They're not silly at all, they're thugs. They want to influence the next one by showing the cost of going against them.
Now, we're lucky that they're mostly grifting, incompetent, blustery cowards, so the risk isn't what it could be.
They're not silly at all, they're thugs. They want to influence the next one by showing the cost of going against them.
Now, we're lucky that they're mostly grifting, incompetent, blustery cowards, so the risk isn't what it could be.
Ahem, Bush v Gore... bit longer than a decade. They're certainly more shameless now that they have a larger margin, but republican justices have been pushing an agenda for awhile.
The republican base isn't conservative in the modern sense, they're reactionary. In a similar vein, evangelical republicans don't support the people who embody the values that they profess to hold sacred, they fully, and loudly, back people who are quite the opposite.
I imagine that both groups feel that they're increasingly losing out in modern society and are seeking someone who'll crush their perceived enemies and return them to their rightful place ruling the rest of us. So, the allure of a strongman to return them to their imagined golden age.
If she only had a record to check... oh, wait, she does:
Haley has consistently supported bills that give rights to an unborn baby and restrict abortion, except when the mother's life is at risk. In 2006, as a member of the South Carolina House of Representatives, Haley voted for the Penalties for Harming an Unborn Child/Fetus law, which asserted that an act of violence against a fetus is akin to a criminal act against the mother. She has also re-signed a new state law that bans abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy.[38]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Nikki_Haley
Haley is opposed to Jail or Death Penalty for women who have abortions.[41][42][43]
Is that the moderate republican position?
Not (re)building in areas prone to wildfires, mudslides, floods, and the like would be a good start. Otherwise, someone has to pay to rebuild when the ever more frequent disaster hits. State farm and other insurers suck in many ways, but this isn't unreasonable on their part.
Because they think that he will hurt people that they've been led to hate.
Assuming Harris wins, the first midterm federal election is usually ugly for the president's party, so it'd be a risk. Especially coming off of this election where dems will have to be extremely lucky just to hold onto the majority (even with the vp tiebreaker).
Gosh, you mean that he's playing by the rules that the republicans have put in place and not unilaterally disarming? How scandalous.
They should flush the entire "money is speech" concept, but until we can replace most of the SC with people who don't suck, we work with what we got.
Oddly, sort of related to some of these same complainers sitting out 2016. Weird how elections can have consequences.
The difference is that Manchin, for all of his many flaws, is probably the only Democratic senator that we're likely to see from WV in the foreseeable future. So, the option isn't "Manchin or a better Democrat", it "Manchin or a hard right-wing republican". WV is one of the reddest of states and it's almost shocking that a Democrat won there at all and it's easy to understand why he bucks the party.
Sinema has no excuse aside from her seeming delusions of importance and dreams of cushy corporate cash once she's out.
Probably, but for other reasons. Neither of those are owned by the US, are they?
Of course, but I don't think that him as the VP candidate changes the odds of that much relative to the other contenders who don't come with that risk.
VP candidates don't usually matter much in an election unless they're freaks with a couch fetish or something weird like that.
Unfortunately, republicans will quite likely take the senate in the next cycle. With Manchin retiring, WV is essentially a republican lock. More broadly, Democrats are defending 20 seats to 11 for republicans, and the lowest hanging fruit for democratic pickups would be Rick Scott (FL) or Ted Cruz (TX), and as much as they both suck, that's still going to be tough.
So, just to retain their slim margin, they'd have to defend all of their other seats and knock off one of those two.
It's a really interesting test of how much conventional campaigning and turnout strategies really matter nowadays.
Quite a bit of what we do is because "we've always done it this way," and there's surprisingly little data on what actually makes a difference in an election at this level where both of the candidates are universally known.
Not hard to have "unity" when they've worked to purge anyone from the party who disagreed with the cult.
Practice?
I don’t see how this follows. He was never a serious contender for the DNC in the first place. It always seemed weird he was running as a Democrat instead of a Republican to me as his policies were much closer to Republican policies.
Because he's being funded as a spoiler to siphon off enough Democratic voters to potentially throw the race to trump? trump has a low cap to his general election support (probably mid-40's), but most of that is strongly committed, so he has a high base. With that, he won't win, but if they can run spoiler candidates to pull a few percent, that might be enough to win with his low cap.
The Democratic coalition is far broader, less cohesive, and thus overall more fickle than the modern republican one, so susceptible to these sorts of things.
So, if they have a family and kids, I guess they're on the street now? The parent involved is likely going to prison, so they're not going to be able to provide support. This is "tough on crime" theater that would likely do nothing but cause more harm.
It shouldn't mean lower prices; deflation is bad, we just want a low rate of inflation. What we do want is for wages to outpace that, and for the past couple of years, they have for people at the lower end of the scale (which is also good)
Smart cars had to pass US crash test standards and have the appropriate safety equipment. The kei trucks that you can currently import and use are 25+ years old and wouldn't have even passed US standards back then. Your legs are the crumple zone in these things.
I assume that new ones would have a chance, but it'd be expensive for a manufacturer to modify and certify for the US market. Small cars haven't sold well here, and the profit margins are slim.
Maybe with the recent size and price increases in autos here, well see some movement. I'd love a modern Honda kei to go with my element.
Well, that would be a good way to guarantee republican dominance, yes.
Wow, there are people who actually believe that in real life? Huh. Good luck with your glorious revolution
Corpratist, center right infotainment networks?