2012 U.S. Presidential Election

[Xiahou]

Ideally, i would want the moderator to step in every time there is a lie, a sly misdirect to avoid answering a question, or even when they keep repeating the same half true talking points over and over.Fair, real-time fact checking would be quite impossible. If a moderator is to be a more active participant, they should press candidates on dodges and non-answers. Save the fact checking for afterwards.

However, even pressing the candidates on anything leaves the door open for personal biases to come in. I think we're smart enough to know when someone doesn't want to answer the question. Moderators best serve us when they facilitate discussion and then fade into the background.

[Centurion1]

Wow. Only in this weird ultra conservative universe would calling someone out on a bold faced politically motivated lie be considered heinous.

Ultra cOnservative not really. I dot even dislike Obama. But it doesn't change the fact that moderators job isn't to fact check candidates it's to moderate. And I wouldn't call it a bold faced lie my brother..... It's still debatable either way.

[a completely inoffensive name]

The real question is why is it the moderators job to not fact check?

[Centurion1]

The real question is why is it the moderators job to not fact check?

I apologize in advance if this isn't clear ill fix tomorrow! I think it's fine if a moderators job is to fact check but let's decide ahead of time. And let's do it for both sides because Obama wasn't completely honest so why didn't she correct him it seems a bit unfair.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

The real question is why is it the moderators job to not fact check?

Because they're the moderator. It's a debate. The candidates "fact check" each other. If it was an interview, then the interviewer would ask questions and such.

[Greyblades]

Also they're politicians, if they pointed out and corrected every lie and untruth it would take days.

[Greyblades]

Better?

Maybe.

Patient enough?

Nope.

[ICantSpellDawg]

With all due respect, that's a load of crap. If your are okay with your leaders not respecting you enough to be honest and down to earth, then you deserve the figuritive anal violation they're going to give you in return.

Why not just come out and admit you want an authoritarian regime? Maybe some Oligarchy of pre-approved millionaires from the Fox News top 100 Douchebags list? If we aren't going to DEMAND more honesty and DEMAND more transparency and DEMAND Democratic progress then we should just give up any pretense of being an enlightened society and go back to killing eachother for whichever asshole happens to own the piece of land we're serfing on.
:wall:

I challenge you to find one person who will not become corrupt to some extent almost immediately upon gaining power. This is how the human animal operates and we need to accept this reality. On the flip side, we also need to make sure that they don't get away with it and cycle them. I view people in power like water. We need it, but we need to cycle and filter it so that it doesn't get stagnant. Get lazy or stop paying attention and you'll contract some horrible water-born disease.

Keep telling yourself that your candidate doesn't lie to you or mislead you. That's the bunch of crap.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I apologize in advance if this isn't clear ill fix tomorrow! I think it's fine if a moderators job is to fact check but let's decide ahead of time. And let's do it for both sides because Obama wasn't completely honest so why didn't she correct him it seems a bit unfair.

Some of the GOP primary debates had multiple moderators. Why not have a diversity of fact checkers?


Because they're the moderator. It's a debate. The candidates "fact check" each other. If it was an interview, then the interviewer would ask questions and such.

It seems obvious that candidates do not fact check each other in any way. Anything that candidates say in the heat of a debate has no real authority to it either way, what reason do you have to believe that the numbers Obama brings up are more legitimate than Romney's?

[Major Robert Dump]

The Heavy Hitters coming out of Obama. LOL

http://www.rgj.com/article/20121020/NEWS19/310200053/Fluke-takes-center-stage-Reno

[Strike For The South]

The real question is why is it the moderators job to not fact check?

Look up the definition of moderator.

Beyond that she didn't fact check. I should never have used that term. She was deliberately deceptive and portrayed Romney as a liar when his comment was completely defensible and no where near the most egregious "stretch" of the night.

She also only interjected that one time, this gives her comment allot of weight as the viewer thinks the comment must have been way out of line for the moderator to interject.

This, followed by the absolute disgusting rank closing of the media reminds me why I hate every journialism major I ever met.

[Strike For The South]

Also, the debate is not meant for an education on the issues

As a voter, you are supposed to know the issues. The debate is for you to decide which candidates solution most squares with you. Candidates can lie their asses off and you need to be able to recognize that. It is your responsibility.

The laziness of the electorate has made debates into nothing more than abstract stump speeches that get interrupted.

It is your job to educate you

[Strike For The South]

The Heavy Hitters coming out of Obama. LOL

http://www.rgj.com/article/20121020/NEWS19/310200053/Fluke-takes-center-stage-Reno


I love 30 year old part time students/part time social advocates.

Easily the most brain dead people in the country, that grand total of 20 books you read for your university degree does not make you enlightend, it makes you a fanatic who worships at a different altar minus the drunken holidays

get a job, hippy

[a completely inoffensive name]

Look up the definition of moderator.

Beyond that she didn't fact check. I should never have used that term. She was deliberately deceptive and portrayed Romney as a liar when his comment was completely defensible and no where near the most egregious "stretch" of the night.

She also only interjected that one time, this gives her comment allot of weight as the viewer thinks the comment must have been way out of line for the moderator to interject.

This, followed by the absolute disgusting rank closing of the media reminds me why I hate every journialism major I ever met.

Definitions change, jobs change as society and its needs change. Politics and debating is very different from the days of Lincoln-Douglas. It's noticeably different from the days of Kennedy-Nixon. The purpose of things can change, it just depends on whether we feel it should change or not and if there is a compelling reason to change it. You obviously don't think there is a reason to change it, nor Sasaki, which is fine. But tossing a dictionary at me isn't an argument.


Also, the debate is not meant for an education on the issues

As a voter, you are supposed to know the issues. The debate is for you to decide which candidates solution most squares with you. Candidates can lie their asses off and you need to be able to recognize that. It is your responsibility.

The laziness of the electorate has made debates into nothing more than abstract stump speeches that get interrupted.

It is your job to educate you

I think it is hopeless to think that the assertions of personal responsibility have any chance of turning around a country as self-indulgent as the US. You either create a structure to help people figure out the truth by providing the facts in relation of what candidates are saying, or you remove power from the public. That's why I said in the other thread I would rather have the public only vote for their local representative in the HoR.

[Montmorency]

It is your job to educate you

Every tyrant gives this statement his blessings.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I think it is hopeless to think that the assertions of personal responsibility have any chance of turning around a country as self-indulgent as the US. You either create a structure to help people figure out the truth by providing the facts in relation of what candidates are saying, or you remove power from the public. That's why I said in the other thread I would rather have the public only vote for their local representative in the HoR.

All we really need is a change in the intellectual/academic/journalist culture. Hopefully as time goes by, and with the ease of access to a variety of information on the internet, it will become clear to more people that they are disgracefully incompetent.

[a completely inoffensive name]

All we really need is a change in the intellectual/academic/journalist culture. Hopefully as time goes by, and with the ease of access to a variety of information on the internet, it will become clear to more people that they are disgracefully incompetent.

It has been more or less 15 years since the internet entered mainstream society with its ease of access to information and the public has chosen to mostly spend their time reading Drudge or Huffington. I don't think people will exert responsibility on the internet if they won't exert responsibility in real life.

[Ironside]

You missed the point 100%. None of these candidates are good enough, and it is your attitude of complacency and apathy that allows it to continue. YOU are the problem.

I think you'll appriciate the ending.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dX_1B0w7Hzc

[Ronin]

A moderator is not meant to be a fact checker. When she says Obama called it terrorism she loses all credibility as a moderator.

The actual context of the speech shows Obama hedging his bets, which is understandable. You don't want to get out too far ahead in these foreign policy debacles as they are nightmares to walk back. An added bonus is the ambiguous language allows Obama to reference the speech in an abstract way.

Crawleys language was unambiguous, added with the perception of being fair.

the fact that the moderator is being attacked for correctly pointing out a factual lie by one of the debaters is a sad sign of what the political game has become in American politics.
this is not about right or wrong, it's about "did it help my guy or not".....just ridiculous really.....if the moderator has pointed out a lie Obama has said then Fox News would be building her a statue.

[Strike For The South]

Definitions change, jobs change as society and its needs change. Politics and debating is very different from the days of Lincoln-Douglas. It's noticeably different from the days of Kennedy-Nixon. The purpose of things can change, it just depends on whether we feel it should change or not and if there is a compelling reason to change it. You obviously don't think there is a reason to change it, nor Sasaki, which is fine. But tossing a dictionary at me isn't an argument.

Things Change
Therefore Crawley can unilaterally decide when her role changes
She only does this once
And she is wrong to boot.


Every tyrant gives this statement his blessings.

Oh look a meaningless abstraction, your specialty. Supposed "public and neutral" media outlets are generally the first to be swallowed up by your "tyrants". I hesitate to even say that as tyrant is such a broad term.


the fact that the moderator is being attacked for correctly pointing out a factual lie by one of the debaters is a sad sign of what the political game has become in American politics.
this is not about right or wrong, it's about "did it help my guy or not".....just ridiculous really.....if the moderator has pointed out a lie Obama has said then Fox News would be building her a statue.

What Crawley said was in no way a fact. She acted on her perception of Romneys broad statement, which is out of line. She took his broad statement and attached a narrow meaning to it, which is out of line. She only did this once, this is also out of line.

It's a sad state when this sort of thing becomes permissible because the intelligentsia feels they pulled one over on Mitt.

[Montmorency]

Oh look a meaningless abstraction, your specialty. Supposed "public and neutral" media outlets are generally the first to be swallowed up by your "tyrants". I hesitate to even say that as tyrant is such a broad term.

You literally don't know what you're talking about. This has no bearing on my post. :shrug:

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I get the feeling that this was just how Romney wanted things to go. He came off as reasonable and dedicated to peace, and more coherent about his vision. His comments on china were more reasonably than anything said by either side in the previous debates, regardless of the currency manipulator idea.

I felt like Obama degraded himself with some of his contemptuous smears but I have no idea how that came across to other people...I wouldn't think that going for "wrong and reckless" when Romney appears the opposite of reckless would work...and I wouldn't think that accusing him of dishonesty and being all over the map would work well either...seems like people would trust their own impression of what Romney said during the debate itself.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I only watched the first 10 minutes or so, but it was surprising to see a GOP candidate tell a Democratic President 'You can't kill your way out of a problem'. A good critique of Obama's dealings with Islamists as well, to bad Romeny is too aggressive on foreign policy.

Also, nice move on Romney's part mentioning Osama before Obama could.

CR

[ICantSpellDawg]

That was exactly the kind of performance I was hoping for. I'm extremely happy with tonight. Just over 2 weeks to tell if aggression on economic policy and steadfast and nuanced foreign policy positions are what Americans are looking for. Romney just needed to be perceived as matching the former Senator who has a political science/foreign affairs degree and 4 years being Commander in Chief in order to do well in this debate. I believe that an objective view of the debate will show that he did this. He needed to avoid scaring Americans into thinking that he was a neo-con looking to plunge us into another war. He did it. Americans today are focused on an overhaul of our economic system and how we relate to the world in this way. They are less focused on military threats at the moment, but never want to lose sight of them. I think Mitt Romney has been successful in his late October narrative thus far.

[Centurion1]

Obama is such a snarky jagoff.

And just for the record the US military probably has more bayonets now in than it did in 1916 when it was minuscule in size.

I dunno I suppose he won if your one of the kinds of people who like when these things get snarky. Personally, I don't like it and I thought they both got a little snarky. I love shots but not when they are delivered with the panache of a teenage girl.

[gaelic cowboy]

I watched it and I fail to see how Romney can claim Obama is weak if he ends essentially wanting to do the same things as Obama in foreign policy??

[SoFarSoGood]

Is declaring China a currency fixer on 'day 1' in Obama's plans?

[Major Robert Dump]

Obama is such a snarky jagoff.

And just for the record the US military probably has more bayonets now in than it did in 1916 when it was minuscule in size.

I dunno I suppose he won if your one of the kinds of people who like when these things get snarky. Personally, I don't like it and I thought they both got a little snarky. I love shots but not when they are delivered with the panache of a teenage girl.

Have you been talking to Vuk, again?

The Marines still occasionally get issued bayonets, although the number of them being actually used functionally in combat is non existent. They may affix them, but they rarely use them

The Army may have bayonets, but we do not use them.

And for the record, we do still use horses. SF uses horses and donkeys as pack animals in the mountains.

So if we are going to argue about 100% total accuracy in the statements, then Obama was wrong, as 1% still use those things.
If we are going to generalize and ask if this is true, for the most part, then Obama is right.

[Centurion1]

Have you been talking to Vuk, again?

The Marines still occasionally get issued bayonets, although the number of them being actually used functionally in combat is non existent. They may affix them, but they rarely use them

The Army may have bayonets, but we do not use them.

And for the record, we do still use horses. SF uses horses and donkeys as pack animals in the mountains.

So if we are going to argue about 100% total accuracy in the statements, then Obama was wrong, as 1% still use those things.
If we are going to generalize and ask if this is true, for the most part, then Obama is right.

Obviously I understand his actual point as I am sure most people do. Like I said his snarkiness (as well as romney) is something I find distasteful.


"Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military's changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines."

I think this was a prepared statement he was likely sitting on. I also find it an annoying statement as it seemed at the time as well as now very petty. My snarky and petty response to the snarky and petty statement was that we do in fact likely have more bayonets than we did then. All Obama said is we have fewer. If he wanted to say we use them less he should have. He should have known such a smack in the face of romaney would be attacked pettily by the opposition.

