Obama picks Sotomayor for Supreme Court -- bye bye Republican Party

Superfreak said:
While I agree with the above for the most part.... keep in mind who it was that first nominated her to the federal bench. It was a Republican... not a democrat.

So while I agree that groups will vote in their best interest, allegiances can change. So proclaiming 'bye bye Republicans' is rather silly based on this nomination.
Click to expand...

do you agree that obama NOW has a lock on hispanics simply for nominating a hispanic to the scotus?
 
Yurt said:
do you agree that obama NOW has a lock on hispanics simply for nominating a hispanic to the scotus?
Click to expand...

I do agree that this decision will swing the hispanic vote to the Dems in 2010 in larger numbers than before. You cannot deny it is a powerful image that will persuade many that the 'Dems' are on 'our side'.

That said, I think it is simplistic and ridiculous to proclaim one party 'dead' due to this decision. So no, I do not think it is a 'LOCK'... too many other things can happen between now and the next election that could cause another shift in allegiance.
 
Superfreak said:
I do agree that this decision will swing the hispanic vote to the Dems in 2010 in larger numbers than before. You cannot deny it is a powerful image that will persuade many that the 'Dems' are on 'our side'.

That said, I think it is simplistic and ridiculous to proclaim one party 'dead' due to this decision. So no, I do not think it is a 'LOCK'... too many other things can happen between now and the next election that could cause another shift in allegiance.
Click to expand...

i guess then you believe the US attorney general is a wimpy and not very important position....or do you believe that the office of US attorney general is an important and public position? what about secretary of state....
 
Yurt said:
so you somehow think having a hispanic nominated to the scotus is in their best interest? we are not discussing black people, we are discussing your comment about hispanics, that ONLY NOW does obama have a lock:



it is clear you think hispanics are just a bunch of sheep that will drool after the democratic party NOW because obama nominated a hispanic to the bench. you don't give them credit that they may not in fact agree with her policies or beliefs, you crudely lump them into one mass who see only that a hispanic was nominated and nothing else.

if you don't see bigotry in that, i highly overrated your intellect and honesty.
Click to expand...

pretty good point
I know plenty hispanic people with conservative leanings. Mostly tradesmen, so probably a skewed representation of the group as a whole, but we're making generalized and stereotypical statements here, so it's cool if I save all the hispanics will give a burrito's worth of shit about this anyway
 
Yurt said:
i guess then you believe the US attorney general is a wimpy and not very important position....or do you believe that the office of US attorney general is an important and public position? what about secretary of state....
Click to expand...

Now why would you assume I thought that? Of course I think the US Attorney general is an important position.... so what is your point???
 
Superfreak said:
Now why would you assume I thought that? Of course I think the US Attorney general is an important position.... so what is your point???
Click to expand...

You are exaggerating by calling it a "point" but what he is whining about is your failure to acknowledge that W appointed Goonzalez Attorney General. And you haven't said anything about Hispanics voting for Republicans because of that. Why not? Huh? Why not?
 
Darla said:
You are exaggerating by calling it a "point" but what he is whining about is your failure to acknowledge that W appointed Goonzalez Attorney General. And you haven't said anything about Hispanics voting for Republicans because of that. Why not? Huh? Why not?
Click to expand...

Soooooo.... You.... ARE... Yurt....
 
Darla said:
Um, why would someone to the left of today's Democratic party, love Republicans?

Republicans are basically irrelevant. No one hardly even talks about them anymore. It's just the democratic right, the centrists who have replaced the Libertarians in arrogance, and the left.

No one cares about the Republicans, but they insist on hanging around, so sometimes, we make sport of them. You know, for comic relief.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you're describing some ladies that dress in pink and get laughed at.
 
Socrtease said:
This. I remember hearing in 1994 that the Democratic party was dead. Both sides keep eulogizing each other while the patient still breathes. Unless righties and lefties have somewhere viable to go, the parties will not die. They will lay dormant for a while, not gaining much ground in congress and that will be further evidence for the die hard fringers to make further claims of death. Then a year like 2006 will come along and the dead party will live again, make more gains 2 years later and so it goes. No one is dead yet.
Click to expand...

This works the same way the condemnation of third parties works. Many people hate to back a loser so they avoid voting for someone they think will lose.

If they can convince some people that the other party is dead they will gain voters. Not particularly bright voters. But voters none the less.
 
Superfreak said:
Now why would you assume I thought that? Of course I think the US Attorney general is an important position.... so what is your point???
Click to expand...

you already know why, why are you being obtuse? when a republican appointed the 1st hispanic to the US AG, did that give the republicans a "lock" on the hispanic vote? what about the 1st black sec state, did that give republicans a "lock" on the black vote?

it is moronic to think that NOW obama and the dems have a lock on the hispanic vote solely for appointing a hispanic to the bench. i don't think hispanics are as myopic and ignorant as you seemingly believe them to be. i honestly thought you would be the last person to state that solely becuase obama appointed a hispanic to the bench that now obama has a lock on the hispanic vote....
 
Yurt said:
you already know why, why are you being obtuse? when a republican appointed the 1st hispanic to the US AG, did that give the republicans a "lock" on the hispanic vote? what about the 1st black sec state, did that give republicans a "lock" on the black vote?

it is moronic to think that NOW obama and the dems have a lock on the hispanic vote solely for appointing a hispanic to the bench. i don't think hispanics are as myopic and ignorant as you seemingly believe them to be. i honestly thought you would be the last person to state that solely becuase obama appointed a hispanic to the bench that now obama has a lock on the hispanic vote....
Click to expand...



Just for fun and because it's a slow day - can you show us where he did state that?
 
Yurt said:
that is what BAC said, and he said he agreed and see post 21 and 22...notice i underlined "simply"
Click to expand...

Yes, but, your mental state aside, I still don't see where SF "stated this" which is what you claimed he did. Maybe you can bump that post up.
 
Yurt said:
you already know why, why are you being obtuse? when a republican appointed the 1st hispanic to the US AG, did that give the republicans a "lock" on the hispanic vote? what about the 1st black sec state, did that give republicans a "lock" on the black vote?

it is moronic to think that NOW obama and the dems have a lock on the hispanic vote solely for appointing a hispanic to the bench. i don't think hispanics are as myopic and ignorant as you seemingly believe them to be. i honestly thought you would be the last person to state that solely becuase obama appointed a hispanic to the bench that now obama has a lock on the hispanic vote....
Click to expand...

Again you twit... I am not the one who said it was a 'lock'. Had you bothered to read my post you might have noticed that.

"Originally Posted by Superfreak
While I agree with the above for the most part.... keep in mind who it was that first nominated her to the federal bench. It was a Republican... not a democrat.

So while I agree that groups will vote in their best interest, allegiances can change. So proclaiming 'bye bye Republicans' is rather silly based on this nomination."

As you can see, I said I agreed with BAC for the most part, then explained which portion I did not agree with.

When you asked later on, I clarified further....

"I do agree that this decision will swing the hispanic vote to the Dems in 2010 in larger numbers than before. You cannot deny it is a powerful image that will persuade many that the 'Dems' are on 'our side'.

That said, I think it is simplistic and ridiculous to proclaim one party 'dead' due to this decision. So no, I do not think it is a 'LOCK'... too many other things can happen between now and the next election that could cause another shift in allegiance. "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top