Should Obama compromise/negotiate with the Tea Party?

[dmcheatw]

Wait, you're telling me this on a board where we have a thread on the front page that says "Everyone in {Party A} is dumb"? Like...in writing, where people can read it?

I asked, not asserted, if republicans had measurably lower IQ scores than democrats. it's a legitimate (though inflammatory) question which is apparently true. of a quarter million results, here are the first few unique results from the query "liberals smarter than conservatives?":

http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1968042,00.html
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...y-liberals-are-more-intelligent-conservatives
http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/04/0956797611421206.abstract
http://2012election.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=004818 (number 2)

conservatives just want to dismiss the question itself rather than address it's substance and the implications of it. if you reverse the phrase, you still get basically the same results (on page one at least), except for one op-ed piece by WordlNetDaily, which i skimmed and contains fallacies.

that said, even with the data showing what they show, there are a number of grounds you could attack the results of these studies on.

 

[ConnorEl]

...That's ludicrous.

Well, in my defense, I do still harbor some conservative tendencies...

 

[Deacon923]

The talking point about "the people" "voting for a divided government" by electing a GOP house of representatives is greatly undermined by the fact that Democrats got something like 1.7 million more votes for house seats than GOP candidates. The GOP retained the house because of gerrymandering, not some popular will of the people. Acting like they have some kind of moral mandate that is superior to that of the President or the Senate is silly.

They are duly elected and the President has to deal with them in some form or fashion. Some concession will be made. That doesn't change the fact that what the TPers in the House are doing is deeply, deeply irresponsible and I hope they are lashed at the polls next year. Personally speaking, I voted mostly Republican in 2010 and have been horrified by the actions of party at the state and federal level since then. I am not supporting the Republican party again so long as the Tea Party cancer is driving it. I don't think I am alone.

 

[WFFaithful]

No, go back and read my post about the GOP running the only candidate who couldn't run against it effectively. I think the people re-elected a divided government...and a divided government they received. I think they realize that neither party is worthy of their support.

You do know that 1.4 million more people voted for Democrats than Republicans for the House of Representatives. Yet the Democrats somehow only have 46% of the seats. Let's look at North Carolina. Democrats won 50.6% of the votes for US House candidates, yet they control only 30.8% of the seats. The people spoke, and Republicans gerrymandered.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

I also voted mostly Republican in 2010, but I will not be voting for any Republican at the state or federal level in upcoming elections unless something drastically changes.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

I do think it's prudent to point out though that both sides gerrymander. The obvious solution is that an apolitical (or I guess bi-partisan if apolitical can't occur) body be responsible for drawing all the districts.

 

[RJKarl]

I can't ever remember it being this gerrymandered. Some say there are about three dozen competitive districts left. there always used to be over 100.

 

[dmcheatw]

Perhaps I should start a thread about how all Dems are dumb...

can u not read man? i said constituents in your party might be dumber than democrats as shown by standard measures of IQ. and it's true.

that's all that it proves. i have not said republicans are dumb, or that there is any causation between the two variables, or that IQ tests are meaningful, or they govern less effectively or anything like that, because those things haven't been proven even if i do tend to believe those things as well.

the conservative response in the thread seems to (for me) strengthen the case. exhibit a) you've incorrectly characterized a simple sentence twice now.

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

I want to know when we get to stop paying federal income taxes. The Taxing clause in the Constitution reads: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States ..."

So, if the debts are not being paid then there is no power to tax. If a default occurs and this shit drags on, there are some serious dollars in play and a legitimate Constitutional argument exists against the government's ability to tax for that period.

 

[FuckmouthedRube]

The other way to phrase this question:

"Should Obama encourage the shutting down of government and defaulting on US debts as a viable tactic for a single party faction to leverage in an effort to repeal laws that were passed legally and upheld by the Supreme Court?"

Now ditch Obama for "any President, regardless of party offiliation."

Now ditch the entire President section and just ask is a faction of a party should be allowed to use a shutdown or default as leverage at all.

Hard to believe anyone could still be answering yes to the original question.

