http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2012/11/15/morning-notes-house-leadership-vote-suppression Comments On: Morning notes — House leadership, vote suppression by Max Brantley en-us Copyright 2013 Arkansas Times. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, Arkansas Times readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact Arkansas Times. robert@arktimes.com (Arkansas Times Webmaster) Wed, 19 Jun 2013 00:00:01 -0500 Wed, 19 Jun 2013 08:30:00 -0500 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
Who would vote for a party that wants to take so many rights away from them?

It's not about "stuff." It's about basic rights, the right to have a say about what grows in their bodies, and a choice whether to sacrifice themselves for another entity. Men are not forced to give their bodies and lives to keep others alive, why should girls and women be?

Women wanted girls and women to be all-volunteer parents, not forced into it, just like our military is all-volunteer.
Posted by rablib]]> Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:47:27 -0600 Arkansas Times
I mentioned this earlier. There is a Harvard Business School study called The Dying Swan where a company tries to gain a greater and greater percentage of a product losing market until they own 100% of no market. The modern equivalent-the Republican Party. For us, it was a product going off patent where marketing continued to raise the price as more and more generics with lower prices entered the market, hoping that the brand name would hold or slow the sales decline.

It didn't work for us on the product and unless the GOTP gets a new philosophy, like become the GOP again, you will have older and older voters hoping they live until the next election. The religious right managed to turn off a lot of the country with their Taliban attitude. And Huckabuck and the bishops threatening hell just caused a few more people to find they could sleep in on Sunday morning (but send Huck a check as he needs the money).
Posted by couldn't be better]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:43:42 -0600 Arkansas Times
"Once again, the Republicans have to look away from the obvious facts: Urban dwellers have to interact daily with a heterogenous group of people, and tend to realize that we are in this together. Rural society is very homogenous and its much easier to only interact with ‘your kind.’
The grand irony is that there are so many productive urban people who were driven away from their small towns because they are ‘different.’ Big cities, especially on the coasts, are the beneficiaries of this provincial bigotry."
Posted by the outlier]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:05:24 -0600 Arkansas Times
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washingto…
Posted by the outlier]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 11:19:57 -0600 Arkansas Times
I would make a distinction between suburban and rural, too.
Posted by the outlier]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:52:29 -0600 Arkansas Times
I don't literally mean that every white person voted against Obama. My point was that whites are swinging very hard towards Republicans, a fact you cannot deny. Hispanics are moving towards Democrats.

I can ask you your race, sex, whether you are married and can figure out how you voted 90% of the time. The fact that 10% surprise you doesn't mean anything. It's more telling that people are voting largely based on their demographic.

I repeat: we're eff'ed. We've been balkanized by the so called leaders of this country.
Posted by ProCarry]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:49:37 -0600 Arkansas Times
Uh, PC, I'm one of those white married males and I voted FOR Obama and AGAINST Willard. Got another theory? That one's got leaks galore.

I heard the other day that Obama both in 2008 and last week got the same percentage of the African-American vote as did John Kerry in 2004. That ought to make PC's head explode!
Posted by Sound Policy]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:39:24 -0600 Arkansas Times
I'm an urbanite at heart who lives in the suburbs. Most others become hypocrites like me when they have children.
Posted by ProCarry]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:38:14 -0600 Arkansas Times Posted by Perplexed]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:34:09 -0600 Arkansas Times
Judas Escargot, Bringer of Loaves and Fish Sandwiches Says:

Here’s another problem for the GOP: Eighty percent of the human race lives in cities. Outside of Agriculture and Resource Extraction, most human wealth (and knowledge) is developed in cities. Even post-Sandy, a tightly-packed city like NYC has orders of magnitude more value per sq ft than any Red State in the union.
For all their big talk of ‘gifts’, much GOP domestic policy since at least 1980 has been driven by the impulse to extract wealth from the cities and give it to white flighters in the suburbs, to buy their votes. Starve the urban schools of funding, divert the funds to suburban whites. Favor essentially non-productive sectors like suburban construction over manufacturing. Starve urban infrastructure (including transportation) to favor roads out in the burbs.
I’ve come to think of the suburbs as a well-managed theme park for older white people, and it’s worked for some of them. But the nation as a whole can no longer afford the expense of maintaining that illusion for them. And as younger folks continue to move to the cities, the country will continue to become more and more urban. In this long term, this is a very good thing.
Cities are the future, and there’s really nothing the GOP can do to stop it.
Posted by the outlier]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:28:33 -0600 Arkansas Times
When the hurricane hit New Jersey just before the election, some news reports started asking "Why can't we vote on our smartphones?" So the idea is starting to gain public awareness.

I see it as inevitable. It will be more convenient, it should increase voter participation rates - but for voters who choose this option, they will need to provide an authenticated biometric identifier - a fingerprint - that will be scanned on their smartphone to verify the voter's ID when the vote is cast.
Posted by radical centrist]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:12:52 -0600 Arkansas Times
You can't make the GOP base happy.
Posted by ProCarry]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:12:06 -0600 Arkansas Times
This is anecdotal I know but the three Repub voters I know did not vote for Mitt because of Ryan. He may not be the brightest bulb in the R chandelier but he's too extreme for many of them.
Posted by eLwood]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:04:43 -0600 Arkansas Times
What's about the only thing in the last 80 years that worked as a plan/policy in the south for Dems / for the country? The New Deal. You want to divide the southern bigot vote... offer them decent pay, health care, a job guarantee, basic decency in so many areas... even when they protest.

Which is exactly why it is now so easy to vote Green... Only they have a New Deal. Rising tide lifts all boats! Neoliberals and conservatives today are all about sinking.... unless you are rich.
Posted by Eureka Springs]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:20:13 -0600 Arkansas Times Posted by dave23]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:08:08 -0600 Arkansas Times
Maybe I missed it, but I haven't read anyone making that assumption here.
Posted by the outlier]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:06:53 -0600 Arkansas Times
But you all ought to be very sad about this. Every married white male can't be racist, nor can every single black female.

The fact that people are voting as if they ARE shows the decay and failure of our system. We're eff'ed.
Posted by ProCarry]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:03:08 -0600 Arkansas Times Posted by MarcKyle1964]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 08:41:07 -0600 Arkansas Times
http://farleftside.com/2012/11-14-12-the-a…
Posted by Silverback66]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 08:26:30 -0600 Arkansas Times http://thedailyhatch.org/2012/11/15/is-gru…
Posted by SalineRepublican]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 08:25:50 -0600 Arkansas Times
"Democrats don't have a white problem. They have a Southern white problem,"

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012…

Can we call it racism?
Posted by the outlier]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 08:05:47 -0600 Arkansas Times Posted by the outlier]]> Thu, 15 Nov 2012 08:01:14 -0600 Arkansas Times