• 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.

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Obama voters knocking someone running a campaign on platitudes. That's rich.

Obama says things like "I'm want to work on tax credits to help small businesses" and "I want to pass regulation to extend student loan rates to help students get a higher education". Romney says "I'm going to help hard-working Americans". You cannot tell me that you don't see the difference Kosmo. One of these people is proposing courses of action, the other is vaguely saying that he'll make things better without any details whatsoever.
 

LosDaddie

Banned
Romney has stated his healthcare plan many times. It's the same plan REpubs ran on in 2010. Sell insurance across state lines, and tort reform.
 

ToxicAdam

Member
Obama can still win over independents on Romney's godawful foreign policy stances. Trade war with China and tough talk on Iran isn't going to play well with middle America.

Not saying it's a slam dunk, but it will mean something in places where the economy isn't so bad.


I'm kind of curious to see Romney's negative numbers in Ohio in that upcoming PPP poll. He's been getting hit pretty hard by Bain attack ads.
 

Kosmo

Banned
Obama says things like "I'm want to work on tax credits to help small businesses" and "I want to pass regulation to extend student loan rates to help students get a higher education". Romney says "I'm going to help hard-working Americans". You cannot tell me that you don't see the difference Kosmo. One of these people is proposing courses of action, the other is vaguely saying that he'll make things better without any details whatsoever.

Take your pick of plans in the issue of your choosing:

http://www.mittromney.com/issues

On the two issues you bring up, here is his stance:

The U.S. economy’s 35 percent corporate tax rate is among the highest in the industrial world, reducing the ability of our nation’s businesses to compete in the global economy and to invest and create jobs at home. By limiting investment and growth, the high rate of corporate tax also hurts U.S. wages.

Cut the corporate rate to 25 percent
Strengthen and make permanent the R&D tax credit
Switch to a territorial tax system
Repeal the corporate Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)

What he did on education in MA:

He proposed the John and Abigail Adams Scholarship, providing a four-year tuition-free scholarship to any state institution for any Massachusetts students that scored among the top 25 percent in their school. Mitt also defended the requirement that high school students pass a rigorous test to graduate and saw students and educators respond to heightened accountability with dramatically improved performance.

Specifically on student loans:

April 27, 2012
But Romney, interestingly, agreed with the president. "Particularly with the number of college graduates that can't find work or that can only find work well beneath their skill level, I fully support the effort to extend the low interest rate on student loans," Romney told reporters Monday in Florida.
 

Jackson50

Member
Man, I really hope Kennedy retires during a second Obama term (with a Dem Senate). The conservative justices are nothing more than Republican shills.
Speaking of SCOTUS vacancies, the next appointment which affects the balance of the court is going to be acrimonious. Man, it's going to be ugly.
Obama can still win over independents on Romney's godawful foreign policy stances. Trade war with China and tough talk on Iran isn't going to play well with middle America.

Not saying it's a slam dunk, but it will mean something in places where the economy isn't so bad.


I'm kind of curious to see Romney's negative numbers in Ohio in that upcoming PPP poll. He's been getting hit pretty hard by Bain attack ads.
I doubt foreign policy is going to move many voters for Obama. Outside of major wars, it's typically perceived as an obscure issue from which voters feel disconnected. And it's been largely ignored this cycle.
 

ToxicAdam

Member
TF: I think I just realized you're asking for logical consistency from American political parties.

There is none, and there's no way to understand it without studying history. You might note that the Lincoln (R) freed the slaves, Teddy (R) was an environmentalist, Wilson (D) was a sexist, and Nixon (R) did a lot for the environment.

And yes, as TA hates mentioning, Reagan in practice was far more economically liberal than conservatives pretend, though he was still a terrible president.

I suggest studying American history at least back to JFK, the first modern Democrat. To understand Republicans, you have to understand and learn about the evangelical embrace that Reagan conducted and how it's nearly brought down our entire country since then.

It's slightly disingenuous, or ignorant, to characterize Reagan as having done many things that were liberal or socialist. Granted, despite the apotheosis of Reagan, he was not absolutely conservative. Although, he had to operate within a divided government. Again, the U.S.'s institutional arrangement muddles the picture. Undoubtedly, having to cooperate with a Democratic House and, towards the end of his term, Senate moderated the legislation passed during his presidency.