I also can't imagine anyone supporting a group who held 40 meaningless votes on something that had zero chance of becoming law. Then the same clown show thought they could take a final stand with a threat of shutting down the government after 40 prior failed votes and people would treat them as heroes. 74% disapproval on that scenario was eminently predictable. Obamacare may be a huge failure and there will be political consequences for that failure. Cruz's Tea Party stunt was a tactical clusterfuck that didn't address any of the problems with Obamacare. He's very fortunate that only three fourths of Americans are pissed off at his ridiculous shenanigans.

 

[Deacon923]

I do think it's prudent to point out though that both sides gerrymander. The obvious solution is that an apolitical (or I guess bi-partisan if apolitical can't occur) body be responsible for drawing all the districts.

Politicians have gotten better and better at gerrymandering as the science of demography and micro-census reporting has gotten more and more precise. California has created a bi-partisan system that by most accounts is working very well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Citizens_Redistricting_Commission

 

[Wakeforest22890]

I want to know when we get to stop paying federal income taxes. The Taxing clause in the Constitution reads: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States ..."

So, if the debts are not being paid then there is no power to tax. If a default occurs and this shit drags on, there are some serious dollars in play and a legitimate Constitutional argument exists against the government's ability to tax for that period.

I just think the argument would be we were still providing for the common defense right? Not to mention that it doesn't change the fact that taxes are collected in order to pay debts, the debts just wouldn't be able to be paid. Taxes would still be collected for that purpose. I doubt there's much of a legitimate argument that if a default occurs there is no power for the government to tax.

 

[Deacon923]

I want to know when we get to stop paying federal income taxes. The Taxing clause in the Constitution reads: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States ..."

So, if the debts are not being paid then there is no power to tax. If a default occurs and this shit drags on, there are some serious dollars in play and a legitimate Constitutional argument exists against the government's ability to tax for that period.

What? This sounds like a talking point straight from Mark Levin or The Blaze or some other Tea Party deep thinkers, the same crowd that thinks the SCOTUS should have been impeached for Marbury v. Madison in 1803.

 

[RJKarl]

I want to know when we get to stop paying federal income taxes. The Taxing clause in the Constitution reads: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States ..."

So, if the debts are not being paid then there is no power to tax. If a default occurs and this shit drags on, there are some serious dollars in play and a legitimate Constitutional argument exists against the government's ability to tax for that period.

So the bold red part doesn't matter?

You constantly amaze me.

 

[WFFaithful]

I want to know when we get to stop paying federal income taxes. The Taxing clause in the Constitution reads: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States ..."

So, if the debts are not being paid then there is no power to tax. If a default occurs and this shit drags on, there are some serious dollars in play and a legitimate Constitutional argument exists against the government's ability to tax for that period.

TP has a wet dream over flawed logic.

 

[bcobbdeacs]

For what it is worth the state of NC tried to create a non political districting board to draw new districts that were not gerrymandered but following the 2010 elections the repubs refused because they wanted to draw their districts to suit themselves. Sadly, it would have probably been the same had Dems won.

 

[deacphan]

but with better districts!

 

[ABCDeac]

I want to know when we get to stop paying federal income taxes. The Taxing clause in the Constitution reads: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States ..."

So, if the debts are not being paid then there is no power to tax. If a default occurs and this shit drags on, there are some serious dollars in play and a legitimate Constitutional argument exists against the government's ability to tax for that period.

Yeah, well, that would make everything better, right? Saving your tax dollars while the world crumbles. SILVER LINING! TEA PARTY!

 

[WFFaithful]

For what it is worth the state of NC tried to create a non political districting board to draw new districts that were not gerrymandered but following the 2010 elections the repubs refused because they wanted to draw their districts to suit themselves. Sadly, it would have probably been the same had Dems won.

As I have pointed out before, the Dem drawn districts were much more representative than the Pub drawn districts are today. At most, the Dem drawn districts added one seat to the Dems over the correct split, while the Pub drawn districts have added three seats to the Pubs over the correct split.

 

[PhDeac]

As I have pointed out before, the Dem drawn districts were much more representative than the Pub drawn districts are today. At most, the Dem drawn districts added one seat to the Dems over the correct split, while the Pub drawn districts have added three seats to the Pubs over the correct split.

Yep.

Loosen up population restrictions and it wouldn't be too difficult to just put together counties into the same district in NC.