• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2012 Community Thread |OT2| This thread title is now under military control

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NathanMcMahon

Banned
Here's something I think we can all find disgusting:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/16/u...n-the-campaign-trail-i-take-it-back.html?_r=1

From Capitol Hill to the Treasury Department, interviews granted only with quote approval have become the default position. Those officials who dare to speak out of school, but fearful of making the slightest off-message remark, shroud even the most innocuous and anodyne quotations in anonymity by insisting they be referred to as a “top Democrat” or a “Republican strategist.”

It is a double-edged sword for journalists, who are getting the on-the-record quotes they have long asked for, but losing much of the spontaneity and authenticity in their interviews.

Jim Messina, the Obama campaign manager, can be foul-mouthed. But readers would not know it because he deletes the curse words before approving his quotes. Brevity is not a strong suit of David Plouffe, a senior White House adviser. So he tightens up his sentences before giving them the O.K.

Stuart Stevens, the senior Romney strategist, is fond of disparaging political opponents by quoting authors like Walt Whitman and referring to historical figures like H. R. Haldeman, Richard Nixon’s chief of staff. But such clever lines later rarely make it past Mr. Stevens.

Many journalists spoke about the editing only if granted anonymity, an irony that did not escape them. No one said the editing altered the meaning of a quote. The changes were almost always small and seemingly unnecessary, they said.

Those who did speak on the record said the restrictions seem only to be growing. “It’s not something I’m particularly proud of because there’s a part of me that says, ‘Don’t do it, don’t agree to their terms,’ ” said Major Garrett, a correspondent for The National Journal. “There are times when this feels like I’m dealing with some of my editors. It’s like, ‘You just changed this because you could!’ ”

It was difficult to find a news outlet that had not agreed to quote approval, albeit reluctantly. Organizations like Bloomberg, The Washington Post, Vanity Fair, Reuters and The New York Times have all consented to interviews under such terms.
Click to expand...

seems to be a systemic failure all around. Kind of works in context with the recent blundering of the Romney Campaign.
 
T

Tim-E

Member
Even though Romney has no interest in releasing his own, he wants VP hopefuls to give him their tax documents

WOLFEBORO, N.H. — Aides to Mitt Romney have pored over video footage of potential running mates, studying hundreds of hours of Sunday show appearances, campaign debates and stump speeches for insight into how they handle unwelcome inquiries, even hecklers.

They have instructed possible No. 2’s to fill out a questionnaire with about 80 detailed and sometimes intrusive questions covering the financial and the personal, including, “Have you ever been unfaithful?”

And they have listened for political intangibles that are subjective but potent, like: is their style of speaking inviting or grating?

The Romney campaign has cloaked its vetting of possible vice-presidential nominees in secrecy, imposing corporate-style discretion on the sometimes unruly political ritual.

But as the presumptive Republican nominee prepares to unveil his selection, interviews with those inside and outside the campaign offer a glimpse into the scope and depth of the three-month process and the intense lobbying that Mr. Romney has faced from donors, operatives and elected officials trying to influence his choice. (Karl Rove and Senator Mitch McConnell, for example, have talked up Senator Marco Rubio.)

With their leave-no-document unturned thoroughness, advisers to the candidate readily acknowledge that he is conducting a search specifically designed to avoid the kind of rushed and risky selection of Sarah Palin that ultimately bedeviled John McCain four years ago, a choice that startled Mr. Romney as much as anyone.

Friends and advisers say that after assessing basic qualifications and personal chemistry, Mr. Romney has been guided by a simple principle: do no harm to the ticket.

Mr. Romney could disclose his pick as early as this week or after returning from a trip abroad the first week of August, according to those close to him. The campaign has already started sketching out the stagecraft of a vice-presidential debut.

A longtime Republican operative, Randy Bumps, who served as a chief strategist for the National Republican Senatorial Committee during the 2010 midterm elections, has relocated to Boston to oversee the rollout of the vice-presidential candidate, people familiar with the move said. And a former spokesman for the Republican National Committee, Kevin Sheridan, will become the communications director for the vice-presidential candidate.

