• 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.

Facebook election meltdowns and tasty, salty tears |OT|

Status
Not open for further replies.
How is secession good for either party (the state or the Union)? Please tell me this won't happen ever and that people will eventually be normal again some day?

I feel like this national idealogical divide is more divisive and prominent than at any other time other than the Civil War. Am I a sucker to a conspiracy theory of some kind of hypothetical Second Civil War? Why are politics so extreme these days? The moderates, especially moderate Republicans, seem to be gone now, and the electorate reflects this. Are we becoming dumber or something?

I'm not asking these questions rhetorically. I'm seriously worried about all the stuff I read in here and elsewhere.

It'll never get off the ground. Worst case scenario is rioting in the south which I have a hard time believing will happen either. They'll have their little temper tantrum and go back to their lives until the next election.
 

RDreamer

Member
I feel like this national idealogical divide is more divisive and prominent than at any other time other than the Civil War. Am I a sucker to a conspiracy theory of some kind of hypothetical Second Civil War? Why are politics so extreme these days? The moderates, especially moderate Republicans, seem to be gone now, and the electorate reflects this. Are we becoming dumber or something?

Because, think about what would have happened had the Republican party not full out revolted after Obama's resounding victory. The country as a whole absolutely disliked Bush and what he left us and put everything into Obama's hands. If the republicans had gone along with it he'd be a savior. He'd be Reagan for the left and shift politics in this country by that much for probably the next ~30 years. Without that obstruction the Democrats would have fixed healthcare and averted another great depression (they still might, but it's a bit fuzzier now).

The thing is that now we joke about the Republicans having to reinvent themselves, but I think they'd have really had to do it if they went along with things. It would have been an easier re-invention, though, but they still would have been beat for a while, probably. So, they made a gamble that stopping him at any cost was a better risk than letting him be a savior.

On top of this you have the conservative media machine. They cater to old fearful people. That's how they make their money. They saw and opportunity and did what they had to make money. In doing so, they had to practically make up their own reality in order to keep the fear and madness going for so long. So, the liberals see what could have been their defining politician for a few decades torn down by obstruction, and the conservatives see their entire way of life quickly fading away.
 
This is the most aggressively bitter "Why I was wrong" piece I've seen yet:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012...ediction-about-mitt-romney-and-2012-election/

This is cracking me up. I'm actually teaching my students how to express opinion in writing, I'd like to show them this but I wouldn't be able to without bursting out laughing.

My favourite sentence

If Romney had been aggressive and not played it safe, would we be talking about President Romney, and celebrating my once brilliant prediction?

Romney will win by a landslide - "brilliant prediction"...

after Romney loses a by landslide - "once brilliant prediction"
 
This is the most aggressively bitter "Why I was wrong" piece I've seen yet:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012...ediction-about-mitt-romney-and-2012-election/

i love when people talk about that university of colorado study because...

didn't we find out that that Colorado model was tuned to past elections after the fact and didn't actually predict anything?

it shows they dont understand what that study actually did. it was basically a backtest, probably with some pretty serious data mining. i hope the people relying on that aren't traders.

from a news story on colorado.edu:
The state-by-state economic data used in their model have been available since 1980. When these data were applied retroactively to each election year, the model correctly classifies all presidential election winners

also, this seems pretty important and is usually ignored:

“As scholars and pundits well know, each election has unique elements that could lead one or more states to behave in ways in a particular election that the model is unable to correctly predict,” they wrote.

also, why would this possibly be better than polls?
 

maharg

idspispopd
This is cracking me up. I'm actually teaching my students how to express opinion in writing, I'd like to show them this but I wouldn't be able to without bursting out laughing.

My favourite sentence



Romney will win by a landslide - "brilliant prediction"...

after Romney loses a by landslide - "once brilliant prediction"

All that aside, he does point out what is probably the path to relevance for the republican party. Drop the socon nonsense and focus on the economic message. Run slates of candidates that are inclusive (Romney+Ryan was such an immense backslide into a white fratboy ticket). Stop making everything about Roe v. Wade but don't abandon the principle.

The increasingly urban United States will not elect a ticket like Romney/Ryan for a very long time, and he's entirely right about why.
 
All that aside, he does point out what is probably the path to relevance for the republican party. Drop the socon nonsense and focus on the economic message. Run slates of candidates that are inclusive (Romney+Ryan was such an immense backslide into a white fratboy ticket). Stop making everything about Roe v. Wade but don't abandon the principle.

The increasingly urban United States will not elect a ticket like Romney/Ryan for a very long time, and he's entirely right about why.


What was there economic message before the election last week? "We'll tell you after we're elected"!
 
18269_10151191389427740_1683734598_n.jpg


On a Facebook page of one of my old college teachers.
 

maharg

idspispopd
What was there economic message before the election last week? "We'll tell you after we're elected"!

An economic message doesn't have to be detailed to work. It just has to not be attached to all sorts of other ridiculous baggage.

It's not like I *want* the republican party to be resurgent, or that I agree with what economic message they have. I'm just saying that he's right about what could bring the party back to the white house.
 
This social media shit needs to die. People are so tough and say what they want on the internet because they can hide behind their computer. All of these people would be deathly afraid to say it outside their house.

It also comes down to attention and trying to go against the grain. They think "Hmm what can I post on Facebook that will be funny and show I hate Obama because most people like him?" oH i'm moving to canada see you in four years is a good one! LOL look at all the likes I get!!

Pathetic people

Yes! This this this! 100% this. Especially true for college students I'd say.
 

Hawkian

The Cryptarch's Bane
This is the most aggressively bitter "Why I was wrong" piece I've seen yet:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012...ediction-about-mitt-romney-and-2012-election/

Worst of all, Ryan's views on abortion reinforced the message that the GOP wanted to take away women’s sexual freedom and rights. Ryan supports no exceptions for abortion including rape, incest, or a women's life in danger. Men and conservatives didn't notice. But Obama's campaign team made sure women noticed. Millions of female voters ignored the awful economy and record unemployment and voted for Obama based on reproductive rights.
Keep pursuing this angle, fellas. It'll pay off eventually.
 
An economic message doesn't have to be detailed to work. It just has to not be attached to all sorts of other ridiculous baggage.

It's not like I *want* the republican party to be resurgent, or that I agree with what economic message they have. I'm just saying that he's right about what could bring the party back to the white house.


I didn't mean that sentence to sound as though it was directed at people who support Republicans. I'm just questioning whether nowadays it still works to have an economic message that was basically "Obama hasn't done very well we can do better!!".
 

Eusis

Member
On a Facebook page of one of my old college teachers.
This made me curious to check the Facebook of the PoliSci teacher I had, and fortunately it was more or less the polar opposite. Ironically, shortly after the 2008 election he DID say it was a shame people were writing off Mitt Romney just because of his religion, but I imagine most optimism about him from anyone who isn't seriously right wing evaporated once he actually became a presidential candidate.
 
I'm having some fun with the "Boycott Blue States" blogger...

I don't think we have to boycott anything. Remember, these liberals LOVE their abortions...which is GREAT! This means they won't have liberal kids! Seriously speaking, if the republican party promoted abortions who do you think would do it? It won't be the God-fearing conservatives, it would be these atheist liberals.

I say let them have their abortions!
 

sonicmj1

Member
This is the most aggressively bitter "Why I was wrong" piece I've seen yet:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012...ediction-about-mitt-romney-and-2012-election/

Obama’s re-election proves that bribery as a campaign tactic is validated. Promise enough "free stuff” and you win votes, even if the end result is no jobs, no hope, and a lifetime dependent on government.

The other bizarre thing about this meme is that I don't remember unemployment benefits and food stamps being a debated issue at any point in the campaign. Romney didn't campaign on cutting social programs for the poor. Obama didn't promise to expand them, or tout some expansion there as a great policy success.

When in the campaign did Obama promise "free stuff"? I don't think Romney even painted that as the Obama camp's position directly, except in those 47% comments.
 

Jintor

Member
The other bizarre thing about this meme is that I don't remember unemployment benefits and food stamps being a debated issue at any point in the campaign. Romney didn't campaign on cutting social programs for the poor. Obama didn't promise to expand them, or tout some expansion there as a great policy success.

When in the campaign did Obama promise "free stuff"? I don't think Romney even painted that as the Obama camp's position directly, except in those 47% comments.

My question is, what the hell do they think the tax cuts for the rich are if not "Free stuff"? Oh, it's letting you keep the wealth you COMPLETELY generated yourself, that's right, I forgot.
 
The other bizarre thing about this meme is that I don't remember unemployment benefits and food stamps being a debated issue at any point in the campaign. Romney didn't campaign on cutting social programs for the poor. Obama didn't promise to expand them, or tout some expansion there as a great policy success.

When in the campaign did Obama promise "free stuff"? I don't think Romney even painted that as the Obama camp's position directly, except in those 47% comments.
Romney did a obama is getting rid of the work requirement for welfare commercial. But it was a lie and the press pilloried them for it.
 

KtSlime

Member
The other bizarre thing about this meme is that I don't remember unemployment benefits and food stamps being a debated issue at any point in the campaign. Romney didn't campaign on cutting social programs for the poor. Obama didn't promise to expand them, or tout some expansion there as a great policy success.

When in the campaign did Obama promise "free stuff"? I don't think Romney even painted that as the Obama camp's position directly, except in those 47% comments.

Yeah, this meme makes no sense. The entire point of electing a person to office is that he or she promises the constituents things they want whether that be a war, a tax, a refund, a service or a law, etc. and they reciprocate by giving him or her the job. This is how it is in all elections, and has always been.

They're just pissed because they thought they should be able to give us a crappy deal and get away with it.
 
This is the most aggressively bitter "Why I was wrong" piece I've seen yet:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012...ediction-about-mitt-romney-and-2012-election/

Wayne Allyn Root is capitalist evangelist, entrepreneur, and Tea Party Libertarian Republican. He is a former Libertarian vice presidential nominee. He is the best-selling author of "The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gold & Tax Cuts." For more, visit his website: www.ROOTforAmerica.com.

lulzy. Science and common sense is what he went with. Except it involved none of it.
 
My question is, what the hell do they think the tax cuts for the rich are if not "Free stuff"? Oh, it's letting you keep the wealth you COMPLETELY generated yourself, that's right, I forgot.

Because they are convinced for some reason that companies use the money that was not collected in taxes as an investment (new hires, expansion). I see how it makes sense but that's not what happened during Reagan or Bush or any time there were tax cuts. But then again, Republicans and Libertarians are terrible scholars.
 

GloveSlap

Member
I was afraid that Romney was going to win, but I still had a realistic perspective to the drawbacks that his presidency could potentially entail. Some of these Obama haters just have their head up their ass with their doomsday fear mongering crap.
 
This is the most aggressively bitter "Why I was wrong" piece I've seen yet:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012...ediction-about-mitt-romney-and-2012-election/

I've seen so many conservatives throwing around the phrase "scientific evidence" this election season when they really just mean "evidence".

It really, really makes me depressed, because the usage of that phrase just goes to show you that they don't know what the fuck science is.

Poll numbers rising is not scientific evidence.
 

DarkFlow

Banned
This is the most aggressively bitter "Why I was wrong" piece I've seen yet:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012...ediction-about-mitt-romney-and-2012-election/
My fav part.

Lastly, my prediction was based on SCIENCE -- The University of Colorado's predictive model had never failed. It worked to perfection in the presidential elections of 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004, and 2008. It predicted a Romney landslide in 2012 based on scientific facts and historical precedent.

They like to trump that one up, but it only did all that retroactively, they just made it this year.
 

nib95

Banned
This is the most aggressively bitter "Why I was wrong" piece I've seen yet:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012...ediction-about-mitt-romney-and-2012-election/

This one didn't amuse me like so many of the other bitter tears pieces, it just angered me. So much misinformation, false judgement and outright arrogance.

This notion that people on the left voted on hand outs and ignored the economy in place of rights, freebies etc, it's just despicably inaccurate. The truth is, it's conservative methods that got the country in to the financial and fiscal mess, and it's usually democratic methods that get you out. Or at least, stood a better chance than Romney/Ryan's awful plan, that was far LESS fiscally conservative than Obama's plan. One plan included tax increases on the upper tiers, decreased spending, cuts in the military budget and seeking to close loopholes, the other did the complete opposite. More tax cuts, more military spending, more leeway on certain loopholes (tax havens etc) and when asked to detail the loopholes it would close, Big Bird and that's it. The Conservative/GOP plan was the opposite of fiscally conservative. If you actually cared about the economy and with it the general wealth inequality of the nation as a whole, which historically has been tied to growth and prosperity, you'd vote Obama.

The conservatives and republicans even in defeat, are as disingenuous, woefully ignorant and arrogant as ever.
 
Posted by a fucking idiot on my Facebook feed (who happens to be my ex-boss' uncle):

548967_173284006145706_2102665444_n.jpg

Damn, this shitbrain is on fire today.

481881_426921694028668_800391704_n.jpg

Just a follow-up to these:

I finally wised up and defriended this horse's ass. He has been posting shit like this for the better part of a year and now that the election is over, it's just downright pathetic.

I really, really wanted to chew him out before defriending him, but as I stated earlier, he's the uncle of my former boss (which is the only reason I accepted his friend request in the first place - back when his niece was still my boss) and I didn't want to risk ruining a reference, even though I find his niece as insufferable as him.

With that, it's time to stop subjecting myself to bullshit like this. No more getting riled up by ignorant fucktards on social media. No more hate-listening to Rush Limbaugh. They lost, society won - end of story.
 

jon bones

hot hot hanuman-on-man action
Just a follow-up to these:

I finally wised up and defriended this horse's ass. He has been posting shit like this for the better part of a year and now that the election is over, it's just downright pathetic.

I really, really wanted to chew him out before defriending him, but as I stated earlier, he's the uncle of my former boss (which is the only reason I accepted his friend request in the first place - back when his niece was still my boss) and I didn't want to risk ruining a reference, even though I find his niece as insufferable as him.

With that, it's time to stop subjecting myself to bullshit like this. No more getting riled up by ignorant fucktards on social media. No more hate-listening to Rush Limbaugh. They lost, society won - end of story.

Why didn't you just hide him from your news feed?
 
If I might add to my previous statement, only someone who has never been poor before would consider such a hearty portion of protein to be "recession food".

If that's what the creator of the image considers "recession food," then I wonder what he or she thinks is non-recession food. My guess is that he or she has not ever been poor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom