posted
I've made my comments down in the basement (open discussion forum).
Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was intriqued by the return coverage last night and could not help 'channel grazing'. Most networks had panels representing various factions.
By about 9:30pm eastern the 'liberal' leaning folks on the panels from ABC and CNN were absolutely giddy at how close the tallies already pouring in from Florida were. Their conservative counterparts were equally glum and talking about how the party had failed to connect with immigrants.
At about this same time MSNBC, which can be counted on to be 'snarky left wing' was, well... snarky left wing.
Over at Fox they were not showing the big electoral maps or talking about returns. Attention was being given, rather, to a bus load of Pentecostals voting illegally in Hamilton County, OH.
I am hopeful that the outcome nationally will mean that a number of projects helpful to passenger train service already underway will not face automatic and immediate cancellation. Specifically I am thinking of the 125 new Viewliner cars abuilding for Amtrak, the infrastructure improvements extending from Chicago to St. Louis and Michigan, and a 'new' Union Station in Raleigh, NC.
Professionally, as I move into the final third of my career, I have grave concerns about how the outcome of the election in North Carolina will impact public education.... though I will continue to be at my post with my toes firmly on the line hoping for a pleasant surprise.
Now - I'm just going to go on a train ride this weekend and enjoy the view.
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I won't venture down into the basement, but here are my takeaways from the election, in no special order:
1. 2010 was an anomaly, not a wave. The Tea Party is not irrelevant, but will have to be "dealt with" by the Republican Party going forward (read, "identity crisis").
2. Republicans should stay away from any use of the word "rape" until they learn what it means. Akin and Mourdock fell out of the nut tree on this, hitting every branch on the way down, and probably impacting the top of the ticket's chances.
3. The October Surprise did turn out to be Hurricane Sandy and its sequel.
4. Romney peaked too soon; 3. above killed his momentum, and the optics of Obama's love affair with Christie helped BO enormously.
5. The legitimate polls were essentially right all along; they weren't badly skewed left as many believed (hoped).
6. Steadily falling gas prices (where you could buy the stuff!) helped Obama; remember when it was all about gas prices? Non-issue at the end.
7. Finally, because I'm getting tired of typing, this observation - ARITHMETIC AND DEMOGRAPHICS CAN TRUMP ENTHUSIASM. Intelligent R's will figure that out.
As far as predicting the final electoral count, it appears that my state is still in play. If it goes to the candidate now leading, Obama winds up, I think, with 332 to Romney's 206.
-------------------- Ocala Mike Posts: 1536 | From: Ocala, FL | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think next time I'm going to make some bets based on the 538 Blog projections.
If Florida does, in fact, go blue, that makes Nate Silver 50 for 50 in 2012 I believe.
Seriously though - I'd buy lottery tickets before I'd bet on an election...... and I gave up on that when I fortunately 'broke even' for a year on the Kentucky lottery twenty years ago when I was still in the Army.
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
I think next time I'm going to make some bets based on the 538 Blog projections.
If Florida does, in fact, go blue, that makes Nate Silver 50 for 50 in 2012 I believe.
You do realize, of course, that he got his start as a horse racing handicapper? His stock should be way up this morning, that's for sure.
He still handicaps horse races! Just the two-legged kind!
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, Moderator, it appears that one of the following will be the official result of our little contest, depending on how Florida turns out:
OBAMA 303 ROMNEY 235
or
OBAMA 332 ROMNEY 203
Can you divulge the "winner" for each of the above scenarios at this time?
I still can't believe that the R's missed a lay-up in Florida. A right-to-work state with a Republican chief executive and a heavily Republican legislature, and looked to be solidly in the bag for Romney up until mid-October. When the early vote came in for Sen. Nelson winning big, I thought BO might have a good chance.
-------------------- Ocala Mike Posts: 1536 | From: Ocala, FL | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looks to me like the Tea Partiers are double agents for the Dems - they cost the GOP over two years 5 Senate seats that a mainstream Republican could have easily won. And the Republican's business model is broken. There just aren't enough angry old white men to guarantee a Presidential victory. Obama LOST the white vote both times, and still won. The Big Question wasn't "does Obama deserve a second term?", it was, "Is Romney the one to solve our problems?" And to most people, the answer was "No!" And if you weren't in the basement to read it, I quoted an ABC pundit who said,"The Republicans are a "Mad Men" party in a "Modern Family" world!" That was it in a nutshell!