:nods head:
 

Clevinger

Member
Obama voters knocking someone running a campaign on platitudes. That's rich.

Who could forget the Obama platitude where he said he'd go into Pakistan if he had to in order to get Bin Laden. He certainly wasn't criticized by Romney and McCain for it at the time either.
 

Chumly

Member
Can we go back and reiterate what a mindfuck it is that a Tea Bagger like Scalia is on the SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, FOR LIFE?

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...ages-against-obama-on-immigration.php?ref=fpa

Pretty sure this was posted/mentioned already, but dear fucking god. The man is so blatantly backwards.

Can't wait for Scalia to support forcing federal benefits SSM in Massachusetts and other states that allow SSM. I mean its STATE rights.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Wow, that Romney spokesperson dodged the Arizona question TWENTY TWO times. Holy shit.
 

Jackson50

Member
Probably just taking notes from Jay Carney addressing cabinet members' car accidents.
tumblr_m0ty9iyFjv1rozozlo1_400.gif
Wow, that Romney spokesperson dodged the Arizona question TWENTY TWO times. Holy shit.
See, that's not cowardly. That's bravery and fastness. God bless the Romney Campaign.
 
Take your pick of plans in the issue of your choosing:

http://www.mittromney.com/issues

On the two issues you bring up, here is his stance:



What he did on education in MA:



Specifically on student loans:

Then I guess you will be voting for Obama. He too has offered to lower the corporate tax rate to 25% by eliminating loopholes. Also wants to keep the R&D tax credit. Also wants to keep interest rates lower for college students. And his race to the top program has many accolades. Glad you support our current right president Kosmo.
 
It's going to happy eventually. But right now he's clearly focused on getting us out of the hole

If Obama had do focused purely on the economy (with a few side issues like DADT, Start treaty, etc) I think he'd be in a better position today. So much of his "jobs" plan could have been passed years ago, but the administration decided to do other things, assuming the economy would just get better.

Although I find myself wanting it both ways, I wish he had just passed health care and everything else on his agenda as fast as possible like Walker. Worry about the consequences later, and hope the economy improves enough for people not to care what you did two years ago
I have never heard a sentence that started with "If Obama had focused more on the economy," that did not end with reductive, revisionist, inside-the-Beltway counterfactual bullshit. That we got as much stimulus as we did at the time was a huge to-do, and that much of that stimulus came in the form of tax cuts was to get conservatives on board. Do you think Congress would simply have gone back to the well for more multiple hundreds of billions?

MOREOVER, fixing the health care problem and fixing the economy are not mutually exclusive. One might even go so far as to think them related!
 

PantherLotus

Professional Schmuck
Your Post: Relevant political points!
Kosmo Redux: Irrelevant Conspiracy Theories/Your Side Did it too!

Never, ever responds with "yeah that sucks" but always some irrelevant BS. Annoying.
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
Your Post: Relevant political points!
Kosmo Redux: Irrelevant Conspiracy Theories/Your Side Did it too!

Never, ever responds with "yeah that sucks" but always some irrelevant BS. Annoying.
He's kind of gotten better. I think GAF is training him to be a calloused tea party muscle.
 

PantherLotus

Professional Schmuck
Hey, I'm not above cheap political points, it just sucks they go unacknowledged. I feel like I'm fair about certain things, like that silly gaffe about the private sector being fine. Even in context it was a poor choice of words.

I think a lot of this goes back to why conservative political cartoons are never funny. They never give an inch, are never self-deprecating, and never see the shit on their own shoes.
 

XMonkey

lacks enthusiasm.
Do you think Congress would simply have gone back to the well for more multiple hundreds of billions?
If I recall, Obama did indeed think he could go back to Congress to get another stimulus package passed. Obviously a politically naive mindset.
MOREOVER, fixing the health care problem and fixing the economy are not mutually exclusive. One might even go so far as to think them related!
Indeed. I hate when people say Obama was too focused on health care and not the economy in the beginning of his term. Health care reform is an important step in helping our economy.
 

PantherLotus

Professional Schmuck
"Quite simply, the United States has never been witness to a presidential candidate, in modern American history, who lies as frequently, as flagrantly and as brazenly as Mitt Romney."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/21/mendacious-mitt-romney-bid-liar-in-chief

One of the best-sourced articles I've read that wasn't a blatant link dump. Seriously. Also, damn at the conclusion:

Romney has figured out a loophole – one can lie over and over, and those lies quickly become part of the political narrative, practically immune to "fact-checking". Ironically, the more Romney lies, the harder it then becomes to correct the record. Even if an enterprising reporter can knock down two or three falsehoods, there are still so many more that slip past.

It's reminiscent of the old line that a lie gets halfway around the world before the truth gets its boots on. In Romney's case, his lies are regularly corrected by media sources, but usually, in some antiseptic fact-checking article, or by Democratic/liberal voices who can be dismissed for their "partisan bent". Meanwhile, splashed across the front page of newspapers is Romney saying "Obamacare will lead to a government take-over of healthcare"; "Obama went on an apology tour"; or "the stimulus didn't create any jobs". Because, after all, it's what the candidate said and reporters dutifully must transcribe it.

Pointing out that Romney is consistently not telling the truth thus risks simply falling into the category of the usual "he-said, she-said" of American politics. For cynical reporters, the behavior is inevitably seen to be the way the political game is now played. Rather than being viewed and ultimately exposed as examples of a pervasive pattern of falsehoods, Romney's statements embed themselves in the normalized political narrative – along with aggrieved Democrats complaining that Romney isn't telling the truth. Meanwhile, the lie sticks in the minds of voters.
 

Matt

Member
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/21/mendacious-mitt-romney-bid-liar-in-chief

One of the best-sourced articles I've read that wasn't a blatant link dump. Seriously. Also, damn at the conclusion:

It's actually something that was noticed a while ago. After a point, reporting on Romney's lies started drying up, because it always seemed like old news, even when they were brand new lies.

It even, in a way, became a political asset. Romney can now say pretty much whatever he wants, and some people will believe him, and some people will think he is lying and that he actually believes in the position they hold, and will support him for that reason. It is really quite amazing.

And sad. Oh so sad.
 

PantherLotus

Professional Schmuck
I disagree. I think it will come to haunt him, much like the full effect of his flip-flops haven't yet been felt. We're already at a point that there's no "true north" for the man and eventually we'll get to a point that nobody believes anything that he says.

Think: Romney's biggest appeal to independents right now is that they think he might be lying 'bout all that crazy shit he was saying a few weeks ago. It's that bad.
 

Matt

Member
I disagree. I think it will come to haunt him, much like the full effect of his flip-flops haven't yet been felt. We're already at a point that there's no "true north" for the man and eventually we'll get to a point that nobody believes anything that he says.

Think: Romney's biggest appeal to independents right now is that they think he might be lying 'bout all that crazy shit he was saying a few weeks ago. It's that bad.

Oh, it could absolutely come back around and hurt him. I hope it does, I also tend to think it will. I'm just commenting on a really interesting and disturbing piece of data that has been observed.
 
I disagree. I think it will come to haunt him, much like the full effect of his flip-flops haven't yet been felt. We're already at a point that there's no "true north" for the man and eventually we'll get to a point that nobody believes anything that he says.

Think: Romney's biggest appeal to independents right now is that they think he might be lying 'bout all that crazy shit he was saying a few weeks ago. It's that bad.
I think it's pretty optimistic to assume that they heard any of it.
 
Independants are gonna flip when they start seeing more primary Romney. Or if he ever, you know, verbally explains his ridiculous positions on a host of issues (foreign policy, China, Paul Ryan, etc)
 

PantherLotus

Professional Schmuck
I think it's pretty optimistic to assume that they heard any of it.

Probably true, though I don't believe they're as insular as that. I mean, if it's on Leno, Letterman, and SNL, it's digging pretty deep into the public conscious. I could be wrong, and PD speaks to this -- if they don't already know the crazy shit he was saying literally just weeks ago, they will soon.
 

