• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2012 Community Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kehs

Banned
Clevinger said:
Pretty decent interview outside of the gay marriage and weed answers. And the whole Homeland/drone strike question felt like a well deserved "fuck you" to him.
Click to expand...

Why do you think those weren't adequate answers to the questions? It's pretty obvious by now that Obama and his administration are taking a very smart approach to changing policy. Rather than get on a soapbox they are systematically planting the necessary stepping stones in place first.
 
M

markatisu

Member
Angry Fork said:
What do you think would happen if democrats got back majority in house/senate this year and Obama won? Would they fuck it all up again by compromising and being nice or will they have learned their lesson and push full left legislation all the way? (Whichever congressman aren't bought obviously)
Click to expand...

If Obama was re-elected there would be no way he would compromise, there is not another election he needs to win.

That said, the Democratic Congress would still bitch out and play nice because they constantly fear re-elections to keep their jobs.
 
C

Clevinger

Member
Copernicus said:
Why do you think those weren't adequate answers to the questions? It's pretty obvious by now that Obama and his administration are taking a very smart approach to changing policy. Rather than get on a soapbox they are systematically planting the necessary stepping stones in place first.
Click to expand...

His supporting and then not supporting gay marriage (and very likely supporting it again sometime after the election) is 100% cowardice or political expediency. Total Romney move.

As for the weed, he acts like his hands are tied in having to raid the medical marijuana places because the DoJ can't just ignore laws it doesn't like, and yet that's what they're doing with DOMA. He's doing precisely what he said he wouldn't: "I'm not going to use Justice Department resources to try and circumvent state laws about medical marijuana."
 
M

Mike M

Nick N
GhaleonEB said:
Yeah, the sustained increase is hugely discouraging. All the underlying data was very strong, and in just a few weeks the floor has dropped out of claims, manufacturing data, and more. It really does feel like the start of last year all over again.
Click to expand...

I'm not as much of a wonk about this stuff as other PoliGAFers, but was there ever a reason not to expect this?
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
GhaleonEB said:
Yeah, the sustained increase is hugely discouraging. All the underlying data was very strong, and in just a few weeks the floor has dropped out of claims, manufacturing data, and more. It really does feel like the start of last year all over again.
Click to expand...

I've been saying for weeks that this was looking like 2011 redux. The massive gas prices certainly played a part in crippling some production
 
T

TacticalFox88

Banned
Angry Fork said:
What do you think would happen if democrats got back majority in house/senate this year and Obama won? Would they fuck it all up again by compromising and being nice or will they have learned their lesson and push full left legislation all the way? (Whichever congressman aren't bought obviously)
Click to expand...

The more progressive Dems in the Senate the better. Eventually, all the blue dogs will be thrown out.
 
A

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
PhoenixDark said:
I've been saying for weeks that this was looking like 2011 redux. The massive gas prices certainly played a part in crippling some production
Click to expand...

People were getting pretty damn optomistic, myself included. Even with everyone saying how it was going to come back down, I am still pretty surprised. If UE crawls back towards 9%, I think Obama might be toast.
 
K

kehs

Banned
Clevinger said:
His supporting and then not supporting gay marriage (and very likely supporting it again sometime after the election) is 100% cowardice or political expediency. Total Romney move.

As for the weed, he acts like his hands are tied in having to raid the medical marijuana places because the DoJ can't just ignore laws it doesn't like, and yet that's what they're doing with DOMA. He's doing precisely what he said he wouldn't: "I'm not going to use Justice Department resources to try and circumvent state laws about medical marijuana."
Click to expand...

Call it cowardice if you want, but he's getting shit done. The alternative is to be boisterous about it and not have a single ounce of result to show for it.

About the dispensary raids, you have to be naive if you think 100% of those places are purely serving medicinal clientele. I'm all for legalization of marijuana even though I'm not a user, but that shit isn't happening anytime soon mainly because of all the hurdles already in place not to mention the obfuscation and hyperbole from the pro-legalization crowd.

