Support NeoGAF

[SolKane]

I think the vote Cain thing is smart for Colbert. He can actually tell how influentional he is since there is no write in in SC.

But how does he tell the joke votes from the serious ones?

 

[teh_pwn]

Even though I like Paul on a lot of issues, his performance was weak. Partly because he seemed tired, but also because the audience was extreme.

Otherwise the debate was all over the place if I try to imagine the reaction of SC voters. Thought Newt and Santorum appealed to them well.

 

[Puddles]

Fact or fiction: if the U.S. workforce were heavily unionized, we would have lost far fewer jobs in the recession.

My theory: many businesses could have easily survived without workforce cuts, but used the recession as leverage to get the same production out of fewer employees. Had those workforces been unionized, the employees could have prevented unnecessary cuts by threatening to strike.

 

[WowBaby]

South Carolina Republicans don't like black people...or mexicans.

 

[bodyofanamerican]

You don't understand. He's playing the long game. /Sullivan

I'm like 3 pages late but this made me chuckle. Sullivan's right btw

 

[Kosmo]

Fact or fiction: if the U.S. workforce were heavily unionized, we would have lost far fewer jobs in the recession.

My theory: many businesses could have easily survived without workforce cuts, but used the recession as leverage to get the same production out of fewer employees. Had those workforces been unionized, the employees could have prevented unnecessary cuts by threatening to strike.

Hence the problem with unions...

 

[The Librarian]

I probably shouldn't have said that, but I really took offense to being told, by someone ten years my junior, who was just spouting massively ignorant shit that I need to learn how the real world works? He can call me an idiot and all that all he wants, but to tell me I need more life experience? That just grinds my fucking gears.

I'm not saying you're on the wrong side here or anything, just that you were a touch out of line by dismissing him because of his age.

Confession time! The main reason why I hopped back into PoliGAF was because I saw people repeatedly dismissing Starwolf because of his age, as if being 19 somehow precludes someone from knowing more than next-to-nothing. I hope I'm doing a good job making people consider otherwise!

 

[timetokill]

Paul will never do well with the FoxNews Republicans

 

[el retorno]

But how does he tell the joke votes from the serious ones?

They're all jokes

 

[Plinko]

South Carolina Republicans don't like black people...or mexicans.

Or sanity.

Gingrich is going to win SC now. His nutty stances played right into the far-right SC crowd.

 

[Joel Was Right]

 

[teh_pwn]

Eh, I'd say Paul supporters were very organized in responding to that.

 

[Plinko]

I can see how Newt would appeal to those who don't bother to think or research anything. His answers sound great. His one-liners are zippy.

But anybody who spent 5 seconds thinking about how bad the economy was today would realize, "Oh, wait, THAT'S why food stamps are at a record high."

Anybody who spent 5 seconds thinking about how Chile's economy has absolutely no comparison to the American economy (stock markets, durable goods, Chile not having a MASSIVE defense budget, etc) would realize, "Oh, wait, that comparison makes no sense at all."

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Resize that shit yesterday.

I'm like 3 pages late but this made me chuckle. Sullivan's right btw

I don't think so, but in any case, Sullivan's argument isn't material here. Providing additional powers to the executive branch, even if the current president says he won't use them is not the direction I want to be moving in.

I can see how Newt would appeal to those who don't bother to think or research anything. His answers sound great. His one-liners are zippy.

But anybody who spent 5 seconds thinking about how bad the economy was today would realize, "Oh, wait, THAT'S why food stamps are at a record high."

Anybody who spent 5 seconds thinking about how Chile's economy has absolutely no comparison to the American economy (stock markets, durable goods, Chile not having a MASSIVE defense budget, etc) would realize, "Oh, wait, that comparison makes no sense at all."

As I said to the last guy who made a good point:

Are you thinking critically about assertions at a Republican debate?

Come on, son.

 

[Plinko]

Those pictures really do justice to how bad Romney appeals to the SC nutball crowd. He should just pack it up and move on to Florida now. He may still win SC but Gingrich is going to be right up there.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Fact or fiction: if the U.S. workforce were heavily unionized, we would have lost far fewer jobs in the recession.

