Posts Tagged ‘Republicans’
OK, I mean I don’t really believe that he could (do I?), but the skirmishes he has experienced recently have only enhanced his brand.
Here is the 2016 Republican Primary Debate Schedule. The first one will be August 6, 2015 at 9 p.m. EDT in Cleveland, OH, airing on Fox News Channel.
The rules of participation: “the Top 10 candidates in an average of 5 national polls will be included.”
I looked at the graphic above from the Washington Post on July 16, and the percentages were these Read the rest of this entry »
I took a couple of those I Side With quizzes. Nothing particularly surprising, except that my affinity with the Republican Party was worse than I thought.
I did take exception to a handful of the answer choices besides YES and NO being counted as the same as mine. For example: “Should National Parks continue to be preserved and protected by the federal government?”
Republicans: Yes, but allow limited logging, drilling, and mining. Your similar answer: Yes. Well, that’s not similar at all, to my mind. This USUALLY is not an issue, but it may skew some results.
This is how much I had forgotten about Dennis Hastert: when I heard that the longest serving Republican Speaker of the House (1999- 2007) had been indicted, I couldn’t even visualize what he looked like.
There’s been a lot of back-and-forth about the “victimization” of Hastert, that that perhaps the former student he paid nearly $1 million, out of $3.7 million promised, was extorting the former Congressman.
And if Hastert had actually had sex with one of his male high school students, when he was a teacher and wrestling coach between 1965 and 1981, why is he charged with, essentially money laundering, specifically, withdrawing cash from his bank accounts in amounts and patterns designed to hide the payments to the former student?
As many have correctly pointed out, this is selective prosecution. Read the rest of this entry »
After the 2012 Presidential election – thank every deity it is over – you may recall that only a handful of states were crucial to the decision – Ohio! Florida! Virginia! The Democratic “blue” states – New York, California – were not in play, nor were the Republican “red” states such as Texas. Candidates didn’t campaign in those because of most states’ “winner-take-all” mechanism when it came to the Electoral College. All the electoral votes of a state would go to one candidate. (The upside is that I missed the vast majority of the political ads.)
So the recent Republican plan to change states from winner-takes-all, the way every state, except Maine and Nebraska, does it, to awarding electoral votes by Congressional District, seems to be more fair. And it would be, if Congressional boundary lines were drawn equitably.