gets, or how much Republicans hurt the country, conservative will still support the party because they have to. It's just who they are, and that will never change.

[wareyin]

Originally Posted by cmikes

I don't know that spending 8.3 million dollars in one Congressional district to go from Hillary Clinton's 46.8 percent to Ossoff's 48.1 percent is really something to cheer about.

Can even the Democratic warchest afford many more victories like that?

Here's a piece from Politico about some of the challenges that Democrats are facing. When even a pro-Democrat website like Politico can't spin it into a Democratic victory, you know things are grim.

Politico

Do you have a source for Clinton's percentage in Georgia's 6th district that shows your claim of 46.8%? The best I can find is that overall in Georgia she got 45.3%, and the Democratic candidate for the Representative of the 6th district only got 38.4%. I'd say 48.1% is a hell of an improvement over 38.4%, especially when the highest a Republican did in this election was 20%.

Also, talking about the $8m spent by Ds is a little empty if you don't compare it to the amount of money spent by the Rs. Do you know how much the Rs spent? I'm reading that outside Republican groups spent over $8 million, and that doesn't include what the Republican candidates themselves spent, or factor in the Trump phone calls or twitter promotions.

[Argumemnon]

Originally Posted by logger

See if you can figure that out on your own?

I'm not a mind reader. I take your evasiveness as evidence that you'd rather not answer that question.

[Firestone]

Originally Posted by wareyin

Do you have a source for Clinton's percentage in Georgia's 6th district that shows your claim of 46.8%?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/1...ns?detail=hide

[Argumemnon]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

As I expected, you're wrong. They don't care because he doesn't look down on them. Hillary and Obama do.

Wow, that's pretty deluded. I get the impression that Hillary looks down on them, but Obama? Please. And it's clear that Trump looks down on them too.

[Argumemnon]

Originally Posted by logger

I'd rather deal with serious questions.

It's quite serious. You said the left hates the institutions that made the US. I want to know how convinced you are of this statement.

[wareyin]

Originally Posted by Firestone

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/1...ns?detail=hide

Thanks!

[Cleon]

Originally Posted by logger

Lol
No actually it will be about Assoff being LIBERAL! This is a red state!

A red state that keeps sending John Lewis to Washington.

Demographics change, and the sixth has been changing rapidly over the past 20 years.

[Craig B]

Originally Posted by Argumemnon

You know that's not an argument, right?

I don't think Logger does know that.

[Border Reiver]

Originally Posted by logger

No like police, military, capitalism and don't forget Jesus himself, the king of kings.

Not sure if your understanding of history and "what made America" is all that accurate:

Police - The first police force in the US wasn't formed until 1838. Prior to that policing was done by an untrained sheriff who was able to convince enough of his neighbours that he could drag the town drunk to cells to sober up and stop Bob and Frank from brawling in the local tavern (or who the local powerbase thought could keep the local undesirables in line). Policing has often been the tool for social repression in addition to its more idealized role. While individual police officers tend to do their best under very challenging circumstances, the police have not always been a part of that advances the ideas enshrined in the US constitution.

Military - Based on the writings left to us, the Founders would be absolutely appalled at the size of the US military and how much of the budget it eats. A professional military was anathema to many of the Founders who would have been quite happy to keep the US military at a size where they could have kept the entire US Army in a moderate size football stadium, with a group of volunteer militia to fill out the ranks if something happened.

Jesus/Christianity - Remember that whole First Amendment?

[Argumemnon]

Originally Posted by Border Reiver

Jesus/Christianity - Remember that whole First Amendment?

That's the easiest one to forget!

[Tony Stark]

Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets

It's not a cult of personality, but of party. The reason Trump can't do anything wrong is that he's a Republican - nothing more.

This attitude does not exist to the same extent on the 'other side' - liberals had no qualms about dissing Obama for things they didn't like. In fact many 'progressives' were bitterly disappointed to find out that he wasn't as far left as they wanted (though it was a relief for some of us).

But the question is, why do conservatives and liberals have these different attitudes?

The answer is simple - their brains are 'wired' differently.

Conservatives are driven by fear. They are afraid that social change will lead to the destruction of their wealth, their culture, even their lives. So they must support whoever the Republican leader is no matter what, because anything less risks the country being taken over by 'leftists' who will murder them in their beds.

Liberals don't fear change - they want it. They think that 'progress' will make our lives better, despite the uncertainty it brings. Liberals will openly criticize their leaders or withhold support for the party if they think things should be done differently. In the current political environment that puts them at a disadvantage to conservatives, who know that winning is far more important.

Another difference is empathy - liberals generally have more of it. This is one reason why rich liberals don't mind paying higher taxes to support social programs that help people less fortunate than themselves, whereas conservatives tend to see them as bloodsucking 'losers' who don't deserve anything (and then change their minds when they need help).