This is all irrelevant because it has nothing to do with Obama's point.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I watched it and I fail to see how Romney can claim Obama is weak if he ends essentially wanting to do the same things as Obama in foreign policy??

So true. This is a sad election if one wants to support something besides a very aggressive and violent foreign policy because you've noone to support.

Though at least with Romney in charge the dems might remember they used to oppose war.

And Obama should be kicked out on principle (kill list, NDAA act, drone warfare, citizen assassination).

CR

[Seamus Fermanagh]

So:

Round 1 10:8 Romney, Round 1 (undercard) 10:9 Ryan, Round 2 10:9 Obama, Round 3 10;10 Draw.

Is that enough points to push key uncommitted voters into the Romney camp, or is it not enough of a points performance to dethrone the champ?

[Lemur]

Is that enough points to push key uncommitted voters into the Romney camp, or is it not enough of a points performance to dethrone the champ?
I am highly skeptical about the impact of debates. I remember the first Bush-Kerry debate, in which our sitting President was at times inarticulate, at other times completely speechless. It was a devastatingly bad performance by the incumbent. And it didn't move the needle.

Then again, this is a strange election that doesn't appear to be playing by precedent, so ... meh. Who knows?

[gaelic cowboy]

Is declaring China a currency fixer on 'day 1' in Obama's plans?

:laugh4: that wont happen when all those businessmen that Romney supposedly has a better handle on tucking into bed at night would :daisy: themselves.

Dumping rocks in your own port is not an economic policy Romney will follow.

[Xiahou]

I am highly skeptical about the impact of debates. I remember the first Bush-Kerry debate, in which our sitting President was at times inarticulate, at other times completely speechless. It was a devastatingly bad performance by the incumbent. And it didn't move the needle.

Then again, this is a strange election that doesn't appear to be playing by precedent, so ... meh. Who knows?
The first debate seemed to coincide with a major momentum swing in Romney's favor. I suspect the Obama campaign was successful in painting Romney as an out-of-touch elitist up until that point. Once he showed himself to be articulate/competent in the first debate, Romney suddenly seemed like a viable alternative for voters who are on the fence.

It was a much different economic picture for Bush v Kerry. With unemployment still around 8 percent, it's surprising that Obama isn't doing worse...

[ICantSpellDawg]

Romney has not appeared articulate in any of these debates. He's been bullish, arrogant, off topic, and snide.


right

[ICantSpellDawg]

I watched it and I fail to see how Romney can claim Obama is weak if he ends essentially wanting to do the same things as Obama in foreign policy??

He's taking us back to water's edge foreign policy. Differ in important details, not in substance. You guys honestly can't see how agreeing with some of your opponents on some issues/actions might be both reasonable and politically advantageous? You wonder why your representatives are having a hard time pulling their heads from their arses? (goes for you Irish, too)

[Xiahou]

Fun fact from the CSM (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Wire/2012/1023/Presidential-debate-101-Does-US-military-still-use-horses-and-bayonets) on 'horses and bayonets'...

Well, the bayonet thing is easy to elucidate. The Marines and the Army both still issue rifle-mounted knives to serve as hand weapons, utility knives, saws, and all-around handy items.

Bayonet training is an integral part of the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program, which every recruit must pass. During such training, recruits fix OKC-3S bayonets underneath the muzzles of their rifles, effectively turning it into a spear. They’re taught thrusts, jabs, and slashes, according to a Marine public affairs account of such training. They then must use these techniques on a dummy-filled course intended to simulate close combat.

Bayonets are still issued and are required training for marines. :laugh4:

[Major Robert Dump]

The article is wrong about the Army.

Besides, the president said, IIRC, that we had fewer. He didn't say we didn't use them.

And getting issued something and actually using it in combat are two different things. I don't see why this is even a topic of discussion,

[Hooahguy]

Arent bayonets used in combatives now and not on a bayonet course?

[Major Robert Dump]

The Army phased out bayonet training for BCT around 2009 or 2010. LAst I checked, there is still a bayonet course offered in Infantry AIT if the training commander wants to use it.

A unit commander can request bayonets if he wants. He may or may not get them, as the bulk of them have been processed through DLA and auctioned off online.

We have other effective blades issued now, notably the spring blade and the tomohawk (not kidding). Bayonets are not suited for insurgency wars where the enemies main weapon is bombs against armored vehicles.

You can count the bayonet kills/injuries vs badguys in Iraq and Afghanistan on one hand.

It all boils down to commanders discretion. But a bayonet is not standard issue in the army. Marines still use them because they are psychopaths.

[Xiahou]

Besides, the president said, IIRC, that we had fewer. He didn't say we didn't use them.How many marines are there today? What was the size of the army in 1916? ~;)


You can count the bayonet kills/injuries vs badguys in Iraq and Afghanistan on one hand.I know of a noted bayonet charge by the British in Basra, 2004 that was said to have killed about 20 Mahdi militiamen....

Edit: Looks like the Pentagon has well over half a million bayonets (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/how-many-bayonets-does-the-u-s-have-quite-a-few/).

Obama was right about horses though- there's alot less of them than there was in 1916.

[Xiahou]

Do tell! That sounds freaking awesome.Sorry, I forgot to link (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0bd_1249524865) it.....


In May 2004, approximately 20 British troops in Basra were ambushed and forced out of their vehicles by about 100 Shiite militia fighters. When ammunition ran low, the British troops fixed bayonets and charged the enemy. About 20 militiamen were killed in the assault without any British deaths.

The bayonet charge appeared to succeed for three main reasons. First, the attack was the first of its kind in that region and captured the element of surprise. Second, enemy fighters probably believed jihadist propaganda stating that coalition troops were cowards unwilling to fight in close combat, further enhancing the element of surprise. Third, the strict discipline of the British troops overwhelmed the ability of the militia fighters to organize a cohesive counteraction.

The effects of this tactical action in Basra are not immediately applicable elsewhere, but an important dominant theme emerges regarding the need to avoid predictable patterns of behavior within restrictive rules of engagement. Commanders should keep adversaries off balance with creative feints and occasional shows of force lest they surrender the initiative to the enemy.

[Centurion1]

Do tell! That sounds freaking awesome.

Actually pretty well known I am surprised you didn't hear of it. I think they ran out of ammo then rushed them, pretty crazy stuff.

All Obama said was we had fewer. We do not. Therefore his snarky little comment was wrong.

[Strike For The South]

where was the fact checking?

OBAMA IS LYING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

[Lemur]

I continue to be stunned by the things Republican Senate candidates say. It's as though, in their heart of hearts, they don't really want to be elected (http://theweek.com/article/index/235272/did-richard-mourdocks-rape-comment-cost-the-gop-indianas-senate-seat). Or something.

Asked whether abortion should be allowed in cases of rape or incest, Mourdock replied that while he's "struggled" with that question for a long time, "I came to realize that life is that gift from God. And, I think, even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen." Man, says Margaret Hartmann at New York, "one might think that after all the trouble Todd Akin caused for the GOP by sharing his thoughts on 'legitimate rape,' Republican candidates across the country would be choosing their words on the topic extremely carefully."

[drone]

The Brits have always been partial to their bayonets. :yes:


TWe have other effective blades issued now, notably the spring blade and the tomohawk (not kidding). Bayonets are not suited for insurgency wars where the enemies main weapon is bombs against armored vehicles.
What does an US Army issued tomahawk look like?

[Lemur]

What does an US Army issued tomahawk look like?
Apparently something like this:

https://i.imgur.com/wYe0d.png

[Major Robert Dump]

How many marines are there today? What was the size of the army in 1916? ~;)

I know of a noted bayonet charge by the British in Basra, 2004 that was said to have killed about 20 Mahdi militiamen....

Edit: Looks like the Pentagon has well over half a million bayonets (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/how-many-bayonets-does-the-u-s-have-quite-a-few/).

Obama was right about horses though- there's alot less of them than there was in 1916.

I knew of this, and I wasn't counting it, because they were not US soldiers.

ZOMG I was proven wrong because we have a bunch of bayonets in backstock that we never use. Because the DOD has never bought useless things or kept outdated inventory, I swear those soft skin humvees and HCLOS trucks and SINGARS and all those bayonets can be used somewhere in some alternate universe. I swear that purple, ergonomic litter that came with my MATV was put to good use rather than using my standard litter, and I swear I used my multitool shovel that they issue and make you carry into Afghanistan. I swear.

[Major Robert Dump]

While we are on this topic of useless things....

This:
http://www.toledoblade.com/Politics/2012/09/25/Foreign-affairs-tank-plant-dominate-GOP-rally-in-Lima.html

Although I didn't see it in this article, on several of Ryans rounds on the talk shows he discussed how closing this factory would put American lives in danger. This is the crap that bugs me. We are winding down 2 wars, we don't need as many toys, and I am sure Ryan and Romneys vision have nothing to do with contracts and cronies. Nothing at all. Yes, I know Obama essentially did the same thing with green companies and the GM bailout, and I didn't like that either. But someone may want to point out to Ryan that we are not using many tanks in Afghanistan, so the conclusion that American lives are in danger because of scaled back production is pulling-the-patriot-hearstrings crap that politicians are so good at.

[Strike For The South]

Christ these things piss me off

We need deep cuts in the budgets
But not where I need the votes

How do people not see through this tripe?

Which is why voting should be restricted.

[Major Robert Dump]

The Armed Forces Committee makes decisions based on cronyism as much as national defense, hence Jim Inhofe pushing for us to keep oversized fighters we don't use and no one wants, trying to revive artillery systems that have been killed by multiple SODs and that no one wants, and opposing the Navys experimentation with alternative methods of fuel (the navy has been very successful fyi). Inhofe bitches about the cost of going green, yet he pushes for production of systems that are absolute CRAP. The number one cause of death in Afghanistan and Iraq is/was IEDs against mounted movements, and the number one mounted movement in Afghanistan and Iraq are FUEL CONVOYS. So yeah, eat a *****, Inhofe.

Oh, and even though the due date for owning a set of dress blues for the army has not yet arrived (we changed over from the greens a couple of years ago, blues are being phased in).... the Army is now talking of a new class A uniform. They are also working on a contract for a new PT uniform, and this one os only a few years old and works just fine.... I'm sure there is no cronyism here at all, nothing to see here, move along

[gaelic cowboy]

He's taking us back to water's edge foreign policy. Differ in important details, not in substance. You guys honestly can't see how agreeing with some of your opponents on some issues/actions might be both reasonable and politically advantageous? You wonder why your representatives are having a hard time pulling their heads from their arses? (goes for you Irish, too)

What doe that comment even mean "Waters edge" there was me thinking foreign policy was by definition about you know stuff abroad. You cant claim Obama is weak for doing X when in the debate itself you essentially say "Mubarak had to go" that "Sanctions on Iran are a good thing" etc etc etc these are all things Obama gets lambasted for by Romney. Or at least they like to give the impression there lambasting him for these policies with certain voting bloc's.,

You say he agrees on good things when all I see is a man who is executing a massive turnaround in policy with two weeks to go, essentially Romney is pro cake and pro eating it but which Romney is real.

Is it the one who agrees with Obama policy on Iraq or Iran or the one who winks at the hawks through Ryan standing around tank plants.







Ah it seems "Waters Edge Foreign Policy" essentially means you pretend yer all one happy family, it's like that British atittude of not in front of the neighbours. Waters edge foreign policy is pretty much not possible anymore with a 24hr media cycle.




In 2008 if I had being an American I would have probably not have voted Obama however now I would because I don't believe the Repubs deserve another chance at making an even bigger mess than they left the last time.

[SoFarSoGood]

Obama did apologise for US policy and has done NOTHING on the Israeli/Palestine problem that underlies alot of trouble in the ME. He was also right that Iran is closer now to a nuclear weapon than it was. Look foreign affairs is about threatening the worst precisily so that you do NOT have do it. Clinton is no match for Lavrov nor is Obama capable of dealing with Putin. Why? Because the the first thing they try to do 'work with Russia'. All well and good is you're dealing similarly well meaning people but they are not. Poland was 'sold out' on the missile shield when Putin threatened to put missles Kaliningrad. But that is not a reason to sell your ally down the road...it should have been an incentive to press forward more on the missile shield. You cannot afford to give into bullies in foreign affairs and the current US Government has done so.

[Fisherking]

While we are on this topic of useless things....

This:
http://www.toledoblade.com/Politics/2012/09/25/Foreign-affairs-tank-plant-dominate-GOP-rally-in-Lima.html

Although I didn't see it in this article, on several of Ryans rounds on the talk shows he discussed how closing this factory would put American lives in danger. This is the crap that bugs me. We are winding down 2 wars, we don't need as many toys, and I am sure Ryan and Romneys vision have nothing to do with contracts and cronies. Nothing at all. Yes, I know Obama essentially did the same thing with green companies and the GM bailout, and I didn't like that either. But someone may want to point out to Ryan that we are not using many tanks in Afghanistan, so the conclusion that American lives are in danger because of scaled back production is pulling-the-patriot-hearstrings crap that politicians are so good at.

You are going to have to show me why closing the tank plant is a good idea.

There is one. No more. It is government owned and contractor operated. The contractor operation was one of your beefs but that aside I guess you never think we will ever, ever need another tank.

