How many Democratic Senators will Lose Their Seats?

Tenshinai wrote:

Biochem wrote:On the other hand the tea party is too purist.

Too stupid is probably a better description.

Their meetings looks like a de-intellectualised version of scientology coupled with a hardcore facist political rally.

And the proclaimed "purism" is inconsequent and lacks logic most of the time. I´m not sure if i can think of ANY-thing good to say of them.

Ignoring evidence to the contrary and maintaining your prejudice from far away Sweden truly unscores the sagacity of your posted comments. That was sarcastic if anyone was wondering.

http://www.culturalcognition.net/blog/2013/10/15/some-data-on-education-religiosity-ideology-and-science-comp.html?lastPage=true&postSubmitted=true

http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Conservatives-Understand-Liberals.-Liberals-Don-t-Understand-Conservatives

This is an example of just how accurate these studies are.

ps. As evidence I submit this definition.

prej·u·dice
[ préjjədiss ]

1.opinion formed beforehand: a preformed opinion, usually an unfavorable one, based on insufficient knowledge, irrational feelings, or inaccurate stereotypes

2.holding of ill-informed opinions: the holding of preformed opinions based on insufficient knowledge, irrational feelings, or inaccurate stereotypes

3.irrational dislike of somebody: an unfounded hatred, fear, or mistrust of a person or group, especially one of a particular religion, ethnicity, nationality, sexual preference, or social status

namelessfly wrote:...
This last comment about the "Psycho shower scene" is an example of the type of crap that convinces me that not only should we need to revert back to being a republic that restricts the right to vote to the minority of the population that has demonstrated the capacity to manage their own affairs responsibly
...

Guess you wont be voting much then.

That´s the funny thing about people wanting restrictions like that, they´re always so convinced that they WILL be part of the elite.

If you think gerrymandering is even a tiny problem, you haven´t seen anything like what your restricted system will cause.


*****

PeterZ wrote:ps. As evidence I submit this definition.

How nice of you to provide such a thorough description of yourself.

Ignoring evidence to the contrary

Ah well you see, the problem here is your prejudice. Because i´m not ignoring evidence to the contrary, nor am i ignoring the actual evidence.

As that´s pretty much the point.

Shall we compare our interests outside our own nations?

Oh yeah, there´s a free online game where your score is based on how fast and how accurate you can place cities on a map of USA, i can outscore people from USA on that.
Lots of them. In fact, most of them.

Can you place even a single city correctly on a map of Sweden?


But of course, it´s so much easier for you to chicken out and play the "not one of us" game.
Rather pathetic.

They might not, but I as True Map-addict can!

Stockholm: On the East Coast,
in the southern part of the "bulge,"
a bit south of the Gulf of Finland across the Baltic.

Uppsala: North by West of Stockholm,
still in the "bulge,"
due west of the Gulf of Finland.

Howard True Map-addict

[quote="Tenshinai
Can you place even a single city correctly on a map of Sweden?

[/quote]

Howard T. Map-addict wrote:They might not, but I as True Map-addict can!

Stockholm: On the East Coast,
in the southern part of the "bulge,"
a bit south of the Gulf of Finland across the Baltic.

Uppsala: North by West of Stockholm,
still in the "bulge,"
due west of the Gulf of Finland.

Howard True Map-addict

Wouldn't think of arguing with you about the maps. Heck I enjoy reading most of your posts, especially the ones I disagree with.

But knowing what you know about maps how would you describe your knowledge of the individuals who make up the associated major political parties in each of those cities?

What was that paraphrase. Think it went something like this, "The map is not the country."

Used to think I was a geography nut. I have learned better. <bow> But I can find the public library, local museum and laundry in Montpelier, ID. Bunch of other towns in the US as well. Needed Garmin the first time though.

Have fun,
T2M

Tenshinai wrote:

PeterZ wrote:ps. As evidence I submit this definition.

How nice of you to provide such a thorough description of yourself.

Thank you for bringing me back to the playgrounds of my childhood where all arguments are resolved with quips. One of my favorites has always been..."I'm rubber and you're glue. Bounces off me and sticks on you".

Tenshinai wrote:

Ignoring evidence to the contrary

Ah well you see, the problem here is your prejudice. Because i´m not ignoring evidence to the contrary, nor am i ignoring the actual evidence.

As that´s pretty much the point.

Shall we compare our interests outside our own nations?

