That fat son of a bitch who convinced Clinton to keep the derivatives market unregulated so as to lead to the economic collapse we saw a few years ago?

Yeah, I'll totally listen to what he has to say.

Maine also does this.

from wiki:

The design of the Electoral College was based upon several assumptions and anticipations of the Framers of the Constitution

Each state would employ the district system of allocating electors.

Each presidential elector would exercise independent judgment when voting.

Candidates would not pair together on the same ticket with assumed placements toward each office of President and Vice President.

The system as designed would rarely produce a winner, thus sending the election to Congress.

On these facts, some scholars have described the Electoral College as being intended to nominate candidates from which the Congress would then select a President and Vice President.

anyone know where i can find the rest of that obama vid? i want to hear his answer to the plan b question

The Bush tax cuts are also temporary. There is nothing that makes the Bush tax cuts inherently more stimulative (except the size of the cut, ofc) than the payroll tax cut. In the end the payroll tax cuts are probably even more stimulative and they probably make the economy more competitive because of who they target. And the loss of revenue for SS is transferred onto the general budget.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011...on-room-photo/

Right-wing nutter sites make me laugh. And this is from one of the top ranked political blogs.

Lol ikes. Are you claiming he put out that advert with no hope of it increasing his popularity? Because that is the core of what i said.

Well, that and American politicians being boorish. But that goes without saying.

I don't recall anyone saying anything of this nature when these were going through Congress.

The bush tax cuts were for 10 years. The only reason they weren't permanent was to force democrats to debate an unpopular issue down the road. The current plan is to make the cuts permanent.

The stimulative argument is really besides the point. The republicans want structural changes to the whole tax code that last forever. The payroll tax holiday simply isn't that, even if you really like it.

This is an LDO statement, but doesn't mesh with the Dems descriptions of social security in prior years. The payroll tax has always been described as a special thing that you'll really get back!

The system just doesn't incentivize states moving to split electors. Winner-take-all means that the candidates pay more attention to your state's issues and campaign in your state. Why would they give that up?

I agree that it would be a good thing if they did, but I just don't see how it would happen.

He may have hoped, but it's pretty well established he's a ****ing idiot. One idiotic campaign from a guy who won't come close to winning the nomination doesn't represent the whole country.

Liberia's constitution is modeled after the US constitution. The Congo has a democratic elections and a bicameral legislature. Two of the most dangerous places on earth so what's the point?

So if the Democrats say that they want to make the PR tax cuts permanent the Republicans will suddenly vote in favor of it?

So what? Vote in favor of it and launch your plan for the tax code. They have no problem voting in favor of extending the Bush tax cuts temporarily without structural changes in the tax code.
Wait, what? With the PR tax cut you pay less PR taxes but get the same SS back. How does this change anything?

Jim Hoft makes Jonah Goldberg look like Richard Feynman.

You weren't around much awhile ago, but the republicans plan for awhile to leave the tax cuts in temporarily in order to bring up a popular issue for them every 4 years as a political ploy. It was a pretty good one as well. It's nice to have an issue that you're a favorite on come up all the time.

Brons, for years social security was described as a self-contained program (google: al gore's lockbox). Payroll taxes weren't even taxes, they were more like payments to your future! (I hope you can see my eyeroll)

Many republicans feel like the short term stimulus is money burned (for damn good reason imo) and want to focus on the long term. Many others just want to oppose obama. Quite a few others are in favor of the PR tax cut. The party is pretty split on this.

My suggestion is really only the (in my mind) optimal version of Taso's situation/state. I actually do think that requiring that type of inspection is a bit much. WA just does emissions (at a state run facility I believe) every other year.

Not necessarily, right? Aren't California and New York basically ignored because they're assumed to be voting for the Democrats? Seems like if they split their EC votes candidates would have to spend time talking to them.

Yeah, so? Their own ploy is being used against them now in a pretty bad way. Exposing them how hypocritical they are and how much they favor the rich vs the middle class.

I know. So what? Nothing has changed in that regard. Now people pay less but the money still goes into the lockbox.

he pwned the winkelvi tho

Is it Washington or is it just King county? I've never had a smog inspection and Kitsap happily renews my registration every year.

Don't think you read the article, it was as well thought out and fair as you're going to get from someone in Summers position with his biases.

[drudgesiren]

Obama admits Osama bin Laden still alive!

[drudgesiren]

I bet they felt embarrassed when it turned out the people started turning on them and they found themselves polling on the wrong side of the issue.

This is why they want to make it permanent in case you werent aware.

lol thanks for that insight phil.

I never said he represented the entire country. The point is its a sad reflection and one which wouldnt happen here. Yours is a country that has major politicians that talk of liberty and equality whilst saying a significant percentage shouldnt have equality or liberty at the same time. Its frankly very very weird.

Your image didnt show up for me, but the name gives it away. Boris isnt particularly boorish. There are better examples, Nigel Farage is a great one, but i see where you were going with it.

Fwiw, the funny thing about the London Mayoral election that he won is that no one in it deserved to win. Im not a fan of Boris but he is better than Livingstone (the only guy who would ever beat him) who is the far left mirror image of him ironically/coincidentally and a complete douchebag in a different way.

I tend to think this makes more sense. When votes are in play then candidates are forced to play for them. Assuming the goal of the "game" is to force participants to appeal to everyone across a nation of 300 million instead of just a few swing states.