Of course 6 months after it is closed we will pay some contractor millions to build a privately owned one that we paid for.

Next, it is a little specialized and skills can’t be replaced should we find we need a few more.

The army has cut tank units to nothing and the infantry is not exactly over manned either. The only place we can repair them other than Lima is Anniston but they don’t make new parts.

The Navy may not need a lot of new ships but it still has a couple of shipyards still open, that have not been sold to the Chinese yet.

I see your point about the uniforms but this is not one of those cost saving measures that will save money.

This is one of those, seemingly, short sighted measures that will cost a lot more than money when it is needed.

[Major Robert Dump]

Saying that Iran is 4 years closer to a nuke is like pointing out that I am four years older than I was 4 years ago.

While fighting 2 wars, we cannot start another. Nothing would have been any different under McCain. I mean, if we can levy heavy sanctions on Iraq for 10 years and they can still manage to make an IMAGINARY NUKILLER BOMB, then imagine what Iran can do since they already have the necessary tools. Romney and Ryan are blowing hot air about Iran.

I do, however, agree that O has dropped the ball on Isreal/Palestine and Russia/Poland, but I cannot honestly blame him for not wanting to try the middle east thing. Hell, I would not want to try either.

[Major Robert Dump]

You are going to have to show me why closing the tank plant is a good idea.

There is one. No more. It is government owned and contractor operated. The contractor operation was one of your beefs but that aside I guess you never think we will ever, ever need another tank.

Of course 6 months after it is closed we will pay some contractor millions to build a privately owned one that we paid for.

Next, it is a little specialized and skills can’t be replaced should we find we need a few more.

The army has cut tank units to nothing and the infantry is not exactly over manned either. The only place we can repair them other than Lima is Anniston but they don’t make new parts.

The Navy may not need a lot of new ships but it still has a couple of shipyards still open, that have not been sold to the Chinese yet.

I see your point about the uniforms but this is not one of those cost saving measures that will save money.

This is one of those, seemingly, short sighted measures that will cost a lot more than money when it is needed.

It depends on who you want to believe. The department of the Army says closing and reopening when its needed will cost 400 million. GD says 3 times that. Who are we gonna believe?

No one is talking about closing it and building another. The plan is to stop operations until we need them again.

GD suggests scaling back and going to limited operations making fewer tanks. It appears the Pentagon is willing to consider this. Romney and Ryan will have none of this.

If we are not using the tanks, then we will not need many new parts. If we have too many tanks, then we have extras from which to pull the parts from.

I do not work at the Pentagon. All I know is that the Department of the Army and the Pentagon say we have too many, and the ones we do have are only used in training and foreign posturing, minus a couple stationary tanks in Kabul. One might be able to argue that we continue to produce them for the purpose of selling them to other countries, like NavAir does with helicopter type stuff, but again, I don't know that Abrams tanks are a hot commodity right now

And I do not even know why anyone brings up the jobs that will be lost/gained amisdst all of this, because as we all know, the government doesn't create jobs.

[Fisherking]

Never mind. I see it will only be closed for 3 year at a cost of $822 million. General Dynamics will maintain the contract and get paid for not doing anything. It is just the workers who will lose out.

We pay them 6 months unemployment but then they drop off the records and don’t count any more. So who should care.


edit:By the way, when they say build the tanks, it is from the ground up. They smelt the steel and secret stuff too. The place started out making the gun tubes but we closed the other plants so this one does it all.

And if GD says it will cost more you can bet they will get paid.

[Major Robert Dump]

I certainly don't care. Just like I don't care about GM employees or Bank of America employees.

Blame the paying-them-for-nothing thing on the people who wrote and approved the contract. This stuff is written into the agreement, and signed by greased palms and noses covered in fecal matter. It's the norm, and this is the price we pay.

[SoFarSoGood]

Saying that Iran is 4 years closer to a nuke is like pointing out that I am four years older than I was 4 years ago.

While fighting 2 wars, we cannot start another. Nothing would have been any different under McCain. I mean, if we can levy heavy sanctions on Iraq for 10 years and they can still manage to make an IMAGINARY NUKILLER BOMB, then imagine what Iran can do since they already have the necessary tools. Romney and Ryan are blowing hot air about Iran.

I do, however, agree that O has dropped the ball on Isreal/Palestine and Russia/Poland, but I cannot honestly blame him for not wanting to try the middle east thing. Hell, I would not want to try either.

In general I agree but that is not my point. The point is that if you talk big you often save yourself having to do what you have threatened to do.

[Lemur]

government doesn't create jobs.
But Springfield, Oregon has the job-creation thing down. Proof. (http://www.statisticbrain.com/strip-club-statistics/)

[Major Robert Dump]

I shit you not, one of the reasons i didn't re-up was because i will never, ever wear those stupid new dress uniforms. I still have my greens in my closet.

The online vote/survey on AKO I believe is still going on. Basically, it was a Q&A about what we want with our new PT uniforms. Or at least thats what I think it was, because I refuse to take it.

[Ronin]

Its true. The University of Oregon drives the economy of Eugene, but Springfield (right next door--basically the same town, aside from the invisible political line on a map) is driven by Strip Clubs.

Fun fact: Mat Groening (creator of the Simpsons) was an Oregonian. Springfield is based on Springfield and Shelbyville is based on Eugene. Ironically, the Comic Book Guy was based on a store called Emerald City Comics (in Eugene) which was (until recently) run by a guy who fit the character to a tee. Moe's tavern is also based on a Eugene establishment called Max's--a great little bar.

the university brings horny your men that sponsor the strip clubs, which in turn, pays for the tuitions of several young ladies to frequent the university.
It's the circle of night life.

[gaelic cowboy]

Obama did apologise for US policy and has done NOTHING on the Israeli/Palestine problem that underlies alot of trouble in the ME. He was also right that Iran is closer now to a nuclear weapon than it was. Look foreign affairs is about threatening the worst precisily so that you do NOT have do it. Clinton is no match for Lavrov nor is Obama capable of dealing with Putin. Why? Because the the first thing they try to do 'work with Russia'. All well and good is you're dealing similarly well meaning people but they are not. Poland was 'sold out' on the missile shield when Putin threatened to put missles Kaliningrad. But that is not a reason to sell your ally down the road...it should have been an incentive to press forward more on the missile shield. You cannot afford to give into bullies in foreign affairs and the current US Government has done so.

USA was weak before Obama got elected or did Georgia get a millitary hammering for nothing.


In general I agree but that is not my point. The point is that if you talk big you often save yourself having to do what you have threatened to do.

USA was talking big for 8 yrs and did precisely nothing on North Korea, the reality is that Russia an China seen weakeness in the USA as a result of how the War on Terror panned out.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/10/31/american-mustache-institute-axelrods-mustache-wager-incredibly-irresponsible


Senior adviser to the Obama campaign David Axelrod made a hairy wager on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" Wednesday: he will shave off his four-decade-old mustache on national television if Obama loses Minnesota, Michigan or Pennsylvania on Election Day.

The American Mustache Institute isn't pleased with the wagers, especially the bet by Axe. "It's incredibly irresponsible for Axelrod to be playing games with such an exceptionally powerful mustache," institute chairman Dr. Aaron Perlut tells Whispers, noting that Axelrod's famous stache can be categorized as the "Chevron style," or the standard issue law enforcement mustache.

"There are very few people in positions of power who are mustached Americans, so for he to even jest about removing his lip sweater is somewhat offensive to the entire American mustached community," he says.

[Xiahou]

I've been enjoying some of our political ads on local TV. One of the better ones comes from the PA senate race which features this:

https://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/827/capturerk.png

Stay classy folks...:laugh4:

[a completely inoffensive name]

Both Mayor Bloomberg of NYC and The Economist just endorsed Obama.

[Hooahguy]

Both Mayor Bloomberg of NYC and The Economist just endorsed Obama.

Shocker.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Shocker.

Bloomberg refused to endorse either of them until Obama's response to Sandy got his respect.

[Hooahguy]

True, but I think this was an excuse by Bloomberg to pick a side while looking bi-partisan. His political views mostly match up with Obama, at least to my understanding.

[Lemur]

From The Economist's (http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21565623-america-could-do-better-barack-obama-sadly-mitt-romney-does-not-fit-bill-which-one?fsrc=scn/rd_ec/which_one_) endorsement:

Many of The Economist’s readers, especially those who run businesses in America, may well conclude that nothing could be worse than another four years of Mr Obama. We beg to differ. For all his businesslike intentions, Mr Romney has an economic plan that works only if you don’t believe most of what he says. That is not a convincing pitch for a chief executive. And for all his shortcomings, Mr Obama has dragged America’s economy back from the brink of disaster, and has made a decent fist of foreign policy. So this newspaper would stick with the devil it knows, and re-elect him.

[Xiahou]

Both Mayor Bloomberg of NYC and The Economist just endorsed Obama.I've said as much before, and I'll say it again- Bloomberg is an imbecile (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/new-york-city-marathon-canceled-after-severe-backlash-from-public.html).

[Lemur]

Bloomberg is an imbecile (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/new-york-city-marathon-canceled-after-severe-backlash-from-public.html).
How dare you speak of your betters a job creator in that way.

When in the presence of wealth you should be silent and respectful.

[Fragony]

http://video.elsevier.nl/#!clip/2080528 LOL

I kinda suspect a case of abuse though

[Lemur]

God hates Florida (http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/11/04/3081614/florida-democratic-party-files.html)

What began Sunday morning as an attempt by the Miami-Dade elections department to let more people early vote devolved into chaos and confusion only days before the nation decides its next president.

Call it the debacle in Doral.

Elections officials, overwhelmed with voters, locked the doors to its Doral headquarters and temporarily shut down the operation, angering nearly 200 voters standing in line outside — only to resume the proceedings an hour later.

On the surface, officials blamed technical equipment and a lack of staff for the shutdown. But behind the scenes, there was another issue: Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez.

The Republican had never signed off on the additional in-person absentee voting hours in the first place.

“That was counter to what I said on Friday, which was we were not going to change the game mid-stream,” he said. “I said, ‘No, there’s no way we did this.’”

[Strike For The South]

The Redskins lost

[Lemur]

God also hates Ohio (http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2012/10/state_data_glitch_delays_deliv.html)

A small fraction of Ohio voters’ absentee ballot requests may have been mistakenly rejected due to a recently discovered glitch in the transfer of change-of-address records.

Even though the deadline for voters to register or change their address was three weeks ago, Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted just this week sent about 33,000 updated registration records to local elections officials. The local boards had to immediately process the records to ensure those voters could properly cast a ballot in the Nov. 6 election.

An unknown number of absentee ballot applications across the state have been rejected due to the delay because election officials did not have some voters’ current addresses.

Officials in Cuyahoga County said 71 such applications were rejected. Those voters now will be sent new absentee ballots. Figures for rejected absentee ballot applications in other counties were not immediately available.

The delay can be traced to a breakdown in the data-sharing partnership between the Secretary of State and the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.

Husted last year began working with the BMV to coordinate the agency’s online change-of-address system with the state’s voter registration rolls.

But, according to a directive Husted sent Monday to election officials across the state, "the vast majority of the records collected electronically through the BMV change of address system between July and Oct. 9, 2012 were transferred late last week."

Husted, a Republican, sent the updated data to county boards of elections in batches on Monday and Tuesday. He called the timing "unfortunate" in his directive.

[Xiahou]

I've always been a little uncomfortable with the whole early/absentee voting for everyone thing. It's ripe for fraud and absentee ballots have a much higher rate of rejection that in-person voting so your ballot is less likely to be counted that way.

In other news, the latest CNN poll (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/04/cnn-national-poll-dead-heat-between-obama-and-romney/) says it's all tied up at 49% but ,when you look at the crosstabs, it looks bad for Obama- he's losing independents by 22%. The only thing keeping it tied is the sample, which is assuming a larger Democrat turnout than in 2008- unlikely.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I'm done talking about the election until my vote is cast. This thing is over and we'll find out the results soon enough.

[Strike For The South]

Guys, I'll say it again.

The Redskins lost, there is nothing left to talk about

[Ronin]

I've always been a little uncomfortable with the whole early/absentee voting for everyone thing. It's ripe for fraud and absentee ballots have a much higher rate of rejection that in-person voting so your ballot is less likely to be counted that way.


why is the vote on a Tuesday anyway?
wouldn´t it be easier to move the vote to one of the days on the weekend than having to deal with this early voting thing?

[Lemur]

why is the vote on a Tuesday anyway?
Because in 1845 it made a ton of sense. Source (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Wire/2010/1102/Election-Day-2010-Why-we-always-vote-on-Tuesdays).

For a society in which most people lived on farms, November was a good month to vote. The harvest was in, and snow hadn’t yet closed the roads. Why Tuesday? Records of lawmaker debate show that officials thought Sunday wouldn’t work, because many people were in church. Monday wouldn’t work, because most polling places were in county seats, and folks from outlying areas could not always get there in time.

Tuesday was the earliest day everybody could make it into town. So Tuesday it was.

[Kadagar_AV]

I think this elections decide if a war with Iran will start in the next 4 years, or if there is a 95% chance a war with Iran will start in the next 4 years.

I honestly think your politicians are so close in their values, that I can't be bothered. And regardless, isn't it the big monye controlling things as always, regardless of who is president?

