Support NeoGAF

[empty vessel]

The truth is, in this current paradigm of polarized politics, moderates ARE a dirty word. They are seen as weak and easily manipulated (when the opposite is actually true) and a roadblock to party unity. You look at the comments liberals make about Blue Dogs and it's the EXACT SAME verbiage you would see coming from Rush Limbaugh when he talks about moderate Republicans.

That's funny, I consider myself a moderate. I think of you as one of those extremists situated between the Republican and Democratic parties.

 

[timetokill]

That's funny, I consider myself a moderate. I think of you as one of those extremists situated between the Republican and Democratic parties.

ha! I would be interested to know how many consider you a moderate.

That said, I think most people consider themselves to be moderate, and others to be extreme.

 

[RustyNails]

empty vessel is actually Hugo Chavez

 

[PantherLotus]

Empty Vessel leans moderate-left on the worldwide scale, which means he's a socialist communist zombie gay heathen.

 

[TacticalFox88]

That's funny, I consider myself a moderate. I think of you as one of those extremists situated between the Republican and Democratic parties.

Wait, I thought you referred to yourself as a socialist?

 

[ToxicAdam]

What exactly ARE you conservative about anyhow?

I think the bare minimum would be state rights and a limited role of the federal government. Off of that, you can have a hodge podge of different isses/ideas that can create different sects of conservatism.

Well, then I will defer to you as leader of Moderate GAF! Didn't mean to give you a label you don't want. I was more just whining about my lack of impact in these threads lol.

I don't mind the label. If you view this thread as a political scale, anyone with a center-right proclivity is going to be considered 'conservative' in comparison.

That's funny, I consider myself a moderate. I think of you as one of those extremists situated between the Republican and Democratic parties.

I know, I get it. American politics are center-right. ::jerkoff motion:: Get some new material, it's so fucking tired.

 

[Snake]

After placing 170th in posts last thread, I plan to break the top 50 this time!

Wait, I thought you referred to yourself as a socialist?

Well, social democracy can be a moderate position between free market capitalism and marxism-leninism, and in some contexts can be center-right (just not in American politics).

 

[Dude Abides]

Huntsman has a weird perma-five o clock shadow goatee.

He also has a weird announcement ad on his website, which is getting hammered right now.

http://www.jonhuntsmanjr.com/

Apparently Romney and Huntsman are skipping the Iowa straw poll because of their opposition to ethanol subsidies. Good for them. Fuck Iowa (and New Hampshire).

TPaw, on the other hand, is making Romney look like a man of deep and consistent principles.

 

[SolKane]

I don't think Perry is serious about running, he'd lose any position he had as a spur in the backside of the federal government. What would he intend to do as President, reinstate the Articles of Confederation?

 

[Skiptastic]

Door is thataway, sir ---------->.

Spoiler

Spoiler

My MS Paint skills are finally put to the test.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

I don't mind the label. If you view this thread as a political scale, anyone with a center-right proclivity is going to be considered 'conservative' in comparison.

Well as long as you avoided the libertarian tag, you're not the worst off. Granted I'm come off as conservative (on non social things), but I think the last time I voted Republican was for Arlen Spector, and it was far more an exception.

 

[besada]

ha! I would be interested to know how many consider you a moderate.

That said, I think most people consider themselves to be moderate, and others to be extreme.

I don't consider myself a moderate. I'm a progressive with low expectations. I'm liberal and Southern -- and characteristically I don't care that much about gun control and I dislike the nanny tendencies of the left. I dislike many things about the Democratic party, and if there were a more liberal party that had a chance in hell to do anything, I'd probably vote for them.

I've been active in groups trying to change the fundamental way we vote and count votes for twenty years, which I suppose could be seen as radical.

Many of the people in here who describe themselves as liberal do not seem liberal to me, by the way.

 

[besada]

I don't think Perry is serious about running, he'd lose any position he had as a spur in the backside of the federal government. What would he intend to do as President, reinstate the Articles of Confederation?

He'd do his best to make the rest of the country like Texas -- business friendly, minimal services, low, low taxes, non-existent regulation, massive business subsidies, etc.

I think he wants to run, but only if he really thinks he can take it, and he hasn't made that leap yet. He's got a cushy spot as the perpetual Governor of Texas and he doesn't want to lose it unless he's got a great place to land. He's got to be scaring the shit out of the other candidates -- he's notorious for being a fund raising beast.

And he's the only one who can compete with Mitt's hair.

