The poll is five months old which is an eternity in politics.Swing and a miss.
The economy is the worst its been for an incumbent in decades. Still Obama is beating every GOP candidate in polling averages. Either Americans love Obama, they're giving all the credit of the economic hole to the GOP or with the those numbers, probably both.o
Bachmann's popularity has more to do with the size and strength of the poor conservative movement that in all probability have been turned out by the right wing media.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
- Thread starter Kepler
- Start date
- Status
duper
Well-known member
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
And by my standards of DOUBT (you know, the one that according to a couple hundred years of law is THE standard) quite a few death row inmates, including some who have been executed, had reason for doubt.
That said, it's funny that you can even argue when someone is agreeing with you, like I am.
I brought up that situation only as an example. There is only one kind of person who can definitively say that NO innocent person has ever been executed, and that is someone who has long since closed their eyes and decided to keep them closed.
My mind is made up, don't bother me with the facts.
Old Pio, we are Americans. NO ONE EVER HAS TO BE PROVEN INNOCENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And by my standards of DOUBT (you know, the one that according to a couple hundred years of law is THE standard) quite a few death row inmates, including some who have been executed, had reason for doubt.
That said, it's funny that you can even argue when someone is agreeing with you, like I am.
I brought up that situation only as an example. There is only one kind of person who can definitively say that NO innocent person has ever been executed, and that is someone who has long since closed their eyes and decided to keep them closed.
My mind is made up, don't bother me with the facts.
Last edited:
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
Center right, left, socialist, the guy isn't a leader
duper
Well-known member
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
My problem with this statement is that it is obvious, and has been for quite some time, that the Republican establishment (by which I mean the powers that control the republican party, not some crazy conspiratorial secret republican police, although that would be fun, too) have decided that nothing Obama wants shall come to fruition. It doesn't matter what it is; it doesn't matter if it's something they actually agree with; they will do everything they can to block every single thing he does. How can anyone lead against that?
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
So what, when the GOP establishment didnt have the power to block his stuff he still couldnt lead effectively. He spent too much time worrying if people liked him and showing up on TV and not enough time actually leading. You cant blame the GOP for a leader who had both houses of Congress and the best he could do was a Health Care Reform Act authored by Bob Dole.
Obama lost his spine on his first day in office.
So what, when the GOP establishment didnt have the power to block his stuff he still couldnt lead effectively. He spent too much time worrying if people liked him and showing up on TV and not enough time actually leading. You cant blame the GOP for a leader who had both houses of Congress and the best he could do was a Health Care Reform Act authored by Bob Dole.
Obama lost his spine on his first day in office.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
Or he had no spine to begin with. Which is one of a thousand reasons I didn't want him to be the nominee. He's a wimp and always has been.
Or he had no spine to begin with. Which is one of a thousand reasons I didn't want him to be the nominee. He's a wimp and always has been.
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
I don't disagree with what you are saying but he had both houses and did nothing, Pelosi did health care, without her he would have passed nothing. The so called biggest dolt ever got stuff passed,unfortunately
Foxton
Banned
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
Remember, compromise is a four letter word, so just shove your legislative dick down the other parties throat.
So the republicans didn't use every parliamentary procedure or publicity stunt they could to delay and obstruct the health care bill that did pass? Amazing how that's been so quickly forgotten.
Remember, compromise is a four letter word, so just shove your legislative dick down the other parties throat.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
Stop carrying water for Obama Scooby!!
Stop carrying water for Obama Scooby!!
unofan
Well-known member
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
Once you're convicted in a court of law, you do. The burden during appeals and post-conviction relief proceedings is on the convict, not the state.
Once you're convicted in a court of law, you do. The burden during appeals and post-conviction relief proceedings is on the convict, not the state.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
ABC News
So even when asked for comment after the debate, they wouldn't disown the audience booing the soldier. How badly do all these people want to lose? When the media asked this, especially of the lower-tier candidates who can't get any traction, this was an absolute gift...and they all pulled an Ochocinco and dropped the ball.
ABC News
So even when asked for comment after the debate, they wouldn't disown the audience booing the soldier. How badly do all these people want to lose? When the media asked this, especially of the lower-tier candidates who can't get any traction, this was an absolute gift...and they all pulled an Ochocinco and dropped the ball.
duper
Well-known member
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
Definitely not a lawyer, but my understanding was that an appeal has very little if anything to do with guilt or innocence, and everything to do with whether the original trial was kosher. Which is to say, an appeal's purpose is not either to prove guilt or innocence. I could definitely be wrong.
Foxton
Banned
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
Well it is to prove innocence or more specifically not guilty by showing that something was wrong with the previous trial. So innocent until proven guilty is reversed to an extent.
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
You misunderstood me. I was merely observing that "innocence" in these cases of dudes already executed is pretty subjective and you have already said you're against the death penalty in all cases. Therefore it stands to reason it wouldn't take much to convince you of someone's "innocence." Whereas in my case, it would take a bunch more.. We aren't arguing. We're having a pleasant discussion.
In the Davis case, SCOTUS ordered a rare hearing (first time in 50 years) for the lower courts to review the proceedings. Davis' lawyers didn't call some of these "recanting" witnesses, and the presiding judge characterized the case submitted as substantially "smoke and mirrors." Davis was given an extraordianry amount of due process and came up short. Like I said in a previous post, the people furthest away from this case know the least about it and have the strongest opinions (I'm not talking about you). Bishop Tutu is a lovely man, as is the Pope, but neither one of 'em has any friggin' idea about the specifics in this case. Recanting witnesses, twenty years later, not under oath, aren't very persuasive to me. Again, you're the only one with the intellectual integrity to say the execution of Brewer in Texas was also wrong. I haven't read or seen or heard of anyone, save you, who objected to that monster's death. IMHO they borth got what they deserved.
Old Pio, we are Americans. NO ONE EVER HAS TO BE PROVEN INNOCENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And by my standards of DOUBT (you know, the one that according to a couple hundred years of law is THE standard) quite a few death row inmates, including some who have been executed, had reason for doubt.
That said, it's funny that you can even argue when someone is agreeing with you, like I am.
I brought up that situation only as an example. There is only one kind of person who can definitively say that NO innocent person has ever been executed, and that is someone who has long since closed their eyes and decided to keep them closed.
My mind is made up, don't bother me with the facts.
You misunderstood me. I was merely observing that "innocence" in these cases of dudes already executed is pretty subjective and you have already said you're against the death penalty in all cases. Therefore it stands to reason it wouldn't take much to convince you of someone's "innocence." Whereas in my case, it would take a bunch more.. We aren't arguing. We're having a pleasant discussion.
In the Davis case, SCOTUS ordered a rare hearing (first time in 50 years) for the lower courts to review the proceedings. Davis' lawyers didn't call some of these "recanting" witnesses, and the presiding judge characterized the case submitted as substantially "smoke and mirrors." Davis was given an extraordianry amount of due process and came up short. Like I said in a previous post, the people furthest away from this case know the least about it and have the strongest opinions (I'm not talking about you). Bishop Tutu is a lovely man, as is the Pope, but neither one of 'em has any friggin' idea about the specifics in this case. Recanting witnesses, twenty years later, not under oath, aren't very persuasive to me. Again, you're the only one with the intellectual integrity to say the execution of Brewer in Texas was also wrong. I haven't read or seen or heard of anyone, save you, who objected to that monster's death. IMHO they borth got what they deserved.
duper
Well-known member
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
Edit: As a side note, I can't even say why I am so opposed to the death penalty. There was a potential capital case that tangentially affected my life, but for as long as I can remember even before that, the whole idea has just made me irrationally angry. So I actually generally try not to even engage in discussion about it, because I have been known to fly off the handle about it. Who knows.
Fair enough. I guess the thing you get is peopel who want rid of the death penalty jumping on a bandwagon like Davis where there is a degree of popular opinion regarding it. I read an interesting opinion piece, I think it was on NYTimes.com, about the case. I didn't much agree with the guy, but he has an interesting viewpoint. I can no longer find it, but the guy said, among other things, that cases that get this much press aren't what law should be based on anyway, which I agree with. If the death penalty is wrong, it should be eliminated, but not because of a cnadle light vigil for someone who, for whatever reason, garnered popular support. If it is good, it should continue to exist, but not because of mass coverage of cases like Ted Bundy or John Gacy.
Edit: As a side note, I can't even say why I am so opposed to the death penalty. There was a potential capital case that tangentially affected my life, but for as long as I can remember even before that, the whole idea has just made me irrationally angry. So I actually generally try not to even engage in discussion about it, because I have been known to fly off the handle about it. Who knows.
Last edited:
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
Better to be irrelevant than to be thought of as a gay supporter. Think about that for a second...
Better to be irrelevant than to be thought of as a gay supporter. Think about that for a second...
unofan
Well-known member
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
Yes and no. You're arguing whether or not the trial's kosher, but you also have to show that the error wasn't harmless; i.e., but for that error, the jury would have acquitted you. On direct appeal, you also get to argue that the jury acted unreasonably and that you really are innocent (not that it'll work more than 1 out of 1000 times).
Most states also allow a PCR proceeding in the event new evidence comes to light that was not acsertainable at the time of trial, but again to be successful you have to show that the evidence would've created an acquittal at trial. But you only get so many bites at the apple.
What most people have issues with is "actual innocence" is not normally grounds for a PCR hearing in and of itself, because you've already been convicted and gone through the direct appeals process. A PCR petition must attack the verdict collaterally, not directly.