My theory: many businesses could have easily survived without workforce cuts, but used the recession as leverage to get the same production out of fewer employees. Had those workforces been unionized, the employees could have prevented unnecessary cuts by threatening to strike.

Or you could, like, you know, take a gander at what Germany did.

 

[Admiral Bone to Pick]

Those pictures really do justice to how bad Romney appeals to the SC nutball crowd. He should just pack it up and move on to Florida now. He may still win SC but Gingrich is going to be right up there.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Romney do a near clean sweep considering just how bad the Republican field is this election.

 

[The Librarian]

Watch: Romney's evolving issues on campaign finance: http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/11/video-mitt-romney-campaign-finance-flip-flop

 

[Al-ibn Kermit]

Does anyone think this debate bumped Romney out of the frontrunner status in S.C.? Who's in front now?

I don't think he got bumped out of first place, but if he did then maybe Santorum. I think all the candidates had a net loss of voters in this debate.

 

[Puddles]

Hence the problem with unions...

http://20somethingfinance.com/american-hours-worked-productivity-vacation/

At least 134 countries have laws setting the maximum length of the work week; the U.S. does not.
In the U.S., 85.8 percent of males and 66.5 percent of females work more than 40 hours per week.
According to the ILO, “Americans work 137 more hours per year than Japanese workers, 260 more hours per year than British workers, and 499 more hours per year than French workers.”
Using data by the U.S. BLS, the average productivity per American worker has increased 400% since 1950. One way to look at that is that it should only take one-quarter the work hours, or 11 hours per week, to afford the same standard of living as a worker in 1950 (or our standard of living should be 4 times higher). Is that the case? Obviously not. Someone is profiting, it’s just not the average American worker.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38453333/ns/business-careers/t/overworked-underpaid-relieved/#.TxTztaWm-Ts

The shoddy economy is leaving many workers feeling overworked, underpaid — and yet relieved to be employed at all.

“Fewer workers are doing more and more,” said Brett Good, a district president with staffing firm Robert Half, which has surveyed workers on this topic. “You’ve got a lot of people that are working harder, making less money — and you’re getting to a point of frustration.”

Employers have cut millions of jobs since the recession began in December 2007, driven by a drop in business and a desire to shore up costs and boost profits. Although the cost-cutting has helped propel a spate of strong earnings in recent weeks, pleasing Wall Street, it has left those who are still employed struggling to pick up the slack.

Fifty-six percent of Americans have taken on extra duties at work over the past two years because of staff cuts, according to insurer MetLife’s Study of the American Dream, which was conducted in April and released last week.

We could create a lot of jobs in one day by cracking down on this kind of abuse.

 

[speculawyer]

South Carolina Republicans don't like black people...or mexicans.

And especially black people with Mexican names.

 

[bodyofanamerican]

Resize that shit yesterday.


I don't think so, but in any case, Sullivan's argument isn't material here. Providing additional powers to the executive branch, even if the current president says he won't use them is not the direction I want to be moving in.

Totally agreed and no offense meant. I unfortunately have no defense for the any of the expansion of executive powers Obama has signed into law. As Stewart said "oh well, thats ok because Obama will be president forever, right?"

Sigh.

One other thing and I know this is ridiculous but...does Gingrich's obvious resonance with southern red meat voters give him any credence as a VP candidate?

 

[Kosmo]

http://20somethingfinance.com/american-hours-worked-productivity-vacation/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38453333/ns/business-careers/t/overworked-underpaid-relieved/#.TxTztaWm-Ts

We could create a lot of jobs in one day by cracking down on this kind of abuse.

We could also take care of all these "problems" by going back to a paper based society and forgoing much of the technology we've developed in the last 60 years. We would need to employ far more people to get the same level of productivity technology has afforded us.

 

[Puddles]

We could also take care of all these "problems" by going back to a paper based society and forgoing much of the technology we've developed in the last 60 years.

Are non-sequiturs your default MO at this point?

I'm not talking about people being put out of work because of new software. I'm talking about people being put out of work because their co-workers assumed all of their responsibilities and are now putting in 60 hour weeks. And these co-workers put up with it because they'll be sacked if they complain, plus there's nothing better out there.

 

[Kosmo]

Are non-sequiturs your default MO at this point?

How else would we take care of this problem:

the average productivity per American worker has increased 400% since 1950. One way to look at that is that it should only take one-quarter the work hours, or 11 hours per week, to afford the same standard of living as a worker in 1950 (or our standard of living should be 4 times higher). Is that the case? Obviously not. Someone is profiting, it’s just not the average American worker.

I would hardly say that the American worker is working "harder" today than they were in 1950 to reach that 400% increase in productivity.

 

[Oblivion]

Didn't see the debate. Heard this crowd was pretty douchey?

 

[Puddles]

I'm not talking about productivity gains due to technology. I'm talking about this:

Fifty-six percent of Americans have taken on extra duties at work over the past two years because of staff cuts, according to insurer MetLife’s Study of the American Dream, which was conducted in April and released last week.

 

[vas_a_morir]

I watched for a bit.

I heard 'Christians' booing something Jesus said.

I turned the channel.

 

[Dude Abides]

Man that audience was ugly. They seemed to still be aggrieved over Fort Sumter.

 

[Kosmo]

I'm not talking about productivity gains due to technology. I'm talking about this:

Companies were overstaffed? That is such a generalized metric it's not even worth discussing. When companies are forced to continue to pay employees that are not needed, we get things like the UAW "Jobs bank."

 

[Puddles]

Companies were overstaffed? That is such a generalized metric it's not even worth discussing. When companies are forced to continue to pay employees that are not needed, we get things like the UAW "Jobs bank."

Did you overlook the fact that 86% of male workers and 66% of female workers are putting in more than 40 hours a week (obviously counting only full-time workers)?

For the most part, they weren't overstaffed. They're currently understaffed. They can get away with it because their employees are just happy to have jobs. They'll keep their mouths shut, bend over and put in unpaid overtime just to stay on the payroll.

A business that tried this in a normal economy would lose its talent pretty quickly.

 

[Joel Was Right]

nm

 

[Kosmo]

Did you overlook the fact that 86% of male workers and 66% of female workers are putting in more than 40 hours a week?

For the most part, they weren't overstaffed. They're currently understaffed. They can get away with it because their employees are just happy to have jobs. They'll keep their mouths shut, bend over and put in unpaid overtime just to stay on the payroll.

A business that tried this in a normal economy would lose its talent pretty quickly.

1) These are likely not unionizable jobs, as they are probably salaried employees.
2) I haven't met a union member who doesn't love overtime - which is why they try to bargain for overtime starting at 8 hours during a single day, instead of 40 for the week.
3) It's illegal in the US to not pay overtime after 40 hours, according to the Fair Labor Standards Act, for hourly employees.

 

[rohlfinator]

1) These are likely not unionizable jobs, as they are probably salaried employees.

86% of male workers and 66% of female workers are salaried? Eh?

 

[Puddles]

Too many jobs are salaried.

 

[Kosmo]

Too many jobs are salaried.

Most people making a salary don't want to be monitored like an hourly employee.

 

[Puddles]

Most people making a salary don't want to be monitored like an hourly employee.

What exactly is your angle with this argument?

There's hard evidence for the fact that many businesses have used the recession as leverage to overwork their employees.

We have data showing that business profits have returned to or exceeded their pre-recession levels.

We need millions more jobs in this country.

This seems to add up to a picture of great potential for job creation if we cracked down on employer abuses.

But you're contending that those businesses were just overstaffed and the employees underworked prior to the recession? How did that happen? Doesn't the free market prevent things like that?

 

[Particle Physicist]

Is the audience drunk or on laugh tracks? They're cheering the same for everything.

The audience is just there for a good show

 

[Joel Was Right]

Hannity asked Juan why the foodstamps point was racially insensitive and what he thought about the crowds response to his question. Juan completely ignored that last question and instead championed the debate as "the best" so far.

 

[speculawyer]

Hannity asked Juan why the foodstamps point was racially insensitive and what he thought about the crowds response to his question. Juan completely ignored that last question and instead championed the debate as "the best" so far.

Have you seen the clip from the debate? You need to see that.

 

[Puddles]

Have you seen the clip from the debate? You need to see that.

Link to clip?

 

[PhoenixDark]

Hannity asked Juan why the foodstamps point was racially insensitive and what he thought about the crowds response to his question. Juan completely ignored that last question and instead championed the debate as "the best" so far.

I'm shocked Juan didn't make the obvious points: more whites use food stamps than blacks, and a challenge on the point that blacks are not already "demanding" jobs over food stamps. Some people legitimately need food stamps, and they provide stimulus to the economy. But it's ridiculous to insinuate most black people would rather use food stamps than get a job. Especially when arguing at the same time that there are few jobs because of Obama's Economy. If people can't find jobs what are they supposed to do?

 

[Byakuya769]

I'm shocked Juan didn't make the obvious points: more whites use food stamps than blacks, and a challenge on the point that blacks are not already "demanding" jobs over food stamps. Some people legitimately need food stamps, and they provide stimulus to the economy. But it's ridiculous to insinuate most black people would rather use food stamps than get a job. Especially when arguing at the same time that there are few jobs because of Obama's Economy. If people can't find jobs what are they supposed to do?

Why, though?

 

[PhoenixDark]

Why, though?

He clearly enjoys being the semi-liberal guy on Fox News, but he's still a journalist and serious commentator. Some of the questions he asked were pretty good, I just felt the food stamp one deserved better context.

 

[sc0la]

Yeah, Newt, why don't those people who are on unemployment for 99 weeks just go get an associates degree!

I feel my intelligence going down the tubes the longer I watch these debates....

Good time to point out again that being on unemployment prevents you from taking classes during normal business hours.

You aren't getting an AA anytime soon on night and weekend classes only. But they should just bootstrap harder right gingrich?

 

[Suikoguy]

But you're contending that those businesses were just overstaffed and the employees underworked prior to the recession? How did that happen? Doesn't the free market prevent things like that?

The free market would cause all of the jobs to move to China and India.
But, it would also cause less consumption in the US due to decreased consumer income...

 

[Ixzion]

I thought it was amazing to see a crowd full of Christians boo The Golden Rule, which is attributed to Jesus Christ himself, when Ron Paul brought it up.

 

[jamesinclair]

So Ive just thought of the perfect ad....

During the debate, there was a bit where Newt was attacking Romney for the PAC lying ads. I think Romney came off really bad, as he looked remarkably insincere when he said "not my problem, I cant control it".

Newt got off a great close with "he cant control his own ads and you want him as president?"

So its time to exploit that

Well imagine the next PAC ad in South Carolina

Context: 27.9% Black state
Context: Crazy right nutjobs in audience



----


Ad begins in scary format. Black and white, ominous music, serious announcer etc


"If Newt Gringich had his way, american society would return to the day of race riots"
*show Newt smiling and then flash to angry black men setting fires and such, historical imagery*
*lightening*
"If Barack Obama remains president, we will become a society where all it takes to succeed, is to not be white"
*show white unemployed people, show minorities using an express lane to get jobs or whatever*
-ad switches to positive mode, full color, happy announcer etc-
"But not if you pick Mtt Romney"
*romney smiling, waving, flags blowing etc*
"Romney likes things just as they are today, where minorities are treated fair, but not too fair"
*show minority woman smiling as she passes over a mcdonalds meal to a white businessman*
"Vote Mitt Romney, for an equal, positive america"


----

Who loses?

Newt: he supports race riots for petes sake

Romney: Doesnt matter how many times he says hes not involved, hes so slimy that people wont believe him, the ad is pro romney after all. And its racist.

The GOP: Did you see those insanely racist ads theyre running? Whod vote for THAT party? Vote for Cain in the primary!

PACs: Suddenly it would be very hard to support them



It would be wonderful.

 

[Byakuya769]

I thought it was amazing to see a crowd full of Christians boo The Golden Rule, which is attributed to Jesus Christ himself, when Ron Paul brought it up.

He brought it up in a very stupid context though.

 

[Chumly]

What exactly is your angle with this argument?

There's hard evidence for the fact that many businesses have used the recession as leverage to overwork their employees.

We have data showing that business profits have returned to or exceeded their pre-recession levels.

We need millions more jobs in this country.

This seems to add up to a picture of great potential for job creation if we cracked down on employer abuses.

But you're contending that those businesses were just overstaffed and the employees underworked prior to the recession? How did that happen? Doesn't the free market prevent things like that?

Its called the Kosmo wormhole. Its always the evil unions fault. No matter what!