Diablos

Member
I sure as hell hope it doesn't, but it'll still help him more than hurt him, I think.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/1...law-will-prevent-college-students-from-voting


This November should be an exciting time on Pennsylvania college campuses. Students across the state, many for the first time, will cast a vote in the presidential election. Unfortunately, many Pennsylvania students will be kept out of our political process. Some will not bother to go to the polls because they lack any of the recently specified forms of required photo identification; others will be turned away because they are unaware of the state’s new law. This is because of Pennsylvania’s new, complex voter ID law that puts strict requirements on which student IDs are acceptable for voting. Several student IDs issued by Pennsylvania colleges and universities currently do not comply with the new voter ID law.

The few types of identification cards that will be acceptable in Pennsylvania for the November election include U.S. military IDs; employee photo IDs issued by federal or Pennsylvania state, county or municipal governments; photo ID cards issued by a Pennsylvania care facility; photo IDs issued by the U.S. Federal Government or the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, or photo ID cards from an accredited Pennsylvania public or private institution of higher learning.

The vast majority of students in Pennsylvania universities do not have the first three IDs. Also, tens of thousands of students who will wish to vote in Pennsylvania will not have a Pennsylvania driver’s license; Pennsylvania has more out-of-state freshmen at their schools than any other state. Some native Pennsylvania students will not have a driver’s license or identification card. In fact, in 2010 the number of 20 to 34-year-olds without a driver’s license reached 15.7 percent and is increasing. That percentage is even higher for people aged 19 and younger. This means that a student ID will be the last fallback for many young people in need of a voter ID.

The law becomes much more problematic for students because it requires a student ID to have a photo and an expiration date. Few student IDs meet these requirements. A recent study by PennPIRG suggests that 85% of students in Pennsylvania go to schools without acceptable IDs for voting. A survey that is underway of 186 colleges and universities by the ACLU, Advancement Project, Fair Elections Legal Network, PennPIRG, and Rock the Vote also indicates that most schools’ IDs are not (and will not be made to be) acceptable before the November 2012 election. Therefore, at many Pennsylvania schools the last lifeline for students to dodge this suppressive law is cut.

The problem is compounded by poor communication. Not all school officials are aware of the law. There are not provisions in the law for communicating its requirements to schools or students. This is a glaring omission because without voter education, students will be less likely to find out about the new law before Election Day. Fair Elections Legal Network has reached out to campuses in hope that its Campus Vote Project can help spread the word on the new law.

The law’s details are unclear. For example, putting a sticker on an ID with its expiration date satisfies the law and certain schools plan to provide stickers with expiration dates for students this fall. Some stickers will simply have the semester during which the card is valid printed on them (e.g., “fall 2012”). Will a volunteer at a polling station understand it that the ID is still valid? The decision to accept that type of ID will be made at the discretion of the volunteer; Pennsylvania's Secretary of State has not issued any formal directives on this and does not have plans to do so. If the Board of Election staff is to implement this law fairly in November, the nuts and bolts must be worked out internally as soon as possible.

The controversy over student IDs should not even be on the table. Someone who is able to obtain a student ID card has passed the many hurdles of identification required to attend college including filing the FAFSA, having a proper immunization record, and submitting standardized test scores and high school transcripts. Whether the ID is expired or not shouldn’t matter. If the person on the ID is also on the voter rolls and is identifiable as the person attempting to vote, the job of the ID has been done. They are still the same person whether or not they are currently a student! Other identification cards are not subjected to such scrutiny. For example, driver’s licenses are still valid 12 months after they expire despite there being an accessible black market for driver’s licenses. Therefore, the voter ID law makes a double standard that disadvantages young people.

All in all, student participation in the 2012 election is vulnerable thanks to this law. The state of Pennsylvania ought to clear up the meaning of its rules. Pennsylvania universities should do what they can to make sure their schools' IDs comply with the law so students will have the ID they need to cast a ballot this November. Election officials and college administrators should work together to educate students about changes in the law and get acceptable IDs into the hands of students.
This is really unsettling stuff. Those statistics are worse than I ever thought they'd be.

All it takes for Obama to win PA would be Allegheny County + Philly, but if it's tight, denying so many students their right to vote because of such an unnecessary law could hand it over to Romney, even if narrowly.

They failed at gerrymandering the EV's here, so I guess this is the most obstruction they could come up with. What a bunch of assholes. I hate Corbett and can't wait to vote him out (I'd be shocked if he got another term).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom