Could Texas become a battleground state ?
- Thread starter QueEx
- Start date
Typical conservative excuse. Just respond in the order of questioning. You bullet point my comments to you on a consistent basis. You just did it! Stop cum dodging UD.
You tend to give opinions rather than post facts. Opinions can be argued till the cows come home which resolves nothing and sways few.
Which is the nature of conservatism.
"A conservative is someone who stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it."
William F. Buckley
Our Mission Statement" in National Review (19 November 1955)
Odd how many people think this quote doesn't apply to them.
If a liberal program is 50 years old and someone wants to change it, then are the program's supporters against change liberal or are they the conservatives.
If the people want it.
I love how minorities have such a deep value for the absoluteness of majority rule.
Your individuality of course. Everyone is a minority of one.
You know I was joking. I know you don't see yourself as an individual, maybe not even a person.
Another reason you deserve everything you voted for.
At least I do vote! Such the individualist, you can give two fucks about the many who gave their lives so you can vote. You built it!
Ayn Rand would be proud.
If the change fundamentally changes it, liberals should be against it.
Why are you proud of yourself for voting for evil?
The only thing your vote accomplishes is which of the 5 too-big-to-fail banks gets bigger at a faster rate than the others.
I used to think I was voting against a particular politician when I used to vote for the lesser of two evils. Now I know that I'm voting against you and 100 million more just like you that supports the politicians.
Bush said "we gave bankers a trillion dollars" and you gave a collective, "Thank You."
That's when I knew it was pointless.
So stay proud. All of you built the America that exist today.
Damn Greed. You've found true enlightenment. Or, cynicism.
And if it doesn't fundamentally change it?
If the fundamental is taxpayer money is used to fund the education of a child or if the fundamental is taxpayer money is used to cover the health care of seniors, then should liberals oppose changes to the details.
The answer is already an absolute yes. I just wish they realized that they are the conservatives protecting entrenched interest groups.
I prefer enlightenment since I also realized it doesn't have to be this way.
America is like this by choice. They can choose to stop supporting Democrats and Republicans.
I mean, it won't happen in my lifetime, but they could not choose evil.
No, it's not. Liberals will challenge changes to Medicaid or Social Security because these programs have been targeted from their inception. But they won't fight positive changes made that would make them more inclusive or more solvent. The party suggesting the changes has to make the case that the changes are necessary and will do no harm. That's how Clinton was able to make Medicare cuts despite some initial objections from other Democrats and Obama is able to do the same thing.
I don't think both were targeted since inception since Republicans were split at least 50/50 to pass both. Of course, we definitely have different ideas of what targeted means.
You're a bad winner. This is the America you voted for.
I also said I'll never vote democrat and republican. I didn't say I'll never vote again ever. I won't vote for the lesser of two evils. I'll only vote for someone not against.
When it goes from opposition from initial legislation to your Congressional and Presidential candidates campaigning on dismantling them (though they always call it "reform"), I call that "targeting".
Hispanics Actually Don't Share Republican 'Faith and Family' Values
Hispanics Actually Don't Share Republican 'Faith and Family' Values
There's a gulf between how the GOP and the voters it needs define social and cultural issues.
By Jill Lawrence
Updated: April 26, 2013 | 5:36 p.m.
April 26, 2013 | 12:56 p.m.
New Republican research on the GOP and Hispanics gives the party reason for hope that it can climb out of the political hole it is in with these voters. But there’s some bad news mixed in with the good, laid out in a Public Opinion Strategies memo about two lengthy focus groups of Hispanic voters this month in Las Vegas.
The most surprising findings involve social and cultural issues. Conservatives may assume they have the franchise on “faith and family” and all that label signifies, but Hispanics don’t see it that way.
Polls show that Hispanics really do line up more with Republicans on gay marriage and abortion, as the GOP claims when it talks of Hispanics as Republicans in waiting or Republicans who just don’t realize it yet. But “by a rather staggering margin,” POS partner Nicole McCleskey writes in the memo, Hispanics say they are much more likely to agree with the Democratic approach to social and cultural issues.
How can that be? The POS focus groups suggested that while Republicans interpret “social and cultural issues” primarily to mean gay rights and gay marriage, for Hispanics the phrase has to do with justice, fairness, and respect for “cultural differences.” “It’s no wonder Hispanic voters are perplexed when Republicans insist we share the same values,” McCleskey writes. They are also perplexed when asked if the GOP is more likely to share their values of faith and family, she says, “because they do not see either party as having cornered the market on faith and family.”
McCleskey said in an interview that Republicans and Hispanics "talk past each other” on social and cultural issues, particularly when it comes to the phrase "faith and family." “I don’t know if they hear what is intended, which is that we share similar positions on the value of the traditional family,” she said. “It’s kind of a code and they haven’t gotten the decoder ring.” She said she doesn’t have the answer yet for how the GOP should proceed, and intends her work to be a conversation-starter.
On the good-news front, the focus-group participants liked what they heard about Medicaid, immigration, economics, and education in clips from speeches by some prominent party figures. But the people they listened to—New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez, and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush—are unusual in how they talk about these issues and seemed like anomalies to the focus-group participants.
Comments about Christie, who is expanding Medicaid under the new health care law even though he disagrees with the law, summed up the problem. After hearing him talk about the human cost of not taking the new federal Medicaid money, the focus-group participants described him as human, caring, and someone who calls it like he sees it—but said he is just one person. The overriding perceptions among Hispanics, according to McCleskey’s memo, are that “Republicans don’t want us here” and whatever they say about the economy “will naturally be to the advantage to the wealthy and hurt the working class.”
Martinez won praise from McCleskey for going beyond the “traditional opportunity refrain” to frame lower business-tax rates as a matter of fairness—leveling the playing field with neighboring states. Bush’s description of why he pursued his Florida education reforms—to lift the poor and shrink the achievement gap between white and minority students—was powerful and “surprising stuff” to the groups, she said in the memo. McCleskey also said Paul was lauded for using personal stories in a discussion of immigration reform and making clear it is about all immigrants and not just Mexicans. McCleskey warned, however, that Republicans need to be careful about stressing that new citizens will create new taxpayers. That point reminded the focus groups of their perception that “Republicans care more about money than they do about people,” she wrote.
It will take a presidential candidate to recast the image of the party, but the 2016 nominee is not likely to be one of the three politicians the POS focus groups showcased talking about immigration, education, or the economy. Martinez has signaled so far that she is not interested in a national race. Bush, whose wife is Mexican, clearly is interested, but the nation probably is not ready for a third Bush presidency (his mother certainly isn’t, telling NBC this week that “we’ve had enough Bushes” in the White House). As for Paul, he is laying groundwork for a 2016 bid and may be less of a boutique candidate than his dad, but his libertarian leanings and odd mix of positions still make him a long shot.
The GOP does have some politicians with the potential to shift Hispanic views of Republicans. Christie and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida are at the top of that list. “Those two dominate the landscape as far as being change agents for our party,” McCleskey told National Journal. But first they’d have to survive a primary process that in 2012 reinforced the idea that Republicans are hostile to immigrants and led seven in 10 Hispanics to vote for Barack Obama.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/poli...e-republican-faith-and-family-values-20130426
Hispanics Actually Don't Share Republican 'Faith and Family' Values
There's a gulf between how the GOP and the voters it needs define social and cultural issues.
By Jill Lawrence
Updated: April 26, 2013 | 5:36 p.m.
April 26, 2013 | 12:56 p.m.
New Republican research on the GOP and Hispanics gives the party reason for hope that it can climb out of the political hole it is in with these voters. But there’s some bad news mixed in with the good, laid out in a Public Opinion Strategies memo about two lengthy focus groups of Hispanic voters this month in Las Vegas.
The most surprising findings involve social and cultural issues. Conservatives may assume they have the franchise on “faith and family” and all that label signifies, but Hispanics don’t see it that way.
Polls show that Hispanics really do line up more with Republicans on gay marriage and abortion, as the GOP claims when it talks of Hispanics as Republicans in waiting or Republicans who just don’t realize it yet. But “by a rather staggering margin,” POS partner Nicole McCleskey writes in the memo, Hispanics say they are much more likely to agree with the Democratic approach to social and cultural issues.
How can that be? The POS focus groups suggested that while Republicans interpret “social and cultural issues” primarily to mean gay rights and gay marriage, for Hispanics the phrase has to do with justice, fairness, and respect for “cultural differences.” “It’s no wonder Hispanic voters are perplexed when Republicans insist we share the same values,” McCleskey writes. They are also perplexed when asked if the GOP is more likely to share their values of faith and family, she says, “because they do not see either party as having cornered the market on faith and family.”
McCleskey said in an interview that Republicans and Hispanics "talk past each other” on social and cultural issues, particularly when it comes to the phrase "faith and family." “I don’t know if they hear what is intended, which is that we share similar positions on the value of the traditional family,” she said. “It’s kind of a code and they haven’t gotten the decoder ring.” She said she doesn’t have the answer yet for how the GOP should proceed, and intends her work to be a conversation-starter.
On the good-news front, the focus-group participants liked what they heard about Medicaid, immigration, economics, and education in clips from speeches by some prominent party figures. But the people they listened to—New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez, and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush—are unusual in how they talk about these issues and seemed like anomalies to the focus-group participants.
Comments about Christie, who is expanding Medicaid under the new health care law even though he disagrees with the law, summed up the problem. After hearing him talk about the human cost of not taking the new federal Medicaid money, the focus-group participants described him as human, caring, and someone who calls it like he sees it—but said he is just one person. The overriding perceptions among Hispanics, according to McCleskey’s memo, are that “Republicans don’t want us here” and whatever they say about the economy “will naturally be to the advantage to the wealthy and hurt the working class.”
Martinez won praise from McCleskey for going beyond the “traditional opportunity refrain” to frame lower business-tax rates as a matter of fairness—leveling the playing field with neighboring states. Bush’s description of why he pursued his Florida education reforms—to lift the poor and shrink the achievement gap between white and minority students—was powerful and “surprising stuff” to the groups, she said in the memo. McCleskey also said Paul was lauded for using personal stories in a discussion of immigration reform and making clear it is about all immigrants and not just Mexicans. McCleskey warned, however, that Republicans need to be careful about stressing that new citizens will create new taxpayers. That point reminded the focus groups of their perception that “Republicans care more about money than they do about people,” she wrote.
It will take a presidential candidate to recast the image of the party, but the 2016 nominee is not likely to be one of the three politicians the POS focus groups showcased talking about immigration, education, or the economy. Martinez has signaled so far that she is not interested in a national race. Bush, whose wife is Mexican, clearly is interested, but the nation probably is not ready for a third Bush presidency (his mother certainly isn’t, telling NBC this week that “we’ve had enough Bushes” in the White House). As for Paul, he is laying groundwork for a 2016 bid and may be less of a boutique candidate than his dad, but his libertarian leanings and odd mix of positions still make him a long shot.
The GOP does have some politicians with the potential to shift Hispanic views of Republicans. Christie and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida are at the top of that list. “Those two dominate the landscape as far as being change agents for our party,” McCleskey told National Journal. But first they’d have to survive a primary process that in 2012 reinforced the idea that Republicans are hostile to immigrants and led seven in 10 Hispanics to vote for Barack Obama.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/poli...e-republican-faith-and-family-values-20130426
Did the Supreme Court Just Turn Texas Blue?
Did the Supreme Court Just Turn Texas Blue?
By Francis Wilkinson
Jun 27, 2013 12:00 PM CT
Tuesday was a busy day for Texas Republicans. After the Supreme Court invalidated a key part of the Voting Rights Act that specifically covered Texas, state Attorney General Greg Abbott promised that his state, newly freed from federal oversight, would "immediately" implement its previously blocked voter ID law.
The law's a zinger: It requires voters to display proper identification, such as a concealed-weapons permit, while disallowing the use of student ID's from state universities. By the state's own data, Hispanics are markedly less likely to possess the required identification. And some citizens seeking proper ID may have to pay for a copy of a birth certificate in order to obtain it.
Having promised to resurrect what is arguably the nation's most partisan voter ID law, Abbott mentioned one more thing: "Redistricting maps passed by the Legislature may also take effect without approval from the federal government.”
The maps in question were adopted with "discriminatory purpose," according to a federal district court panel, whose ruling, it seems, was just rendered moot by the Supreme Court. Three facts explain how the panel reached that conclusion. Population growth over the past decade gave Texas four new seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. Almost all of that growth resulted from Hispanic and black population increases. Yet once state Republicans finished drawing their election maps, the number of Texas districts in which racial minorities are a majority actually declined.
Texas, like California and New Mexico, is already a minority-majority state, with non-Hispanic whites accounting for less than 45 percent of state population. Demographics are changing fast. According to demographer William Frey at the Brookings Institution, only 31.1 percent of Texans under the age of 5 are non-Hispanic white.
The demographic wave exposes a peculiar bind Republicans face in redistricting. Democratic majorities use redistricting to maximize their political power. But because the Democratic Party is a multiracial coalition, the redistricting process is partisan without necessarily being racial. For Republicans, partisan is racial. In a diverse state such as Texas, when Republicans aim at Democrats, they inevitably hit minorities. And each hit risks deepening the alienation that many minorities already feel from the Republican Party.
There is little public polling on minority awareness or reaction to voter-suppression efforts, so it's hard to gauge the impact.
Via e-mail, pollster Matt Barreto of Latino Decisions passed along a line from a November 2012 survey, in which more than nine in 10 black voters said there is "a need for the federal government to play a role in protecting the interests of racial and ethnic minorities in the area of voting rights."
That's not much to go on. Whether Hispanic voters share that "concern," however, and whether such concern translates into anger will influence the next few years of Texas politics. The state is basically a vast untapped Democratic well.
"There are currently 2 million Latinos eligible to vote who are not registered in Texas. There are 800,000 African Americans eligible to vote, but not registered in Texas," Baretto said. "Registration rates are comparatively low in Texas because historically it has not been competitive and the Democratic Party in Texas has an abysmal record of outreach to minorities."
That's changing. Democrats are now investing in organizing the state. They have a long way to go. But if the combination of Republican redistricting and voter ID regulations -- both of which inhibit minority power -- wake the sleeping nonwhite majority, the state's demographic wave could hit shore sooner than many realize. Under optimal circumstances, Barreto said the state could become a battleground in four to eight years.
Republicans seem perversely eager to bring it on. After spending the morning gearing up to annoy blacks and Hispanics, Texas Republicans inspired a fiery filibuster by Democratic state legislator Wendy Davis that stretched into the night. By trying to regulate abortion rights out of existence, Texas Republicans made a national hero of Davis, who is already talking of running for governor. Altogether, quite a day.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-27/did-the-supreme-court-just-turn-texas-blue-.html
Did the Supreme Court Just Turn Texas Blue?
By Francis Wilkinson
Jun 27, 2013 12:00 PM CT
Tuesday was a busy day for Texas Republicans. After the Supreme Court invalidated a key part of the Voting Rights Act that specifically covered Texas, state Attorney General Greg Abbott promised that his state, newly freed from federal oversight, would "immediately" implement its previously blocked voter ID law.
The law's a zinger: It requires voters to display proper identification, such as a concealed-weapons permit, while disallowing the use of student ID's from state universities. By the state's own data, Hispanics are markedly less likely to possess the required identification. And some citizens seeking proper ID may have to pay for a copy of a birth certificate in order to obtain it.
Having promised to resurrect what is arguably the nation's most partisan voter ID law, Abbott mentioned one more thing: "Redistricting maps passed by the Legislature may also take effect without approval from the federal government.”
The maps in question were adopted with "discriminatory purpose," according to a federal district court panel, whose ruling, it seems, was just rendered moot by the Supreme Court. Three facts explain how the panel reached that conclusion. Population growth over the past decade gave Texas four new seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. Almost all of that growth resulted from Hispanic and black population increases. Yet once state Republicans finished drawing their election maps, the number of Texas districts in which racial minorities are a majority actually declined.
Texas, like California and New Mexico, is already a minority-majority state, with non-Hispanic whites accounting for less than 45 percent of state population. Demographics are changing fast. According to demographer William Frey at the Brookings Institution, only 31.1 percent of Texans under the age of 5 are non-Hispanic white.
The demographic wave exposes a peculiar bind Republicans face in redistricting. Democratic majorities use redistricting to maximize their political power. But because the Democratic Party is a multiracial coalition, the redistricting process is partisan without necessarily being racial. For Republicans, partisan is racial. In a diverse state such as Texas, when Republicans aim at Democrats, they inevitably hit minorities. And each hit risks deepening the alienation that many minorities already feel from the Republican Party.
There is little public polling on minority awareness or reaction to voter-suppression efforts, so it's hard to gauge the impact.
Via e-mail, pollster Matt Barreto of Latino Decisions passed along a line from a November 2012 survey, in which more than nine in 10 black voters said there is "a need for the federal government to play a role in protecting the interests of racial and ethnic minorities in the area of voting rights."
That's not much to go on. Whether Hispanic voters share that "concern," however, and whether such concern translates into anger will influence the next few years of Texas politics. The state is basically a vast untapped Democratic well.
"There are currently 2 million Latinos eligible to vote who are not registered in Texas. There are 800,000 African Americans eligible to vote, but not registered in Texas," Baretto said. "Registration rates are comparatively low in Texas because historically it has not been competitive and the Democratic Party in Texas has an abysmal record of outreach to minorities."
That's changing. Democrats are now investing in organizing the state. They have a long way to go. But if the combination of Republican redistricting and voter ID regulations -- both of which inhibit minority power -- wake the sleeping nonwhite majority, the state's demographic wave could hit shore sooner than many realize. Under optimal circumstances, Barreto said the state could become a battleground in four to eight years.
Republicans seem perversely eager to bring it on. After spending the morning gearing up to annoy blacks and Hispanics, Texas Republicans inspired a fiery filibuster by Democratic state legislator Wendy Davis that stretched into the night. By trying to regulate abortion rights out of existence, Texas Republicans made a national hero of Davis, who is already talking of running for governor. Altogether, quite a day.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-27/did-the-supreme-court-just-turn-texas-blue-.html
Similar threads