[Ronin]

Because in 1845 it made a ton of sense. Source (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Wire/2010/1102/Election-Day-2010-Why-we-always-vote-on-Tuesdays).

For a society in which most people lived on farms, November was a good month to vote. The harvest was in, and snow hadn’t yet closed the roads. Why Tuesday? Records of lawmaker debate show that officials thought Sunday wouldn’t work, because many people were in church. Monday wouldn’t work, because most polling places were in county seats, and folks from outlying areas could not always get there in time.

Tuesday was the earliest day everybody could make it into town. So Tuesday it was.

ahhh America...so forward and backwards at the same time.

[drone]

I cannot wait for this thing to be over. With Virginia up for grabs, the number of phone calls is getting ridiculous.

Best one yet: Numerous calls to the house with caller ID saying "Burlington, Vermont", no message left on the machine. So the 4th time they call I pick up out of curiosity. "Hello?", nothing, lots of background noise. "Hello?" Finally a guy's voice says, "Um, can I speak to [last name]?" Not my complete name, just my last name. Plus it sounded like this guy was on his third bowl. "That is my last name, what do you want?" "I'd like to speak to you about Tim Kaine..." and I hang up. For the non-Virginians on the board, Tim Kaine(D) is a former governor of Virginia, former DNC chairman, and is running for Jim Webb's Senate seat against George Allen(R), former governor and previous Senator before Webb. My termination of the call had nothing to do with Kaine, just the fact that I don't want to talk about it. But the facts around the call made me wonder. Why is Tim Kaine paying Vermont stoners to harass voters? In these tough economic times, could he not have found some unemployed methheads here in the Commonwealth to do this? Is this the kind of man I want representing me and my state in the Senate? ~D

Most of the rest are the standard robocalls, heavy on the RNC side. Wednesday will be a blessing, regardless of which idiot wins.

edit:

Guys, I'll say it again.

The Redskins lost, there is nothing left to talk about
I wouldn't put too much stock in that trend. The Redskins tend to lose a lot these days. ~;)

[Lemur]

A Princeton mathematician runs the numbers, and sees a 9% chance (http://election.princeton.edu/2012/11/03/how-likely-is-a-popular-voteelectoral-vote-mismatch/) of a Bush v Gore-style mismatch between popular and Electoral College vote. He says that's great. I say 9% is still too damn high. Not good for the country when that happens.

Getting a popular vote and electoral vote mismatch can happen two ways: President Obama wins EV but not PV, or Romney does the same. These add up to 9%. This is a pretty low risk.

[Hooahguy]

Guys, I'll say it again.

The Redskins lost, there is nothing left to talk about
Can someone explain this to me? As someone who doesnt follow football, who does the Redskins represent and why is it important?

EDIT: Googled it, Romney must be happy right now. But do Mormons watch football?

[a completely inoffensive name]

I've always been a little uncomfortable with the whole early/absentee voting for everyone thing. It's ripe for fraud and absentee ballots have a much higher rate of rejection that in-person voting so your ballot is less likely to be counted that way.

In other news, the latest CNN poll (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/04/cnn-national-poll-dead-heat-between-obama-and-romney/) says it's all tied up at 49% but ,when you look at the crosstabs, it looks bad for Obama- he's losing independents by 22%. The only thing keeping it tied is the sample, which is assuming a larger Democrat turnout than in 2008- unlikely.

I am going to have to go with Nate Silver, instead of one CNN poll. There is a reason he puts Obama at 86% chance to win.

[Strike For The South]

Panthers 21 Redskins 13

[Lemur]

Panthers 21 Redskins 13
Interesting that the last time an election broke the Redskin rule was the last mid-term presidential election. Spoooooooky!

[ajaxfetish]

EDIT: Googled it, Romney must be happy right now. But do Mormons watch football?

Unfortunately, Utah doesn't host a professional team, but for many Mormons, BYU football is one of the central doctrines of the church.

Ajax

[Hooahguy]

Interesting that the last time an election broke the Redskin rule was the last mid-term presidential election. Spoooooooky!

Yeah but didnt they revise the rule to say that if the incumbent president loses the popular vote but still wins the next election prediction is flipped? Regardless, Obama won the popular vote last election so it wont matter. Im eager to see who wins really only for this rule, plus the University of Colorado report a few months ago which said that Romney would win.

[ajaxfetish]

Some more possible prediction tools: http://xkcd.com/1122/.

Ajax

[Strike For The South]

1
Sun, Sep 9


@

New Orleans (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/no/new-orleans-saints)




W
40-32 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=320909018)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 320
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 96
Garcon (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11439/pierre-garcon) 109


2
Sun, Sep 16


@

St. Louis (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/stl/st.-louis-rams)




L
31-28 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=320916014)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 206
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 89
Hankerson (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14021/leonard-hankerson) 68


3
Sun, Sep 23


vs

Cincinnati (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/cin/cincinnati-bengals)




L
38-31 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=320923028)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 221
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 78
Davis (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11282/fred-davis) 90


4
Sun, Sep 30


@

Tampa Bay (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/tb/tampa-bay-buccaneers)




W
24-22 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=320930027)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 323
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 113
Davis (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11282/fred-davis) 70


5
Sun, Oct 7


vs

Atlanta (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/atl/atlanta-falcons)




L
24-17 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321007028)


Cousins (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14880/kirk-cousins) 111
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 115
Moss (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/2564/santana-moss) 80


6
Sun, Oct 14


vs

Minnesota (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/min/minnesota-vikings)




W
38-26 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321014028)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 182
Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 138
Moss (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/2564/santana-moss)
Davis (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11282/fred-davis) 46


7
Sun, Oct 21


@

New York (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/nyg/new-york-giants)




L
27-23 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321021019)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 258
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 120
Paulsen (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/13726/logan-paulsen) 76


8
Sun, Oct 28


@

Pittsburgh (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/pit/pittsburgh-steelers)




L
27-12 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321028023)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 177
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 59
Morgan (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11408/josh-morgan) 46


9
Sun, Nov 4


vs

Carolina (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/car/carolina-panthers)




L
21-13 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321104028)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 215
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 76
Paulsen (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/13726/logan-paulsen) 59

[Lemur]

God help me, I love the American voter. I really do. (http://xpostfactoid.blogspot.com/2012/11/obamacare-and-end-of-days.html)

Canvassing in Allentown, PA today, I met a young white woman coming out of her apartment, lighting up a cigarette. [...] Then she pointed to her forearm and said, "what about that chip?"

I had heard this once before. A Hispanic girl of about 13, translating for her mother who remained far from the door, asked us whether Obama was going to put a chip in everyone's arm through which we could be controlled. I asked one of the district coordinators about this, and she said they had heard the tale occasionally, and thought one of the churches was spreading the rumor (she may have said a Seventh Day Adventist church, or that may be my memory embellishing).

I just looked up "obama care chip in arm" and found a 5-minute YouTube clip narrated by a professed Ron Paul acolyte: Obamacare Mandates RFID Chips to be Implanted in All Americans by March 23, 2013? It begins with a mock commercial in which vaguely zombie-ish dupes speak enthusiastically of having their medical conditions effectively monitored by the wonderful device. Then comes an earnest, wonkish sounding young man with the inside story: the ACA mandates that an RFID chip be implanted in each of us. Your bank account will be linked to it; it will have a GPS, so the government knows where you are all the time, as well as your whole medical history. It will enable the government to track all of us illegally; there will be no 4th amendment any more, etc etc. And the ACA mandates that all American citizens have this chip implanted by March 23, 2013. He then reads off ominous-sounding language, allegedly from the ACA pp 1000-1008 (who reads a 2000-page bill, he asks near the end) establishing a medical device registry.

Even on the face of it, the quoted language sounds like exactly what it is: a registry of existing medical devices for the purpose of tracking effectiveness. In any case, the registry is not in the ACA; it was included in a version of the bill that did not pass. Snopes.com has a complete debunk. And as a quick Google search demonstrates, this fever dream is connected with End of Days fantasies; the chip is the mark of the beast.

As Snopes points out, these rumors have been kicking around since the days of Hillarycare; more broadly, rumors of government implants "have been around just about as long as microchips have." Still, it's disturbing that these smears are having a noticeable effect.

[Strike For The South]

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?142708-The-Franchise-Should-Be-Limited

[drone]

1
Sun, Sep 9


@

New Orleans (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/no/new-orleans-saints)




W
40-32 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=320909018)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 320
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 96
Garcon (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11439/pierre-garcon) 109


2
Sun, Sep 16


@

St. Louis (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/stl/st.-louis-rams)




L
31-28 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=320916014)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 206
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 89
Hankerson (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14021/leonard-hankerson) 68


3
Sun, Sep 23


vs

Cincinnati (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/cin/cincinnati-bengals)




L
38-31 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=320923028)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 221
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 78
Davis (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11282/fred-davis) 90


4
Sun, Sep 30


@

Tampa Bay (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/tb/tampa-bay-buccaneers)




W
24-22 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=320930027)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 323
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 113
Davis (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11282/fred-davis) 70


5
Sun, Oct 7


vs

Atlanta (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/atl/atlanta-falcons)




L
24-17 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321007028)


Cousins (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14880/kirk-cousins) 111
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 115
Moss (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/2564/santana-moss) 80


6
Sun, Oct 14


vs

Minnesota (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/min/minnesota-vikings)




W
38-26 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321014028)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 182
Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 138
Moss (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/2564/santana-moss)
Davis (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11282/fred-davis) 46


7
Sun, Oct 21


@

New York (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/nyg/new-york-giants)




L
27-23 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321021019)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 258
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 120
Paulsen (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/13726/logan-paulsen) 76


8
Sun, Oct 28


@

Pittsburgh (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/pit/pittsburgh-steelers)




L
27-12 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321028023)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 177
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 59
Morgan (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/11408/josh-morgan) 46


9
Sun, Nov 4


vs

Carolina (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/car/carolina-panthers)




L
21-13 (http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321104028)


Griffin III (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/14875/robert-griffin-iii) 215
Morris (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/15009/alfred-morris) 76
Paulsen (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/13726/logan-paulsen) 59



The mediocre performance of the Skins is a matter of public record, now you are just rubbing it in. ~;)

[ICantSpellDawg]

Legalize drugs, abolish the civil institution of marriage, illegalize abortion, an armory in every household, lower all taxes and cut spending. If any of you can agree to any of these basic ideas, lets form a political party.

First things first, lets encourage our States to allot electors by popular vote. This will benefit everyone and take us from being a nation with one of the lowest turnout and political involvement of citizens and bring us to the top.

[Beskar]

I have to admit, I would be kind of scared if Mitt Romney gets elected.

[Hooahguy]

Half of that seems like sarcasm, the other half seems deadly serious. Interesting.

[Hooahguy]

As a Libertarian myself, I cannot agree that the FBI and all those other "fascist" organizations be disbanded, especially the FBI. Argue all you want about the CIA and NSA, but I firmly believe that we need at least the FBI. I would go much more into this but this isnt the thread for it. They need to be reformed to stop infringing on our private lives, but we need a centralized law enforcement agency that has jurisdiction throughout the US.

As for taxing the crap out of the rich, there is no point. If there was a policy like that here and I was rich, Id just send all my money away somewhere it wouldnt be taxed. That or I would stay at my medium-low paying job and never look to advance. Because why work hard if theres no reward to do so? You cannot punish success or there wont be any. Granted, before we take the radical step and tax the wealthy to oblivion, we should close the tax loopholes and see what happens then.

I agree that the government shouldnt be interfering with our private lives, but the general responsibilities of a government need to apply. Like FEMA. And other stuff like that.

[Strike For The South]

As a Libertarian myself, I cannot agree that the FBI and all those other "fascist" organizations be disbanded, especially the FBI. Argue all you want about the CIA and NSA, but I firmly believe that we need at least the FBI. I would go much more into this but this isnt the thread for it. They need to be reformed to stop infringing on our private lives, but we need a centralized law enforcement agency that has jurisdiction throughout the US.

As for taxing the crap out of the rich, there is no point. If there was a policy like that here and I was rich, Id just send all my money away somewhere it wouldnt be taxed. That or I would stay at my medium-low paying job and never look to advance. Because why work hard if theres no reward to do so? You cannot punish success or there wont be any. Granted, before we take the radical step and tax the wealthy to oblivion, we should close the tax loopholes and see what happens then.

I agree that the government shouldnt be interfering with our private lives, but the general responsibilities of a government need to apply. Like FEMA. And other stuff like that.

This is a terrible post.

Taxes in this country do not work like you think they do. If you think staying at middle management is somehow avoiding than horror that is being upper class, then I have some beachfront in Arizona to tell you

The FBI has killed far more American citizens and trampled over more liberties than the CIA could ever dream of. Granted I know you want to work for them so obviusly they must be the exception in this massive government cut

The last sentence is just bullshit

[Hooahguy]

As for taxing the rich, it is just the only option. I'm not saying we need 90% taxes or anything, but at least 50%. During our most successful years, the rich paid far higher taxes than they do today.
As I said, lets close the numerous tax loopholes and see what happens.


The whole notion of 'punishing success will end success' is just scare-mongering by people who don't want to give up a lavish lifestyle.
Thats debatable.

And Strike, I may be wrong about the economy, as I have no real experience with it other than articles I read online and from Wikipedia. So please, teach me.

And please, show me evidence of the FBI thing. A bit less ambiguous would be lovely. Again, Im not saying that the FBI is perfect. They are far from it and they do need reform. But we need a centralized law enforcement agency.

