• 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.

Romney: "What we feared is happening...the administration has made things worse"

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think it would be a net positive, but for the meantime I'm encouraged that the political strata isn't set in stone.

I take it you were at this party? Had a good time?

Yeah, if nothing else 2011 will have been worth it if the Liberals finally start proving they deserve to govern instead of the holding pattern they managed to get stuck in for most of the 2000s.

Yep, met Mulcair and got a picture with him, and got drunk off of the white wine they had at their open bar. Overall a really fun night
 
Civil liberties have not been "destroyed" under Obama. We have many historical examples of civil liberties being destroyed under various forms of totalitarianism and fascism. Obama certainly has not helped to turn the tide back to restore some of the privacy that was lost with things like the Patriot Act and the recent NSA stuff, but no president would have, realistically. At the very least, he's been stronger on gay rights and women's rights than previous presidents, has given people with preexisting conditions the right to insurance, and has done his best to stop torture in U.S. detention sites (though I wouldn't be surprised if the CIA practiced such off the radar, away from Obama's attention). By any OBJECTIVE metric, the most significant civil liberties - the ones that affect the way we go about our day-to-day life - have actually expanded under Obama. That the NSA stuff superficially resembles certain aspects of Orwellian dystopia does not mean it actually represents an offense as egregious as such.

I won't defend Obama's general spinelessness, on many issues, or his continued use of drones, but to act like he's now "as bad as Bush" lacks any kind of perspective.
 

Slavik81

Member
Why is this?

Because you don't pay nearly what it really costs. There's a lot of motor vehicle subsidies funded through general taxes.

The federal gas tax, for example, hasn't been increased in 20 years despite inflation and significant increases in vehicle efficiency chipping away at its revenues.
 

@____@

Banned
Because you don't pay nearly what it really costs. There's a lot of motor vehicle subsidies funded through general taxes.

The federal gas tax, for example, hasn't been increased in 20 years despite inflation and significant increases in vehicle efficiency chipping away at its revenues.

Not sure why it has to go up? Are you concerned with how it affects the deficitin terms of the federal side?


How are band-aids and hot coco related to black people?


How is fried chicken related to black people?
 
Economy is good. No terrorists attacks (OK Obama abused civil liberties to make himself look like a better president.). Things could be worse, guys... The real fucking crime in this country is health insurance...

The economy is good? You serious, Clark?

"Things could be worse" is something you can say until the day you die. It's not a rallying cry.
 

Jimothy

Member
Civil liberties have not been "destroyed" under Obama. We have many historical examples of civil liberties being destroyed under various forms of totalitarianism and fascism. Obama certainly has not helped to turn the tide back to restore some of the privacy that was lost with things like the Patriot Act and the recent NSA stuff, but no president would have, realistically. At the very least, he's been stronger on gay rights and women's rights than previous presidents, has given people with preexisting conditions the right to insurance, and has done his best to stop torture in U.S. detention sites (though I wouldn't be surprised if the CIA practiced such off the radar, away from Obama's attention). By any OBJECTIVE metric, the most significant civil liberties - the ones that affect the way we go about our day-to-day life - have actually expanded under Obama. That the NSA stuff superficially resembles certain aspects of Orwellian dystopia does not mean it actually represents an offense as egregious as such.

I won't defend Obama's general spinelessness, on many issues, or his continued use of drones, but to act like he's now "as bad as Bush" lacks any kind of perspective.

To the majority of straight white males, civil liberties only include internet privacy, gun rights, and pot legalization.
 

way more

Member
The economy is good? You serious, Clark?

"Things could be worse" is something you can say until the day you die. It's not a rallying cry.

"Things could be better" is something you can say until the day you die. It's not a rallying cry.

Screen%20Shot%202012-10-22%20at%2011.52.47%20AM.png


Ask a dumb enough question, get a answer that is both stupid, pointless, and proves nothing!
 

Slavik81

Member
Not sure why it has to go up? Are you concerned with how it affects the deficitin terms of the federal side?
Not really. The market distortions are the bigger issue. Artificially cheap gasoline promotes an over-dependence on long distance car travel. It contributes to urban sprawl, and a number of environmental problems.

Though, reducing other taxes and/or the deficit would be a bonus.
 
B-b-but at least they weren't shutting down the government? Right?
So that must mean Obama is better at compromising with whiny man children than Clinton, am I right? They did hold the economy hostage over extending unemployment benefits, and their antics led to the first ever credit downgrade of America's debt. I don't know why you're arguing against yourself.
 

Jack_AG

Banned
Civil liberties have been destroyed under Obama. Worse than they were with Bush. The economy is still in shambles. Gas prices are surging. Unemployment is shitty. Let's not forget about the NSA and IRS controversies. Obama has been shit, but Romney should not pretend he'd be better.
.
 

Sayter

Member
So that must mean Obama is better at compromising with whiny man children than Clinton, am I right? They did hold the economy hostage over extending unemployment benefits, and their antics led to the first ever credit downgrade of America's debt. I don't know why you're arguing against yourself.

I only listed what Clinton was able to do with a Republican congress post 1994 election. Obama has only done a fraction of what he accomplished. That was my point.
 

way more

Member
Better, but it's a far away from good.

Did I miss him saying things were getting better as opposed to stating the economy as it is was good?




Why shouldn't that be a rallying cry?


Because, improve the economy till infinity, means brushing aside all practicality and social decency.
 
I only listed what Clinton was able to do with a Republican congress post 1994 election. Obama has only done a fraction of what he accomplished. That was my point.
And my point is Clinton was only able to pass Republican measures which were horrible there and horrible now. The fact that he was even able to negotiate them came from backlash against Republicans from shutdown.

The two scenarios are not comparable. Neither is comparing Tipp O Neil with Boehner.
 
They should split the USA down the middle, run one side under the democrats and one side under the republicans.

Then have an argument on who runs what better. Or better yet. The winner is who has the most people move to their side.
 

Jintor

Member
They should split the USA down the middle, run one side under the democrats and one side under the republicans.

Then have an argument on who runs what better. Or better yet. The winner is who has the most people move to their side.

Would you call one side North, and the other South, perhaps?

Maybe say one's a confederacy...?
 

Drek

Member
Civil liberties have been destroyed under Obama. Worse than they were with Bush. The economy is still in shambles. Gas prices are surging. Unemployment is shitty. Let's not forget about the NSA and IRS controversies. Obama has been shit, but Romney should not pretend he'd be better.

1. Yep, because I'm sure Obama started PRISM. Maybe, just maybe, his administration is the first one not black bagging people like Snowden and THAT is why we're actually hearing about this shit, since the PRISM itself pre-dates Obama's presidency and similar programs likely date back even further than that.

2. Drones? Fuck that. Drones are bad ass. I don't care where you were born, when you personally declare war on America you don't get to hide behind American civil liberties anymore.

3. Bush is the reason we have prison style checkpoints in our airports, "border" patrol searches 100 miles from our borders, and entire secret government agencies focused on spying on the U.S. citizenry actually living in this country without their knowledge. All of these agencies were so over-saturated with money and power during the Bush administration that it's laughable to think Obama can do much of anything to stop them.

A similar example - do you really think Obama gives two fucks about state marijuana legalization? I sure don't. But the DEA, for profit prison industry, and prison worker unions will make damn sure everyone knows that Obama's soft on crime the minute he doesn't stand with them and the DEA is going to police it anyway. His hands are tied because too much of this country thinks voting every 4 years is all it takes to effect change.

4. The economy will remain in shambles as long as we have a large portion of this nation arguing that 1. inflation matters at all for the United States, 2. that workers rights and fair compensation go directly against "free market economics" and 3. that nation building abroad and foreign intervention are somehow more important than nation building at home. Obama's been beating the same (correct) drum for years about nation building at home with zero support from congress and only tepid support from the senate. That is where our economic problems lie.

5. Gas prices. Fucking seriously?

6. See 4, it's not changing until we fundamentally change how we run this country because as long as you reward outsourcing to 3rd world nations private industry will continue to do just that.

7. I didn't realize Obama directly managed the NSA and IRS, or even had direct oversight over the people who do. If he was involved enough to have averted their scandals there would instead be an entire scandal built around how he's too involved with these agencies.

I'm not an apologist for Obama. I think he's an ok president, but far from the one this nation needs. He looks to build consensus too much and has squandered too much executive power in that vain attempt. He also forced a gimped healthcare law through as a result when he should have been using his fist two years of clout to steamroll republicans on economic reform.

But all that said, he's a fair sight better than his predecessor, who was in the pocket of every major multi-national with a handout for him and his party, with the only real agenda being to push the Christian moral prerogative on every scrap of earth he could.

He was better than the guy before him too. I know card carrying dems love to felate Clinton but the man was a crook. He horse traded Glass-Steagall for some magic mortgage beans. He signed free trade agreements with no regard to the consequences. He cooked the budgetary books to push debts into the future and make himself look good. He never engaged in any hard stances because he'd always quid pro quo his way through a back door. He (and his wife) are entirely political animals and while effective when in office breed the kind of gerrymandered corruption that destroys our democracy long term.

G.H.W. Bush was actually not half bad on some shit. An old thinking crone with a moral agenda in straight lockstep with his rival Ronnie but at least he understood the financial demands of the nation and didn't WANT long drawn out conflicts that shuffled national wealth into the hands of a select few via defense contractors and the like. He got himself a one term presidency for that fact though, since he wasn't going to blow smoke about tax increases being a necessity post-Reagan.

Then we get to the great American Anti-Christ, Ronald Wilson Reagan (666). Homophobe, bigot, directly responsible for the for profit prison industry, nuked the nation's financial solvency, created generations of over-entitled wasps sitting on mommy and daddy's money, kicked the foreign handout train into overdrive in his attempt to buy off nations from the USSR, and drove decades long effective government programs from the New Deal into insolvency to fund it all. Yet if you did a poll a decent number of people would argue he was our best president, and many more that he was at least a good one. The power of image and telling scared white protestants what than to hear.
 

Drek

Member
Not sure why it has to go up? Are you concerned with how it affects the deficitin terms of the federal side?

Because the gas tax builds our fucking roads and bridges.

Concrete and steel cost more than they did in 1980. Cars use less fuel. The gas tax hasn't moved. And people wonder why there's no money to fix our shitty infrastructure.
 

ICKE

Banned
European Union has also failed to create a good mechanism to bring us back from the recession, there is not enough trust between different nations to build a coherent solution. You can't force people to accept your world view so we end up with gridlock and everything degenerates slowly as politicians refuse to co-operate, because of various social issues and what not. Gridlock will continue and everything degenerates slowly but surely.
 

ced

Member
He would be completely right, but I can't image how much worse it would be with him and his buddies in power.
 

KHarvey16

Member
My healthcare has only gone up an extra $100 a month and is only set to increase by 41% and the deductible cost doubled by the time the effects go in to place so I guess you could say he made it better for me in terms of how it's completely unaffordable to live with a chronic illness even more now than ever before...

Healthcare costs have been steadily rising for a long time. When everything goes into effect you'll be able to compare and shop on the exchanges, and if you can't afford coverage you'll receive a subsidy or be given access to Medicaid.
 
The unemployment stats are heavily altered into making things look better than things actually are. This economy has not improved hardly any when one looks at the entire picture. Most jobs that have been created in retail, fast food, and the health care industry. Only one of those fields offers viable jobs where one can make a true living. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since 2009, though the labor force participation rate dropped to the lowest point since 1981, at 64.3 percent. One in seven people in the U.S. are on food stamps and that's got a lot to do with the fact that so many people have completely given up on finding work. From the moment Obama entered office, there has been no net gain in full time jobs, only part time jobs. 3 million people have actively given up looking for work. But the economy is turning around. The real unemployment rate is closer to 15%.
 

Batman

Banned
The unemployment stats are heavily altered into making things look better than things actually are. This economy has not improved hardly any when one looks at the entire picture. Most jobs that have been created in retail, fast food, and the health care industry. Only one of those fields offers viable jobs where one can make a true living. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since 2009, though the labor force participation rate dropped to the lowest point since 1981, at 64.3 percent. One in seven people in the U.S. are on food stamps and that's got a lot to do with the fact that so many people have completely given up on finding work. From the moment Obama entered office, there has been no net gain in full time jobs, only part time jobs. 3 million people have actively given up looking for work. But the economy is turning around.

Just like the stock market, the numbers are being manipulated.
 

KHarvey16

Member
The unemployment stats are heavily altered into making things look better than things actually are. This economy has not improved hardly any when one looks at the entire picture. Most jobs that have been created in retail, fast food, and the health care industry. Only one of those fields offers viable jobs where one can make a true living. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the unemployment rate is the lowest its been since 2009, though the labor force participation rate dropped to the lowest point since 1981, at 64.3 percent. One in seven people in the U.S. are on food stamps and that's got a lot to do with the fact that so many people have completely given up on finding work. From the moment Obama entered office, there has been no net gain in full time jobs, only part time jobs. 3 million people have actively given up looking for work. But the economy is turning around. The real unemployment rate is closer to 15%.

Unemployment numbers are not altered. The participation rate should be dropping given the number of baby boomers reaching retirement age.

The hardest hit sectors are the fastest to recover. That should be expected.
 
Unemployment numbers are not altered. The participation rate should be dropping given the number of baby boomers reaching retirement age.