Politics are politics and they won't be changed overnight, but they can be swayed over time. This administration has managed to shame nearly a decade of democrats in office for their inadequacies.
 
empty vessel

empty vessel

Member
GhaleonEB said:
Yeah, the sustained increase is hugely discouraging. All the underlying data was very strong, and in just a few weeks the floor has dropped out of claims, manufacturing data, and more. It really does feel like the start of last year all over again.
Click to expand...

fredgraph.png


Mini-austerity, possibly. Or as S&P likes to put it, "fiscal conslidation." This graph only goes until the end of 2011, but I suspect that, and will be curious to see if, the lines between federal spending and federal receipts continue to converge (or at least that spending continues to decline), which means the government is cooling the economy down, i.e., removing financial assets from the private sector (lord knows why). It could represent a turn towards UK austerity policy, which the US government appears to be preparing to emulate. At least, I don't hear much talk of more stimulus. And by much I mean any.
 
T

TacticalFox88

Banned
AlteredBeast said:
People were getting pretty damn optomistic, myself included. Even with everyone saying how it was going to come back down, I am still pretty surprised. If UE crawls back towards 9%, I think Obama might be toast.
Click to expand...

Like it's been stated. The GOP has no chance in hell at beating Obama. Only events will beat Obama.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
The recovery's slowing down but I don't think we're going to see major increases in the unemployment rate or whatever.

Richard Lugar looks like he's toast. There's a new poll out that has him trailing his primary opponent by 5 points (44-39). This is the second poll that had Mourdock leading. In races like this, the momentum comes at the end - Christine O'Donnell never actually lead in a Delaware Senate poll but sweeped with undecideds on election day.

Indiana's probably out of reach for Obama but Democrats could still pick up the Senate seat.
 
A

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
TacticalFox88 said:
Like it's been stated. The GOP has no chance in hell at beating Obama. Only events will beat Obama.
Click to expand...

I think it is more apt to say, "the opposition cannot beat the incumbent. Only events can beat the incumbent"

Obama isn't bulletproof and is no more popular than incumbents that have come before him. In essence, thanks to a large incompetence of the voting populace, they might believe that there is a legitimate contender in Mitt Romney. Mitt is as bad or good as many other challengers were before him who have lost or won. If the circumstances tilt, he could win, if they don't, he could promise to give a thousands to every household in America and he still wouldn't win.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
Loudninja said:
Chrysler posts best quarterly profit in 13 years

http://news.yahoo.com/chrysler-posts-best-quarterly-profit-062519432.html
Click to expand...

Of course next time there is an oil crunch they are gonna get hammered.

The Auburn Hills, Mich., company made a net profit of $473 million, its best quarter in 13 years, mainly on the back of strong U.S. sales. From January through March, Chrysler's sales were up 39 percent as customers bought more Ram pickups, Jeep Grand Cherokee SUVs and Chrysler 200 midsize sedans.
Click to expand...

At least GM has the Cruze, Sonic, Volt, and Spark. Ford has the Focus, C-Max, C-Max Energi, Fusion hybrid, etc.
 
W

War Peaceman

You're a big guy.
empty vessel said:
It could represent a turn towards UK austerity policy, which the US government appears to be preparing to emulate. At least, I don't hear much talk of more stimulus. And by much I mean any.
Click to expand...

Hopefully your government has been paying attention to our economy then! Whispers talk of a shift away from austerity. Though it seems unlikely.
 
I

Invisible_Insane

Member
PhoenixDark said:
And it looks like events are about to beat Obama. A third false recovery will only turn voters off permanently
Click to expand...
What does that even mean? An anemic recovery is not a second or third recession, no matter how badly you seem to want it to be. The trend, while disappointing, has consistently been an upward one.
 
empty vessel

empty vessel

Member
vcassano1 said:
Hopefully your government has been paying attention to our economy then! Whispers talk of a shift away from austerity. Though it seems unlikely.
Click to expand...