People take that secession stuff way too seriously. That was Perry whipping up the Texas crazies for turnout in the election. He doesn't actually believe that stuff. It's strictly for the rubes. Secession would hose the business environment, which is what Perry really cares about.

 

[AntoneM]

I know, I get it. American politics are center-right. ::jerkoff motion:: Get some new material, it's so fucking tired.

Does the truth really bother you that much?

 

[PantherLotus]

Clearly the secession stuff was a crazy turnout effort, but that isn't the problem.

 

[PantherLotus]

Does the truth really bother you that much?

TBF, TA's point is that "yes yes we've covered that, and it has very little real relevance to American political discussion, for which this thread is mostly intended." He's right. It doesn't matter if President Obama would be the most conservative leader at a NATO meeting, the labels we're using are known quantities that we know and understand.

It doesn't matter if everything that occurs in America is way far to the right of anything in Europe -- there's still a large spectrum of differences that we can discern and discuss.

 

[speculawyer]

Apparently Romney and Huntsman are skipping the Iowa straw poll because of their opposition to ethanol subsidies. Good for them. Fuck Iowa (and New Hampshire).

TPaw, on the other hand, is making Romney look like a man of deep and consistent principles.

It is not just the ethanol subsidies. Iowa has a bunch of crazy evangelicals that control the caucus and that doesn't work so well for moderate & Mormon Romney (or Huntsman). Especially when born-in-Iowa Jesus-freak Bachmann is running. Plus neighboring MN governor Tpaw.

Romney poured a pile of money into Iowa last time and didn't win . . . he's not going to waste his money their this time.

 

[sc0la]

subscrizzle-to this izzle

Nice edit to Obama's pic

 

[Clevinger]

The truth is, in this current paradigm of polarized politics, moderates ARE a dirty word. They are seen as weak and easily manipulated (when the opposite is actually true) and a roadblock to party unity. You look at the comments liberals make about Blue Dogs and it's the EXACT SAME verbiage you would see coming from Rush Limbaugh when he talks about moderate Republicans.

Nah. Rush calls Republicans RINOs simply because they have more moderate or slightly liberal positions. Liberals hate Blue Dogs because they've hijacked major pieces of legislation to severely gut them. There's a pretty big difference.

 

[AntoneM]

Anyone following the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) case against Boeing? Basic rundown is that Boeing was shopping around to locate their newest manufacturing facility, it was narrowed to Washington and South Carolina. Fresh on the corporate board minds were the worker strikes in 2005 and 2008 by the Machinists Union in Washington. After these strike Boeing demanded a no-strike pledge. Washington offered $3 billion in subsidies and the workers agreed to a 10 year no-strike pledge. Boeing went with South Carolina, a "right to work" state who offered $450 million to entice Boeing. Boeing executive vice president Jim Albaugh told the Seattle Times last year, "The overriding factor was not the business climate and it was not the wages we're paying people today. It was that we can't afford to have a work stoppage every three years." when asked about their decision to set up shop in South Carolina. The NLRB brought charges against Boeing for retaliating against union workers who exercised their legal right to use concerted activity to better their working conditions.

 

[mre]

Tagged.

 

[AntoneM]

TBF, TA's point is that "yes yes we've covered that, and it has very little real relevance to American political discussion, for which this thread is mostly intended." He's right. It doesn't matter if President Obama would be the most conservative leader at a NATO meeting, the labels we're using are known quantities that we know and understand.

It doesn't matter if everything that occurs in America is way far to the right of anything in Europe -- there's still a large spectrum of differences that we can discern and discuss.

Doesn't change the fact that a rational minded person who leans left is politely called a far-left liberal and at worst a bomb-throwing commie-athiest by much of the American media; and therefore are discredited before they even say anything.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Anyone following the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) case against Boeing? Basic rundown is that Boeing was shopping around to locate their newest manufacturing facility, it was narrowed to Washington and South Carolina. Fresh on the corporate board minds were the worker strikes in 2005 and 2008 by the Machinists Union in Washington. After these strike Boeing demanded a no-strike pledge. Washington offered $3 billion in subsidies and the workers agreed to a 10 year no-strike pledge. Boeing went with South Carolina, a "right to work" state who offered $450 million to entice Boeing. Boeing executive vice president Jim Albaugh told the Seattle Times last year, "The overriding factor was not the business climate and it was not the wages we're paying people today. It was that we can't afford to have a work stoppage every three years." when asked about their decision to set up shop in South Carolina. The NLRB brought charges against Boeing for retaliating against union workers who exercised their legal right to use concerted activity to better their working conditions.

Was the deal with the Machinists Union fully locked up or was it they agreed to the no-strike pledge, but other issues still remained?

Doesn't change the fact that a rational minded person who leans left is politely called a far-left liberal and at worst a bomb-throwing commie-athiest by much of the American media; and therefore are discredited before they even say anything.

You have read most of empty_vessel's posts? He is not someone who leans left. He is far left. He's not moderate on a global scale, unless you include leftist and rightist terrorist groups, which I guess by a balancing factor would make that work.

 

[PantherLotus]

Doesn't change the fact that a rational minded person who leans left is politely called a far-left liberal and at worst a bomb-throwing commie-athiest by much of the American media; and therefore are discredited before they even say anything.

Oh you'll get no disagreement from me there.

 

[bill gonorrhea]

Anyone following the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) case against Boeing? Basic rundown is that Boeing was shopping around to locate their newest manufacturing facility, it was narrowed to Washington and South Carolina. Fresh on the corporate board minds were the worker strikes in 2005 and 2008 by the Machinists Union in Washington. After these strike Boeing demanded a no-strike pledge. Washington offered $3 billion in subsidies and the workers agreed to a 10 year no-strike pledge. Boeing went with South Carolina, a "right to work" state who offered $450 million to entice Boeing. Boeing executive vice president Jim Albaugh told the Seattle Times last year, "The overriding factor was not the business climate and it was not the wages we're paying people today. It was that we can't afford to have a work stoppage every three years." when asked about their decision to set up shop in South Carolina. The NLRB brought charges against Boeing for retaliating against union workers who exercised their legal right to use concerted activity to better their working conditions.

As a former Boeing employee and the son of a Boeing exec, their case is complete bullshit.

 

[AntoneM]

Was the deal with the Machinists Union fully locked up or was it they agreed to the no-strike pledge, but other issues still remained?

I don't know. I only know what I have read of what has been reported.

As a former Boeing employee and the son of a Boeing exec, their case is complete bullshit.

How is that?

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

As a former Boeing employee and the son of a Boeing exec, their case is complete bullshit.

So can you answer my question, was the MU deal completely agreed to or was their a no strike pledge, but other issues to work out, and no complete deal?

 

[TacticalFox88]

Doesn't change the fact that a rational minded person who leans left is politely called a far-left liberal and at worst a bomb-throwing commie-athiest by much of the American media; and therefore are discredited before they even say anything.

Don't forget the false equivalencies.

 

[Jackson50]

He'd do his best to make the rest of the country like Texas -- business friendly, minimal services, low, low taxes, non-existent regulation, massive business subsidies, etc.

I think he wants to run, but only if he really thinks he can take it, and he hasn't made that leap yet. He's got a cushy spot as the perpetual Governor of Texas and he doesn't want to lose it unless he's got a great place to land. He's got to be scaring the shit out of the other candidates -- he's notorious for being a fund raising beast.

And he's the only one who can compete with Mitt's hair.

People take that secession stuff way too seriously. That was Perry whipping up the Texas crazies for turnout in the election. He doesn't actually believe that stuff. It's strictly for the rubes. Secession would hose the business environment, which is what Perry really cares about.

If Pawlenty founders and the establishment/interest groups do not coalesce behind Romney, I think he runs. And neither scenario is outlandish. Otherwise, why risk a negative reaction in Texas and expend the energy on a losing bid? For as you note, he already has a plush job.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Didn't make the top 10. Well, there's always this thread.

Mini-poll dump, Pennsylvania presidential and senate:

Barack Obama (D-inc.) 47
Mitt Romney 40

Barack Obama (D-inc.) 49
Rick Santorum 38

Bob Casey (D-inc.) 47
Generic Republican 32

Nevada senate:

Shelley Berkeley (D) 42
Dean Heller (R-inc.) 37

Great news for John McCain!

 

[Oblivion]

Here's a really nice article from Esquire about the global warming debate:

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/global-warming-religion-5912388

Somewhat long, but a really good read.

edit: actually, not that long at all.

 

[jamesinclair]

Folks, read the california tax thread to see how republicans have managed to turn:

Dems pass bill cutting billions in education, lower taxes, but don't allow taxes to be lowered as much as the republicans want

into

TAXES ARE GOING UP!!!!!!

 

[mj1108]

Tagged.

Instead of "Tagged" it should be "Teabagged"

 

[Alpha-Bromega]

I don't even think I have a political ideology or have even a general idea where I stand in regards to the left-right spectrum either globally or in the context of American entertainment masquerading as politics.

All things should be balanced, I feel like Dak'Kon basically :lol

 

[Servizio]

I don't even think I have a political ideology or have even a general idea where I stand in regards to the left-right spectrum either globally or in the context of American entertainment masquerading as politics.

All things should be balanced, I feel like Dak'Kon basically :lol

Man, it's been a while, but I really want to say that Dak'Kon was a Libertarian. What was he, Neutral Neutral, or Neutral Chaotic?

 

[Hitokage]

Self-proclaimed moderates are like self-proclaimed members of the middle class.

 

[Oblivion]

Self-proclaimed moderates are like self-proclaimed members of the middle class.

Agreed.

I'm socially liberal, and economically pragmatic. I'll go with whatever tax policy that actually WORKS.

 

[Alpha-Bromega]

Man, it's been a while, but I really want to say that Dak'Kon was a Libertarian. What was he, Neutral Neutral, or Neutral Chaotic?

Neutral Neutral, for sure. Balance in all things.

 

[mj1108]

Agreed.

I'm socially liberal, and economically pragmatic. I'll go with whatever tax policy that actually WORKS.

Agreed 100000%.

 

[Diablos]

Mittens keeps it real: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EP2GsRzROF8

WE AREN'T BUMPS IN THE ROAD, YO

 

[Xdrive05]

Liberal-Gaf, which two Republicans running now would you prefer to see take the 2012 election, given a scenario where Republicans were guaranteed the win? Which for president and which for vice president - and why ?

 

[SleazyC]

Liberal-Gaf, which two Republicans running now would you prefer to see take the 2012 election, given a scenario where Republicans were guaranteed the win? Which for president and which for vice president - and why ?

We talking out of the current field in the running or any member of the Republican party?

Assuming you mean out of the current field running, my pick for president would probably be Romney. I am banking on the fact that some of his legislation when he held office in Mass. were more aligned with my views and hope that he is currently pandering to the base to get elected.

With Romney off the board I really don't like any of the remaining candidates to fill a VP slot.

 

[Kosmo]

Liberal-Gaf, which two Republicans running now would you prefer to see take the 2012 election, given a scenario where Republicans were guaranteed the win? Which for president and which for vice president - and why ?

Strongest ticket the Republicans can put out there is Romney/Rubio. I wound't call it a guarantee to win, but I can't think of a stronger ticket short of a zombie Reagan.

And don't believe the hype that this is a anti-conservative thread -- it's just that conservatism has lacked smart and honest voices for a long time, at least those that are elected.

"PoliGAF - where even moderate conservatives are treated like liberals on Fox News."

 

[gcubed]

Didn't make the top 10. Well, there's always this thread.

Mini-poll dump, Pennsylvania presidential and senate:



Nevada senate:


Great news for John McCain!

And again its shown diablos talks out his ass. What shocks me is that you live in this state diablos, I'd expect you to know better. PA is the biggest bullshit battleground state there is

 

[Averon]

New NBC News poll

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/S...Teases/11236 JUNE NBC-WSJ Final Filled-in.pdf

Obama 49%/46%

Obama 49% vs Romney 43%

Obama 50% vs Pawlenty 37%

 

[GaimeGuy]

Agreed.

I'm socially liberal, and economically pragmatic. I'll go with whatever tax policy that actually WORKS.

Same.

Socially liberal, economically whatever proves to work. Which, being ideologically neutral, is "radically far left" in the US political spectrum. :/

 

[IrishNinja]

great OP, will be watching this one. already liking the article on healthcare across states meme.

 

[Manmademan]

Serious question:

why aren't the poligaf threads stickied? I always have to search for them, and yet the last one had more views/comments than some of the Major league sports threads?

 

[DasRaven]

Liberal-Gaf, which two Republicans running now would you prefer to see take the 2012 election, given a scenario where Republicans were guaranteed the win? Which for president and which for vice president - and why ?

Fred Karger & Mitch Daniels.
*No Norquist/ATR signatories.
*Both socially moderate. Karger's gay & jewish, Daniels called for a truce on social issues.
*Daniels I believe could get the reticent GOP onboard for real tax reform.
*Karger is pro-legalization & taxation of marijuana & anti-nation building.

If they were the ticket, I'd be happy for the nation, but likely still vote for Obama.

 

[Kosmo]

Same.

Socially liberal, economically whatever proves to work. Which, being ideologically neutral, is "radically far left" in the US political spectrum. :/

I think the fundamental difference is how far you are willing to let your social liberalism creep into your economic pragmatism. Socially, I don't really care what people do with their own time and money - pro-gay marriage, pro-choice, etc. Where I draw the line is the second they start collecting government funds.