Aides have begun discussing how to deploy Mr. Romney’s running mate on the trail and at fund-raisers. Campaign officials envision having the candidate headline a combination of $30,000-per-couple dinners in big cities and smaller events in second-tier locations, to gauge which proves more lucrative.

Those who spoke about the vetting and rollout did so on the condition of anonymity, citing orders to keep them under wraps. The campaign declined to comment.

For the potential running mates, the vetting process began with a telephone call from Mr. Romney, followed shortly thereafter by another from Beth Myers, a longtime Romney confidante who is overseeing the search. The candidates filled out a form authorizing the release of financial documents and background information. A team of lawyers is responsible for assessing each prospective candidate.

Many hands are involved, but the research is done by separate teams, so that only Ms. Myers and Mr. Romney have access to the full picture at all times.

Mr. Romney has taken a hands-on role. He checks in with Ms. Myers over the phone roughly every other day to discuss his thinking. And the candidate, a Harvard-trained lawyer, reviews some of the background information himself.

At the end of every day, confidential materials (tax returns, investment records and real estate documents) are returned to a secure vault inside the Romney campaign headquarters in Boston.
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/u...idential-search-began-months-ago.html?_r=1&hp
 
M

MonkeyKing

Member
We have to keep in mind that Romney was never a great candidate. He only looked good in comparison to the other really lousy candidates in the GOP field.

We should expect more ugly comments from the GOP for the rest of this campaign. They can't hype up Romney so they need to shit on Obama as much as possible.

Oh, and Huma Abedin is SMOKIN' hot.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
The Huma Abedin thing is just a reminder that racism and fear mongering against Arabs and Muslims is still tolerated in mainstream outlets of the US. Similar nonsense aimed at Latinos or gay people would likely be met with condemnations.
 
C

codhand

Member
PhoenixDark said:
The Huma Abedin thing is just a reminder that racism and fear mongering against Arabs and Muslims is still tolerated in mainstream outlets of the US. Similar nonsense aimed at Latinos or gay people would likely be met with condemnations.
Click to expand...

I just watched Battle of Algiers for the first time last night, a lot of its lessons still (sadly) apply.
 
D

Dram

Member
Perkins urges Romney to pick outspoken abortion critic in private meeting

http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/07/perkins-urges-romney-to-pick-outspoken-abortion-critic-129207.html
Family Research Council president Tony Perkins urged Mitt Romney in a private meeting yesterday to select a running mate who has been outspoken against abortion.

“My encouragement to him on a pro-life running mate isn’t just somebody who has checked the box [on opposing abortion rights] but somebody who has a portfolio of support on the culture of life,” Perkins said in a telephone interview. Perkins said he told Romney that Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell would all be good picks, but also raised the prospect of firebrand freshman Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.).

And Romney’s response?

“He’d make a good poker player,” Perkins cracked. “He was not going to let on one way or another.”

The social conservative leader said he “talked about how the vice-presidential pick is an important step in ensuring enthusiastic support among social conservatives.”

Perkins, who is in frequent contact with Romney advisers Peter Flaherty and Ed Gillespie, said he didn’t get a commitment from Romney to pick a running mate who opposes abortion rights because he didn’t need one.

“The campaign has clearly communicated that,” he said. “That was my understanding going in.”

But Perkins, who was unofficially representing an umbrella group of social conservatives who’ve been meeting for the last year on the presidential race and threw their support to Santorum this past winter, acknowledged that he didn’t know if a President Romney would be an ardent advocate for social conservatives.
“I don’t know that,” he said. “I could not say definitively what kind of president he would be. Will he advance those issues? I can’t say that. But I do know what Obama has done. So I’m cautiously optimistic about what a Romney administration would mean for the country. I certainly know it would be better than Obama’s term.”
Click to expand...
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
McDonnell would be a great pick if he wasn't such a hardcore fundamentalist on women's issues. Pawlenty seems like the least offensive pick. I think if he had stayed in the race he might have lasted as long as Santorum. Everyone got an anti-Romney boost during the primary, Pawlenty just withdrew before his time came.
 
