• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

US PoliGAF 2012 | The Romney VeepStakes: Waiting for Chris Christie to Sing…

Status
Not open for further replies.
We can actually make this happen. It wouldn't be an official Obama campaign ad, but we could make this video and put it on youtube.

If you're interested in putting something like that together, PM me.

Well, I don't like to brag, but I think I know a thing or two about editing. Just need people to submit their ideas (will contribute too, of course) and I'll get to cuttin and splicin and the like.


Wow.
 
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?

The sad thing is that there isn't few jobs, there's actually lots of jobs out there. The problem is that the jobs available are high tech or highly specialized and the average American with a high school diploma lacks the skills to get them.

I also fully expect the food stamp thing to get drudged up over and over again. Pat Buchanan's racist pamphlet he just got published is pretty much the mindset of many people in the South and Middle America who think "the brown horde" is taking over the country.
 
Couple recent graphs that illustrate why China is not the enemy and our trade imbalance is not as bad as you think.


Here’s the paper’s estimates of the share of personal consumption expenditure (PCE) spent on imports in general and imports from China

011612krugman1-blog480.jpg


So we’re still a country where about 85 cents of your consumer dollar is spent at home, one way or another. And this means, among other things, that the rules of macroeconomics haven’t changed nearly as much as people imagine.
Krugman

--- /// ---

china.jpg


As much as we continually hear about China's currency manipulation to artificially increase its exports to the U.S., the chart above shows something very interesting. When: a) monthly U.S. exports to China, and b) monthly imports from China, are both normalized to equal 100 in January 2005, we can see that U.S. exports to China have actually grown much faster (about 21% per year) than imports from China (about 11% per year). Over the 7-year period from January 2005 to November 2011, U.S. exports to China have increased almost four times while imports from China have only doubled.

Another way to describe the trend: in 2005, there were about $6 of imports from China for every $1 of exports to China, and by 2011 the ratio of Chinese imports-to-U.S. exports to China had fallen to less than 4. Conversely, the ratio of U.S. exports-to-Chinese imports has risen from 17% to 26% since 2005.
Perry


Something to keep in mind, if Romney starts throwing out the Chinese fearmongering in the GE.
 
Couple recent graphs that illustrate why China is not the enemy and our trade imbalance is not as bad as you think.
4 months old article from WSJ:

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2011/08/10/made-in-china-taking-over-u-s-not-by-a-long-shot/

“On average, of every dollar spent on an item labeled ‘Made in China,’ 55 cents go for services produced in the U.S.,” Ms. Hale and Mr. Hobijn write. “In other words, the U.S. content of ‘Made in China’ is about 55%. The fact that the U.S. content of Chinese goods is much higher than for imports as a whole is mainly due to higher retail and wholesale margins on consumer electronics and clothing than on most other goods and services.”

What does it all mean? There’s good news and there’s bad news. The good news is that the China threat that looms so large in U.S. political debate is overstated. China’s exports as a share of U.S. consumption might have grown quickly, but they are still a small fraction of the total. U.S. workers and companies are also taking a fair chunk of change from the process.

But what's the point? Blaming everything on China is a fashion both on the internet and in your government. Perfect excuse to explain why the US economy is going down the south to joe American without compromising all the inside jobs from wall street invest banks.
 
My favorite part of the debate (paraphrased):

Newt: Mitt, you have no control of your super PAC! What terrible leadership skills for a possible president, am I right? * crowd goes nuts *

Mitt: You do realize that contacting/interacting with/leading a super PAC is against federal law, right?

Newt: *sheepishly* Yes.

* tepid applause *
 

Yeah, pretty ridiculous. I had this to say about it when it actually happened:

Ron Paul: "Perhaps we should apply to the Golden Rule to other countries. Don't do to other countries what we wouldn't want them to do to us."

Crowd: "FUCK THAT NOISE"

Edit:

I was catching up on last night's Rachel Maddow when she highlight this pro-union ad from a group called the Lunchpail Republicans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCxlc0XNVEQ

The Carmina Burana music had me rolling.
 
Just a question about the Health Care law.

Is there any progress on the states that wanted to institute a single payer system in their state? I think I heard Vermont and maybe NY?

Also what did this law do that made this even possible to start discussing?
 
I caught about 30min of the debate last night. Good stuff. I thought Romney did about the minimum he needed to do to stay on top. Gingrich is a skilled debator, and would be a perfect attack dog as a VP pick. And Paul was just the same old irrelevant Paul. :lol

Also, it still amazes me how the "Christian" party in AMerica is eager to cut domestic social service programs, but God forbid one cent of the Defense budget gets cut. It's as if they don't read, or understand, the Bible they claim to live by.



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.

eh, Williams just enjoys the big paychecks FNC cuts him. All he has to do is be the liberal punching bag, rarely ever argue for the Left's position on an issue. It's an easy paycheck.
 
Hey, what's your opinion on Michelle Obama "buying" Lysol wipes?

If nothing else, I am so glad you will think of Michelle Obama and me every time you see Lysol wipes in the store, LOL

In other news, Facebook is selling your "private" data to Politico (and surely the campaigns):

Counting Twitter mentions would have you believe that Ron Paul is the most popular Republican candidate in the ongoing U.S. primaries. Umm, right.

But some social media analysis of politics is going beyond that. A partnership between Facebook and Politico announced today is one of the more far-reaching efforts. It will consist of sentiment analysis reports and voting-age user surveys, accompanied by stories by Politico reporters.

Most notably, the Facebook-Politico data set will include Facebook users’ private status messages and comments. While that may alarm some people, Facebook and Politico say the entire process is automated and no Facebook employees read the posts.
Rather, every post and comment — both public and private — by a U.S. user that mentions a presidential candidate’s name will be fed through a sentiment analysis tool that spits out anonymized measures of the general U.S. Facebook population.
This is similar to the way Google offers reports on search trends based on its users’ aggregate search activities.

Sentiment analysis.
 
Johnathan Cohn is up with a piece detailing that Romney's tax plan will require deeper cuts than the Ryan plan.

Via Fact Checker, Romney is back with +100K jobs claim. From his latest ad in SC claiming he created "thousands of jobs," now he says he's created over 120K, including jobs created after he left Bain.
 
I caught about 30min of the debate last night. Good stuff. I thought Romney did about the minimum he needed to do to stay on top. Gingrich is a skilled debator, and would be a perfect attack dog as a VP pick. And Paul was just the same old irrelevant Paul. :lol

Also, it still amazes me how the "Christian" party in AMerica is eager to cut domestic social service programs, but God forbid one cent of the Defense budget gets cut. It's as if they don't read, or understand, the Bible they claim to live by.


Jesus loves Cruise missiles!
 
First read on manufacturing this year. Expectations was for a reading of 10.5, it came in at 13.5 (above 0 means expansion). The details are particularly encouraging:

The Empire State Manufacturing Survey indicates that manufacturing activity expanded in New York State in January. The general business conditions index climbed five points to 13.5. The new orders index rose eight points to 13.7 and the shipments index inched up to 21.7. ... Future indexes conveyed a high degree of optimism about the six-month outlook, with the future general business conditions index rising nine points to 54.9, its highest level since January 2011.

On employment:

Employment indexes were positive and higher, pointing to higher employment levels [12.1 up from 2.3] and a longer average workweek [6.6 up from -2.3]. ... On a series of supplementary survey questions, 51 percent of respondents indicated that they expect their workforces to increase over the next six to twelve months, while just 9 percent predicted declines in the total number of workers—results noticeably more positive than in the June 2011 survey.​
 
The Media False Equivalency and stupidness continues (of course it is POLITICO):

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71511.html

Partisan DC Still? Obama's fault.

I think he pretty much blew that chance out of the water when he started his Presidency by saying "I won. I don't have to take your ideas" and similar rhetoric.

I'm not saying partisanship in Washington is in any way his fault, but he certainly has not done much to really try to move things to be post-partisan. I don't even think that Washington is that much more partisan than it has ever been, but there is 1000X the coverage of every little piece of minutiae that goes on.
 
On the final night of this year's Democratic National Convention, President Obama will deliver his acceptance speech at Bank of America stadium, the Charlotte Observer reports.

Fitting?

Get them swing state votes!
 
I think he pretty much blew that chance out of the water when he started his Presidency by saying "I won. I don't have to take your ideas" and similar rhetoric.

I'm not saying partisanship in Washington is in any way his fault, but he certainly has not done much to really try to move things to be post-partisan. I don't even think that Washington is that much more partisan than it has ever been, but there is 1000X the coverage of every little piece of minutiae that goes on.

I know it's absolutely meaningless to respond to you, but Obama tried numerous times to court Republican votes on his biggest ticket items – the stimulus, the health care bill, and Wall Street reform – but his hand was slapped away each time.

Especially health care reform. It's the largely the Republican plan adopted by Congressional Republicans in response to what Clinton was proposing.

How many Republican votes did it receive? 0. The basis of his presidency was to be post-partisan, and he tried numerous times, up until the debt ceiling deal blew up in his face. Just because you refuse to acknowledge what he has tried to do, does not mean it hasn't happened.
 
Fitting?

Get them swing state votes!

That should be interesting and risky as fuck if he doesn't fill it with 72,000 "fans".

I know it's absolutely meaningless to respond to you, but Obama tried numerous times to court Republican votes on his biggest ticket items – the stimulus, the health care bill, and Wall Street reform – but his hand was slapped away each time.

Especially health care reform. It's the largely the Republican plan adopted by Congressional Republicans in response to what Clinton was proposing.

How many Republican votes did it receive? 0. The basis of his presidency was to be post-partisan, and he tried numerous times, up until the debt ceiling deal blew up in his face. Just because you refuse to acknowledge what he has tried to do, does not mean it hasn't happened.

I don't deny that he tried to get Republicans on board with HIS plan, but true post-partisanship is also adopting ideas from the other side. Shit, it would be easy if all you had to do was get people to agree to YOUR ideas. What did he say when Republicans made proposals?

"Republicans had been driving the car for eight years. It went into the ditch. And now that Democrats have dug the car out., the Republicans want back the keys."

The more gridlock, the better, IMO. The less Congress does, the better off we are.
 
I think he pretty much blew that chance out of the water when he started his Presidency by saying "I won. I don't have to take your ideas" and similar rhetoric.

Your divergence from reality continues to be remarkable. Obama's adoption of GOP ideas have been legion - and they rejected them as soon as Obama embraced them.
 
Obama's election year budget going to piss off the troops?

Top White House officials are warning liberal and labor leaders to brace themselves for President Obama’s budget proposal.

Gene Sperling, director of the National Economic Council, sought in meetings last week to lift the left’s gloom about Washington’s crackdown on spending by promising that the president this year will focus on job creation rather than deficit cutting.


Obama staffers sought to present their budget plan as a glass half full. According to sources familiar with the briefings, they promised that the president will focus on jobs and the economy, instead of deficit-cutting, which dominated last year’s debate on Capitol Hill.

Obama has signaled in recent weeks that he plans to run a populist reelection campaign. He will need to keep liberal activist and labor groups — important parts of the Democratic base — energized for his strategy to work.

In his first three years, Obama had a free hand to suggest spending levels for government programs in his annual budget blueprint. But that is not the case this year because the administration is constrained by the budget deal reached in August to raise the debt limit.

He must stick to the $1.047 trillion spending cap he agreed to with GOP leaders, which means he will call for less discretionary spending than he did last year.

Senior administration officials fear a backlash from the left and are trying to prepare their allies to expect a disappointing budget, sources say.

“A senior White House person said we weren’t going to be happy with the budget, but they’re doing the best they can” given the spending caps set by the 2011 Budget Control Act, said one source
.



http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/204435-obama-warns-left-you-will-not-like-my-budget
 
I think he pretty much blew that chance out of the water when he started his Presidency by saying "I won. I don't have to take your ideas" and similar rhetoric.

Assuming you are sincerely this interested in politics and remotely intelligent, to get even the basics wrong to this extent just has to be intentional.
 
I don't deny that he tried to get Republicans on board with HIS plan, but true post-partisanship is also adopting ideas from the other side. Shit, it would be easy if all you had to do was get people to agree to YOUR ideas. What did he say when Republicans made proposals?
Do you mean...?








Wait for it...










Wait for it...












Wait for it...













The individual mandate?!


Woohoo!
 
Assuming you are sincerely this interested in politics and remotely intelligent, to get even the basics wrong to this extent just has to be intentional.

Nah. Just the result of watching Fox News and listening to right wing radio. It's unfortunately persuasive bullshit.

I remember when I was younger I had a job that involved lots and lots of driving. And my co-worker always wanted to listen to Rush and Hannity and all that horseshit. I got pretty conservative for a while (I didn't know anything at all about politics before then) until I finally bothered to look up what they were saying. And even after I knew almost everything they were saying was bullshit, their demonization of liberals was so firmly rooted in me that I didn't shake it for a while.
 
My favorite part of the debate (paraphrased):

Newt: Mitt, you have no control of your super PAC! What terrible leadership skills for a possible president, am I right? * crowd goes nuts *

Mitt: You do realize that contacting/interacting with/leading a super PAC is against federal law, right?

Newt: *sheepishly* Yes.

* tepid applause *

I gotta see this
 
So I guess other countries do pay some sort of attention to these horror shows we call the republican debates:

Turkish Foreign Ministry condemns Perry's remarks
The Turkish Foreign Ministry released a statement that "condemned" the remarks of the U.S. Republican presidential candidate.

"It is expected of people aiming for a responsible position like the United States presidency to know more about the world and to be careful about what they say," the statement read. "Turkey became a member of NATO when the governor was 2 years old. Turkey is an important member who has contributed immensely to the Transatlantic Organization's struggle and shall remain as one."

The statement also described the Turkish political leadership as "globally respected."

"It's been shown by the low support he received ahead of the presidential race that Perry's unfortunate remarks are not taken on by the Republican voters," the statement ended by saying. "The United States has no time to lose for names who fail its allies."


Mitt reluctantly reveals his effective tax rate: 15%.

I am frankly surprised. I never expected it to be that low!
 
Mitt reluctantly reveals his effective tax rate: 15%.

This is ridiculous. I don't understand why this is news. Obama himself claimed to pay less tax than a teacher.

Obama, Sept. 26: "I shouldn’t be paying a lower effective rate than a teacher, or a firefighter, or a construction worker. And they sure shouldn’t be paying a higher tax rate than somebody pulling in $50 million a year. It’s not fair, and it’s not right. And it’s got to change."

A single taxpayer with $50,000 of income would have paid 11.9 percent in federal income taxes for 2010.
 
1) You're wrong, (effective rate of 26%)

and 2) do people not understand how counterfactual statements work?

Then does he just lie about how much tax he's paying, because this sure doesn't sound like a counterfactual to me:

Obama, Sept. 26: "Somebody who’s making $50,000 a year as a teacher shouldn’t be paying a higher effective tax rate than somebody like myself or Jeff [Weiner, CEO of Linkdin], who’ve been incredibly blessed."
 
This is ridiculous. I don't understand why this is news. Obama himself claimed to pay less tax than a teacher.

Oh yeah. Let's ignore that one of them is trying to change the tax code so someone as wealthy as Mitt doesn't pay the same tax rate as a teacher (Buffet rule) while the other wants to exacerbate the problem further.

Nope! Same thing.
 
Oh yeah. Let's ignore that one of them is trying to change the tax code so someone as wealthy as Mitt doesn't pay the same tax rate as a teacher while the other wants to exacerbate the problem further.

Nope! Same thing.

Actually one of them has squandered any real chance of changing the tax brackets while he was President and is now finally speaking out against it, while extending the $858 billion Bush tax cuts.
 
This is ridiculous. I don't understand why this is news. Obama himself claimed to pay less tax than a teacher.



A single taxpayer with $50,000 of income would have paid 11.9 percent in federal income taxes for 2010.

It's news because he wants to lower that even further, Obama wants to raise taxes on rich people like himself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom