Nola

Members
  • Content count

    32,321
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    35

Nola last won the day on June 30 2015

Nola had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

497 Excellent

About Nola

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday
  1. http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/opinions-about-the-iran-deal-are-more-about-obama-than-iran/ Opinions About The Iran Deal Are More About Obama Than Iran The political debate has begun on the Obama administration’s nuclear deal with Iran, and it is falling almost exactly along partisan lines. Nearly all the Republican presidential candidates are against it (Rand Paul has not issued a statement). Jeb Bush, who is more moderate than most of his fellow Republicans, has already called the deal “appeasement.” All the Democratic candidates are either supportive or noncommittal. In fact, the best predictor of how Americans will feel about the deal, announced Tuesday, is not their position on Iran or nuclear disarmament, but simply their opinion about President Obama. Over the past few months a number of nonpartisan polls have been conducted on a nuclear agreement with Iran. Every single one of them found more support for a deal than opposition. The most recent, a Fox News poll from June, said that 47 percent were in favor of “an agreement that would involve the U.S. easing economic sanctions on Iran for ten years and in return Iran agreeing to stop its nuclear program over that period” compared with 43 percent who were against it. The groups that generally approved of the deal were the same ones that generally approved of the job Obama has been doing as president. Black, Democratic, liberal and younger voters were generally for the deal, while white, Republican, conservative and older voters were more likely to be opposed. In fact, you can explain 82 percent of the variation in support for the Iran deal in 18 subgroups just by knowing what Obama’s job approval rating was in each group. The matchup isn’t perfect. There are, for example, plenty of Republicans (34 percent) in favor of the deal and plenty of black people (31 percent) against it. But it wouldn’t be surprising if those groups returned to the partisan fold as the debate reaches a climax. The partisanship on display in this issue was also apparent during the gun control debate after the Newtown school massacre in Connecticut. You probably remember how the initial pollingseemed to show that there was a lot of support for Obama’s proposals. But once Obama’s name was attached to the legislation, support for any bill lined up almost perfectly with how people feltabout members of his administration. A different question asked by Fox News gets at this polarization phenomenon. Fox News asked voters, “how confident are you in the ability of the Obama administration to handle negotiations with Iran on its nuclear program?” Forty-eight percent of Americans said they were at least somewhat confident in the Obama administration, similar to the 47 percent that favored the deal, but the subgroup breakdown was much closer to how Americans felt about Obama overall. Ninety-six percent of the variation in confidence in the Obama administration’s negotiations was explained by approval of Obama’s job performance overall. Within the 18 subgroups, the average difference between Obama’s job approval rating and confidence in the administration’s handling of negotiations was just 3 percentage points. Only 17 percent of Republicans were confident in the negotiations, and just 11 percent of black respondents were not. So what does this mean for the deal as it heads to Congress for approval? On the face of it, it means Democratic voters are probably not going to push for congressional Democrats to stray from the president (except possibly for strong supporters of Israel). That’s not good for the deal’s opponents, who will need bipartisan support tooverturn the Iran agreement in Congress (which requires a two-thirds majority). But it also means the White House will not be able to claim a political consensus for one of its most significant foreign policy achievements.
  2. Given the amount of time you waste on here, that seems doubtful.
  3. Of course you do, because you don't think Obama has the "black experience"... I'm sure you watched that church funeral and thought "Wow, he really sticks out like a sore them, doesn't fit this culture at all"
  4. Of course they are. Who on earth says they aren't? It's arguing against a straw man. But if you believe that is really what he was doing, you're being naive.
  5. It's 100% trolling. He even criticizes Obama for singing at the funeral (FOR HIS FRIEND) but that he won't do it for Amari Brown. Amari Brown's killing is national news so I'm a bit unsure what the actual critique is... though Allen West does want us to know that Amari Brown's death wasn't because of a gun! Sounds like he really is actually genuinely concerned about his murder! I'm sure he must have attended the funeral today given his critique... "I suppose President Obama will deliver the eulogy and sing “Amazing Grace” for this young black child who lost his life – but not because of a gun"
  6. Ah yes, it was the "liberal progressive media" boogeyman that got the flag taken down, just ignore the Republican Governor and two Republican Senators from South Carolina that also called for it to be taken down... Allen West is an Ann Coulter or a Donald Trump, a pure troll trying to get a rise out of people. And yet, it appears some of you in here actually think he's someone intelligent that we should be listening to!
  7. So, haven't had a chance to scan through the OT, has there been a lot of talk about the Republicans and the filibuster from the Senate traditionalists in here?
  8. Turkey is up 10% Palestine up 17% Israel up 6% Seems like that would feed CBF's "mostly the same" as some are up and some are down.
  9. Reports coming out about the Republican contenders (and Senators) ending the Filibuster if they win the WH in 2016. Given the "traditionalists" that were up in arms in here about Harry Reid's violation of Senate precedent, I can only imagine that this has been a hot topic in here that those traditionalists are pissed at the Republicans about now and won't vote for anyone who would say they'd end the filibuster. Can anyone point me to the page of the discussion? For the record, I think the 60 vote majority is dumb and the filibuster was never intended to be used in this way and should be ended. The "traditional" filibuster, where someone speaks for hours in order to not yield the floor and allow something to move forward, should still be allowed.
  10. http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/06/guide-to-triggering/ Editors Note: Like this phenomenal article, Everyday Feminism definitely believes in giving people a heads up about material that might provoke our reader’s trauma. However, we use the phrase “content warning” instead of “trigger warning,” as the word “trigger” relies on and evokes violent weaponry imagery. This could be re-traumatizing for folks who have suffered military, police, and other forms of violence. So, while warnings are so necessary and the points in this article are right on, we strongly encourage the term “content warning” instead of “trigger warning.”
  11. Danville - You often say you want to hear Obama discuss race. I encourage you to listen to his eulogy today for his friend Rev. Pinckney.
  12. "Cheating" in this case is fairly relative. Growing up, on our Little League district team (that if we won all the way through, would go to the WS in theory), we had an illegal player (who happens to now play in MLB) because he lived in a neighboring city. My brother played for a number of years and I believe every team he ever played on had at least one player who fit this criteria (often times, a player lived in the area and moved and stayed playing sports in the same city using a false address). I don't know if it's as wide spread as it used to be 15 years ago but it wouldn't surprise me. The same can be said for school, as regularly people use addresses belonging to a family member or friend in order to gain admission into a 'better' school or school district. In high school boys basketball here, it got so bad that they essentially changed the rules because it led to these kind of goose chases since most quality public schools had guys from out of the area. I actually know of someone (who is wealthy) who bought another house in order for his son to go to a specific public school just because of sports.
  13. I do think people tend to value what they know over what is unknown to them. But my objection was more to the idea that blacks only care about black deaths when they're killed by white cops.