Support NeoGAF

[RDreamer]

He's not changed his positions. He's not a democrat. He's a republican whose had his base move from him. Where is there any motive to run as a democrat? He's not Arlen Specter who did not share many of the orthodox beliefs of his party (he supported Affirmative Action, voted against giving millionaires tax cuts in the 90s, somewhat pro-union, etc).

I'd rather have him running in the republican party than the current tea party crazies but why on earth would you cheer for him running as a dem. Are people that nostalgic for the GOP of 90s?

Because his party treated him like trash in the primary, and then he made some comments about the Republican party needing big ideas again and got blackballed by the party afterwards.

I dunno if you're referring to my posts, but I'm not cheering for him to run as a democrat or anything like that. If was just musing about what his next move would be because of what I wrote up there. It seems like the Republican party doesn't want people like him anymore. And yeah even as a Republican I wouldn't vote for him, unless there was a moron on the other side, then maybe, but definitely not likely. I'm personally glad he did get ousted, though, because I think this election cycle would be much harder with Huntsman on the other side rather than Romney.

 

[sc0la]

At this point I'm not even sure a majority of republicans in Congress want the Ryan budget.

Oh they still want it, and would vote for it in an instant if they thought it would pass (no senate or WH control). Some on the margin are smart enough to know that saying so is potentially toxic.

 

[el retorno]

Because his party treated him like trash in the primary, and then he made some comments about the Republican party needing big ideas again and got blackballed by the party afterwards.

I dunno if you're referring to my posts, but I'm not cheering for him to run as a democrat or anything like that. If was just musing about what his next move would be because of what I wrote up there. It seems like the Republican party doesn't want people like him anymore. And yeah even as a Republican I wouldn't vote for him, unless there was a moron on the other side, then maybe, but definitely not likely. I'm personally glad he did get ousted, though, because I think this election cycle would be much harder with Huntsman on the other side rather than Romney.

I was referring more to Aaron's post. I mean I'm not against the guy and understand people cheering for him in the REPUBLICAN party, or accepting him as a democrat but I don't get why people would be cheering for someone whose policies are not of the democratic party to represent them in congress. I mean work with the other side but all that having him as a democratic sen. would do would be push the party further to the right in their original bargaining positions

I'd also on the question of motivation put him more in the David Frum camp who wants to take back his party rather than abandon it. If he does address the convention I hope it is as a republican and a man who disagrees with Obama but puts his country first and doesn't feel that his party has. I wouldn't want him coming as a "convert" unless he changes his positions.

 

[Aaron Strife]

I was referring more to Aaron's post. I mean I'm not against the guy and understand people cheering for him in the REPUBLICAN party, or accepting him as a democrat but I don't get why people would be cheering for someone whose policies are not of the democratic party to represent them in congress. I mean work with the other side but all that having him as a democratic sen. would do would be push the party further to the right in their original bargaining positions

I'd also on the question of motivation put him more in the David Frum camp who wants to take back his party rather than abandon it. If he does address the convention I hope it is as a republican and a man who disagrees with Obama but puts his country first and doesn't feel that his party has. I wouldn't want him coming as a "convert" unless he changes his positions.

I guess I'm looking at his social positions more than his economic positions, and it's true that he supported the Ryan budget. I just think it'd be pretty easy to walk it back if he ever put the D next to his name.

It'd be better if more Republicans were like Huntsman than Democrats, but if he ever moved leftward and decided to go for a run in Utah as a D, I'd support it. Huntsman changing a few positions and running as a Democrat would be much easier to envision than Michele Bachmann having some sort of spiritual awakening and becoming a hippie liberal.

 

[Loudninja]

High Number Of Swing-State Residents Watching Controversial Obama Super PAC Ad Online

The Crossroads ad is airing on TV; the Priorities ad so far is online-only (though it is getting free heavy rotation on cable news as the controversy rages on). But Priorities points out the ad is being seen by the very voters Democrats want watching it. Below is a breakdown of the top five states in which the Priorities ad is getting its YouTube clicks, via Priorities:

1. Florida: 48,979
2. Pennsylvania: 28,473
3. California: 28, 084
4. Ohio: 23,739
5. Virginia: 22,887

Take out California, and you’ve got four of the most targeted swing states this cycle. Of course, there’s no way to tell whether the swing-state residents clicking on the ad are over 18, or registered to vote (though that also rings true of TV ads).

Nor are the numbers huge — or anywhere near the viewership of a broadcast TV spot — but they do suggest Priorities is getting its message to the voters it wants to reach, even as the ad agitates Republicans and Team Obama.

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...versial-obama-super-pac-ad.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

 

[The Chosen One]

Ed Rendel doesn't even try to hide anymore that he's a sleeper agent for Romney.

 

[Loudninja]

Ed Rendel doesn't even try to hide anymore that he's a sleeper agent for Romney.

Yep.

 

[el retorno]

I know this point as been beaten to death but the times we're living with now mirror the Gilded ages of the turn of the 20th century. I mean we have runaway tycoons (koch bros) and giant banks which have lead us to an amazing concentration of wealth in just a few hands. We even have some crazy guy yelling about gold and monetary standards

 

[Black Mamba]

High Number Of Swing-State Residents Watching Controversial Obama Super PAC Ad Online

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...versial-obama-super-pac-ad.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

Take out California, and you’ve got four of the most targeted swing states this cycle. Of course, there’s no way to tell whether the swing-state residents clicking on the ad are over 18, or registered to vote (though that also rings true of TV ads).

Am I missing something here? Since you have to be 18 to be registered to vote, why did the "registered to vote" part come into play? Did I read this incorrectly?

 

[el retorno]

Am I missing something here? Since you have to be 18 to be registered to vote, why did the "registered to vote" part come into play? Did I read this incorrectly?

They could be over 18 but not registered

 

[jiggle]

think the whole tax thing will have blown over by Nov, had Romney released his tax returns when the the (non-primary) attacks first start?

 

[el retorno]

think the whole tax thing will have blown over by Nov, had Romney released his tax returns when the the (non-primary) attacks first start?

Depends on what is in them.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Depends on what is in them.

Yup. Romney has decided that taking this heat is better than releasing them. Given how bad it's gotten, one has to imagine the contents would be even worse.

 

[B-Dubs]

Yup. Romney has decided that taking this heat is better than releasing them. Given how bad it's gotten, one has to imagine the contents would be even worse.

He has to have gotten big tax refunds, nothing but that could be worse than paying no taxes. Imagine someone making 23mil a year and then instead of paying taxes he got money back from the government. It's the only thing I could think of that's worse looking than having low to almost none existent tax rates.

 

[el retorno]

Yup. Romney has decided that taking this heat is better than releasing them. Given how bad it's gotten, one has to imagine the contents would be even worse.

I mean if its just a rate less than what he's already show I think It'd blow over but I'm thinking its either below 7 or so percent or something with the gifts or swiss accounts if he's not releasing them.

 

[TacticalFox88]

I'm still in the camp that thinks Obama knows EXACTLY why he won't release them, but refuses to say so publicly for obvious reason.

 

[el retorno]

I'm still in the camp that thinks Obama knows EXACTLY why he won't release them, but refuses to say so publicly for obvious reason.

If that's true I'd expect some speculation that gets pretty close and maybe a superpac ad.

 

[gcubed]

I'm still in the camp that thinks Obama knows EXACTLY why he won't release them, but refuses to say so publicly for obvious reason.

There is no way the campaign and surrogates would put this much heat and attention on the issue if it was going to backfire.

 

[Guevara]

Romney promised to release his 2011 returns "when they're done" and filed for an extension to October 15.

October surprise?

 

[Chichikov]

CNN and TIME suspend Fareed Zakaria for plagiarism

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/08/cnn-suspends-fareed-zakaria-for-plagiarism-131695.html?hp=l1_b2

Not Fareed! NOOOOOOOOOOOO!
He's my methadone for the Sunday morning talk shows addiction.
Without my GPS it's only a question of time before I start doing black tar heroin, or worse, watching David Gregory.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

I don't think he ever expected the heat for not releasing his taxes would be this bad, so I have to think he would have been at least slightly better off releasing the returns very early and weathering the storm for the rest of the year. At this point though, there's absolutely no time for whatever is in those returns to drift out of the election conversation so he just has to stick to his guns. It's pretty much gone off in the worst possible way for him.

 

[Mike M]

I don't think he ever expected the heat for not releasing his taxes would be this bad, so I have to think he would have been at least slightly better off releasing the returns very early and weathering the storm for the rest of the year. At this point though, there's absolutely no time for whatever is in those returns to drift out of the election conversation so he just has to stick to his guns. It's pretty much gone off in the worst possible way for him.

Well, short of the actual returns leaking and having his stonewalling on the issue not only amount to nothing but exacerbate the damage.

 

[Chichikov]

I don't think he ever expected the heat for not releasing his taxes would be this bad, so I have to think he would have been at least slightly better off releasing the returns very early and weathering the storm for the rest of the year. At this point though, there's absolutely no time for whatever is in those returns to drift out of the election conversation so he just has to stick to his guns. It's pretty much gone off in the worst possible way for him.

He got to know that he can't carry that to the debates, right?

 

[Plinko]

Romney promised to release his 2011 returns "when they're done" and filed for an extension to October 15.

October surprise?

"Crap, how do we shift this money back into the United States so it shows up on our taxes?"

2 years won't cut it, Mitt. We want the full 10 years of back tax returns.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I'm still in the camp that thinks Obama knows EXACTLY why he won't release them, but refuses to say so publicly for obvious reason.

Likewise.

If that's true I'd expect some speculation that gets pretty close and maybe a superpac ad.

Heck, the Obama campaign is doing it themselves.

 

[jiggle]

He got to know that he can't carry that to the debates, right?

if he had such foresight, he would've started cleaning after his taxes the moment political ambition dawned on him

 

[el retorno]

Heck, the Obama campaign is doing it themselves.

More will come if they do know whats in them. Romeny doesn't flat out lie about legal matters so if they know they can hit the nail on the head and Romeny will only be able to muster a "dirty politics" line but won't lie. I think people would pick up on that.

I'd expect an add which goes through the theories kind of like that son of boss ad with the swiss and gift things (if they have a hint thats what it is) and ending on some kind of line questioning how we can trust him with our finances if won't be honest with us with his.

 

[thatbox]

I just read this detailed description of the DNC plans. It's going to be fucking brutal.

The "Real People" segments, the Social Contrast stuff, and then using Republican speakers to hammer Romney; awesome.

Holy shit, that sounds so fucking destructive. Considering what Romney has to use the GOP convention for, there's no way their bumps from the coverage of these events will be anywhere near comparable.

 

[The Librarian]

Bahahaha at Chuck Todd's face.

Here's a link to the video.

 

[el retorno]

Bahahaha at Chuck Todd's face.

Here's a link to the video.

Its better in motion. The disbelief.

 

[Guevara]

Bahahaha at Chuck Todd's face.

Here's a link to the video.

Somehow this is even more embarrassing for Romney in video than I was imagining based on the quote.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Bahahaha at Chuck Todd's face.

Here's a link to the video.

Chuck Todd on Romney: Not sure if want.

 

[Drek]

Why are Dems so excited about Huntsman maybe running again? He's not liberal or even centrist. He's pretty far to the right. He's for the elimination of Capital Gains tax, lowering the top rate to 23 percent eliminating Alternative Minimum Tax.

He's just a little more sane on social issues.

1. Not everyone who would be excited about Huntsman running as a dem are actually dems. I'm an independent and think that Huntsman is a very good public servant who deserves to be in a meaningful office.

2. By electing more people who are "more sane on social issues" we can set aside the frivolity inherent in the federal government legislating morality and instead have a real debate about core federal issues (economics, public welfare, foreign policy, etc.).

3. If someone like Huntsman could run as a dem and win a traditionally GOP seat in a state like Utah and we saw more dems like him taking GOP seats we'd wind up with a lot of legislation that lands somewhere between his views and the dem party platform, which to me is the sweet spot for most public policy.

 

[Snake]

Bahahaha at Chuck Todd's face.

Here's a link to the video.

Maaan.

For the first time in ages I'm going to stroll into the right-wing blogs to see how they're reacting to the last few days.

edit: lol, maybe I spoke too soon. First top recommended diary I see on Redstate? "Harry Reid is a pedophile." I think my curiosity has been expended.

 

[GhaleonEB]

More will come if they do know whats in them. Romeny doesn't flat out lie about legal matters so if they know they can hit the nail on the head and Romeny will only be able to muster a "dirty politics" line but won't lie. I think people would pick up on that.

I'd expect an add which goes through the theories kind of like that son of boss ad with the swiss and gift things (if they have a hint thats what it is) and ending on some kind of line questioning how we can trust him with our finances if won't be honest with us with his.

I think there will be a lot more to come. The way the Obama camp is escalating the issue gradually and slowly adding more specificity to me implies they are building toward something closer to the election. If nothing else, the gradual drip drip will keep this in the headlines all the way through.

Personally, I fully expect the returns to get leaked to the press at some point, probably quite close to the election.

 

[el retorno]

I think there will be a lot more to come. The way the Obama camp is escalating the issue gradually and slowly adding more specificity to me implies they are building toward something closer to the election. If nothing else, the gradual drip drip will keep this in the headlines all the way through.

Personally, I fully expect the returns to get leaked to the press at some point, probably quite close to the election.

by who?

 

[jiggle]

I think there will be a lot more to come. The way the Obama camp is escalating the issue gradually and slowly adding more specificity to me implies they are building toward something closer to the election. If nothing else, the gradual drip drip will keep this in the headlines all the way through.

Personally, I fully expect the returns to get leaked to the press at some point, probably quite close to the election.

yeah
too big a card to play this early if they don't have something to keep it going

 

[Wray]

Dems won't win every election. When they lose, I'd rather a reasonable Rep win than a crazy person.

Maybe not "every", but demographic advantage can lead a particular party dominating a general election for extended periods of time. Don't believe me, look at the Republican party during the late 60's, 70's, and 80's.

68 - Nixon
72 - Nixon
80 - Reagan
84 - Reagan
88 - Bush

That's a 20 year period of republican domination. All of those elections were blowouts too I might add.They won not because their candidates were so overwhelmingly superior, but because they had such a gigantic demographic advantage thanks to the Southern Strategy being at its height.

And it would have been 6 straight wins if not for Watergate and the unprecedented scandal it was. Even so, it took a southern democratic to beat Ford in 76, and it was a close election.

That's what you're going to see over the next 20 years or so (Maybe longer), except in favor of democrats this time. The absolutely huge Gen Y generation combined with a soaring Latino population is going to give democrats a demographic advantage equally potent to the Southern Strategy.

 

[GhaleonEB]

by who?

Wikileaks!

(I have no idea. Stuff is leaked to the press all the time.)

 

[TacticalFox88]

Maybe not "every", but demographic advantage can lead a particular party dominating a general election for extended periods of time. Don't believe me, look at the Republican party during the late 60's, 70's, and 80's.

68 - Nixon
72 - Nixon
80 - Reagan
84 - Reagan
88 - Bush

That's a 20 year period of republican domination. All of those elections were blowouts too I might add.They won not because their candidates were so overwhelmingly superior, but because they had such a gigantic demographic advantage thanks to the Southern Strategy being at its height.

And it would have been 6 straight wins if not for Watergate and the unprecedented scandal it was. Even so, it took a southern democratic to beat Ford in 76, and it was a close election.

That's what you're going to see over the next 20 years or so (Maybe longer), except in favor of democrats this time. The absolutely huge Gen Y generation combined with a soaring Latino population is going to give democrats a demographic advantage equally potent to the Southern Strategy.

Obama better set a foundation so in the next twenty years of Democratic domination we set the country forward so far ahead, that we'll surpass Europe, eventually.

I'd be heated, if they pissed away this opportunity to do the country some real good.

 

[Drek]

Personally, I fully expect the returns to get leaked to the press at some point, probably quite close to the election.

It won't be until mid-October or so though. Any leaker would be doing it to hurt Romney and that is when it would hurt the most. At the same time any journalist who got them would absolutely prefer to sit on them until within a few weeks of the election, when it would be a career defining bomb to be the trigger man on.

Just picture a New York Times writer dropping that bomb on October 15th. At a minimum he'd have MSNBC and CNN fighting over him, multiple Op-Ed offers pouring in, and likely almost as many book deals. It's instant stardom if you drop the bomb just before the election. You do it now and you're important for the duration of the news cycle, but you aren't instantly the investigative journalist of your generation.

 

[el retorno]

Wikileaks!

(I have no idea. Stuff is leaked to the press all the time.)

I just don't know who'd have access and want to leak it.

 

[Drek]

Obama better set a foundation so in the next twenty years of Democratic domination we set the country forward so far ahead, that we'll surpass Europe, eventually.

I'd be heated, if they pissed away this opportunity to do the country some real good.

I wouldn't consider surpassing Europe a necessarily good thing. The EU is in worse shape than the U.S. right now.

What this country needs is a reset to the pre-Southern Strategy days where guys like FDR and Kennedy could deliver a clear message on moving the nation forward in terms of infrastructure, technology, etc. through a collaborative mix of public and private initiatives.

 

[Chumly]

It won't be until mid-October or so though. Any leaker would be doing it to hurt Romney and that is when it would hurt the most. At the same time any journalist who got them would absolutely prefer to sit on them until within a few weeks of the election, when it would be a career defining bomb to be the trigger man on.

Just picture a New York Times writer dropping that bomb on October 15th. At a minimum he'd have MSNBC and CNN fighting over him, multiple Op-Ed offers pouring in, and likely almost as many book deals. It's instant stardom if you drop the bomb just before the election. You do it now and you're important for the duration of the news cycle, but you aren't instantly the investigative journalist of your generation.

Could a journalist be prosecuted for leaking tax returns?

 

[el retorno]

I wouldn't consider surpassing Europe a necessarily good thing. The EU is in worse shape than the U.S. right now.

The EU's structure also currently resembles the Articles of Confederation. They take steps to federalism they'd be doing much better.

Could a journalist be prosecuted for leaking tax returns?

EV I think answered this earlier. Depends on how they got them. They'd probably just leak the info and not that actual return itself

 

[tranciful]

yet more GOPers charged with voter fraud

http://politic365.com/2012/08/09/4-...tant-and-disgraceful-voter-fraud-in-michigan/

It feels like Republicans are committing a majority of the voter fraud -- someone should gather some statistics from the past year.

 

[The Technomancer]

Yup. Romney has decided that taking this heat is better than releasing them. Given how bad it's gotten, one has to imagine the contents would be even worse.

I thought for a while that he was possibly not releasing them even if what was in them was fine because he didn't want to seem like the kind of person who gives in, but he clearly doesn't care about seeming weak anymore

 

[el retorno]

I just saw this on Maddow.

Mitt Romney is literally a bank, some people in Texas are paying their mortgage to Mitt. Not to something run by Mitt but Mitt himself. They even refinanced with him


Also this was funny to me.

Lured by the prospect of buying five rent-to-own houses in the Houston suburbs without putting up any of his own money, Mr. Romney jumped into a speculative deal geared toward “affluent free enterprise capitalists who desire a quality investment with tax shelter benefits,” according to a prospectus. Based on frothy assumptions of a never-ending real estate boom, it was unlike the data-driven, analytical investments that came to define his later successes at Bain Capital.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/10/u...romney-made-his-loss-a-couples-gain.html?_r=1

 

[Drek]

The EU's structure also currently resembles the Articles of Confederation. They take steps to federalism they'd be doing much better.

Exactly. They have a more socially progressive standard, but that is a large reason they're so screwed up right now.

Instead of moving towards a "how do you minimize how much a person HAS TO work?" we need to move towards a society where people embrace their work as how they help to better society.

 

[B-Dubs]

I just saw this on Maddow.

Mitt Romney is literally a bank, some people in Texas are paying their mortgage to Mitt. Not to something run by Mitt but Mitt himself. They even refinanced with him


Also this was funny to me.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/10/u...romney-made-his-loss-a-couples-gain.html?_r=1

No, no. This can't be real. How the fuck is this even allowed? Borrowing money I can understand, but a god damn....no.

Corporations aren't people, people are corporations. I'm sorry but this whole thing is fucked up, did he even have a banking license?