Tweet
Originally posted by David Floyd
Well, that demonstrates a couple of things. First, it demonstrates your ignorance of the value of a viable automobile industry in this country and what it does for the economy. Odds are strong that you would end up down far more than $100 if GM, Ford, and Chrysler go under. Secondly, you can like reduces cost to dollar per person all you want, but that doesn't make it a valid argument. Thirdly, your right to vote isn't being denied by having a replacement appointed. Hell, if Obama didn't win, you wouldn't have gotten to vote for another two years anyway. Your vote will make zero difference in the grand scheme of things, because a 1st term, special election Senator with 1/3 of a term to serve is going to exercise effectively no power and bring little, if anything, of value to Illinois. So, in order for you to feel warm inside about your "right to vote" - which is pretty irrelevant in this case - taxpayers should have to shell out $25 million?
You're not skimping on anything. There was never a scheduled election, nor is there a provision for a special election. Let's please use correct language, otherwise you'll confuse stupid people. And confusing stupid people is another real good way to wind up with more government spending.
Don't see why not. You are arguing in favor of a costly special election - unless you are willing to tell me that $25 million is not very much money, in which case, let's use it for a cause you disagree with and see if you have the same attitude - for no practical purpose, and I'm calling you out on it.
Well, that demonstrates a couple of things. First, it demonstrates your ignorance of the value of a viable automobile industry in this country and what it does for the economy. Odds are strong that you would end up down far more than $100 if GM, Ford, and Chrysler go under. Secondly, you can like reduces cost to dollar per person all you want, but that doesn't make it a valid argument. Thirdly, your right to vote isn't being denied by having a replacement appointed. Hell, if Obama didn't win, you wouldn't have gotten to vote for another two years anyway. Your vote will make zero difference in the grand scheme of things, because a 1st term, special election Senator with 1/3 of a term to serve is going to exercise effectively no power and bring little, if anything, of value to Illinois. So, in order for you to feel warm inside about your "right to vote" - which is pretty irrelevant in this case - taxpayers should have to shell out $25 million?
You're not skimping on anything. There was never a scheduled election, nor is there a provision for a special election. Let's please use correct language, otherwise you'll confuse stupid people. And confusing stupid people is another real good way to wind up with more government spending.
Don't see why not. You are arguing in favor of a costly special election - unless you are willing to tell me that $25 million is not very much money, in which case, let's use it for a cause you disagree with and see if you have the same attitude - for no practical purpose, and I'm calling you out on it.
Comment