Yep, what's happening over there is hard to watch. Because it issues its own currency, the UK is not constrained in its fiscal response to the financial crisis as Eurozone countries are. Yet the UK has pretty much done exactly the opposite of what responsible economic policy dictates. It's embarrassing for the government, and terrible for the people who have to suffer because of it. Unfortunately, I fear the US government is on the precipice of embarrassing itself and inflicting more suffering on the American people.

Ironically, it is quite possible that only Romney's election can spare us, because, while Republicans are perfectly happy to spend money (indeed, their principal budget calls for massive increases in net spending), they will refuse to spend it in worthwhile ways or on ways that make it into the pockets of working class people. So they will oppose any Democratic plan to spend money if it is not spent on the top 1% or will in any way increase worker bargaining power. That means the government will be more likely to increase net spending under a Romney administration than under an Obama administration.

In short, Democrats do not oppose spending money on the wealthy as much as Republicans oppose spending money on average Americans, so Republicans will be able to pass spending legislation with Democratic support whereas Democrats will be unable to pass anything.
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
PhoenixDark said:
And it looks like events are about to beat Obama. A third false recovery will only turn voters off permanently
Click to expand...

If things follow last year, hiring will pick up as the fall gets underway, buoying Obama to victory. No one pays attention to the campaign through the summer anyways.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
GhaleonEB said:
If things follow last year, hiring will pick up as the fall gets underway, buoying Obama to victory. No one pays attention to the campaign through the summer anyways.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that's true. But you're right about things picking up in the late summer/fall. But if things get really bad during the summer - like, negative jobs reports - an uptick in September and October might not matter.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
PhoenixDark said:
I'm not sure that's true. But you're right about things picking up in the late summer/fall. But if things get really bad during the summer - like, negative jobs reports - an uptick in September and October might not matter.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And when HCR mandate is thrown out and when gas prices hit $8/gal, Obumbo will be impeached.
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
PhoenixDark said:
I'm not sure that's true. But you're right about things picking up in the late summer/fall. But if things get really bad during the summer - like, negative jobs reports - an uptick in September and October might not matter.
Click to expand...

I was exaggeration in the interest of simplificaiton. People do pay attention to a lesser degree during summer, but things tend not to get cemented until around the debates. If we have a similar lull as last year - growth, but slower - and it picks up in late summer/fall, the summer lull will not have had a material effect on the election.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
GhaleonEB said:
I was exaggeration in the interest of simplificaiton. People do pay attention to a lesser degree during summer, but things tend not to get cemented until around the debates. If we have a similar lull as last year - growth, but slower - and it picks up in late summer/fall, the summer lull will not have had a material effect on the election.
Click to expand...

So a summer of stagnant growth and high gas prices won't effect the election? It will set the table for the debates, and ultimately the election.
 
T

TacticalFox88

Banned
My favorite parts of that interview with Bams:

You end up having a very thick skin. I entered here with a thick skin, and now my skin is even thicker. Part of what you understand is that you are a person, but you're also a symbol. If things are going wrong, then people are looking to you to fix them. And sometimes, if you're just frustrated in your efforts, you're going to be the object of their frustration. You don't take it personally – you just recognize that it goes with the office and the desk and Marine One and all the other aspects of being president.
Click to expand...

My respect for this man has amplified. To simply shrug off all of the sheer amount of bullshit he's had to deal with?
 
empty vessel

empty vessel

Member
TacticalFox88 said:
My favorite parts of that interview with Bams:

My respect for this man has amplified. To simply shrug off all of the sheer amount of bullshit he's had to deal with?
Click to expand...

He's exactly right that he's a symbol. That's why it is perfectly legitimate to direct criticism at him even if it is personally unwarranted. And, by that, I do not mean criticism that invents negative things to say. I mean, e.g., blaming him for a too-small stimulus. Even though his advisers did not give him all the information he needed, and even though the Congress represented a significant obstacle to passing a larger stimulus, it is perfectly fair to express these as criticisms of Obama. It's how pressure is applied that motivates action in conformity with demands.
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
PhoenixDark said:
So a summer of stagnant growth and high gas prices won't effect the election? It will set the table for the debates, and ultimately the election.
Click to expand...

I did not say it would not affect the election; my view is that it will not determine the outcome. The trajectory we're on from August-November will carry far more impact than May-August.

Incidentally, the October jobs report is due a couple days before the election, which will be a first in a very long time. I read a piece a while back showing how presidental approval ratings are highly responsive to job reports for a few days after they come out; a good one leads to a bump, a poor one to a slump. So a good October jobs report could have a non-trivial impact on the election (and probably more than say, the July report, which was my point).
 
R

RustyNails

Member
TacticalFox88 said:
My favorite parts of that interview with Bams:

You end up having a very thick skin. I entered here with a thick skin, and now my skin is even thicker. Part of what you understand is that you are a person, but you're also a symbol. If things are going wrong, then people are looking to you to fix them. And sometimes, if you're just frustrated in your efforts, you're going to be the object of their frustration. You don't take it personally – you just recognize that it goes with the Batcave and Bat Copter and all the other aspects of being Batman.
Click to expand...

My respect for this man has amplified. To simply shrug off all of the sheer amount of bullshit he's had to deal with?
Click to expand...
re-read the quote :p
 
N

NullPointer

Member
PhoenixDark said:
So a summer of stagnant growth and high gas prices won't effect the election? It will set the table for the debates, and ultimately the election.
Click to expand...
That is where I place my hope. Obama can actually respond to allegations which is something Romney will have to deal with, and I don't think Romney'll be able to engage in side quips against Bams and win.

And I've seen the (post dissonance-shattering) afterglow that can take hold of independents and even staunch conservatives after a solid Obama speech or smackdown. For a few days after any heavily televised Obama appearance even the most adamant conservatives in my family have to admit that he sounds like the smartest and most reasonable man in the room.

Anecdotal yes, but powerful to witness. The man does know how to persuade, the trouble is in getting people to listen in the first place.
 
I

Invisible_Insane

Member
Officerrob said:
Too bad Andrew Breitbart is dead, he would just make one up.

Has anyone actually watched Marco Rubio's foreign policy speech at the Brookings Institute? This guy is "the next big thing" for the Republican party? I dare anyone to try and stay awake during this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftujH_N5igI
Click to expand...
I think Jackson50 gave a pretty thorough summary of what the speech was expected to be, and I have precious little motivation to confirm that he was correct.
 
C

cartoon_soldier

Member
PhoenixDark said:
The speech was surprising tame in many regards from what I read; he highlighting a lot of bipartisan agreements with dems
Click to expand...

Which is good.

Considering all Romney wants to do is just say whatever is against the Dem argument.

Oh, and Romney wants to tell us all about the emerging threat from the Soviet Union

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...y-warning-of-soviet-threat.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

“We’re seeing the Soviets pushing into the Arctic with no response from us. In fact, the only response is to announce the early retirement of the last remaining icebreaker.”
Click to expand...

“You know, Russia is another example where we give and Russia gets and we get nothing in return,” Prosper said. “The United States abandoned its missile defense sites in Poland and Czechoslovakia, yet Russia does nothing but obstruct us, or efforts in Iran and Syria.”
Click to expand...

Like...did they all miss the ending of the Cold War? Strange, considering as GOP likes to say, St. Reagan defeated the Soviets...
 
A

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
cartoon_soldier said:
Which is good.

Considering all Romney wants to do is just say whatever is against the Dem argument.

Oh, and Romney wants to tell us all about the emerging threat from the Soviet Union

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...y-warning-of-soviet-threat.php?ref=fpnewsfeed





Like...did they all miss the ending of the Cold War? Strange, considering as GOP likes to say, St. Reagan defeated the Soviets...
Click to expand...

Perhaps he watched Frozen Planet on Discovery? They talked about how Russia, Canada, the UK, and The US are all scrambling to the arctic because, as the permanent ice sheets recede and melt away completely (so that there is 365 days without ice cover), there will be a huge opportunity to stake claims for drilling and research. Once again, you guys attack for things that are not that far out there. Stick to the obvious things.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
PhoenixDark said:
I've been saying for weeks that this was looking like 2011 redux. The massive gas prices certainly played a part in crippling some production
Click to expand...