The hardest hit sectors are the fastest to recover. That should be expected.

They're not accurate whatsoever. The unemployment numbers are simply not accurate. The government has no idea how many people are actually unemployed at the moment. Figures are based on random sampling of the population and do consider the amount of Americans that have sighed, said fuck it, and have quit looking altogether. It's nothing more than an estimate and it's a shitty estimate at that.
 
Things are, at a minimum, no better than Obama's reelection. Whether things would have been better had Romney won, who knows. Romney isn't as spineless as Obama though, so he could have actually made some decisions. Poor decisions maybe.
 

KHarvey16

Member
They're not accurate whatsoever. The unemployment numbers are simply not accurate. The government has no idea how many people are actually unemployed at the moment. Figures are based on random sampling of the population and do consider the amount of Americans that have sighed, said fuck it, and have quit looking altogether. It's nothing more than an estimate and it's a shitty estimate at that.

Of course they measure the number of people who have stopped looking. You understand there are various measures listed in the unemployment report? And even if they didn't measure these things, not doing an adequate job is far different from altering. That implies they have the right data but then change it. Even if we assume the numbers are not sampled properly(and we have no reason to do that) the methodology is still consistent, allowing us to compare relative change.

And if they can't measure it how do you know what it should be? Gut feeling?
 
Of course they measure the number of people who have stopped looking. You understand there are various measures listed in the unemployment report? And even if they didn't measure these things, not doing an adequate job is far different from altering. That implies they have the right data but then change it. Even if we assume the numbers are not sampled properly(and we have no reason to do that) the methodology is still consistent, allowing us to compare relative change.

And if they can't measure it how do you know what it should be? Gut feeling?

We know that 3 million people have actively quit looking for jobs. We know that another 8.5 million are part-timers that want full time work (which is double the norm when looking at history). We have lost 7 million jobs and we have wiped out every job gained since
the year 2000. From the moment Obama entered office there has been no net gain in full time jobs and a lot of jobs being created are through temp agencies.
 
They're not accurate whatsoever. The unemployment numbers are simply not accurate. The government has no idea how many people are actually unemployed at the moment. Figures are based on random sampling of the population and do consider the amount of Americans that have sighed, said fuck it, and have quit looking altogether. It's nothing more than an estimate and it's a shitty estimate at that.
It's pretty impressive that you know more about statistics than professional statisticians.
 

Talon

Member
Civil liberties have been destroyed under Obama. Worse than they were with Bush. The economy is still in shambles. Gas prices are surging. Unemployment is shitty. Let's not forget about the NSA and IRS controversies. Obama has been shit, but Romney should not pretend he'd be better.
You mean the IRS controversy that turned out to be nothing.
 

ICKE

Banned
I think Romney would be a better president. I'm not saying he'd be a better leader than Obama, ideologically they are rather similar, it's just that the political reality in USA is what it is.

A republican president would get more things done as he'd have more leverage within his own party and the democrats are more likely to co-operate in economic matters. There wouldn't be similar gridlock like what we are witnessing at the moment. At the same time liberals could go back to pretending like they care about civil rights and keep the government somewhat in check. I also doubt Romney would have gone for any sort of radical SCOTUS picks, you'd get more people driving corporate interests so no change on that front.
 

BSsBrolly

Banned
It's pretty impressive that people are looking at a percentage that doesn't tell the whole story. I have detailed exactly why the current unemployment rate is dubious.

It's pretty impressive that you don't seem to understand that the way this percentage is calculated is the same way it's always been done...
 
It's pretty impressive that people are looking at a percentage that doesn't tell the whole story. I have detailed exactly why the current unemployment rate is dubious.

Or maybe...just maybe you should are completely wrong?


Despite the fact that the source works for an organization funded by the koch brothers, even he says they are not altering numbers. So you disagree with the methodology, what statistics degrees do you have to back it up?
 
It's always been calculated that way. If its wrong now, it's always been wrong.

That is my exact point. It's completely inaccurate and it always has been. It's never been an accurate barometer. I put no stock in it whatsoever. It's one of the most highly manipulated numbers ever.
 

BSsBrolly

Banned
That is my exact point. It's completely inaccurate and it always has been. It's never been an accurate barometer. I put no stock in it whatsoever. It's one of the most highly manipulated numbers ever.

Yet you pull a completely made up number of 15% and say that's "the true unemployment rate."

Does that mean it was really 13.5% before the economy crashed?

Either way, things have gotten better and would be even better if Republicans would stop slashing funding for government agencies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom