birdog1960

no. it's the point to the under and unemployed of nc. it's the point to those that the gov and his buddies see as deviants. it's the point to those that value the ability to be who you want to be without being judged. and you can bet it's caught the attention of the governor. even you had noticed it labeling it "economic blackmail" in this very thread. it's not blackmail. it's a considered choice. and it's the point.

hmmm.. let's suppose I own a thriving business (I did) and public perception is important to me and my products. and I have kids. and I want them to go to great public schools. and the education of potential workers is important to my company and its products. and I see this petty, discriminatory, vindictive bill. and I see poorly treated teachers. and I see a lack of importance placed on education. and I see it's all flowing from the same state politicians. and I decide NOT to come to nc for my business...because those things have a common and ugly and undesirable thread running through them. and I see others in the same situation making the same choice. that IS exactly the point.

there are plenty more references but you won't bother to read the 3 I cited.

it's weak to challenge documented facts: http://www.teacherportal.com/salary/North-Carolina-teacher-salary http://khon2.com/2014/04/18/600-teachers-quit-in-wake-county-north-carolina/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/katie-mgongolwa-/this-is-what-it-feels-lik_b_4690751.html

paying teachers some of the lowest average wages in the country is anti-intellectual. driving teachers out of the state in hordes is anti-intellectual. dismissing the value of public education is anti intellectual. that's how they roll in nc. this has nothing to do with my personal intellect.

it's not economic blackmail. these companies don't want to locate in a state run by neaderthals, petty imbeciles and anti-intellectuals. they don't want their brand sullied by such an association and I suspect many don't want to live in a place like that.

this is on the governor. if he really cared about the people in his state he'd never have considered this bill. modern, contemporary industries that care about public perception have already changed plans to locate in nc. they aren't going to reconsider anytime soon. it's not like nc is made up of interconnected research triangles. there are more than enough unemployed and underemployed people there. but let's make the bathroom habits of a tiny fraction of the population an issue with higher priority than high paying jobs and , oh, btw, public education which is the ultimate solution to better long term job prospects to those same people. it's a sorry state of affairs and educated people almost everywhere think less of the state of nc.

they have them all over appalachia. I would be no more likely to gauge public opinion on crowd response at a race than I would at a lecture hall full of conferencing social workers in Charlottesville.

close contest between this and an informal poll of minor league stock car race fans....

you "doing one" is not analogous to a veteran dem strategist "doing one" or calling almost 1/2 his party's primary voters "fools".

Bernie is closer to hillary than is any republican to trump...by a lot. the remarkable thing about this commentator is that he is directly criticizing trump supporters who constitute a large portion of his party.

interesting interview with a long time Republican consultant/advisor/strategist : http://www.npr.org/2016/05/09/477301472/republican-backlash-continues-to-build-against-donald-trump about trump supporters: STIPANOVICH: Yeah, I think that they are misinformed and haven't thought this through. Let's talk about his pledge to deport 12 million illegal aliens. Anybody who believes that the United States of America is going to round up, transport, guard, house, feed and deport 12 million people, twice as many as Stalin managed to deport in 30 years of trying, is a fool. And anybody who cynically exploits a fool's credulity is a charlatan. and this: STIPANOVICH: I would say to his supporters, I understand your anger. I understand your frustration. I understand your anxiety - country's changing rapidly, socially, things are changing rapidly, racially the country's in transition. But step back and think about what can actually be done about that. We're not going back to 1956. And to just elect someone like Donald Trump because you're frustrated is irresponsible.

yes, trump supporters are generally miserable I believe. but their economic woes don't stem from obama's policies but from the global economy. neither trump nor anyone else can or will change that fact. I don't believe many of his supporters accept this. special interest pandering at the expense of everymen is on many voters minds including trump supporters. this can actually be changed but I doubt trump is the guy to do it.

sound logic. i'll diagram it for you if you can't discern it yourself. the initial premise is that citizens united resulted in more influence peddling in favor of big moneyed interests. the conclusion is that trump's (and sander's) popularity has significantly benefitted from the anger resulting from this. you can fill in the middle, I trust.

so you disagree that campaign finance laws are an important factor in " party leaders paid closer attention to the people who put them in Washington in the first place"? or by "the people" were you referring to superpacs and corporations? the fact that they have calmost exclusively grassroots support is a large part of their appeal...which is directly attributable to CU and Buckley. nuch of their appeal is due to backlash against the type of candidate CU and Buckley give advantages to.

what set the stage was citizens united. interestingly, I don't hear trump supporters screaming for campaign finance reform but that is the bedrock, fundamental change required to alleviate the proble you describe. Bernie talks more about this than all the other candidates combined.

the answer is to break off the crazies into their own party. there are many dems that would consider rejoining the republican party of Rockefeller.

we finally agree. these asshats have played on and inspired anger and unrest in this impressionable, gullible demographic for years. and now it's come home to roost. and the mainstream repubs have enabled it. just rewards indeed.

from the wsj: Mr. Piketty doesn’t retract his central thesis that there is both income and wealth inequality, and that affirmative steps, including increasing taxes on the wealthy, must be taken to address those inequalities. Are there sentient people who disagree? Does Mr. Rosenkranz? Indeed, as Bill Gates noted in his review of Mr. Piketty’s book: “High levels of inequality are a problem—messing up economic incentives, tilting democracies in favor of powerful interests, and undercutting the ideal that all people are created equal.” Mr. Piketty notes, moreover, that his equation r>g has less applicability for explaining inequality in the 20th and 21st centuries. Furthermore, Mr. Piketty explains, that’s because there are alternative reasons to that calculation for increasing inequality in modern times. As the French would say, “tant pis.” Mr. Rosenkranz conflates the efficacy of certain of Mr. Piketty’s equations with Mr. Piketty’s conclusions; that’s throwing the baby out with the bath. I was curious what Mr. Piketty thought about Mr. Rosenkranz’s opinion and decided to ask him. Here’s Mr. Piketty’s response: “This paper seems to suggest that I have changed my mind, which is clearly wrong.” Marc Chafetz the first five of the graphs i linked are based on tax data. i'm not aware that they have been disputed or at least the conclusions: wealth disparity on a national and global basis is reaching historical highs at an historic pace. that's what bernie's running on. and it is correct.

I believe thomas piketty's analysis http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/pikettys-inequality-story-in-six-charts. it's the essence of Bernie's arguments. and it's the truth. wealth is being concentrated, unsustainably within a tiny group of people. it's not demagoguery. it's fact. and it must be stopped. exactly how it must be is debatable but we should agree that at least slowing this trend is necessary.

just got back from playa del Carmen. take the ferry to Cozumel for a day or 2. scuba or snorkel, eat, drink and be merry at a boutique, all inclusive hotel. can find great values. highly recommended.

selling social;ism to most americans is like selling ice to eskimos. it's not a populist strategy. but he states the truth. his solutions need some work. hell every campaign includes pie in the sky solutions but he's not scapegoating groups that have little control over the nations problems. has identifying the true causes. and it's resonating against all odds. that's not populism.. that's swimming upstream.

I don't think i'd ever fall for trump- like shtick. maybe i'm special. Hillary at least espouses mostly liberal values not far removed from the dem party middle of recent history. I don't particularly like her or the media support that I find unwarranted but she isn't a populist imo. I don't think supporters are being led blindfolded into her camp like thewy are to trump's.

hmmm...you sound like someone that might vote for Bernie. this is what he's been saying all along.

let's assume you are correct. that speaks pretty poorly of the impressionable trump supporters, non?