[Strike For The South]

And Strike, I may be wrong about the economy, as I have no real experience with it other than articles I read online and from Wikipedia. So please, teach me.

There is no may be, you are wrong. How I teach you depends on what kind of taxes you are talking about. The ones where Mitt Romneys first 250,000 gets taxed the same as everyone else. Or the one where Apple sends its money to Ireland, the Holland, then Ireland, Then to the Caymans, all while paying an effective rate of 2%


And please, show me evidence of the FBI thing. A bit less ambiguous would be lovely.

Well we could start with Waco and work our way back to wiretapping uppity Negroes.

[Beskar]

As for taxing the crap out of the rich, there is no point. If there was a policy like that here and I was rich, Id just send all my money away somewhere it wouldnt be taxed. Which is what many do already via loopholes, unless you want to stick all your money into tangible assets then ship it outside the country. Either way, if people left, it would create a wealth-creation vacuum where other people who are currently lower on the food-chain pick up from where they left.


Because why work hard if theres no reward to do so?

False argument. Considering there is some one in a sweat shop who is working away for $5 an hour, I am sure they would love to hard harder for $50 an hour. What the thing is, the higher brackets are just obscene penile measuring with no actual or practical differences. I put it this way.

The average household income is $45,000 a year. Would you work harder to have $45,000 per month after taxes?

The clear answer is "yes". For the "real person", the amounts of the wages are insane differences to their lifestyles. Those at the very top taking a "hit" will not have any realistic affects to their lifestyles.

[Hooahguy]

Leonard Peltier's been sitting in prison for decades on a bogus charge, thanks to two FBI agents who decided to start a shootout on an Indian reservation.

But, to be honest, I think the ATF has killed more people in cold blood than the FBI, unless we count gangsters.
Interesting, never heard of Leonard Peltier, but now I know. And I will say again, the FBI is not perfect, and I firmly believe that it does need big changes. But I believe that reform is easier than tearing down and building from scratch. Which was my main point to begin with.
And if you havent seen the South Park episode with the ATF (s03e08), you need to.

[Strike For The South]

Yes but just look at all those welfare queens driving their cadalics

I HAD BETTER QUIT MY JOB AND LIVE OFF THE DOLE


But, I'm pretty sure Waco was the ATF wasn't it?

It was both the FBI came in and sent in the tank.

[Hooahguy]

Which is what many do already via loopholes, unless you want to stick all your money into tangible assets then ship it outside the country. Either way, if people left, it would create a wealth-creation vacuum where other people who are currently lower on the food-chain pick up from where they left.
...which is why taxing even more without closing the loopholes is worthless.



False argument. Considering there is some one in a sweat shop who is working away for $5 an hour, I am sure they would love to hard harder for $50 an hour. What the thing is, the higher brackets are just obscene penile measuring with no actual or practical differences. I put it this way.

That is just silly, the average household income is $45,000 a year. Would you work harder to have $45,000 per month after taxes?

The clear answer is "yes". For the "real person", the amounts of the wages are insane differences to their lifestyles. Those at the very top taking a "hit" will not have any realistic affects to their lifestyles.
Hmm, didnt think about it like that.

[Strike For The South]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zkJcE3vG_I&feature=related

[Beskar]

...which is why taxing even more without closing the loopholes is worthless.

Agreed. Attempting to close the loop-holes and attempting to do some amnesty "tax corrections" (taking short-term 'loss' from total amount they should be receiving from Tax-dodgers in-exchange for long-term compliance) might balance the budget out so higher taxes are not needed.

Probably to the point where income tax could probably even be considered...

I do believe in a good budget, and there should be a healthy influx of cash which should cover the budget plus small surplus. So having a budget which is well managed is actually the key which can provide for stable taxation. I don't think GC is all for raising taxes for the sake of raising taxes, I don't think anyone actually is. I think it is more the responsibility should fall upon the wealth-creation industries to provide for it (since they have the best means to do so).

[Hooahguy]

Agreed. Attempting to close the loop-holes and attempting to do some amnesty "tax corrections" (taking short-term 'loss' from total amount they should be receiving from Tax-dodgers in-exchange for long-term compliance) might balance the budget out so higher taxes are not needed.
Eh, I think were so far into debt that even with all that its like trying to tear down the Wall of China with a chisel.
Closing the loopholes needs to come with reducing spending.

[Strike For The South]

You'll never close the loopholes

To much money in it,

[Strike For The South]

The debt doesn't matter

All we need to do is run a sound budget with a minute surplus and people will have enough faith in US bonds to continue buying them

The debt isn't the problem, it is the constant running of larger and larger deficits

Run some 90s tech boom surplueses and people will be begging to buy the bonds again

[Xiahou]

The problem with republicans, IMO, is that they would pick and choose the wrong programs, and have no interest at all in raising taxes on anybody (but I'm sure they'd all happily abolish the minimum wage). So, is it fair that almost half the population contributes nothing to the federal budget? Why is asking those that already pay the most to pay more always the knee-jerk response? I live paycheck to paycheck, but I don't think soaking the rich is going to solve any of my problems.

There's about 400 (http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/#page:1_sort:NaN_direction:asc_search:_filter:_filter:_filter:All%20categories) billionaires in the US. Add all their money up.... and it's still not enough to close this year's deficit. I don't see us taxing our way out of this one- remember, social security and other entitlement deficits aren't even counted on the budget.

We need to have a serious discussion about the size and scope of our federal government. It's not sustainable as it is currently running. Our tax code is also completely bloated. We need to stop using it as a social engineering tool- stop giving breaks for pet projects and penalties to industries/behavior that don't have good enough lobbyists. Eliminate most deductions, and offset the increased tax burden by cutting rates. Simplify it. An average family should be able to do their taxes on a post card. It's appalling how much wasted time and productivity individuals and businesses waste complying with our labyrinthine tax regulations. Our time could be spent much more productively elsewhere.

[Hooahguy]

Would it be good just to abolish lobbying completely? I think that would work well.

[Hooahguy]

No, because many good things come from lobbying as well. Most public interest groups qualify as lobbying groups. But we do need to sit down as a country and have a serious talk about money in politics.

Wasnt there some sort of bill last election about money going into politics but it was shut down or something?

[Xiahou]

I don't think we should start class-warfare or anything, but I do think they should pay proportionally more than the average American.They do.

I'm sick of people talking about half the country not paying taxes, when its that half of the country that makes it possible for the businesses to run in the first place.And the businesses make it possible for them to make a living and get the products and services we all enjoy. It's a two-way street, man.

But look, I'll meet you half way: Close the loop-holes, close all overseas military bases, cut the DoD budget to less than $1 Billion, cut the FBI, CIA, NSA, ATF, etc, and all of a sudden I'll bet we've got enough to break even and still pay for universal healthcare. Eh? How about it?First, no. Second, we could completely eliminate the DOD's budget and it'd still only halve this year's deficit. Deficit mind you, not half the budget. I don't think you understand the enormity of the problem.



Would it be good just to abolish lobbying completely? I think that would work well. You can't. People can always, and should always be able to talk to their representatives about issues that are of interest to them. And that, in its simplest terms, is what lobbying is. Again, it comes back to the role of government. It has no business carving out tax breaks and corporate welfare to specific companies and industries.

[Ironside]

We need to have a serious discussion about the size and scope of our federal government. It's not sustainable as it is currently running. Our tax code is also completely bloated. We need to stop using it as a social engineering tool- stop giving breaks for pet projects and penalties to industries/behavior that don't have good enough lobbyists. Eliminate most deductions, and offset the increased tax burden by cutting rates. Simplify it. An average family should be able to do their taxes on a post card. It's appalling how much wasted time and productivity individuals and businesses waste complying with our labyrinthine tax regulations. Our time could be spent much more productively elsewhere.

How complex is it? It's gotten much easier here the last decades. Now it's simply "we found that you earned this kind of money, from these sources, so your yearly tax will be this". Usually it's a payback from the state. Then you can add any deductions you want and they will approve it or not. Say having a small private company, you might need a computer for it, then you can skip the VAT.
Private companies has it more complex since they have to handle the VAT, you settle(?) the VAT on your expenses towards your income, and pay VAT on the difference. Small companies (the ones people don't live on) has a tendency to run close at 0 profits due to that.

For tax income. Running at Clinton level of taxes and closing the loopholes would be a good start. I'm not sure if more is even needed, at least during better economic times.

[CountArach]

Probably. The last time anyone took campaign finance reform seriously was 1992, and thanks to the Supreme Court it would require a constitutional amendment to figure out where all the money comes from, exactly, anyway.
Well actually it was McCain-Feingold in 2002 that was the last major reform that I can think of.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance_reform#Bipartisan_Campaign_Reform_Act_of_2002

But that was a really mixed bag, with some real positives but the same time the Senate undid a lot of good that was in the original bill.

[Captain Blackadder]

So, is it fair that almost half the population contributes nothing to the federal budget? Why is asking those that already pay the most to pay more always the knee-jerk response? I live paycheck to paycheck, but I don't think soaking the rich is going to solve any of my problems.

There's about 400 (http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/#page:1_sort:NaN_direction:asc_search:_filter:_filter:_filter:All%20categories) billionaires in the US. Add all their money up.... and it's still not enough to close this year's deficit. I don't see us taxing our way out of this one- remember, social security and other entitlement deficits aren't even counted on the budget.

We need to have a serious discussion about the size and scope of our federal government. It's not sustainable as it is currently running. Our tax code is also completely bloated. We need to stop using it as a social engineering tool- stop giving breaks for pet projects and penalties to industries/behavior that don't have good enough lobbyists. Eliminate most deductions, and offset the increased tax burden by cutting rates. Simplify it. An average family should be able to do their taxes on a post card. It's appalling how much wasted time and productivity individuals and businesses waste complying with our labyrinthine tax regulations. Our time could be spent much more productively elsewhere.

Do you know why 47% do not pay federal income tax? It is simple because parties have cut taxes so much that for many people it was cut down to nothing. There are millionaires who are part of that 47%. If you want them to pay taxes it is simple many of the tax cuts over the last 30 years need to be rolled back then you will see that 47% go down.

[Fisherking]

Yeah, its a two-way street. The average 47%er is not only working in the business and producing the products, but also consumes the products, markets the products, and is the entire reason the product or business exists in the first place. Don't put business on such a pedastal--where there is a need, someone will provide, and added taxes are a small price to pay for the privilage of success gained quite literally on the backs of everyone else.


As much as everyone wants taxes on businesses and not on people it is silly really.

Business passes those taxes on to the people who buy their goods or use their services. Taxes get factored into the price.

It is a really nice smoke screen for taxing everyone while touting that you are going after evil business men.

Bait and switch.

[rvg]

Whoa, this is gonna be one interesting election. The turnout is AMAZING. Got to the polls at 6:50, and there were already 30 people ahead of me. Never seen such a heavy turnout in Southeast Michigan before.

[CountArach]

And this is why Obama will win today:

https://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r44/CountArach/fivethirtyeight-1106-2-custom2.jpg

The final polls in the battleground states are ridiculously good. Nate's final prediction has put Obama at a 91% chance of winning. Or as CNN just said "One of the closest Presidential elections EVER!"

Anyway here is what I believe the electoral map will look like:

303 for Obama and 235 for Romney
https://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r44/CountArach/ElectionMap.png

Florida is a toss-up and I think that it will be within 1% but ultimately will back Romney.

EDIT: And just to throw a number out there - Obama with 51.3% of the popular vote.

[rvg]

And this is why Obama will win today...

I hope you're right. It's a close election, much closer than I expected.

[Hooahguy]

Uh oh.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QdpGd74DrBM

[Seamus Fermanagh]

As a Floridian, I am looking forward to Freedom Day tomorrow.

Freedom from the [insert drawn out series of adjectives featuring anatomic impossibilities, vulgarity, and profanity] political ads which have been hammering at me relentlessly for 8 months now.

I never thought I would look forward, LONGINGLY, for a return of the endless Private Injury Lawyer advertisements. 1-800-ASK-GARY ads begin to seem almost like Currier and Ives material...

Now, everybody head to the polls and vote for the Peace and Freedom Party. ;-)

[Lemur]

As a Floridian
God hates Florida. You know it's true.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

And this is why Obama will win today:

https://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r44/CountArach/fivethirtyeight-1106-2-custom2.jpg

The final polls in the battleground states are ridiculously good. Nate's final prediction has put Obama at a 91% chance of winning. Or as CNN just said "One of the closest Presidential elections EVER!"

Anyway here is what I believe the electoral map will look like:

303 for Obama and 235 for Romney
https://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r44/CountArach/ElectionMap.png

Florida is a toss-up and I think that it will be within 1% but ultimately will back Romney.

EDIT: And just to throw a number out there - Obama with 51.3% of the popular vote.

I would put VA and CO into the Romney Column. Way too many of the more recent surveys are still over-sampling Dems. Obama does not have that "free" 5% he had in 2008 just for being the first black/anybody but another GOP/not the old guy candidate that he enjoyed last time. I think Obama takes OH 49.5 to 49.1 and that that puts him over the top in the EC. Overall, I suspect that this election WILL fall into the 9% zone and will finish about 49-48.8 Romney in the popular.