A

Amir0x

Banned
TacticalFox88 said:
Romney Campaign: Obama can't create jobs because he spent his early years in Hawaii smoking something




What is this....I don't even....
Click to expand...

Haha, it's hilarious... the conservative nutcases in this country (and thus, now Romney's campaign) really do take their marching orders from Rush Limbaugh. He told him that's how they should attack Obama, and then the next day that's how they attacked Obama.

Embarrassing for Romney's campaign. It just keeps getting worse for those guys
 
A

Allard

Member
Amir0x said:
Haha, it's hilarious... the conservative nutcases in this country (and thus, now Romney's campaign) really do take their marching orders from Rush Limbaugh. He told him that's how they should attack Obama, and then the next day that's how they attacked Obama.

Embarrassing for Romney's campaign. It just keeps getting worse for those guys
Click to expand...

Embarrassing not just that they are doing it, but doing it so early. We had to wait till deep into the general election before McCains group went off the deep end (with exception to Palin nomination), its the throw shit at the wall strategy to see if something sticks and unfortunately for Romney, everyone can see he is just throwing shit.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Amir0x said:
Haha, it's hilarious... the conservative nutcases in this country (and thus, now Romney's campaign) really do take their marching orders from Rush Limbaugh. He told him that's how they should attack Obama, and then the next day that's how they attacked Obama.

Embarrassing for Romney's campaign. It just keeps getting worse for those guys
Click to expand...

320x240.jpg


Rush Limbaugh's bust in Missouri's State Capitol.
 
C

Clevinger

Member
Amir0x said:
I love this line because what Republicans really mean but can't say is Obama campaign is Karl Rove style politics at its finest/worst.
Click to expand...

And what's funny is this isn't even anywhere close to as bad as the worst of Rove. Obama isn't paying people to smear a Vietnam vet's service to his country, or spreading the rumor that a candidate had an illegitimate black baby. He's smearing a businessman who did a lot of shitty and/or shady things.
 
J

Jackson50

Member
GhaleonEB said:
The Senate was intended to be more deliberative, but also to function with majority rule. The filibuster came later.

We can have a deliberative Senate that also functions. I do not believe this can be accomplished without a major reform (and removal) of the filibuster.
Click to expand...
For much of the Senate's history, the majority was respected even with the filibuster. The permanent supermajority is a recent phenomenon. But now that the dam has broken, the problem will not correct itself. Moreover, I'd favor removal to the status quo. But I prefer to retain a limited filibuster to ensure minority party access to a healthy deliberation. The minority has been completely marginalized in the House. And that would be unfortunate occurrence in the Senate. I think we can produce a workable balance.
 
A

Amir0x

Banned
Clevinger said:
And what's funny is this isn't even anywhere close to as bad as the worst of Rove. Obama isn't paying people to smear a Vietnam vet's service to his country, or spreading the rumor that a candidate had an illegitimate black baby. He's smearing a businessman who did a lot of shitty and/or shady things.
Click to expand...

That's true. I'm not going to say every Obama attack is truthful, because they're not, but the nature of a good political campaign is that you strike early, define your opponent and then drip drip drip to build a steady narrative. That's what Obama is doing - what rankles Republicans is that he is doing it more effectively than any Democrat has done in a generation. And that he's literally pulling plays directly from the go-to Republican handbook of gut-and-run politics. And, as you say, he's really only pulling from the margins... he's not even going near the worst of Karl Rove politicking.

So it's funny to see hypocritical Republicans like Kosmo try to cry "b-b-but Chi-ca-go politics, diiiiiirtiest in the nation!" It's pathetic really.

RustyNails said:
320x240.jpg


Rush Limbaugh's bust in Missouri's State Capitol.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know about that bust. Shameful every time I see it.
 
N

NathanMcMahon

Banned
Clevinger said:
And what's funny is this isn't even anywhere close to as bad as the worst of Rove. Obama isn't paying people to smear a Vietnam vet's service to his country, or spreading the rumor that a candidate had an illegitimate black baby. He's smearing a businessman who did a lot of shitty and/or shady things.
Click to expand...

Hey, his kids are patriots because they helped with his campaign, so watch what you say mister.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Krauser Kat said:
Thom is pretty left its hard for me to even listen to him.
Click to expand...
Thom is sensible. Yeah he's a vegan and believes in protecting environment, what's so bad about it? 80% of my politics knowledge came from listening to him. He always has tons of things to say and educate people about, and is always racing against the commercial break. He also invites Sen. Bernie Sanders every friday to discuss the state of Congress.

Rush Limbaugh on the other hand barfs poisonous diarrhea out of his mouth for not more than 1 hour in a 3 hour show. More people get educated by scratching their asses than listening to Limbaugh.

Edit: By the way, Thom made the Citizens United author squirm and admit he didn't know jack shit live on air.
 
G

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
Kosmo said:
I don't think that means what you think it means.
Click to expand...

Correction: They're trying to use the fact holder's name might be attached to F&F documents made after the details about F&F were made public and the program was ended (in other words, when Holder was GUARANTEED to know about it) to prove their accusation that he knew about it while it was going on (even if his name isn't attached to ANYTHING related to F&F documented during F&F).


You're right, it isn't ex-post-facto in the sense that they're retroactively applying a law. What they're instead doing is retroactively applying his knowledge and involvement in the invesetigation of fast and furious as proof that he held that knowledge and was involved in the operation of fast and furious. Or in other weords, a witch hunt where the person either gets burned at the stake for floating and being a witch or dies from drowning and not being a witch.

The only documents the administration has claimed executive privilege over were made after the program was publicly disclosed, ended operations, and holder ordered in the inspector general to begin an investigation. That's not related to showing Holder's involvement with the death of a border patrol agent (and that's what they're going for).
 
K

Kosmo

Banned
Well, there goes that assumed vote:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...k-pantywaist-lightweight-blowhard_648688.html

The star of a pro-Obama super PAC ad is speaking out against ... President Barack Obama.

"I could really care less about Obama," Donnie Box says of President Obama, according to In These Times. "I think Obama is a jerk, a pantywaist, a lightweight, a blowhard. He hasn't done a goddamn thing that he said he would do. When he had a Democratic Senate and Democratic Congress, he didn't do a damn thing. He doesn't have the guts to say what’s on his mind."

Box, In These Times reports, won't be voting for Obama.
Click to expand...
 
A

Amir0x

Banned
Clevinger said:
Heh, Rick Perry is joining in on the schadenfreude with saying Romney should release more tax returns
Click to expand...

As is National Review

at this point the fact Romney is still resisting is so mesmerizing because now it's clear that something must be in the tax returns. Nobody would take this much heat for this long if it was all dandy.
 
K

Kosmo

Banned
Amir0x said:
As is National Review

at this point the fact Romney is still resisting is so mesmerizing because now it's clear that something must be in the tax returns. Nobody would take this much heat for this long if it was all dandy.
Click to expand...

...so said the birthers...
 
X

XMonkey

lacks enthusiasm.
Can we please get some conservative Republican posters around here that aren't as embarrassing as Kosmo? I know there has to be some of you out there reading this thread.

edit - Fixed to be a little more specific...
 
C

Chichikov

Member
Amir0x said:
As is National Review

at this point the fact Romney is still resisting is so mesmerizing because now it's clear that something must be in the tax returns. Nobody would take this much heat for this long if it was all dandy.
Click to expand...
I honestly don't get it.
I mean they'll have to release them before the debates, they got to know that.

The only explanation is that it's all 12 dimensional chess, and on the debate, Romney will drop a stack of 30 1040EZ forms that he did with Turbo Tax basic showing a 95% effective tax rate.

xY4kf.gif
 
G

GTI Guy

Member
National Review - Release the Returns

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/309738/release-returns-editors

Mitt Romney is steadfastly resisting calls to release additional years of his personal tax returns, arguing — not without good reason — that this demand is part of a fishing expedition by the Obama campaign, which hopes to exploit Romney’s personal wealth and successful business career as part of a class-warfare election strategy. Romney argues that whatever he releases will not be enough to satisfy the Obama campaign and its factota in the media, who are, once again, proving their bias and double standards. Romney is right, but he should release the returns anyway. Let them go fish.

We doubt that there is anything truly surprising in Romney’s additional personal tax returns (he’s already released 2010 and will release more from 2011). We already know that he has made vast amounts of money, that he gives generously to his church and to charities, that he has set up trusts for his family, that he maintains bank accounts and investments overseas, and that he takes advantages of such benefits as are available to him under our ridiculously complex tax code. If there is scandal to be had of that, it can be had from the information that already is available. But there is no scandal in that: Romney is a wealthy man — and he has complicated personal finances, something that is typical of wealthy men. In fact, Romney’s personal finances are a very good case study in what’s wrong with the American tax system and regulatory climate.

The Romney campaign says he has released as many returns as candidate John Kerry did in 2004, and cites Teresa Heinz Kerry’s refusal to release any of her tax returns. Neither is an apt comparison. John Kerry actually released returns from 1999 through 2003, and also released tax returns during his Senate runs. As for Teresa Heinz, Romney isn’t the wealthy spouse of a candidate, but the candidate himself. In 2008, John McCain released two years of returns, but he had been filling out financial disclosure forms for decades as a senator. Romney protests that he is not legally obliged to release any tax returns. Of course not. He is no longer in the realm of the private sector, though, where he can comply with the letter of the law with the Securities and Exchange Commission and leave it at that. Perceptions matter.

Romney may feel impatience with requirements that the political culture imposes on a presidential candidate that he feels are pointless (and inconvenient). But he’s a politician running for the highest office in the land, and his current posture is probably unsustainable. In all likelihood, he won’t be able to maintain a position that looks secretive and is a departure from campaign conventions. The only question is whether he releases more returns now, or later — after playing more defense on the issue and sustaining more hits. There will surely be a press feeding frenzy over new returns, but better to weather it in the middle of July.

If he releases more returns, Romney will be in a better position to resist the inevitable demands for even more disclosures. More important, he will be in a better position to pivot his campaign to what should be its focus — telling a story, through a series of detailed, substantive speeches, about where he wants to take the country. It is to President Obama’s advantage to fight the election out over tactics and minutiae. By drawing out the argument over the returns, Romney is playing into the president’s hands. He should release them, respond to any attacks they bring, and move on.
Click to expand...
 
B

Byakuya769

Member
reilo said:
Conserva-GAF really need to stop with this fallacy. Many of us have repeated over and over that we would be okay with a simple majority rule. Exactly as the House functions.
Click to expand...
But if liberals could pass their policies without filibuster shit people might like their policies!!!
 
X

XMonkey

lacks enthusiasm.
Cyan said:
ez, AB, gaborn? We got some good conservatives around here.
Click to expand...
I guess I should have rephrased my statement and said Republicans instead. ez and Gaborn consider themselves libertarians I think (well, Gaborn for sure)? Not sure if AB identifies as Republican or not, but you're right, AB is good people.
 
T

The Librarian

Banned
GTI Guy said:
National Review - Release the Returns

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/309738/release-returns-editors
Click to expand...

We doubt that there is anything truly surprising in Romney’s additional personal tax returns (he’s already released 2010 and will release more from 2011).
Click to expand...

How can you say that? When Romney decided to not release his tax returns, he was looking at the costs and benefits of doing so. He decided that the heat he would take for not releasing them would outweigh the criticism he would receive for what's in them.

I think it's just likely he paid taxes in the single digits for some years, and people will get angry. And rightly so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Cronos features combat mechanic akin to Dead Space dismemberment and Alan Wake 2’s flashlight. Silent Hill 2 team now in preproduction for next title
News
10
1K
TerribleAtThisGame replied
Citizen Sleeper 2: Starward Vector - Reviews Thread
18
1K
Punished Miku replied
Frostpunk 2 | Review Thread
Review
12
2K
geary replied
The Great Graphics Con - No, this probably isn't what you think it is!
21
1K
Trilobit replied
Has the internet regressed reporting of news?
Clickbait
30
3K
StueyDuck replied
Top Bottom