What's new
By:
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.

Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

ScoobyDoo said:
What I want to see is an amendment put forward by the Congress that says no State can take in more than it pays in. That's fair, right? That should cut the budget considerably.
Click to expand...

I'm sensing sarcasm, but in case my detector is off...

Then what, exactly, would be the point of the federal government?
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

ScoobyDoo said:
What I want to see is an amendment put forward by the Congress that says no State can take in more than it pays in. That's fair, right? That should cut the budget considerably.
Click to expand...

Put it forward -- if nothing else it will separate the poseurs from the sincere fiscal conservatives.
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

unofan said:
I'm sensing sarcasm, but in case my detector is off...

Then what, exactly, would be the point of the federal government?
Click to expand...

National Defense?

Minnesota isn't getting any money back from Iraq or Afghanistan.
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

Red Cloud said:
I'll take "Things Sarah Palin Never Actually Said" for $200, Alex.

(She mentioned once that one could see Russia from some places in Alaska, which is just a simple fact.)
Click to expand...

Has she also never actually said "take it easy, Francis, it's a freakin' joke"?
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

Red Cloud said:
I'll take "Things Sarah Palin Never Actually Said" for $200, Alex.

(She mentioned once that one could see Russia from some places in Alaska, which is just a simple fact.)
Click to expand...

It's just as true as Al Gore inventing the internet.
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

Interesting rumors going on that fresh off the heels of their (apparent) Alaska victory, Tea Partiers have Rep. Castle in their crosshairs in Delaware. :eek:

I wouldn't have thought this possible previously, but like Alaska its a small state where a little swing in voter sentiment can go a long way. There's no way Castle can run from his moderate record. Tea Baggers are going for a 600K ad buy to boost their candidate. Much like AK, this one hasn't been polled lately either.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I'm not expecting anything but a Castle win the primaries and the general election. However, this is yet another example of the folly of talking heads predicting races this far out. The problem as I see it is that even normally solid predictors (Rothenberg, Cook, Nate Silver) are taking these races where a moderate Republican is running, and assuming that they'll hold the Tea Party activists enthusiasm but then also keep their normal appeal to the middle. Examples are: WA (Rossi), NV (Lowden), CO (Norton), IL (Kirk), NH (Ayotte), DE (Castle). (Kentucky maybe and I'm not including Alaska because nobody had it on their radar.)

IF an establishment candidate can keep the middle but appeal to the hard core righties, sure - they've got a great shot. Problem is for Lowden and Norton (and Murkowski) that was a tightrope they couldn't walk. Time will tell with Ayotte (Lamontaine just got the Union Leader endorsement) and Castle but in all of these races with a primary remaining in either party we really need to see who makes the finish line after the Alaska surprise.
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

ScoobyDoo said:
National Defense?
Click to expand...
Sure, as long as they put all the military bases in the states that can pay for them rather than where they might otherwise make the most sense. Move all those missiles from ND to MA, pronto!
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
Has she also never actually said "take it easy, Francis, it's a freakin' joke"?
Click to expand...

Wow. Somebody needs to take it easy, I'm not sure it's me.

Besides, if you're going to do it, do it right. It's "Lighten up, Francis." :p
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

LynahFan said:
Sure, as long as they put all the military bases in the states that can pay for them rather than where they might otherwise make the most sense. Move all those missiles from ND to MA, pronto!
Click to expand...

Too funny. The whole military base thing is why the Red States have more coming in then going out was debunked a while ago. Wish I had the link to the thread.

Either way. Put them in outstate NY. Plenty of cash going out and I'm sure Buffalo could use the economic activity.
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

ScoobyDoo said:
Too funny. The whole military base thing is why the Red States have more coming in then going out was debunked a while ago. Wish I had the link to the thread.

Either way. Put them in outstate NY. Plenty of cash going out and I'm sure Buffalo could use the economic activity.
Click to expand...

So where a large chunk of the federal budget is spent has no relation to where federal money is spent? That's priceless logic! :p
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

Bob Gray said:
So where a large chunk of the federal budget is spent has no relation to where federal money is spent? That's priceless logic! :p
Click to expand...

More humor. The folks in the Blue States who are paying more are subsidizing the Red States bases and paying for those in Iraq, Afghanistan, Germany, South Korea, etc. etc. etc.

Next.
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

Rimbaud said:
If you can't see the obvious parallels, then yes, I suppose it is a non sequitur.
Click to expand...

If you can point out where I've seriously said Al Gore said he invented the internet, I'd be able to see the obvious parallels.
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

ScoobyDoo said:
More humor. The folks in the Blue States who are paying more are subsidizing the Red States bases and paying for those in Iraq, Afghanistan, Germany, South Korea, etc. etc. etc.

Next.
Click to expand...

Typical evasive Scooby. So, that'd be a yes, where military spending takes place, influences where overall federal spending takes place. See, that's not so hard.
 
Re: Death to the Incumbent!! Your guide to the 2010 primaries

ScoobyDoo said:
More humor. The folks in the Blue States who are paying more are subsidizing the Red States bases and paying for those in Iraq, Afghanistan, Germany, South Korea, etc. etc. etc.

Next.
Click to expand...

:confused:

That makes no sense whatsoever. Money spent or not spent in Iraq has no bearing on the differential in spending between states. If you want more federal money spent in a blue state and less in a red state, then a guaranteed way to do that would be to move a military base.

You're usually more on the ball than this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top