Posts: 516 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
TSR, I too am an AMC fan. We owned a '51 Nash Statesman, '54 Ambassador, several Ramblers, and the final AMC car was my dad's '61 Ambassador. Dad was a tool and die supervisor at the Fischer Body plant in Chicago. He adamantly refused to buy a GM car. He said he knew too much about how they were made.
The Nashes were ahead of their time. First car to have a single piece of glass for a windshield. Their weathereye heating system was the envy of everybody else. When the patent ran out GM and Ford snapped it up. The Nashes had unitized body construction. The seats were foam rubber and coil springs. The cars were streamlined. But innovation, quality, and engineering don't always win the day.
Interestingly, Chevy sold lots of cars because they were pretty. Marketing research discovered that the "lady of the house" usually had the final say on the car that the family purchased.
AMC had a couple of final successes before their demise. The Hornet Wagon, including the 4x4 version (doctors loved it) was a big success as was the AMC Javelin. The Alabama Highway Patrol purchased Javelins. And Javelin was a NASCAR winner.
AS a young adult, I owned nothing but German cars, Beetles,Karmann Ghia, and Audi until I got married and started a family. My first family car was an AMC Ambassador wagon with a 401 V8 fed by a big 4bbl carb. It was a beautiful car.
I had a friend who had a Nash Metropolitan. I believe that they were made in England. Another first for AMC, imports. And the early Ramblers were little cars that retained the Nash "bathtub" look. They were popular with the youth crowd, especially the convertibles.
I know this has nothing to do with Amtrak but it is fun to reminisce.
Posts: 140 | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Iron Mountain: My father-in-law had the Hornet Wagon with 4WD and it lasted forever. A friend bought an early '70s AMC Matador wagon new that spent spent most of it's first year being repaired. I guess that was the beginning of the end, as well as a bad decade for american car reliability in general.
My current preference, Subaru, once had to quit running ads years ago for the Outback Sedan as "America's first AWD Sedan", because it was discovered AMC beat them to that 30 years earlier with the Hornet 4WD Sedan.
Ocala: I am also old, white, male and grew up in a heavily Republican suburb. Now that I am collecting Social Security I guess I am also part of the 47%, and I do really feel guilty about getting money for nothing.
And I am proud I live in Minnesota where we just threw out the Republican state senate and house majorities, as well as voting down two right wing constitutional amendments for voter photo id and against gay marriage. Analysis says the silly amendments motivated enough young people to vote to oust the Republicans who ran the state. Another case of Republicans shooting themselves in the foot. If you might remember, I said here before, Big Bird has powerful friends. Like most people under 30.
Posts: 1573 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
TwinStarRocket, you're not getting anything for nothing, really. You paid Social Security taxes. Same with Medicare taxes.
Posts: 2236 | From: Evanston, Ill. and Ontonagon, Mich. | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, Henry, but now I am a taker rather than a maker in the Ayn Rand/Paul Ryan world.
Posts: 1573 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I too am an angry old white retired male, who is getting social security now and living in a small town in a rural area of an Obama state. I admit I voted for O., even though my county apparently went for Romney, and for a while, I was considering voting for the wealthy former Republican governor and his young Tea Party running mate.
By the way, I too had a Rambler American -- while I was attending grad school at Western Michigan University more than 30 years ago!! It took a heavy beating, I must admit, while it was being owned by me!
To get back to trains -- I'm glad AMTRAK is running into NYP again now.
Posts: 2428 | From: Grayling, MI | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to wonder to what extent the "Three R's" Romney/Ryan/Rand consider a person that obtained marketable skills, held or sought employment throughout an entire 40 year working life, yet now chooses to "do what they want to do when they want to do it" - and part of what makes that possible is publicly administered pension income and health care benefits - both of which was prepaid during one's working life. Is such a person really a taker?
Somehow, I think I just described myself, and likely most anyone else around here as well.
It would appear that the "takers" are those who choose to "slack" around doing nothing they don't have to, relying upon others (public and private sources) for handouts. I think the TV comedy-drama series such as "Girls' portrays such a cult of young, able bodied, college educated (thanks Mom and Dad), people that could easily be described as "takers".
Likewise, "takers" include those who simply choose not to have health insurance knowing that family or the public trough will care for them. This is why I am in favor of PPACA '10 - even though I voted for Romney.
Simply because Willard Romney is a highly motivated and driven personality - Type A if you will - contemplating his next move (New York Times reports today possibly an executive level position with the LDS church) does not mean everybody else fits that model. The great majority are Type B's who know they have an obligation to provide for themselves and any dependents they choose to have. But I think it harsh to think of a Type B as part of that 47%, or otherwise the takers.
GBN - white, male, retired, Type B - and Railroad Retirement annuitant and Medicare beneficiary.
Posts: 10155 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The three "R"s do not classify SS recipients as takers. The democrats may want you to think that, but it is not true.
Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
The three "R"s do not classify SS recipients as takers. The democrats may want you to think that, but it is not true.
A discussion for another time and thread. Personally, I'm suffering from internet burnout over the election. I would like to say that the final vote in here which, I believe was 14 O, 9 R mirrors very closely the ratio 332 O, 203 R of the electoral college tally. As for my remarks above regarding a little "contest" in here, I now realize that I was referring to my correctly selecting the "under" on Mike Smith's posting of his estimated electoral totals.
-------------------- Ocala Mike Posts: 1536 | From: Ocala, FL | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
SS recipients who have insufficient income for tax liability make up 10.3% (in 2011 according to the Tax Policy Institute) of the 46.4% who pay no income tax. I guess that makes me a Type B with one foot in taker-land and the other on a Medicare banana peel.
But of concern to railfans should be the fallout from the election. Once Texas secedes, will Amtrak 21/22 now terminate in Hope, AR, and be renamed the Arkansas Big Bird in a shameless act of payback and cronyism?
Posts: 1573 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
Mr. Twin Star or anyone, assume Married taxpayers who elect to file Jointly, both 65 or older that each received during 2011 the maximum Social Security Benefit of $2513/mo, or $30156/yr. They also had Interest Income of $14630, but no other income.
That's $74942 of income; what was their 2011 Federal Income Tax liability?
Posts: 10155 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Surprised you haven't gotten an answer to this, Gil. I could figure it out for you, but I become violently ill every time I look at one of those "Social Security Income Worksheets" for my own taxes. I do know that the wife and I are Type B's and not quite in the 47% category.
Do you really want a numerical answer to the above, or are you just trying to make some kind of point? You haven't actually given enough information if the former, i.e., deductions, exemptions for age/blindness, etc.
-------------------- Ocala Mike Posts: 1536 | From: Ocala, FL | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Unfortunately I no longer do paper filing and my online tax service does nothing but ask mostly yes/no questions. It has a what-if calculator, but is no longer accessible this time of year without an archive fee. Back in the days of paper I could probably figure this out. I have not yet been through a tax year without wages (until this one). So I have to say I dunno.
But I would guess that the Social Security is non-taxable and the interest does not exceed the exemptions and standard deduction, so the tax is zero?
Posts: 1573 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
In fact, had the Interest income been $1844 or less, this couple would not even been required to file a Federal Return.
But my point has been made; you can be retired and "doing OK" and not pay any Federal income tax.
These folk would have been in the "Romney 47%".
Mike, be it assured everything needed to compute the tax is there (Married, election to file joint, both 65 or over; if they had Itemized Deductions in excess of the Standard, I would have said so). That is just the kind of "trickie" than can be asked on the CPA exam - and with one of the choices E) Insufficient information.
Posts: 10155 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting, Gil. I guess the key is to not have any income from wages or other taxable pensions like the bride and I have if you want to hit zero tax. Can't complain, though; our effective tax rate is still lower than Mitt's. I think I figured out that we are both working in part-time jobs for probably $.40 on the $1.00, hence the likelihood that we will be "packing it in" next spring.
Maybe we'll do some volunteer work as counsellors at one of Mr. Smith's "Death Panels." I might look good as a "grim reaper."
Posts: 1536 | From: Ocala, FL | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is not my death panel, it is obama's death panel, and you have to be a very well connected member of the governing elite in DC to be assigned a position on that 15-member Board.
(That's right... Fifteen high-priced bureaucrats will be determining if it is cost-effective to give you an operation or send you home with pain pills.)
Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're in shock because you have been lied to all along by the right-wing media/industrial complex in business to pipe "all the news that fits, we print" to the sheeple that follow them. My advice: double the dosage of the adult beverage/antidepressant/pain pill you use for setbacks like this, and call your doctor after the holiday.
Posts: 1536 | From: Ocala, FL | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, now the election was rigged! What stage of grief is denial? An early one, I presume.
Posts: 1536 | From: Ocala, FL | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess it was too much to hope for that the Obama administration would avoid any kind of scandal, but I guess now it has joined as good as any other coming to mind. Now that The New York Times has reported that there was knowledge of the affair within official circles that report to the president during late summer, I can "smell the meat a cookin'".
At least this one involves two highly driven and accomplished "personae" who intended to act discretly and not some "scantily clad Bimbette" chasing Senator Gasbag around the Reflecting Pool.
But the result is the same when any of these episodes move forth - who is in power makes no difference.
Posts: 10155 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Won't be long before the "I" word is bruited about. Meanwhile, the "shock and awe" of events of Election Day continue to ravage the mental health of many on the right. Big pharma needs to come up with a pill for "electoral dysfunction," as some people can't get it up while others can't seem to give it up.
Posts: 1536 | From: Ocala, FL | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike, I think that the "I" for impeachment is a bit much. The opposition has learned from the Clinton episode that they can discredit themselves absent having a case solid enough to result in removal from office. The case against Nixon was rock solid and had it run its course, he would have been convicted and removed. Those involved with exposing Watergate, living or dead, are regarded as national heroes.
I don't think same can be said to the "dramatis personae" of the Clinton affair. The "blubbery Bimbette" of that one has proven to be quite unmarketable, "Javert" (Kenneth Starr) is largely removed from the public eye, and Bill today has rock star standing (I'll always hold that had the people arose in unison "repeal the 22nd Amendment", Bill would have won a third term by a landslide).
But all told, this matter, even if no compromise of national security is found but considering the election-timed disclosure of such, will bring severe discredit to the second term and hamper any initiatives the Administration wishes to bring forth - even if it is old news by the '14 mid-term cycle.
Posts: 10155 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
There was an impeachment bill in Congress way before the election, but if you only watch mainstream news, you never would have known about it.
The Libya scandal is one of the highest order. So many bits and pieces have come out---just wait until the whole thing is put together (that is, if the GOP has the guts to do a thorough and accurate investigation). Lots of people should lose their jobs over this, including Obama and Clinton.
Posts: 2355 | From: Pleasanton, CA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think even us "furriners" were surprised at the gulf between the number of seats won for the contenders. I was with some UK friends in Las Vegas at the time so fortunately didn't get subjected to a live commentary - just a barman towards the end of the night who just seemed shellshocked (and not happy).
I guess we'll never know what was in those tax returns now.
-------------------- Geoff M. Posts: 2426 | From: Apple Valley, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
I am slowing piecing things together, and I'm not liking what I am discovering. Besides the obvious voter fraud (which my side will NEVER EVER do anything about because they are wimps and are afraid of being called, "racist"), I am also beginning to learn just how much crap was covered up by the Obama Admin in order to get elected. We're up to three major cover-ups now:
1) Libya 2) The Patraeus affair was known BEFORE the election 3) Iran shooting down one of our unarmed drones
Those are three "acute" items that were purposely hidden from view prior to the election. But of course in addition to that, we have a complicit media who are completely on Obama's side and continue to do anything they can in order to get him elected and keep positive views on him. And now we have the left saying that the right needs to drop our platform and "get with the times, man!" because we are so outdated. Oh really? Is that what the left thought when they lost in 2010 in record numbers? Did they say, "Oh my, we lost from coast to coast in every category---we better stop talking pro-life and we better stop talking about gay marriage"? Heck no---they doubled-down on those things. Honestly, the left knows exactly how to push an agenda. The right needs to learn from them. Our side is pathetic, even though we are right.
Posts: 2355 | From: Pleasanton, CA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the left did learn a thing or two following the 2010 election. My state (WA) just elected a EuroGreenie for Governor, legalized marijuana possession and approved gay marriage. The GOP candidate in the Senate race ran on a platform criticizing the Dem incumbent for voting FOR the Iraq war (!) and the only statewide candidate that identified with the Tea Party got creamed. Lessons learned.
Posts: 831 | From: Seattle | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic
