Molly Ivans Would Be Smiling About A Democratic Texas

[unbillievable]

10 hours ago, Brueggs said:

Texas is changing.  I remember going to the playoff game in Houston.  I was amazed at all the tent cities beneath the overpasses.  The irony is all of the Californians that fled from their high taxes, filthy streets, sanctuary cities and unsustainable programs, are bringing with them the exact same politics that caused them to leave in the first place.  It truly seems to be a learning disorder.  

Just because socialism didn't work last time, doesn't mean it won't work this time.

 

[Brueggs]

1 hour ago, unbillievable said:

Just because socialism didn't work last time, doesn't mean it won't work this time.

 

True.  Maybe it will work better when people no longer have a choice...

[Tiberius]

39 minutes ago, Brueggs said:

True.  Maybe it will work better when people no longer have a choice...

Or when The People do have a choice 

[Brueggs]

8 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Or when The People do have a choice 

Right.  People who have no understanding of what that entails, or those who would choose to move to move to Cuba or Venezuela, but cant, because they don't have the resources because they don't like to work in a capitalistic society.  Did you ever wonder why no one is fleeing capitalism?

[Tiberius]

1 hour ago, Brueggs said:

Right.  People who have no understanding of what that entails, or those who would choose to move to move to Cuba or Venezuela, but cant, because they don't have the resources because they don't like to work in a capitalistic society.  Did you ever wonder why no one is fleeing capitalism?

Who are you talking about? The majority of citizens of this country? 

[SoTier]

4 hours ago, Brueggs said:

Right.  People who have no understanding of what that entails, or those who would choose to move to move to Cuba or Venezuela, but cant, because they don't have the resources because they don't like to work in a capitalistic society.  Did you ever wonder why no one is fleeing capitalism?

 

Most of the EU countries as well as Canada practice what American conservatives call "socialism", primarily universal health care and social programs to support low income citizens and retirees.  Norway -- and maybe Sweden -- have much more expansive social programs.   Yeah, people pay higher taxes in those countries but their standards of living and their political freedoms and processes aren't impinged upon because these countries are "socialist".  Why isn't there a mass exodus from the EU countries today when they're largely "socialist" as opposed to when millions left those same countries in the late 19th century and early 20th century when capitalism was the economic system there?

[Brueggs]

13 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Who are you talking about? The majority of citizens of this country? 

I don't know if its the majority, but about half sounds right.  

[Brueggs]

10 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

Most of the EU countries as well as Canada practice what American conservatives call "socialism", primarily universal health care and social programs to support low income citizens and retirees.  Norway -- and maybe Sweden -- have much more expansive social programs.   Yeah, people pay higher taxes in those countries but their standards of living and their political freedoms and processes aren't impinged upon because these countries are "socialist".  Why isn't there a mass exodus from the EU countries today when they're largely "socialist" as opposed to when millions left those same countries in the late 19th century and early 20th century when capitalism was the economic system there?

I have no problem with social programs.  They are absolutely necessary.  The problem that we have here, that many of the nations you mentioned do not, is that many of our citizens take advantage of the system who do not need it, taking away from those that do.  I know this happens elsewhere, but not on the grand scale we have here.  Also, many of those nations are equivalent to the size of a single state, with largely indigenous populations that teach their citizens to contribute to their society.  They assume personal responsibilities that we have gotten away from.  We have an influx of people who want to change our society, not support it.   They are also more limited in their freedoms and not presented with nearly the same level of opportunities and ownership as we are.  America has always thrived when the middle class was the strongest element of our society, but we are losing that.  The problem with socialism, is that if its successful, it becomes communism.  It goes against the grain of everything that this nation has built itself upon.  

[Tiberius]

2 hours ago, Brueggs said:

I have no problem with social programs.  They are absolutely necessary.  The problem that we have here, that many of the nations you mentioned do not, is that many of our citizens take advantage of the system who do not need it, taking away from those that do.  I know this happens elsewhere, but not on the grand scale we have here.  Also, many of those nations are equivalent to the size of a single state, with largely indigenous populations that teach their citizens to contribute to their society.  They assume personal responsibilities that we have gotten away from.  We have an influx of people who want to change our society, not support it.   They are also more limited in their freedoms and not presented with nearly the same level of opportunities and ownership as we are.  America has always thrived when the middle class was the strongest element of our society, but we are losing that.  The problem with socialism, is that if its successful, it becomes communism.  It goes against the grain of everything that this nation has built itself upon.  

I think many programs help people reach their potential. Increases human capital. Has Social Security advanced communism in this country? 

[SoTier]

7 hours ago, Brueggs said:

I have no problem with social programs.  They are absolutely necessary.  The problem that we have here, that many of the nations you mentioned do not, is that many of our citizens take advantage of the system who do not need it, taking away from those that do.  I know this happens elsewhere, but not on the grand scale we have here.  Also, many of those nations are equivalent to the size of a single state, with largely indigenous populations that teach their citizens to contribute to their society.  They assume personal responsibilities that we have gotten away from.  We have an influx of people who want to change our society, not support it.   They are also more limited in their freedoms and not presented with nearly the same level of opportunities and ownership as we are.  America has always thrived when the middle class was the strongest element of our society, but we are losing that.  The problem with socialism, is that if its successful, it becomes communism.  It goes against the grain of everything that this nation has built itself upon.  

 

This is absolute bull manure.  Democratic socialism has never morphed into communism anywhere.   In fact, numerous western European nations have swapped captialist and social democratic governments repeatedly in the 65 years since the end of WW II.   Communism has always been imposed upon a society/country by a small oligarchy of ideologues, just like fascism, both of which are simply forms of dictatorship.   Democratic socialism has proven completely compatible with political democracy.

 

You obviously know nothing about European societies not European history.  I suggest you do some reading on it before you start blathering about it. 

 

Moreover, don't give me this bull manure about the US having "an influx of people who want to change our society, not support it".  Just say it.  You don't like brown people from Latin America or black people from Africa or the Caribbean or more brown people from Asia immigrating to the US.  The very same xenophobic nonsense you're spouting about today's immigrants is the same xenophobic nonsense that nativists in the late 19th and early 20th century spouted spouted about my Italian, Polish, and Jewish immigrant grandparents when they came to this country around the turn of the 20th century.   They were full of crap then, and you are full of crap now.  

 

If the middle class is shrinking in this country, it's NOT because of social programs or immigrants but because of forty years of pro-wealth/pro-business government policies that have shifted the tax burden off the wealthy and onto the middle and working classes while depressing wages, gutting social supports for the poorest Americans, and limiting real access to opportunity by transferring the cost of public higher education from government  (which is where it was for about a century before the 1980s) to individual students and their families.

[Brueggs]

1 hour ago, SoTier said:

 

This is absolute bull manure.  Democratic socialism has never morphed into communism anywhere.   In fact, numerous western European nations have swapped captialist and social democratic governments repeatedly in the 65 years since the end of WW II.   Communism has always been imposed upon a society/country by a small oligarchy of ideologues, just like fascism, both of which are simply forms of dictatorship.   Democratic socialism has proven completely compatible with political democracy.

 

You obviously know nothing about European societies not European history.  I suggest you do some reading on it before you start blathering about it. 

 

Moreover, don't give me this bull manure about the US having "an influx of people who want to change our society, not support it".  Just say it.  You don't like brown people from Latin America or black people from Africa or the Caribbean or more brown people from Asia immigrating to the US.  The very same xenophobic nonsense you're spouting about today's immigrants is the same xenophobic nonsense that nativists in the late 19th and early 20th century spouted spouted about my Italian, Polish, and Jewish immigrant grandparents when they came to this country around the turn of the 20th century.   They were full of crap then, and you are full of crap now.  

 

If the middle class is shrinking in this country, it's NOT because of social programs or immigrants but because of forty years of pro-wealth/pro-business government policies that have shifted the tax burden off the wealthy and onto the middle and working classes while depressing wages, gutting social supports for the poorest Americans, and limiting real access to opportunity by transferring the cost of public higher education from government  (which is where it was for about a century before the 1980s) to individual students and their families.

Your first problem is that you are trying to compare two very different countries, with considerable differences in population and demographics, assuming you are going to get the same results.  You also make a lot of incorrect assumptions about me.  I have three close friends in Europe, one in Germany, Praha and Belgium who I speak to regularly.  I have also been married twice, both to "brown" woman, as you would put it.  In your quest to expose my ignorance, you seem to have exposed your own, simply because I think differently than you do.  I believe in the strengthening of our middle class and less government for our constitutional republic.  If I wanted socialism for myself, I would pack up and move somewhere else.  

 

So, when a small class of elites manage the masses of people who now collectively have very little resources, there is no chance of them becoming oligarchs?  I am sure they would never impose their will on the people, would they?  

Edited October 28, 2020 by Brueggs

[Brueggs]

7 hours ago, Tiberius said:

I think many programs help people reach their potential. Increases human capital. Has Social Security advanced communism in this country? 

Like I said, I am not against social programs, they are necessary.  Social Security is not socialism, it is a social program.  

[Tiberius]

55 minutes ago, Brueggs said:

Like I said, I am not against social programs, they are necessary.  Social Security is not socialism, it is a social program.  

All social programs are socialist. Reagan campaigned against Medicare because it was socialism. You, as an obvious Republican, want to make it seem like popular programs are not part of evil socialism, but they are. Democratic Socialism is popular in practice. 

 

 

 

 

 

Texas is a state that Biden doesn't need to win, but it is clear that it's more competitive than ever. Texas' shift from Lean Republican to Toss Up shouldn't come as a surprise. Recent polling in the state — both public and private - shows a 2-4 point race. That's pretty much in line with the hotly contested 2018 Senate race in the state where Sen. Ted Cruz narrowly defeated Rep. Beto O'Rourke 51 percent to 48 percent. 

A huge surge in early vote (as of October 26th, almost half of Texas' registered voters had already cast a ballot) suggests that we could see record turnout in a state that has added many new residents since 2016. That also adds a level of uncertainty to the equation. 

Statewide and district level polling show Biden running strong in and around metro suburban parts of the state, but underperforming with Latino voters. In his analysis of the New York Times/Siena poll (10/20-25) of the state, the New York Times' Nate Cohn writes that "Biden has a lead of only 57 percent to 34 percent among that group, somewhat beneath most estimates of Mrs. Clinton's support among Hispanic voters four years ago. The finding broadly tracks with national surveys, which have shown Mr. Trump improving among Hispanic voters compared with his 2016 standing. Similarly, Hispanic voters in the Times/Siena poll say they backed Mrs. Clinton by a margin of 60 percent to 29 percent."

But, it's also the case that we don't have a whole lot of experience with Texas as a battleground state. Neither do national pollsters. In an analysis of polling errors in 2016 and 2018, my colleague David Wasserman wrote this week that polls in the Southwest "undershot Democrats' final margin in 17 of 19 cases, including by an average of 1.4 points in 2016 and 4.2 points in 2018."

https://cookpolitical.com/analysis/national/national-politics/bidens-path-270-widens-trumps-path-narrows-texas-moves-toss

 

Nice article about both candidates paths to victory in the final week 

[Tiberius]

Publishing date:

Oct 29, 2020  •  Last Updated 3 hours ago  •  5 minute read

Article content

(Bloomberg) — A dramatic surge in early voting across Texas cities is infusing fresh hope in Democrats’ dream of shaking Republicans’ once-solid grip on the state.

