PoliGAF 2011: Of Weiners, Boehners, Santorum, and Teabags

Status
Not open for further replies.
Plinko said:
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.
Click to expand...


yeah, I am still not convinced that any Republican candidate is fit for the national stage. They will implode eventually, some faster than others (Newt, T-Paw).

Unless they take the Palin route and constantly avoid the press and hard questions while playing victim card to hide their craziness. But the stink of their craziness has been too far apparent and exposed, i don't know if it can work anymore.
 
The only Republicans who are actually sane enough to stand the bombardment of the election season are probably Giuliani who isn't going to run(?) and Romney who would do respectfully but wouldn't win.
 
mckmas8808 said:
And you properly fill out your tax returns correctly. That's different than going out and finding gov't subsidies to help you.
Click to expand...

But I do in fact look for logical ways to reduce my taxes. because I am Middle Class, there are no loopholes. So my moral-tax footprint is reduced anyway, in favor of billionaires.
 
Oblivion said:
holy shit:



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61493.html


:lol :lol :lol
Click to expand...

lol at Bachman, but it's not the first time a politician got his dates mixed up:

George [H.W.] Bush's Pearl Harbor

On September 7th, 1988, President George Bush addressed the American Legion in Louisville, Kentucky. "This is Pearl Harbor Day," he declared. "47 years ago to this very day, we were hit and hit hard at Pearl Harbor..."

Alas, Pearl Harbor was hit on December 7th - putting Bush three months off target.
Click to expand...
 
So.....Rick Perry has been a presidential candidate all of 5 minutes and he's already talking the crazy.

He's suggesting we use Predator Drones for border control.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/16/rick-perry-drones-border-security_n_928194.html

If this guy manages to become the Republican nominee, it will be a bloodpath with Obama winning 40+ states. But if Rick Perry keeps going like this, he won't even make it and the GOP establishment and the big donors will sprint toward Romney.
 
The Chosen One said:
So.....Rick Perry has been a presidential candidate all of 5 minutes and he's already talking the crazy.

He's suggesting we use Predator Drones for border control.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/16/rick-perry-drones-border-security_n_928194.html

If this guy manages to become the Republican nominee, it will be a bloodpath with Obama winning 40+ states. But if Rick Perry keeps going like this, he won't even make it and the GOP establishment and the big donors will sprint toward Romney.
Click to expand...
We ARE using drones for border control. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/23/AR2010062305358.html
WaPo said:
The Obama administration announced Wednesday that it will station an aerial drone in Texas as part of its stepped-up surveillance of criminal trafficking along the Mexican border.
Click to expand...
If there's crazy here, it's that Perry is demanding Obama do something he's already done.

EDIT: I mean, militarization of our border with Mexico is unwelcome in my eyes, but use of unarmed drones is pretty harmless. If there's a problem with their use, other than the symbolic application of military hardware to border control, I'd like to know what the argument is.
 
The Chosen One said:
So.....Rick Perry has been a presidential candidate all of 5 minutes and he's already talking the crazy.

He's suggesting we use Predator Drones for border control.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/16/rick-perry-drones-border-security_n_928194.html

If this guy manages to become the Republican nominee, it will be a bloodpath with Obama winning 40+ states. But if Rick Perry keeps going like this, he won't even make it and the GOP establishment and the big donors will sprint toward Romney.
Click to expand...

And how is that different than what Obama is already doing?
Hell, maybe the next thing Perry will talk about is funneling guns to Mexican drug cartels.
 
Evlar said:
We ARE using drones for border control. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/23/AR2010062305358.html
If there's crazy here, it's that Perry is demanding Obama do something he's already done.

EDIT: I mean, militarization of our border with Mexico is unwelcome in my eyes, but use of unarmed drones is pretty harmless. If there's a problem with their use, other than the symbolic application of military hardware to border control, I'd like to know what the argument is.
Click to expand...
Yeah... we've been using drones over the border since at least '08. Why doesn't Perry know this?
 
Evlar said:
Michele Bachmann's fact-checker has the Job from Hell.
Click to expand...

It would be awesome if such a person were to give a truthful interview after the elections and let us know all the horribly wrong things that they managed to catch before Bachmann spewed them.
 
OuterWorldVoice 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.
Click to expand...

But they are just following the tax code, just like you. Why should they be held to a different standard than you because they are advocating for change in how it is done?
 
Karl Rove Piles On Rick Perry: Bernanke Line ‘Not A Presidential Statement’
Evan McMorris-Santoro | August 16, 2011, 8:52AM



karl-rove-point-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg





It's no secret that Team George W. Bush and Team Rick Perry are not exactly close. And with Perry flailing after he accused Federal Reserve chair Ben Bernanke of "almost treasonous" behavior, one of Team W's biggest names is taking the opportunity to twist the knife.

"You don't accuse the chairman of the federal reserve of being a traitor to his country. Of being guilty of treason," Karl Rove told Fox News Tuesday. "And, suggesting that we treat him pretty ugly in texas. You know, that is not, again a presidential statement."


Rove, whose American Crossroads money group is expected to be a central player on the Republican side of the presidential contest, has made a short career of late "telling it like it is" to fiery Republican voices like Perry. Back in 2010, Rove's attacks on Christine O'Donnell led some of the biggest voices in conservatism to turning on him, eventually resulting in Rove backing down.

Perry, of course, is no O'Donnell. But he is super popular with many of the same voters O'Donnell relied on. And once again, Rove is taking on his party's right wing by attacking one of its biggest stars. Perry, meanwhile, has so far decided against apologizing for the headline-dominating comments about Bernanke.

Rove's not pulling any punches, suggesting that Perry's comments are a sign of a candidate destined to be gaffe-prone. "If Rick Perry were to be elected president he'd be saddled with Ben Bernanke who has a term. He's an independent chairman of the federal reserve board, appointed by president and confirmed by Congress and serves for a term and the president couldn't even ask him to resign," Rove said. "So, this is -- I hope this is not the first of sort of over the top statements."

As ThinkProgress reports, Rove also took on Perry over his attempts to distance himself from Bush, whom he served with as Lt. Gov. of Texas before ascending to the big chair when Bush moved to the White House.
​


########################

Damn even Rove knows what he said was stupid. Perry isn't the lock that we all think he is.
 
ToxicAdam said:
But they are just following the tax code, just like you. Why should they be held to a different standard than you because they are advocating for change in how it is done?
Click to expand...
Um...

Are we talking about the subsidies bachmann receives or the taxes that warren buffet pays?
 
GaimeGuy said:
Um...

Are we talking about the subsidies bachmann receives or the taxes that warren buffet pays?
Click to expand...


I don't think 'we' were talking .. :p


mckmas8808 said:
Karl Rove Piles On Rick Perry: Bernanke Line ‘Not A Presidential Statement’
Evan McMorris-Santoro | August 16, 2011, 8:52AM


Damn even Rove knows what he said was stupid. Perry isn't the lock that we all think he is.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think you will see an incredible 'push back' from the establishment GOP talking heads if Perry remains a threat. Similar to the one they gave Palin.

The question is ... does it actually influence voters?
 
Evlar said:
We ARE using drones for border control. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/23/AR2010062305358.html
If there's crazy here, it's that Perry is demanding Obama do something he's already done.

EDIT: I mean, militarization of our border with Mexico is unwelcome in my eyes, but use of unarmed drones is pretty harmless. If there's a problem with their use, other than the symbolic application of military hardware to border control, I'd like to know what the argument is.
Click to expand...

My bad, but from what I got from the Perry quote was that he wanted to use also Drones for combat missions against the drug cartels, not just for surveillance.
 
Farm subsidies aren't tax credits. They are checksdisbursements from the government, not all that different from Social Security checks.
The Chosen One said:
My bad, but from what I got from the Perry quote was that he wanted to use also Drones for combat missions against the drug cartels, not just for surveillance.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that would be nuts, but I think he simply meant eyes in the sky.
 
Who is Rove backing is the bigger question. If its Romney, well, this sort of talk is pretty understandable. Not to mention Bernanke is a Bush appointee.
 
ToxicAdam said:
But they are just following the tax code, just like you. Why should they be held to a different standard than you because they are advocating for change in how it is done?
Click to expand...
they don't just advocate for change, they demonize it and everyone who participates in it.
 
Souldriver said:
the only thing I get from that, is the question it raises: Why doesn't Fox News / The GOP establishment like Perry?
Click to expand...
They like him. They don't like his chances because of the bush connection (oil to a much much much lesser extent
 
There's tension between Bush and Perry, which means there's tension between Rove and Perry; not surprising. I'm somewhat impressed Rove had refused to jump on the tea party bandwagon. He's more interested than winning than pure ideology.
 
mckmas8808 said:
Karl Rove Piles On Rick Perry: Bernanke Line ‘Not A Presidential Statement’
Evan McMorris-Santoro | August 16, 2011, 8:52AM
Click to expand...

Awww . . . what's wrong, Karl? Did the Frankenstein monster you helped create become out of control? Yes. Yes it did. Palin. Cal Paladino. O'Donnell. Bachmann. They are the spawn of your divisive 51% strategy based on culture war tactics. Reap what you sow, jerk.

ToxicAdam said:
I agree. I think you will see an incredible 'push back' from the establishment GOP talking heads if Perry remains a threat. Similar to the one they gave Palin.

The question is ... does it actually influence voters?
Click to expand...
It may make those candidates stronger. The establishment Bushies like Rove are viewed with suspicion by the Tea-party faithful. Having Karl slap you down may raise their street cred among the hardcore tea-partiers.
 
There's old bad blood between Rove and Perry. In addition, Rove sees the Tea Party as a destructive force on his ability to win. It's one thing to hint at crazy and suggest that people are treasonous, it's another to come out and just say it. He knows that an unchecked Tea Party will wreck itself and the GOP along with it, which is why he's been fighting to beat it back.

It's weird seeing inside Texas politics sprawled all over the national stage. Dick Armey creates FreedomWorks, which drives the Tea Party, Rove pushes back, and Perry uses them to get ahead.

We're all Texans, now. Sorry about that.
 
Meadows said:
The only Republicans who are actually sane enough to stand the bombardment of the election season are probably Giuliani who isn't going to run(?) and Romney who would do respectfully but wouldn't win.
Click to expand...

I actually think Giuliani jumps in right before the primaries begin. He'll appear to be the only sane candidate at the time and people will flock to him.
 
The Chosen One said:
My bad, but from what I got from the Perry quote was that he wanted to use also Drones for combat missions against the drug cartels, not just for surveillance.
Click to expand...
Using the word 'Predator' was a bad move . . . although that term was used to describe surveillance-only drones, it is more generally understood to imply the version with Hellfire missiles. And that would be crazy.
 
speculawyer said:
Awww . . . what's wrong, Karl? Did the Frankenstein monster you helped create become out of control? Yes. Yes it did. Palin. Cal Paladino. O'Donnell. Bachmann. They are the spawn of your divisive 51% strategy based on culture war tactics. Reap what you sow, jerk.


It make make those candidates stronger. The establishment Bushies like Rove are viewed with suspicion by the Tea-party faithful. Having Karl slap you down may raise their street cred among the hardcore tea-partiers.
Click to expand...
No they aren't.
The tea partiers are the same 30% who supported Bush at the end of his term
 
GaimeGuy said:
No they aren't.
The tea partiers are the same 30% who supported Bush at the end of his term
Click to expand...
Yes, they are the same 30% that he cultivated . . . and now they have become stronger and Rove is unable to control them like he once was able to.
 
What I love about hillaryis44 is that they've convinced themselves that Obama is a baby-eating demon, and Hillary is an angelic saint, and yet Hillary works for the baby-eating demon while still retaining her sainthood.

That and their full on crazy.
 
How much cuts in spending needs to happen if tax rates remain as they are in order for revenue to be neutral? Bear in mind unemployment is shitty, so I'd assume you'd have to factor in the number of jobs in the country, right?
 
So, as I said earlier, I'm pretty new to the world of politics, and, as such, I am looking for some perspective on the primaries. Is the Republican's Party's current situation of lacking a clear frontrunner at this point the usual situation or is support more fragmented than normal?

Also, I'd seen talk earlier that it would be suicide for the Democratic Party if someone tried to run against Obama for the nomination. While I'm sure you guys are in the right on this, I'd like some clarification. I understand why if someone like Palin ran third party in the race, it'd hurt the Republicans, but I don't understand why an actual primary race would hurt the Dems when they're still left with one candidate at the end for the presidential race. Wouldn't you essentially have the same base of support come election day regardless of whether Obama faced opposition beforehand or not? Would the primary really sour Dems who would have voted for Obama had they not had a new candidate to rally behind for the primary to the point where they just wouldn't vote for him when their candidate fell? (or vice versa if Obama should lose the nom)

Jason's Ultimatum said:
How much cuts in spending needs to happen if tax rates remain as they are in order for revenue to be neutral? Bear in mind unemployment is shitty, so I'd assume you'd have to factor in the number of jobs in the country, right?
Click to expand...

My understanding of the matter is that each cut in spending is effectively going to cut down on consumer spending, which will, in turn, cut down on GDP and taxation, leading to an increase in the deficit. So, it seems to me like the whole idea of spending cuts, in this current environment, is pretty counterproductive. (I will point out that the majority of my reading on this matter comes from Krugman, so take my opinion as you will knowing that.)
 
traveler said:
So, as I said earlier, I'm pretty new to the world of politics, and, as such, I am looking for some perspective on the primaries. Is the Republican's Party's current situation of lacking a clear frontrunner at this point the usual situation or is support more fragmented than normal?

Also, I'd seen talk earlier that it would be suicide for the Democratic Party if someone tried to run against Obama for the nomination. While I'm sure you guys are in the right on this, I'd like some clarification. I understand why if someone like Palin ran third party in the race, it'd hurt the Republicans, but I don't understand why an actual primary race would hurt the Dems when they're still left with one candidate at the end for the presidential race. Wouldn't you essentially have the same base of support come election day regardless of whether Obama faced opposition beforehand or not? Would the primary really sour Dems who would have voted for Obama had they not had a new candidate to rally behind for the primary to the point where they just wouldn't vote for him when their candidate fell? (or vice versa if Obama should lose the nom)
Click to expand...

To your first question, the picture is pretty clear right now.. Although it is just too early to tell who will really come out on top.. Alot of things can happen from now till the Primaries.


On your second point, you simply do not run against an incumbent unless your own party has been going against said incumbent for a while. A Dem primary basically signals that the Democratic party is split. The only way would be if Obama had decided not to run for re election..
 
speculawyer said:
Awww . . . what's wrong, Karl? Did the Frankenstein monster you helped create become out of control? Yes. Yes it did. Palin. Cal Paladino. O'Donnell. Bachmann. They are the spawn of your divisive 51% strategy based on culture war tactics. Reap what you sow, jerk.
Click to expand...

Karl Rove didn't invent this strategy. He didn't create the monster. It was Roger Ailes who literally destroyed American politics. He is one of the worst people ever to live and when this country eventually self-destructs, he will be one of the top ten reasons it happened.
 
It indicates that there's enough room in the party for two different platforms, sure, but, given that this split should only exist for the duration of the primary, I still don't see why it's suicide. Would the party not unify after the primary and be just as strong as before? (This seems to be common wisdom that I'm just not getting, so I'm trying to point out specifically why I don't understand it)
 
traveler said:
It indicates that there's enough room in the party for two different platforms, sure, but, given that this split should only exist for the duration of the primary, I still don't see why it's suicide. Would the party not unify after the primary and be just as strong as before? (This seems to be common wisdom that I'm just not getting, so I'm trying to point out specifically why I don't understand it)
Click to expand...

Well the difference is that its an Incumbent.. Meaning whoever is running against him in the primary would be running against the policies his own party adopted during the presidency. It would get too messy too fast, and the Party would not be able to recover from it.

If this were a local election for a congressman, or maybe even a governor, the Party could probably survive in the right states/district. But on a national level were the nation is basically divided in half it is not feasible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

With Love, Meghan (Netflix) is everything I dreamed of and more
44
3K
Days like these... replied
  • Poll
Your ranking of all Fast and Furious movies
24
990
Rockondevil replied
Amouranth says Crypto-thieves invaded her house in the middle of the night, dragged her out of bed, and she shot one of them before SWAT arrived
Drama  2 3
122
11K
near replied
Project Gravitaur - Unreal engine to create film and VR of Bob Lazars "S4"
4
811
sono replied
  • Locked
El Salvador offers to house violent US criminals and deportees of any nationality in unprecedented deal
36
2K
EviLore replied
Top Bottom