PoliGAF 2011: Of Weiners, Boehners, Santorum, and Teabags
- Thread starter PantherLotus
- Start date
- Status
Invisible_Insane
Member
It would be a reasonably big deal if Romney won it without entering. It's a glorified fundraiser and should be treated as such.mckmas8808 said:
SecretMoblin said:
Well, it should be noted that the 'most libertarian' candidate also suffered one of the worst defeats ever.
Now, future Republicans after Goldwater have co-opted a sliver of his platform and included it into their rhetoric, but how they actually governed once they won is a different story. But, they haven't wavered away from the neocon philosophy. Both in rhetoric and in action.
Escape Goat
Member
bahahah
RustyNails
Member
Oblivion said:
RustyNails
Member
you shut your whore mouth! Elvis is in heaven surrounded by coke and ice creamdabig2 said:
PhoenixDark
Banned
Oblivion said:
To be fair, I make "happy birthday Tupac" threads all the time on his birthday, regardless of him being dead. I'm guessing this is the same
PhoenixDark
Banned
gcubed said:
Oh. Well...smh
Cubsfan23 said:
Exactly. Its what I dont get with the doomsayers.
Yes his numbers are down, but what are they compared to any given specific candidate?
Obama isnt running against the gallup opinion polls, hes running against another candidate.
It doesnt matter what his numbers are on his own, it matters whether when given two choices, more people will chose Obama over the other guy. And so far, polls have him beating the front runners who will potentially fill the other guy role.
Dude Abides
Banned
Cubsfan23 said:
The GOP hasn't coalesced around a candidate. What's delusional is thinking a weak president with 40% approval and 9% unemployment is some kind of shoe-in.
Dude Abides
Banned
Joe said:
There is. He's a fringe crank with no chance at winning. No conspiracy required.
dave is ok
aztek is ok
He doesn't belong to the Republican or Democrat partyJoe said:
Admiral Bone to Pick
Banned
dave is ok said:
Except he's a Republican congressman and was just in the Republican debates.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-16/bachmann-has-income-from-subsidized-farm.html
This will help her in Iowa, where the mental gymnastics required to simultaneously oppose government spending AND demand your subsidy checks are well practiced.
Skiptastic
Member
Heh, I was going to bring this up in the case of Warren Buffet calling for higher tax rates on the wealthy but taking the tax breaks anyway. It just makes me laugh.Evlar said:
Does it mean I'm not allowed to say they should remove the mortgage interest deduction from taxes when I use it?
RustyNails
Member
This is the correct answer.dave is ok said:
Media has no clue how to pigeonhole Ron Paul. They don't understand why he trumps poll after poll and has a huge following, but the shit he says is so far off the well tread Republican talking points they genuinely don't know what to do. And that's a good thing about Paul. He doesn't stick to talking points.
Bill Clinton, don't you have anything better to doPlumbob said:
View from a dirty socialist Brit:
You know, for all I disagreed with him, at least McCain was a sane, balanced individual who was popular, experienced and had a good life background. The rest of the world got behind Obama, sure, but we thought that McCain was a pretty decent person. Sure Palin was crazy but we saw through her appointment as a PR scheme to put some life into a boring ticket.
But then it went wrong. Some Social conservatives in the mid-west started to like Palin. A lot. They went crazy over her, idolised her, hung on her every word. Someone who was a PR gimmick, probably by McCain's admission too, was gaining credibility when that was never meant to be the outcome. McCain knew that putting her on the ticket was a hail mary, he didn't really think that she would be a good VP, just someone to appeal to a demographic. But this demographic is lucrative. Fox News saw this and started targeting its coverage towards this small minority to provide talking points for its news cycles, presenting the minority as a majority. The Tea Party wasn't a nuts fringe group it was a "constitutional movement" that wanted to get the "deficit under control".
This clearly wasn't the Tea Party's intention. The Tea Party can be much more easily traced back to a right-wing white lower-middle class disdain for liberal social policies on issues such as religion, drugs and abortion. The term "separation of state from the church" was hijacked not to mean that government (ran by the people) would be free from the church, but that Baptist/Evangelical groups would be "protected from" the government. It could be easily, although possibly only backed up with anecdotal evidence, contented that most people that joined the "movement" probably didin't understand the fundamental basics of what a deficit is, how it works, how it can be good for the economy.
So it is clear that the Tea Party was founded in Social, not Fiscal conservatism. So how was it that their agenda changed so quickly? Fox News.
It was in Fox News' interest to make this "movement" bigger and bigger, presenting the station as a source of propaganda for followers and a source of amusement/worry for moderates. But the Social Conservatism issue didn't sell. Economics were in vouge. Fox News started to change what the Tea Party were about, something easily done due to the "movement's" lack of hierarchy/structure and in doing so gave them a "reasonable" message. Suddenly the Tea Party weren't Bible bashing nutters, they were concerned fiscal conservatives who were in the moral right. This is what gave the movement a step into political influence.
Politicians started to pander more and more to this "movement" with people like Palin/Bachmann using the guise of "balancing the budget" to disguise their crazy ultra-right wing views, allowing them to seem reasonable, heck even likeable. More traditional republicans, or even Libertarians such as Ron Paul who would be better at balancing the budget suddenly weren't appealing to this "movement" (see: small fringe) and were dropped by the news cycle.
So yes, this America, is how Fox News is killing your country.
Although I already suspect you knew this it was nice for me to sum up the madness that is the GOP.
You know, for all I disagreed with him, at least McCain was a sane, balanced individual who was popular, experienced and had a good life background. The rest of the world got behind Obama, sure, but we thought that McCain was a pretty decent person. Sure Palin was crazy but we saw through her appointment as a PR scheme to put some life into a boring ticket.
But then it went wrong. Some Social conservatives in the mid-west started to like Palin. A lot. They went crazy over her, idolised her, hung on her every word. Someone who was a PR gimmick, probably by McCain's admission too, was gaining credibility when that was never meant to be the outcome. McCain knew that putting her on the ticket was a hail mary, he didn't really think that she would be a good VP, just someone to appeal to a demographic. But this demographic is lucrative. Fox News saw this and started targeting its coverage towards this small minority to provide talking points for its news cycles, presenting the minority as a majority. The Tea Party wasn't a nuts fringe group it was a "constitutional movement" that wanted to get the "deficit under control".
This clearly wasn't the Tea Party's intention. The Tea Party can be much more easily traced back to a right-wing white lower-middle class disdain for liberal social policies on issues such as religion, drugs and abortion. The term "separation of state from the church" was hijacked not to mean that government (ran by the people) would be free from the church, but that Baptist/Evangelical groups would be "protected from" the government. It could be easily, although possibly only backed up with anecdotal evidence, contented that most people that joined the "movement" probably didin't understand the fundamental basics of what a deficit is, how it works, how it can be good for the economy.
So it is clear that the Tea Party was founded in Social, not Fiscal conservatism. So how was it that their agenda changed so quickly? Fox News.
It was in Fox News' interest to make this "movement" bigger and bigger, presenting the station as a source of propaganda for followers and a source of amusement/worry for moderates. But the Social Conservatism issue didn't sell. Economics were in vouge. Fox News started to change what the Tea Party were about, something easily done due to the "movement's" lack of hierarchy/structure and in doing so gave them a "reasonable" message. Suddenly the Tea Party weren't Bible bashing nutters, they were concerned fiscal conservatives who were in the moral right. This is what gave the movement a step into political influence.
Politicians started to pander more and more to this "movement" with people like Palin/Bachmann using the guise of "balancing the budget" to disguise their crazy ultra-right wing views, allowing them to seem reasonable, heck even likeable. More traditional republicans, or even Libertarians such as Ron Paul who would be better at balancing the budget suddenly weren't appealing to this "movement" (see: small fringe) and were dropped by the news cycle.
So yes, this America, is how Fox News is killing your country.
Although I already suspect you knew this it was nice for me to sum up the madness that is the GOP.
With the difference being, Buffett doesn't deny taking the deductions.Skiptastic said:
http://www.americanselect.org/ will be interesting to see how this impacts the 2012 election
SecretMoblin
Member
PhoenixDark
Banned
The tea party's roots have to do with fiscal issues, not social; there's a lot of tension among social conservatives, who feel they're being ignored as the party moves further toward 10th amendment libertarianism. Ron Paul started the movement with his 08 campaign, and it was later hijacked by former GOP leaders.
Fox News helped with this hijack movement by completely ignoring the Paul campaign and billing it as some grassroots movement. And then in 2010 they helped whip the country into a frenzy over health care.
Palin set off a reaction of paranoia and despair among white voters, who later turned to the tea party. Those October 08 rallies were pretty ugly, perhaps dangerous. If it's clear Obama is going to win by next October, things will get even uglier.
Fox News helped with this hijack movement by completely ignoring the Paul campaign and billing it as some grassroots movement. And then in 2010 they helped whip the country into a frenzy over health care.
Palin set off a reaction of paranoia and despair among white voters, who later turned to the tea party. Those October 08 rallies were pretty ugly, perhaps dangerous. If it's clear Obama is going to win by next October, things will get even uglier.
TacticalFox88
Banned
Dear Lord if this is a preview of what's to come this will top '08 in sheer insanityOblivion said:
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I still feel that when the Perry marketing starts nationwide independents will turn on him in a second. He's way too similar to George W. Bush and his state is successful because of the oil companies. Once the democrats tie on that connection he'll lose almost all support from independents.
Skiptastic said:
I voted for income tax in Washington State, but I don't voluntarily send the amount to the State after the measure failed. Because a) It would be meaningless and b) I am simply living my life and obeying the tax code.
The two things are not contradictory.
RustyNails said:
He's also a nutcase with incredibly fringe views and lots of ridiculous contradictory positions. He's made hommophobic remarks in a movie, is against gay marriage based on a mental-gymnastics interpretation of States' Rights and doesn't believe in evolution. And published a series of racist newsletters. These are facts. Ron Paul defense force will be along in a second to deny, but not refute them. He's even more fringe than the Tea Party. He only gets a pass because his foreign policy SOUNDS attractive (but would fail miserably in real life) and Ayn Randisms.
ToxicAdam said:
No. Not at all. My position is consistent. I think we should enact revenue generating taxes in a reasonable fashion. We have not. I will continue to vote that way when the opportunity arises.
I don't get on a podium and state the opposite to get elected.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Evlar said:
This is what the GOP does. Oppose things that they themselves use.
Wait A Minute
Perry Slams Non-Existent Federal Farm Regulation
Perry Slams Non-Existent Federal Farm Regulation
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...m-regulation----that-doesnt-exist.php?ref=fpa
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
OuterWorldVoice said:
And you properly fill out your tax returns correctly. That's different than going out and finding gov't subsidies to help you.
- Status