Heading out to vote for the GOP. But at the end of it all, i suspect that we will see Obama returned, the Senate still narrowly Dem, and the GOP at about the same number of seats it has now in the HoR. Then we all get to see Christie pick up on the road work and attempt to -- as MRD so charmingly phrases it -- regain the ability to look at his own penis.

[Lemur]

i suspect that we will see Obama returned=
Well then, that means the end of America, doesn't it? We're all going to be forced onto collectivist farms.

It's been a good run, America. See you in the labor camps! Private property was nice, but you had to go re-electing the Communist Kenyan Muslin.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Well then, that means the end of America, doesn't it? We're all going to be forced onto collectivist farms.

It's been a good run, America. See you in the labor camps! Private property was nice, but you had to go re-electing the Communist Kenyan Muslin.

It gets a little silly, listening to many right wing radio hosts. They seem to have given up on the Kenyan birth and Actively Muslim labels (though their callers haven't), but I doubt you'd have any trouble finding evidence of their passionate belief that he hates America as constituted and wants to collectivize it.

I keep looking for the cloven hooves and horns, but just don't see them....

[GeneralHankerchief]

Just voted, with my annual Election Day soundtrack in tow:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHhrZgojY1Q

Granted, I live in NJ so it's not like I'm actually affecting anything.

[rvg]

Well then, that means the end of America, doesn't it? We're all going to be forced onto collectivist farms.

It's been a good run, America. See you in the labor camps! Private property was nice, but you had to go re-electing the Communist Kenyan Muslin.

If all goes well, tomorrow I'm gonna start practicing saying the word "comrade" with a heavy Russian accent. Until then, stay vigilant, Komrudd Lemur.

[Fisherking]

Der Spiegel online says it doesn’t matter who wins. The US is pretty much done for.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/us-wahl-wie-der-kapitalismus-das-land-zerstoert-a-865278.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/us-wahl-wie-der-kapitalismus-das-land-zerstoert-a-865278.html%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1600%26bih%3D901%26prmd%3Dimvns&sa=X&ei=HD-ZULz8BcSOswbXk4HIAQ&ved=0CCAQ7gEwAA

[rvg]

Der Spiegel online says it doesn’t matter who wins. The US is pretty much done for.

By the same token, it doesn't matter what Der Spiegel says.

[Fisherking]

By the same token, it doesn't matter what Der Spiegel says.

It doesn’t matter what the candidates say either. They are both proven liars. You just choose to believe the one you want.

[TinCow]

Remind me to never vote at lunch time again. I normally vote after work and it takes 10-15 minutes. Today it took 75 minutes. UGH.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I think any alien civilization would view our elections as an example of collective insanity.

[TinCow]

I think any alien civilization would view our elections as an example of collective insanity.

If you want insanity, I experienced it. In 2011 my county started phasing out electronic voting because of various reliability issues. When I voted today, the paper ballots were not available because the optical scanner used to read them was not working. The electronic machines (down to four, due to phasing out) were working just fine.

So, basically... the paper ballots were broken, but the electronic ballots were fine. :wall:

[drone]

I think any alien civilization would view our elections as an example of collective insanity.

Simpsons did it. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTJ0qYR6YFo)

[Tellos Athenaios]

Der Spiegel online says it doesn’t matter who wins. The US is pretty much done for.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/us-wahl-wie-der-kapitalismus-das-land-zerstoert-a-865278.html&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/us-wahl-wie-der-kapitalismus-das-land-zerstoert-a-865278.html%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1600%26bih%3D901%26prmd%3Dimvns&sa=X&ei=HD-ZULz8BcSOswbXk4HIAQ&ved=0CCAQ7gEwAA


Und Ronald Reagan, der aus der Sicht europäischer Linker gleichzeitig für das Böse und das Lächerliche der amerikanischen Politik steht, war nach den Maßstäben, an die wir uns inzwischen gewöhnt haben, ein friedlicher Mann. Er hat nur Grenada erobert.

:laugh4:

I have to say, though, the article does not translate well to into "American". Probably because it is an opinion piece from a thoroughly German perspective.

[Chaotix]

If you want insanity, I experienced it. In 2011 my county started phasing out electronic voting because of various reliability issues. When I voted today, the paper ballots were not available because the optical scanner used to read them was not working. The electronic machines (down to four, due to phasing out) were working just fine.

So, basically... the paper ballots were broken, but the electronic ballots were fine. :wall:

That's rough.

The problem with the electronic ballots is that there's no backup copy in the event that someone tries to commit election fraud.

Both the touch-screen voting machines and the optical scanners can be reprogrammed to throw the election easily enough, but at least with the scanner you actually have the paper to do a re-count.

[Hooahguy]

All I care about this election is that Johnson get at least 5% of the popular vote.

[Hax]

I'll just go ahead and assume you mean Lyndon B. Johnson.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I don't think the skills of a race car driver translate to the presidency very well.

[Ronin]

I don't think the skills of a race car driver translate to the presidency very well.

why not? it's all about staying the course!

[CountArach]

All I care about this election is that Johnson get at least 5% of the popular vote.
Not going to happen.

[Hooahguy]

Yeah but a guy can wish.

[Ignoramus]

What is it with the US voting system? Couldn't they just use simple written paper ballots that are manually counted? That would surely avoid the controversy of interference by election officials?

Says an Australian :hide:

[Ronin]

What is it with the US voting system? Couldn't they just use simple written paper ballots that are manually counted? That would surely avoid the controversy of interference by election officials?

Says an Australian :hide:

works over here....

[Strike For The South]

I am watching the election with my pops which means its on Fox News

i ain't even mad, because I love Megyn Kelly, I would do terrible ungodly things to her

even if she does spell Meagan wrong.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I'm calling it for Obama, in a landslide. There just aren't enough gullible idiots for Romney to make it close. Plus, any self-respecting woman should be voting for anything but the Romney-Ryan ticket.

Will i be right!? Probably. I've picked the correct superbowl winner three years in a row, so i must be right.:D

According to Nate Silver's blog, of the three most probable scenarios, two of them have obama at 330 electoral votes or above.

[Xiahou]

According to Nate Silver's blog, of the three most probable scenarios, two of them have obama at 330 electoral votes or above.I would be very surprised if Obama wins that big.....

[drone]

What is it with the US voting system? Couldn't they just use simple written paper ballots that are manually counted? That would surely avoid the controversy of interference by election officials?

Says an Australian :hide:
We don't have a "voting system". Voting is controlled at the state and local level, so the methods, funding, efficiency, and corruptibility vary greatly by locale.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

We don't have a "voting system". Voting is controlled at the state and local level, so the methods, funding, efficiency, and corruptibility vary greatly by locale.

Fifty experiments in Republican government! Woot!

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I'm not sure why republicans think the turnout will look like 2010. Young people often skip the 'in between' elections. Many people only get interested for the presidential.

My favorite theory is that the Amish will turnout big and swing ohio and pennsylvania. Polls don't factor them in--they don't have telephones!

[a completely inoffensive name]

I would be very surprised if Obama wins that big.....


I agree with you. Obama would need to take all the contested states to get over 330. That being said, the most probable scenario (at 20%) is Obama sweeping every swing state. Given Nate's track of 99% accuracy in the past, I would say to keep your mind open for anything.

[Strike For The South]

Nate Silver is an ass and I am absolutely sick of hearing about him.

Everyone of you hemp wearing hippies need shut your mouths and find a damn job

[Xiahou]

I'm not sure why republicans think the turnout will look like 2010. Young people often skip the 'in between' elections. Many people only get interested for the presidential.

My favorite theory is that the Amish will turnout big and swing ohio and pennsylvania. Polls don't factor them in--they don't have telephones!Obama isn't riding a wave of hope and change this time either, so it's not rational to expect a Democrat turnout like 2008. It's going to be somewhere in between- the question, of course, is where? I'm just thrilled that my state, Pennsylvania, is marginally in play this time. It makes me feel as though my vote actually matters....


I agree with you. Obama would need to take all the contested states to get over 330. That being said, the most probable scenario (at 20%) is Obama sweeping every swing state. Given Nate's track of 99% accuracy in the past, I would say to keep your mind open for anything. I'm 99% sure he's not 99% accurate. ~;p

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I agree with you. Obama would need to take all the contested states to get over 330. That being said, the most probable scenario (at 20%) is Obama sweeping every swing state. Given Nate's track of 99% accuracy in the past, I would say to keep your mind open for anything.

He conveniently compiles polling data and analyzes it

I could have 95% accuracy by flipping coins based on toss up states

[Lemur]

He conveniently compiles polling data and analyzes it
I don't understand the Nate hostility. Didn't anybody watch Moneyball?

[a completely inoffensive name]

I think that people don't like it when elections are called before they want it to be called. Democrats disregarded Nate in 2010 when he accurately called the Tea Party revolution sweeping into Congress. It undermines civic pride in a way to have the notion that your counted vote means nothing 2-3 possibly 4 days before the election. Obama has been over 80% to win for at least half a week and many on the right have been bashing him non stop for the past month.

[Xiahou]

I don't understand the Nate hostility. Didn't anybody watch Moneyball?It's not hostility so much as we don't worship him as a polling god, as some seem to.

Those who are interested, you can watch the state-by-state results come in on Politico (http://www.politico.com/2012-election/map/#/President/2012/). I think I'm gonna walk away from my computer for an hour and come back when there's something to look at.... :burnout:

[Lemur]

It's not hostility so much as we don't worship him as a polling god, as some seem to.
Hmm, well, anybody who is "worshipped," by definition, should be mocked and derided. But maybe I'm reading the wrong blogs, 'cause I don't see it.

Silver took baseball statistical techniques and applied them to politics. And he's had a decent scorecard. So he's a data point worth looking at, and prolly a lot more worthwhile than the talking heads on cable news. No more, no less. Seems like Silver's become a whipping boy for the right in the last month, which is just weird.

[Lemur]

Obama isn't riding a wave of hope and change this time either, so it's not rational to expect a Democrat turnout like 2008.
It may not be rational, but it may be empirical. Early signs (http://www.wvec.com/news/Va-turnout-expected-to-meet-or-exceed-2008-election-177533131.html):

Virginia election officials said statewide turnout would likely meet or exceed the 2008 presidential election. State Board of Elections Secretary Donald Palmer said robust turnout led to long lines at polling places across the state and waits varied from one to up to four hours.

Officials say they were working with localities to bring in more voting equipment and staff to help ease lines at polls that opened at 6 a.m. Tuesday.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

People who are really invested in following the polling dislike the polls that look bad for them. That's why the democrats often hate on rasmussen, and were attacking gallup earlier. And partisans on the other side throw those polls in their face.

Personally I think we should have fewer polls...it seems like the polls themselves can affect the race when they shouldn't really.

edit:

Haven't seen anything positive for romney so far

[TinCow]

It may not be rational, but it may be empirical. Early signs (http://www.wvec.com/news/Va-turnout-expected-to-meet-or-exceed-2008-election-177533131.html):

Virginia election officials said statewide turnout would likely meet or exceed the 2008 presidential election. State Board of Elections Secretary Donald Palmer said robust turnout led to long lines at polling places across the state and waits varied from one to up to four hours.

Officials say they were working with localities to bring in more voting equipment and staff to help ease lines at polls that opened at 6 a.m. Tuesday.

People I talked to at my polling place said they had never seen lines remotely as long as there were today. I have no idea why so many people have turned out, but it's hard to dispute that's happening here. McDonnell said a little while ago that some precincts couldn't even begin counting until after 8:30 because the lines were so long it took people that long to finish voting, even though the polls closed at 7pm.

[Beskar]

The voting so far looks like the overall popular majority are voting Mitt, but Obama is getting the EC votes.

[GeneralHankerchief]

CNN just called it for Obama. Ohio put him over.

Yawn.

[Hooahguy]

Alright guys, predictions for the 2016 race?

[Memnon]

Alright guys, predictions for the 2016 race?
Assuming the Mayans were correct, I'm going to say proton number #7,984,376,716,903 sweeps what is mostly empty space, otherwise, I'm gonna wait and see.

[Strike For The South]

If CNN shows Kenya one more time I will personally hunt down John King

Talk about missing the point of America

No talent jackasses

[TinCow]

Looks like Colorado is going to legalize marijuana. This will be interesting...

[ICantSpellDawg]

Christie/Rubio 2016.

G.O.P. needs to reach out to hispanics and work to reform immigration. They need to moderate their tone on birth control and stay strong against abortion, but they need to be cautious with the language that they use. We need to be more cautious on the fiscal conservatism, in spite of what pundits will say.

I wish one party would end the drug war - the trajectory is for Democrats to do this, but with the Democratic nanny-state and their growing hubris and "protect us from us" mentality, it could be the G.O.P. As immigration swells and old people die off, the GOP will re-calibrate in a big way for 2016.

[a completely inoffensive name]

There were three states that had propositions to legalize marijuana, Washington, Oregon and Colorado.

Washington and Colorado looks like they passed theirs while Oregon is 10 points behind. Nevertheless, it is going to be a drastic impact on drug policy in the Western United States.

[HopAlongBunny]

4 more years of the O'Bama-Rama!

Happy New President's Day to America :)

[TinCow]

Looks like the Nate Silver doubters will be eating their hats in the morning. Unless something changes in Virginia or Florida, is looks like he called every state correctly.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Looks like the Nate Silver doubters will be eating their hats in the morning. Unless something changes in Virginia or Florida, is looks like he called every state correctly.

Everyone should have "doubted" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doubt) Nate Silver. I expected him to be right, because I am a Republican who reads the polls and his posts, but I hoped that he was missing something. I think that Dick Morris, Zogby and Rassmussen should be dragged into the street. this is the second election where it seems like they are running propaganda, but I can't for the life of me figure out who it is benefiting, other than themselves. Hopefully that is over now. Realclearpolitics has reformed themselves in my eyes. I left them after the 08 election, but they seem to have reformed their method with the data and have been pretty spot on this cycle.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Legalized Pot, Gay Marriage, and limits on tax increases.

:cool:

Go Washington! (state(!))

I went to an election "party" tonight, which I found out was a group of Obama supporters. A bit awkward for me, but they at least acknowledged Obama's failings and were welcoming to Gary Johnson supporters.

I also found out Obama's White House home brew beer recipe is pretty good.

CR

[a completely inoffensive name]

So far, just as I expected, California is fucking up, again.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I cannot believe it didn't pass here in Oregon. :no: This State supplies the weed for all the states that actually passed the law. FUBAR man, FUBAR. All those weed barons just don't wanna pay taxes.

It doesn't matter, all it takes is one state and we got two. Once Washington and Colorado figuratively swim in the tax revenue from everyone in the Western US coming to buy pot, every state is going to want in on the action. The Feds just cannot enforce their laws without massive help on the state level, once that is gone, the fight is over for the Feds. They are going to take it to SCOTUS unless Obama gets enforcement to back off once and for all.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Boy did I get that one wrong.

Obama did not eke out a win, as I expected, he beat Romney soundly. The electoral college win was a walk-away (and will go up further when the recount shows he got Florida as well) and Obama gained a solid popular vote win as well, earning a huge percentage of the West Coast's votes to top that category as well. He may not have had the "new" tag that got him an extra 5% last time, but he had more than enough to win soundly this go around.

The Senate and House remain essentially the same, as expected. All of the oomph from the Tea Party had faded back a notch.

[Hooahguy]

Maryland joins the progressive states and legalized gay marriage. :2thumbsup:

I feel this may be a turning point in American politics. Maybe now the GOP will reject the Tea Party right and become more moderate.

[rvg]

Maryland joins the progressive states and legalized gay marriage. :2thumbsup:

I feel this may be a turning point in American politics. Maybe now the GOP will reject the Tea Party right and become more moderate.

I can only hope. GOP has just lost a reasonable and moderate Scott Brown to a leftist moron, and I can't help but blame the tea party for it.

[Hooahguy]

I also think the Todd Aiken debacle contributed to the nationwide boot of GOP candidates.

[Kadagar_AV]

I also think the Todd Aiken debacle contributed to the nationwide boot of GOP candidates.

It is rather hard getting respect when high ranking members are seen as intellectually challenged by anyone with the ability to, say, google.

[Lemur]

Well, now that's settled, let's abolish the Electoral College and chuck every electronic voting machine off a cliff.

Can we make a deal?

Also, now is the time to talk about voter IDs and so forth. Not in the three months leading up to a national election. Now.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Christie/Rubio 2016.

G.O.P. needs to reach out to hispanics and work to reform immigration. They need to moderate their tone on birth control and stay strong against abortion, but they need to be cautious with the language that they use. We need to be more cautious on the fiscal conservatism, in spite of what pundits will say.

I wish one party would end the drug war - the trajectory is for Democrats to do this, but with the Democratic nanny-state and their growing hubris and "protect us from us" mentality, it could be the G.O.P. As immigration swells and old people die off, the GOP will re-calibrate in a big way for 2016.

I saw some talking head saying some people in the GOP are going to demand a more conservative candidate.

And I thought, really? That's the takeaway from tonight? Someone who's less of a moderate? Being more to the right on social issues? But apparently yes; http://www.redstate.com/2012/11/07/status-quo-ante/
and especially http://www.redstate.com/2012/11/07/baloney/

Good grief.

Maybe the Libertarian party can rise from the ashes (well, probably not, but...)

CR

[Lemur]

Holy ****, this seems like tremendous, major news, or am I missing something? We gonna need some 51-star flags?

Puerto Rico wants to become the 51st state of the US (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20238272)

Voters in Puerto Rico have supported a non-binding referendum to become a full US state.

The measure will require approval from the US Congress, but President Barack Obama has said he will respect the vote.

The island is currently a US territory, which uses the dollar and whose citizens travel on US passports.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Holy ****, this seems like tremendous, major news, or am I missing something? We gonna need some 51-star flags?

Puerto Rico wants to become the 51st state of the US (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20238272)

Voters in Puerto Rico have supported a non-binding referendum to become a full US state.

The measure will require approval from the US Congress, but President Barack Obama has said he will respect the vote.

The island is currently a US territory, which uses the dollar and whose citizens travel on US passports.

If you could time their admission to coincide with the secession of Texas you would not need to change the flag... :idea2:

[Beskar]

The problem is, Obama will still face the issues of the previous end of last term with having a republican Congress and a stalemated Senate. So nothing much will be done as the republicans will just fillibuster everything again.

[Fisherking]

The problem is, Obama will still face the issues of the previous end of last term with having a republican Congress and a stalemated Senate. So nothing much will be done as the republicans will just fillibuster everything again.

Perhaps, just perhaps Republicans may find grounds to work with him now that he can not be reelected. Or he may even move toward them in order to get things done. But I won’t hold my breath.

[TinCow]

Holy ****, this seems like tremendous, major news, or am I missing something? We gonna need some 51-star flags?

Puerto Rico wants to become the 51st state of the US (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20238272)

Voters in Puerto Rico have supported a non-binding referendum to become a full US state.

The measure will require approval from the US Congress, but President Barack Obama has said he will respect the vote.

The island is currently a US territory, which uses the dollar and whose citizens travel on US passports.

Wow... between that and the legalization of marijuana measures, we've certainly got more than our usual share of unusual referendum results to chew on. I've lived my entire life under a 50 star flag with 100 senators... it will screw up all the nice even numbers!

[Lemur]

I think there are modest grounds for optimism. The Republican strategy of the last four years was, frankly, to block attempts at constructive engagement, prevent any Federal efforts at encouraging recovery, and then blame the sitting Prez for getting nothing done. (While also, paradoxically, blaming him for anything he actually did get done.)

The overwhelming goal, as declared on the record by the Speaker of the House, was "to make Obama a one-term president."

That has failed.

Congresscritters will now have to consider their own survival, especially given that the normal outcome of a mid-term election (small-to-large losses in the House and Senate for the incumbent party) also failed to take place.

The House GOP may see political advantage in doing their job as legislators.

It's a possibility.

[Lemur]

Also, we may see some reformation in the right-wing echo chamber. A good takedown (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/how-conservative-media-lost-to-the-msm-and-failed-the-rank-and-file/264855/):

Conservatives were at an information disadvantage because so many right-leaning outlets wasted time on stories the rest of America dismissed as nonsense. WorldNetDaily brought you birtherism. Forbes brought you Kenyan anti-colonialism. National Review obsessed about an imaginary rejection of American exceptionalism, misrepresenting an Obama quote in the process, and Andy McCarthy was interviewed widely about his theory that Obama, aka the Drone Warrior in Chief, allied himself with our Islamist enemies in a "Grand Jihad" against America. Seriously?

Conservatives were at a disadvantage because their information elites pandered in the most cynical, self-defeating ways, treating would-be candidates like Sarah Palin and Herman Cain as if they were plausible presidents rather than national jokes who'd lose worse than George McGovern.

How many months were wasted on them?

How many hours of Glenn Beck conspiracy theories did Fox News broadcast to its viewers? How many hours of transparently mindless Sean Hannity content is still broadcast daily? Why don't Americans trust Republicans on foreign policy as they once did? In part because conservatism hasn't grappled with the foreign-policy failures of George W. Bush. A conspiracy of silence surrounds the subject. Romney could neither run on the man's record nor repudiate it. The most damaging Romney gaffe of the campaign, where he talked about how the 47 percent of Americans who pay no income taxes are a lost cause for Republicans? Either he was unaware that many of those people are Republican voters, or was pandering to GOP donors who are misinformed. Either way, bad information within the conservative movement was to blame.

In conservative fantasy-land, Richard Nixon was a champion of ideological conservatism, tax cuts are the only way to raise revenue, adding neoconservatives to a foreign-policy team reassures American voters, Benghazi was a winning campaign issue, Clint Eastwood's convention speech was a brilliant triumph, and Obama's America is a place where black kids can beat up white kids with impunity. Most conservative pundits know better than this nonsense -- not that they speak up against it. They see criticizing their own side as a sign of disloyalty. I see a coalition that has lost all perspective, partly because there's no cost to broadcasting or publishing inane bullshit. In fact, it's often very profitable. A lot of cynical people have gotten rich broadcasting and publishing red meat for movement conservative consumption.

[Xiahou]

By and large, there was no change in Congress. How is that pressure to do anything differently? The voters wildly disapprove of congress, but when it comes to their own representatives, they sent most of them back. This election adds up to an endorsement of the status quo. :shrug:

[Lemur]

The overwhelming goal, as declared on the record by the Speaker of the House, was "to make Obama a one-term president."

That has failed.

By and large, there was no change in Congress. How is that pressure to do anything differently?
Because the overwhelming goals of the last four years have failed.


Obama will not be a one-term president.
ACA (Obamacare) will not be repealed. And no population in any nation has ever repealed universal health care once enacted.

So the status quo in 2012 is remarkably different from the status quo in 2008 or 2010.

[Xiahou]

Because the overwhelming goals of the last four years have failed.


Obama will not be a one-term president.
ACA (Obamacare) will not be repealed. And no population in any nation has ever repealed universal health care once enacted.

So the status quo in 2012 is remarkably different from the status quo in 2008 or 2010.
Accepting all of that- they were still returned to their seats for another term. I'm straining how to see this would be seen as a mandate for change....

[Lemur]

I'm straining how to see this would be seen as a mandate for change....
You're not "straining to see" anything, you're disagreeing; two very different mental experiences.

As I said earlier, there are "modest grounds for optimism." That's all. Total obstructionism may be judged to not be in the House GOP's best interest. It's a possibility. Hence "modest," hence "optimism."

[Xiahou]

You're not "straining to see" anything, you're disagreeing; two very different mental experiences.No, I'm pretty sure I meant what I said. Thanks for trying to read my thoughts though just the same. :yes:

[Lemur]

Thanks for trying to read my thoughts though just the same.
Not trying to be rude, it just seemed as though "straining to see" was oblique-speak for "disagree."

So, do you see any significance in this election at all? Anything?

[TinCow]

Accepting all of that- they were still returned to their seats for another term. I'm straining how to see this would be seen as a mandate for change....

This statement assumes there was a mandate for anything, which is the problem. This country is heavily split, almost down the middle, and neither side appears prepared to budge. Both want significant changes, but in opposite directions and they continue to pull in those directions. Change will happen due to sheer momentum once one side finally stumbles, but it won't be because of a mandate, it will simply be due to political exhaustion.

[Xiahou]

So, do you see any significance in this election at all? Anything?I think Obama's get out the vote effort was truly impressive- much better than I expected. But, it didn't translate in a significant way to the house or senate... why? I'm curious to see what explanations there are for that.

Also, I think the biggest question mark is will Obama do anything different? Unfettered from the worry of reelection: Will he shift some to the right ala Clinton? Will he move further left? Or will he stay the course? We'll see.

[gaelic cowboy]

Also, we may see some reformation in the right-wing echo chamber. A good takedown (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/how-conservative-media-lost-to-the-msm-and-failed-the-rank-and-file/264855/):

Conservatives were at an information disadvantage because so many right-leaning outlets wasted time on stories the rest of America dismissed as nonsense. WorldNetDaily brought you birtherism. Forbes brought you Kenyan anti-colonialism. National Review obsessed about an imaginary rejection of American exceptionalism, misrepresenting an Obama quote in the process, and Andy McCarthy was interviewed widely about his theory that Obama, aka the Drone Warrior in Chief, allied himself with our Islamist enemies in a "Grand Jihad" against America. Seriously?

Conservatives were at a disadvantage because their information elites pandered in the most cynical, self-defeating ways, treating would-be candidates like Sarah Palin and Herman Cain as if they were plausible presidents rather than national jokes who'd lose worse than George McGovern.

How many months were wasted on them?

How many hours of Glenn Beck conspiracy theories did Fox News broadcast to its viewers? How many hours of transparently mindless Sean Hannity content is still broadcast daily? Why don't Americans trust Republicans on foreign policy as they once did? In part because conservatism hasn't grappled with the foreign-policy failures of George W. Bush. A conspiracy of silence surrounds the subject. Romney could neither run on the man's record nor repudiate it. The most damaging Romney gaffe of the campaign, where he talked about how the 47 percent of Americans who pay no income taxes are a lost cause for Republicans? Either he was unaware that many of those people are Republican voters, or was pandering to GOP donors who are misinformed. Either way, bad information within the conservative movement was to blame.

In conservative fantasy-land, Richard Nixon was a champion of ideological conservatism, tax cuts are the only way to raise revenue, adding neoconservatives to a foreign-policy team reassures American voters, Benghazi was a winning campaign issue, Clint Eastwood's convention speech was a brilliant triumph, and Obama's America is a place where black kids can beat up white kids with impunity. Most conservative pundits know better than this nonsense -- not that they speak up against it. They see criticizing their own side as a sign of disloyalty. I see a coalition that has lost all perspective, partly because there's no cost to broadcasting or publishing inane bullshit. In fact, it's often very profitable. A lot of cynical people have gotten rich broadcasting and publishing red meat for movement conservative consumption.