From Austin to Houston, and in their sprawling suburbs, voter turnout is shattering records in Texas, which hasn’t gone for a Democratic presidential candidate since 1976. Polls show the party’s nominee, Joe Biden, within striking distance of President Donald Trump, and the Cook Political Report on Wednesday moved Texas to a “toss up” from “leans Republican.” Biden’s running mate, Kamala Harris, will visit Houston, Fort Worth and McAllen this week. 

More than 8 million Texans had cast ballots by Tuesday, representing about 90% of the entire vote in 2016. Rapidly growing and increasingly diverse suburbs are the sites of some of the biggest upticks in early voting, and Democrats point to a surge in female voters as cause for optimism. Unmarried women make up a third of the Texans voting in this election who didn’t cast a ballot in 2016, according to the party’s state headquarters.

“We as Democrats are voting like our lives depend on it,” said Cynthia Ginyard, chair of the Democratic Party in Fort Bend, a fast-growing county that encompasses Houston suburbs such as Sugar Land and Katy and has come to embody the demographic shifts that Democrats are seeking to capture.

https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/democrats-dream-of-flipping-texas-with-early-vote-exploding

[Backintheday544]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

Publishing date:

Oct 29, 2020  •  Last Updated 3 hours ago  •  5 minute read

Article content

(Bloomberg) — A dramatic surge in early voting across Texas cities is infusing fresh hope in Democrats’ dream of shaking Republicans’ once-solid grip on the state.

From Austin to Houston, and in their sprawling suburbs, voter turnout is shattering records in Texas, which hasn’t gone for a Democratic presidential candidate since 1976. Polls show the party’s nominee, Joe Biden, within striking distance of President Donald Trump, and the Cook Political Report on Wednesday moved Texas to a “toss up” from “leans Republican.” Biden’s running mate, Kamala Harris, will visit Houston, Fort Worth and McAllen this week. 

More than 8 million Texans had cast ballots by Tuesday, representing about 90% of the entire vote in 2016. Rapidly growing and increasingly diverse suburbs are the sites of some of the biggest upticks in early voting, and Democrats point to a surge in female voters as cause for optimism. Unmarried women make up a third of the Texans voting in this election who didn’t cast a ballot in 2016, according to the party’s state headquarters.

“We as Democrats are voting like our lives depend on it,” said Cynthia Ginyard, chair of the Democratic Party in Fort Bend, a fast-growing county that encompasses Houston suburbs such as Sugar Land and Katy and has come to embody the demographic shifts that Democrats are seeking to capture.

https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/democrats-dream-of-flipping-texas-with-early-vote-exploding

Not going in the record saying it will happen but I think Biden takes Texas based on early voting.

[Tiberius]

Just now, Backintheday544 said:

Not going in the record saying it will happen but I think Biden takes Texas based on early voting.

I'm hopeful. I bet there are a lot of people voting who did not before and maybe the polls are not picking them up. 

 

Go Texas! 

[Backintheday544]

19 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

I'm hopeful. I bet there are a lot of people voting who did not before and maybe the polls are not picking them up. 

 

Go Texas! 

here’s an encouraging stat from WaPo

 

If the country sees a 13 percent increase in voting this year and that’s reflected in Texas’s total vote, the state will see 10.2 million voters in 2020. If those who’ve already voted preferred Biden by seven points, Trump would need to win the day-of vote by 17 points to win the state.

 

[KD in CA]

On 10/27/2020 at 2:41 AM, unbillievable said:

Just because socialism didn't work last time, doesn't mean it won't work this time.

 

 

We just haven't tried real socialism yet.

[TBBills]

9 hours ago, Tiberius said:

I'm hopeful. I bet there are a lot of people voting who did not before and maybe the polls are not picking them up. 

 

Go Texas! 

You know it's bad when a president can drive Texas into the Blue.

[Tiberius]

14 hours ago, TBBills said:

You know it's bad when a president can drive Texas into the Blue.

It's also a sign of the change taking place in the country. But ya, Texas is surprising.