Yes and no. You're arguing whether or not the trial's kosher, but you also have to show that the error wasn't harmless; i.e., but for that error, the jury would have acquitted you. On direct appeal, you also get to argue that the jury acted unreasonably and that you really are innocent (not that it'll work more than 1 out of 1000 times).
Most states also allow a PCR proceeding in the event new evidence comes to light that was not acsertainable at the time of trial, but again to be successful you have to show that the evidence would've created an acquittal at trial. But you only get so many bites at the apple.
What most people have issues with is "actual innocence" is not normally grounds for a PCR hearing in and of itself, because you've already been convicted and gone through the direct appeals process. A PCR petition must attack the verdict collaterally, not directly.
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
As a Dem who wants Obama to grow a pair, I do disagree with this. Obama has done the following things:
1) Health care (monumental achievement)
2) Saved the US auto industry
3) Stimulus (derided by partisans but supported by independent research)
4) Repeal of DODT
5) Bagged OBL
6) START treaty
7) Drone war on Al Quada devastates that terrorist organization
8) Libya
Obama's problem is that he doesn't seem to know how to negotiate from a position of strength. Even when he has overwhelming public opinion on his side of an issue. That's what frustrates his supporters. Be it the DREAM Act (really, what kind of idiot would not want to grant citizenship to a combat veteran of the US military?) or the budget battles (overwhelming support of getting rid of Bush top level tax deduction) he can't seem to use that to get things done. Over the last 40 years, two Presidents stick out as far and away the most popular & effective. While complete opposites politically, Reagan and Clinton shared some similarities. Both had to deal with an opposition in the majority in Congress. Both lost a house of Congress during their terms (although you'd never know that the 1986 Senate takeover happened on Ronbo's watch speaking to conservatives). However, both entered negotiations with a "here's what I'm going to do, I'll work with you if you want or I'll do it anyway" attitude. What Obama needs to do is use the powers of the Presidency to enact change on his own to the extent that he can do so legally and forget about Congress.
He doesn't need Congress to close Gitmo. Likewise if the GOP wants to block his appointment to the Consumer Protection Bureau, simply threaten to appoint L'il Ralphie Nader during a recess if they don't. Republicans want spending cuts? - Great, propose projects in their districts to cut. For the first time he did this a few days ago when he issued waivers to NCLB because Congress won't get off their arse to fix a law everybody agrees needs revision. He needs to do much, much more of this if he plans on getting anything through Congress.
As a Dem who wants Obama to grow a pair, I do disagree with this. Obama has done the following things:
1) Health care (monumental achievement)
2) Saved the US auto industry
3) Stimulus (derided by partisans but supported by independent research)
4) Repeal of DODT
5) Bagged OBL
6) START treaty
7) Drone war on Al Quada devastates that terrorist organization
8) Libya
Obama's problem is that he doesn't seem to know how to negotiate from a position of strength. Even when he has overwhelming public opinion on his side of an issue. That's what frustrates his supporters. Be it the DREAM Act (really, what kind of idiot would not want to grant citizenship to a combat veteran of the US military?) or the budget battles (overwhelming support of getting rid of Bush top level tax deduction) he can't seem to use that to get things done. Over the last 40 years, two Presidents stick out as far and away the most popular & effective. While complete opposites politically, Reagan and Clinton shared some similarities. Both had to deal with an opposition in the majority in Congress. Both lost a house of Congress during their terms (although you'd never know that the 1986 Senate takeover happened on Ronbo's watch speaking to conservatives). However, both entered negotiations with a "here's what I'm going to do, I'll work with you if you want or I'll do it anyway" attitude. What Obama needs to do is use the powers of the Presidency to enact change on his own to the extent that he can do so legally and forget about Congress.
He doesn't need Congress to close Gitmo. Likewise if the GOP wants to block his appointment to the Consumer Protection Bureau, simply threaten to appoint L'il Ralphie Nader during a recess if they don't. Republicans want spending cuts? - Great, propose projects in their districts to cut. For the first time he did this a few days ago when he issued waivers to NCLB because Congress won't get off their arse to fix a law everybody agrees needs revision. He needs to do much, much more of this if he plans on getting anything through Congress.
Last edited:
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
They aren't going into recess anymore. The House goes into "Adjournment" and two members meet once a week to sustain the status. House leaders know that if they go into recess Obam will do all kinds of nasty things - like appoint people to agencies where they might actually get things done.
They aren't going into recess anymore. The House goes into "Adjournment" and two members meet once a week to sustain the status. House leaders know that if they go into recess Obam will do all kinds of nasty things - like appoint people to agencies where they might actually get things done.
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel
Obama is three things:
He's a moderate
He's a consensus builder
He's struggled with his message
The result is the far left is not excited...and the far right is too agenda laden to have an objective opinion.
Obama is three things:
He's a moderate
He's a consensus builder
He's struggled with his message
The result is the far left is not excited...and the far right is too agenda laden to have an objective opinion.
Last edited:
- Status