Unreported World on CH4 basically said this punditocracy is merely making money from hysteria.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/unreported-world/articles/preview-clip-usa-talk-radio-nation

[Fisherking]

Not trying to be rude, it just seemed as though "straining to see" was oblique-speak for "disagree."

So, do you see any significance in this election at all? Anything?


As much as they don’t want to hear it, the Republicans need to stop pandering to the religious right and some of the other tinfoil hat crowd.

A stand on individual liberties, deficit reduction, and smaller government is a good start. Most of the rest is either a lost cause or just not that important at the moment to generate much support. Lowering taxes is popular but getting the deficit and entitlements in order should be a national priority now.
If the two parties can’t find common ground to keep us afloat then we may as well just send them home and petition to join Canada or maybe the EU.

What this election has done is highlight the US voting system, and it has not been impressive, at all. Many of the laws seem to foster voter fraud and the media calling TN. Two minutes after the polls closed without exit polls and no presents reporting was not impressive from outside the country.

Hurricane Sandy also highlighted the poor state of US infrastructure. It is a good thing Obama won. At least it distracts most reports from the rest of the idiocy.

[TinCow]

I Obama's get out the vote effort was truly impressive- much better than I expected. But, it didn't translate in a significant way to the house or senate... why? I'm curious to see what explanations there are for that.

Actually, it made a big difference in the Senate. The Republicans were well placed a year ago to take control of the Senate, but instead they lost seats. Most startling was Scott Brown, who got thrown out despite having broad public approval from his constituents. He was tossed out because he was a Republican, not because he did a bad job.

In any case, the Senate is a very different creature from the House due to the nature of the constituents they represent. Senators represent the entire state and thus the entire state votes for them. As such, there is no impact from redistricting. House seats, on the other hand, are manipulated very heavily by the states (red and blue alike) to ensure that the party in-power in that state keeps as many of their state's representatives as possible. This results in very odd districts that tend to be resistant to any small or moderate demographic or political changes. Large changes in House representation require truly significant shifts in public sentiment or demographics, and that certainly wasn't present between 2010 and 2012. Minor changes will usually return a relatively static House.

[Strike For The South]

I want to repeal Obamacare

That or get a job with a large health insurance company

[Greyblades]

I want to repeal Obamacare

Why?

[Strike For The South]

Why?

Because it hand delivers 30 million young and for the most part healthy people onto insurance rolls. The same insurance companies who, make no mistake, will be crying pittance in a few years as they reap record profits

It hamstrings doctors with ridiculous stipulations

It does nothing about going from reactive to preventive care

It still caters to old people wildly

Its a watered down peice of bullshit

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Apparently 42% of voters said that Obama's response to Sandy was "important" in their vote. Please tell me that's misleading.
****
There is no such thing as a mandate. If you win you have the powers of office. If you win so strongly that people are scared to oppose you then they will compromise. If you don't they won't.

*****

Lot's of talk I've seen about how the Republicans need to "reach out" (aka pander) to latinos or minorities or women or whatever. I don't think so.

First of all that kind of pandering is cheap and doesn't work, anymore than a democrat trying to sound like a warhawk or trying to pander to evangelicals would work.

Secondly, romney won married women by a significant margin. It was single women that went for Obama. The republicans would have to start saying "marriage isn't important, welfare is better" to reach out to them.

Thirdly, a lot of minorities are enthused for obama personally, for democratic welfare type policies in general, and because of the media frenzy over trayvon martin type stories. The media regularly picks out anything any republican says that is anti one of those groups and exaggerates it. That's not going to change.

Unions went heavily to Obama. Auto bailout helps. Media gave a big assist, or as many of the pundits said last night "Romney shouldn't have let Obama define him with those dishonest Bain and "Let detroit go bankrupt" smears"--that's your job guys. Republicans would be better off weakening unions than pandering to them--and so would we all.

Young people to Obama. This is one I could actually see the republicans make a move on. There are plenty of young people who think the whole election is about weed and gay marriage. Those are two things the republicans should back off on. As far as reaching out? Well what we should do is raise the voting age and reform our college education system. But that's not going to happen.

I don't think politics is anywhere near as rational as we act like. Obama essentially won because most people think "he inherited a mess, he hasn't done a bad job, I can think of some successes, let's stick with him, I like him". People still associate the Republicans with the Bush years.

The Republicans should keep on nominating good candidates like Romney who are smart, capable, reasonable, and experienced. Voters don't really decide based on things like that but if your guy gets elected they will judge him and your party for years to come based on how he does. The last thing they should do is go for charisma, speeches that get great press, and policies that target the democratic base.

[Strike For The South]

It is impossible to rational at this level of politics

In other news, we just killed another civilian in Yemen

hope and change hope and change hope and change

[ICantSpellDawg]

Pandering works. Its what democracies are made of. You just have to do it well. Hispanics could use some pandering, there is no reason that they should feel like they only have one party to choose from.

[Papewaio]

Higher education is linked to higher wages is linked to more right votes.

Wouldn't the Republican Party be better off at raising education levels be it home, private or public across the board?

[rvg]

Higher education is linked to higher wages is linked to more right votes...

Not in America. Obama did considerably better than Romney among postgrads (i.e. people with Masters or Ph.D's). Romney did better among people with 4 year degrees.

[gaelic cowboy]

Why, yes. Why do you think the major news networks never go into detailed exposes on PACs and independent issue ads?

Because the money that gets spent is all going straight to the ad fees.


Not sure what your talking about here Gel C I understand that attack adds area nice little earner for the media but actually I was replying to how conservative echo chamber pundits are actually doing a disservice to conservatives themselves. You constantly you hear this refrain about "main stream media" when by all accounts all these fearmongers in talk radio and on tv are themselves mainstream(in the media at least).

The programme I linked to basically showed that cynical fearmongers are pretty much fooling there audience in pursuit of money.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Not in America. Obama did considerably better than Romney among postgrads (i.e. people with Masters or Ph.D's). Romney did better among people with 4 year degrees.

I should look up the statistics, but I wonder what % of 4 year degrees are for business...

[Lemur]

I think Obama's get out the vote effort was truly impressive- much better than I expected.
According to many reports surfacing today, it was not just that Team Hopey Changey had great organization. Team Romney invested time, resources and money quite badly. Here's a good collation of a lot of today's info (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/11/08/how-romney-got-out-organized-by-obama/), including the infamous Orca app (http://www.readability.com/read?url=http%3A//ace.mu.nu/archives/334783.php):

This is precisely the sort of thing that he wasn’t supposed to be outmaneuvered on. [Romney's] ideological heresies were worrisome, but the comfort in nominating him was that his campaign would be smart and efficient enough to fight Obama to a stalemate. [...]

There was, to my mind, only one qualitative argument generally made in favor of Romney: that his management experience made him uniquely qualified to be president. He was a “turn-around artist.” A “genius CEO.” Now even the claim that his private-sector ability to master organizations and rescue them was a variation on process. And it always struck me as a little dubious. For one thing, it’s not immediately clear how the skill set of the private-sector executive transfers to the job of managing the executive branch of the U.S. government. [...]

But at least this was a falsifiable claim. And the fact that Romney could not master even his own campaign organization in order to win an incredibly winnable election demonstrates—incontrovertiably—that it wasn’t true. If he was a turn-around artist, he would be president-elect right now.

[Xiahou]

According to many reports surfacing today, it was not just that Team Hopey Changey had great organization. Team Romney invested time, resources and money quite badly. Here's a good collation of a lot of today's info (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/11/08/how-romney-got-out-organized-by-obama/), including the infamous Orca app (http://www.readability.com/read?url=http%3A//ace.mu.nu/archives/334783.php)
Yeah, the tales of disorder and incompetence in the Romney campaign are beginning to trickle in it seems. It's odd that there wasn't a whisper of it until after the election. I guess the failure of ORCA ect on election night may have just made it painfully apparent.

Here's a thought... could it be that the GOP has a crop of really lousy campaign consultants out there? The McCain campaign was also an undeniable mess- how many of the same people found jobs again on the Romney campaign?

[Beskar]

I have to be honest, as I have said elsewhere, did Romney really need to appeal to the far-right social-conservatives? I mean, I put it this way. I am a "Socialist" and I feel Obama and Romney are far removed from my position, however, I would rather have Obama than Romney. Wouldn't the same logic occur for the 'far-right' base, since it is either "Anti-Christ Muslim Kenyan Obama" or "Romney", wouldn't they have naturally voted for Romney regardless?

[classical_hero]

ACA (Obamacare) will not be repealed. And no population in any nation has ever repealed universal health care once enacted.



So the status quo in 2012 is remarkably different from the status quo in 2008 or 2010.

If you say that the Affordable Care Act is Universal Healthcare then I feel sorry for you, since it is basically allowing the insurance industry far great stranglehold on the American healthcare system, which is not very cost effective.

[Xiahou]

Its a lot simpler than that. The GOP campaigns, from the primary races all the way through until the election, was held hostage to Super PACs and Independant Expenditure-funded Issue Ads. Romney was never able to tell the world what his policy was, because Karl Rove, Fox News, and all the other residents of the echo-chamber were making it for him. I'm sure his own personal campaign advisors were telling him "Look, all this money is coming from the far-right social conservative base--you have to appeal to them!" Hence Ryan.

Obama had the distinct advantage of being able to run his own campaign.

Had Romney come out stronger on his own from the start, forging his own way as a viable candidate and running his own issue ads instead of relying on third-party groups to do it for him (and thus hijack the issues) he may well have reached a much broader base. But by that same token, he never would have won the Republican primary, which was basically a "Who can be the biggest reactionary dickhead?" contest.That's neither simpler, nor explains why Romney's ground game was so disorganized. Project Orca is reported to be a complete disaster (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/08/Orca-How-the-Romney-Campaign-Suppressed-Its-Own-Vote)- you can't explain that by claiming they pandered to the right.


I worked on the Colorado team, and we were called by hundreds (or more) volunteers who couldn't use the app or the backup phone system. The usernames and passwords were wrong, but the reset password tool didn't work, and we couldn't change phone PINs. We were told the problems were limited and asked to project confidence, have people use pencil and paper, and try to submit again later.

Then at 6PM they admitted they had issued the wrong PINs to every volunteer in Colorado, and reissued new PINs (which also didn't work). Meanwhile, counties where we had hundreds of volunteers, such as Denver Colorado, showed zero volunteers in the system all day, but we weren't allowed to add them. In one area, the head of the Republican Party plus 10 volunteers were all locked out. The system went down for a half hour during peak voting, but for hundreds or more, it never worked all day. Many of the poll watchers I spoke with were very discouraged. Many members of our phone bank got up and left.

I do not know if the system was totally broken, or if I just saw the worst of it. But I wonder, because they told us all day that most volunteers were submitting just fine, yet admitted at the end that all of Colorado had the wrong PIN's. They also said the system projected every swing state as pink or red.

[Major Robert Dump]

Man whats with the wolves turning on Gov Christie? I don't particulalry care for the guy, but I hated this when Dems did it to Lieberman and I don't like them doing it to Christie, either. Are people really this stupidly partisan? Get over yourselves and your opinions FFS

[Lemur]

I kinda like the idea of pundit shaming (http://punditshaming.tumblr.com/). Especially since these on-air talking heads seem to pay no price for being wrong. Ever.

[Lemur]

And Florida is still finding ballots, eight days after the fact. Epic corruption or chronic incompetence (http://wonkette.com/489823/broward-county-once-again-sucks-at-life-finds-963-ballots-in-some-warehouse)?

The supervisor of elections, Dr. Brenda Snipes, said this happens all the time, especially when dealing with paper ballots… Snipes noted that it is a routine thing to look for these kind of mishaps after election night and she is just glad that they are now being tallied into that final count. [...]

Snipes said there is no reason for alarm.

“I’ve run several elections here, and this election was run no different than any other,” she said.
https://i.imgur.com/DHSJn.jpg

[Xiahou]

Explain to me again how paper ballots are superior to electronic ones?

[Lemur]

Obviously incompetence (and/or corruption) trumps all. But at least a paper ballot can be re-counted, as should be obvious.

And God hates Florida.

[Hooahguy]

Not really relevant but I love this gif of Obama:
https://i.imgur.com/yUNVY.gif

[Lemur]

Son, didn't your mama tell you that you can embed GIFs in the board? Weren't you raised right?

https://i.imgur.com/yUNVY.gif

[Hooahguy]

Probably not.

:shame:

[Lemur]

Son, I am disappoint. Now worship my sparkles.

https://i.imgur.com/nP8uG.gif

[Memnon]

Son, I am disappoint. Now worship my sparkles.

https://i.imgur.com/nP8uG.gif

:on_gwow:

[el_slapper]

here is not the right question. Ask to a forum of computer programmers. They'll all make the same answer : it may be easy to cheat with paper, but cheating is also easy to spot. It's harder to cheat with a machine, but the cheat is impossible to spot. A creative code can pass through all tests, and, the very day of the election, activate a secondary code that cleverly modifies the results. I can do it in less than a week - if I take time to make it really stealth.