You can't reason people out of these attitudes because it's programmed into their brain chemistry. So no matter how outrageous Trump gets, or how much Republicans hurt the country, conservative will still support the party because they have to. It's just who they are, and that will never change.

If it ends up being proven that the Trump campaign coordinated with the Russians against Hillary in exchange for sanctions relief or something like that, most Republicans would still support him for the sole reason that he's a Republican. Most would decide that Trump is the victim of a Democratic conspiracy to frame him. Some would believe it happened but not care, deciding that conspiring with a hostile foreign government to win the presidency is acceptable. If it is a Republican that did it.

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by Border Reiver

Not sure if your understanding of history and "what made America" is all that accurate:

Police - The first police force in the US wasn't formed until 1838. Prior to that policing was done by an untrained sheriff who was able to convince enough of his neighbours that he could drag the town drunk to cells to sober up and stop Bob and Frank from brawling in the local tavern (or who the local powerbase thought could keep the local undesirables in line). Policing has often been the tool for social repression in addition to its more idealized role. While individual police officers tend to do their best under very challenging circumstances, the police have not always been a part of that advances the ideas enshrined in the US constitution.

Military - Based on the writings left to us, the Founders would be absolutely appalled at the size of the US military and how much of the budget it eats. A professional military was anathema to many of the Founders who would have been quite happy to keep the US military at a size where they could have kept the entire US Army in a moderate size football stadium, with a group of volunteer militia to fill out the ranks if something happened.

Jesus/Christianity - Remember that whole First Amendment?

This. Absolutely this. And it took a Canuck to write it, too.

[logger]

Originally Posted by Cleon

A red state that keeps sending John Lewis to Washington.

Demographics change, and the sixth has been changing rapidly over the past 20 years.

I've already admitted that, pay attention!

[logger]

Originally Posted by Argumemnon

I'm not a mind reader. I take your evasiveness as evidence that you'd rather not answer that question.

Because the vast majority would obviously look at that institution as horrible. You don't have to be a mind reader to get that one.

[logger]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I think you are misstating how a lot of us Progressives viewed Obama. I don't know anyone calling him perfect. But at least he was competent for the job. Trump, not so much.

No, he's got it spot on. Obama surely wasn't qualified for the job. Certainly compared to Trump. His time in office proved that.

[logger]

Originally Posted by Argumemnon

It's quite serious. You said the left hates the institutions that made the US. I want to know how convinced you are of this statement.

Just turn on the news and watch what the left does? Once again we're going in to things that are quite obvious and a waste of time to explore.

[logger]

[quote=Border Reiver;11806831]Not sure if your understanding of history and "what made America" is all that accurate:

Police - The first police force in the US wasn't formed until 1838. Prior to that policing was done by an untrained sheriff who was able to convince enough of his neighbours that he could drag the town drunk to cells to sober up and stop Bob and Frank from brawling in the local tavern (or who the local powerbase thought could keep the local undesirables in line). Policing has often been the tool for social repression in addition to its more idealized role. While individual police officers tend to do their best under very challenging circumstances, the police have not always been a part of that advances the ideas enshrined in the US constitution.[quote]

Try to have a society without them.

Quote:

Military - Based on the writings left to us, the Founders would be absolutely appalled at the size of the US military and how much of the budget it eats. A professional military was anathema to many of the Founders who would have been quite happy to keep the US military at a size where they could have kept the entire US Army in a moderate size football stadium, with a group of volunteer militia to fill out the ranks if something happened.

Lol
What makes this country great doesn't have to start with the founders and I believe you're full of crap in what you "think" the founders thought of military.

Quote:

Jesus/Christianity - Remember that whole First Amendment?

Lol
Please tell me how Jesus effects the first amendment?

[logger]

Originally Posted by Garrette

This. Absolutely this. And it took a Canuck to write it, too.

And leftists will cheer it.

[Argumemnon]

Originally Posted by logger

Because the vast majority would obviously look at that institution as horrible. You don't have to be a mind reader to get that one.

There are people on the right who think slavery was a great thing. You still haven't answered my question.

Again: slavery is one of the founding institutions of the USA. Do you agree with this horrible practice, or do you hate one of the founding institutions of America? You can't have both or neither, logger.

Quote:

Just turn on the news and watch what the left does?

Another dodge. I guess we have a clue of what you believe about slavery.

[Segnosaur]

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

We've got a couple of months to wait, but I'll be astounded if Ossoff wins the general election. The Dems put on a YUGE get-out-the-vote effort. They'll be lucky to equal that result in the general. Meanwhile, the R's have been taken by surprise and be working very hard.

I'm not from the U.S., so obviously I'm not a resident of the district the election was held in.

But from what I understand, Ossoff was doing fairly well in the polls before the election, so I'm not sure how much of a "surprise" it would have been to the republicans, or how they would have handled the situation differently. As for the Democrats, I can't see them having a problem with a second "get-out-the-vote" campaign. After all, they have months to plan it.