Oh yeah, there´s a free online game where your score is based on how fast and how accurate you can place cities on a map of USA, i can outscore people from USA on that.
Lots of them. In fact, most of them.

Can you place even a single city correctly on a map of Sweden?


But of course, it´s so much easier for you to chicken out and play the "not one of us" game.
Rather pathetic.

What does any of this have to do with my post?

T2M's post suggests that TEA part folks have a better scientific knowledge base than the average. My post suggestsed that conservatives understand liberals better than liberals understand conservatives. Both of these studies suggest that your assertion that TEA party activists are simply stupid is incorrect.

I posted my comments because of what you posted. Whether I care a whit about Sweden is irrelevent. Whether I know jacks**t about Sweden is also irrelevent. I wrote nothing about what groups you belong to or even if the two of us shared anything in common. All of that was irrelevent to my earlier post.

What isn't irrelevent is that you asserted the TEA Party as a group was stupid. Evidence suggests that as a group they are not. That you hold that view is not based on fact. That means you hold that view through faith and prejudice. Not through any logic or reason as yet presented. You are free to hold your beliefs through both prejudice and faith. Just I am free to offer an opinion on that prejudice.

Even if I was an ignorant talking donkey and you were an actual angel, had I presented the argument above it would still be valid.

Um, didn't the mostly tea party leaning leadership of the Republican party get together 6 years ago and vow not to pass any bipartisan bills through congress?

That's kinda worthy of demonization right there.

Annachie wrote:Um, didn't the mostly tea party leaning leadership of the Republican party get together 6 years ago and vow not to pass any bipartisan bills through congress?

That's kinda worthy of demonization right there.

Nope,

This is a myth.

The TEA party didn't really even exist as a political movement until well after the 2008 election.

The Democrats controlled both houses of Congress during the next two years so the TEA arty movement had no ability to deny them anything.

namelessfly wrote:

Annachie wrote:Um, didn't the mostly tea party leaning leadership of the Republican party get together 6 years ago and vow not to pass any bipartisan bills through congress?

That's kinda worthy of demonization right there.

Nope,

This is a myth.

The TEA party didn't really even exist as a political movement until well after the 2008 election.

The Democrats controlled both houses of Congress during the next two years so the TEA arty movement had no ability to deny them anything.

Here was one of the seminal events that really lauched the TEA Party recognition. Rick Santelli went off on the bailout rubbish in February 2009. Prior to watching this, I never heard of the TEA Party.

The Dems also refused to pass the budget after the bailouts in order to include those bailouts as the new baseline for their Continuing Resolutions. The result was more than $1 trillion dollars added to the continuing expenditures from measures meant to be one time only. Many folks bought into the TEA Party as a result of that BS.

If the Dems had wanted to spend the money, then include it in a budget and debate that budget on the floor. That was not done. Any wonder many folks have no patience with the current pols?

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=CNBC+Rick+Santelli+Rant&Form=VQFRVP#view=detail&mid=F1EBB93E59A658E8B18DF1EBB93E59A658E8B18D

PeterZ wrote:
The Dems also refused to pass the budget after the bailouts in order to include those bailouts as the new baseline for their Continuing Resolutions. The result was more than $1 trillion dollars added to the continuing expenditures from measures meant to be one time only. Many folks bought into the TEA Party as a result of that BS.

If the Dems had wanted to spend the money, then include it in a budget and debate that budget on the floor. That was not done. Any wonder many folks have no patience with the current pols?

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=CNBC+Rick+Santelli+Rant&Form=VQFRVP#view=detail&mid=F1EBB93E59A658E8B18DF1EBB93E59A658E8B18D

Kind of reminds you of the Highridge Government, doesn't it? I was incensed as well, but the Tea Party has been doing the same for the last several years. After screaming for a budget resolution out of the Senate, when one was finally delivered to them they threw it on the shelf for six months with no attempt to caucus or reconcile. They were more interested in impressing their base than in getting the job done.

ksandgren wrote:
Kind of reminds you of the Highridge Government, doesn't it? I was incensed as well, but the Tea Party has been doing the same for the last several years. After screaming for a budget resolution out of the Senate, when one was finally delivered to them they threw it on the shelf for six months with no attempt to caucus or reconcile. They were more interested in impressing their base than in getting the job done.

Revenue bills start in the House. What happened to all those budgets they sent to the Senate? What compromise did the Senate offer? None as I recall. Yet the TEA Party gets blamed?

Sorry but I am not buying it.