Bad timing. Gas prices are dropping right now.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gas-prices-seen-headed-lower-091600632.html

They'll go back up eventually though.

But more important for much of the economy is the natural gas glut. That has attracted a lot of business to open up here to take advantage of the huge spread between natural gas here and elsewhere. For example fertilizer and plastics can now be made cheaper here than in Europe or Asia where the natural gas price can be five times as expensive.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
AlteredBeast said:
Perhaps he watched Frozen Planet on Discovery? They talked about how Russia, Canada, the UK, and The US are all scrambling to the arctic because, as the permanent ice sheets recede and melt away completely (so that there is 365 days without ice cover), there will be a huge opportunity to stake claims for drilling and research. Once again, you guys attack for things that are not that far out there. Stick to the obvious things.
Click to expand...

That is such a sad statement on humanity. All this fossil fuel burning is helping melt the polar icecaps . . . WHICH IS AWSOME SO WE CAN DRILL MOAR! I don't expect huge amounts of effects from climate change during my lifetime. But our grandkids are going to look back and say "WTF did you think you were doing?!?" Greed & denial.
 
A

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
speculawyer said:
That is such a sad statement on humanity. All this fossil fuel burning is helping melt the polar icecaps . . . WHICH IS AWSOME SO WE CAN DRILL MOAR! I don't expect huge amounts of effects from climate change during my lifetime. But our grandkids are going to look back and say "WTF did you think you were doing?!?" Greed & denial.
Click to expand...

co-signed.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
empty vessel said:
This isn't something I feel the need to prove (and it would require a law review article or book to explain it to a layperson in such a way that they could understand how transparently political the court's actions were). I don't think it's the least bit controversial that Bush v. Gore was an indelible black mark on the Court. I'm only responding to Black Mamba so that the nonsense he is writing isn't left hanging out there.



David Cole, The Liberal Legacy of Bush v. Gore, 94 Georgetown Law Journal 1427 (2006).
Click to expand...

This evidence supports my stance. I never argued it was 50/50, but the fact that you just gave evidence that there is a sizable belief it was the right decision proves my point.

No need to go any further since you undermined your own argument.

And FWIW, I read a bunch of law journals both ways back when I was taking law courses and this was a main topic so I know it's not that all legal scholars agree. And I find it telling you didn't mention O'Connor or Kennedy in your claims in the previous post (because they don't fit the mold you're trying to create).

I do agree it's perceived as a black mark on the Court. I'm just tired of all the claims of constant partisanship on the court when we have numerous unanimous decisions or decisions where Scalia would side with Stevens and those 2 would be on an island. It's easy to pick out a handful of cases and argue partisanship but that's nothing but confirmation bias.

I don't want to argue this. Nothing I could say would change your mind and it's not worth the effort.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
Stephen Colbert’s political action committee has enough cash to play jokes and pull pranks through the presidential campaign, but for now the comedian is mum on how he plans to spend that money.

Colbert’s Super PAC, Americans for A Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow has $794,000 cash-on-hand sitting untouched in its coffers, according to March documents filed with the Federal Election Commission, making it wealthier than some PAC’s intended to back (legitimate!) presidential candidates

The PAC raised just $44,000 in March, but spent only $28,000, mostly on Internet bills and legal fees. Though the March haul is paltry, the committee is sitting on a significant sum.
By contrast, as Politico first reported, Endorse Liberty, a PAC dedicated to supporting Ron Paul’s candidacy has just $54,000 in the bank.

Endorse Liberty, initially bankrolled with a $1.7 million donation from PayPal founder Peter Thiel, raised just $13,000 in March.
Click to expand...

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/04/colbert-super-pac-out-fundraises-ron-paul/

lol Ron Paul. Couldn't out-raise Colbert's PAC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
3K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom