• 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.

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
I am going by what I see in the media.

Cable news is all about filling the hours, if there isn't a big disaster or event going on it's basically a repeat of the same 45 minutes for 24 hours. The only time cable news is any good is if there is a disaster or huge event going on. Honestly we don't need 3 cable news channels, there is barely enough news to justify one.
 

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
Cable news is all about filling the hours, if there isn't a big disaster or event going on it's basically a repeat of the same 45 minutes for 24 hours. The only time cable news is any good is if there is a disaster or huge event going on. Honestly we don't need 3 cable news channels, there is barely enough news to justify one.

No, there's plenty of news. There are issues to discuss, events to report on, 24/7, all across the country, all across the world.


Our news media would rather focus on 1 or 2 pieces of celebrity gossip or political gaffes with propaganda and rhetoric for an entire week, though.
 

KingGondo

Banned
bahahaha

HERE IS MY PLAN FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS

MEDICARE: SOLVED
s-HODGMAN-HACKER-THREAT-large300.jpg
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
No, there's plenty of news. There are issues to discuss, events to report on, 24/7, all across the country, all across the world.


Our news media would rather focus on 1 or 2 pieces of celebrity gossip or political gaffes with propaganda and rhetoric for an entire week, though.

Part of the problem is that when reporting the news, it's all about "what's new". That's why, say when you're listening to 1010WINS, all the international news is in the morning unless it is having a huge effect on the US. I get what you're saying, but that isn't why people put on the news, they put it on to find out what is happening. TV and Radio news casts are basically for summarizing really fast what is going on right now, what's the big story. If you want actual discussion, you are better off reading the newspaper. The format of TV doesn't allow for substantive discussion, sadly that's the way it is.
 

Tim-E

Member
Apparently now it's gone from him speaking there to him having an "amazing surprise" for the convention. This is going to be delicious.


edit:

Oh dear

Recently, mogul, reality television star, and huge Anthony Weiner fan Donald Trump Tweeted that he was working on a “big surprise” for the upcoming RNC convention.

Well, we have a hint as to what that surprise might entail.

Last night, Obama impersonator (or “Fauxbama,” if you prefer) Kevin Michel posted a picture posing with Trump, along with a caption urging his Facebook friends to “e sure to watch the Republican National Convention.”


http://www.mediaite.com/online/does...or-the-rnc-involve-an-obama-impersonator-pic/
 

Raine

Member
What's with Ryan and the word "wonky"? He seems to use it whenever someone asks him a question involving numbers or medicare. I thought this guy was supposed to be good at explaining things?
 

Wilsongt

Member
Ann Romney on tax returns: ‘There’s nothing we’re hiding’

"There's nothing we're hiding," Ann Romney told NBC's Natalie Morales.

Asked why her husband isn't more "transparent," Romney seemed to get a bit irritated, leaning forward in her chair to answer questions.


"Have you seen how we are attacked? Have you seen what's happened?" she said. "We have been very transparent to what's legally required of us. But the more we release, the more we get attacked, the more we get questioned, the more we get pushed.
And so we have done what's legally required, and there's going to be no more tax releases given."

Asked whether she worries Americans will think her husband is trying to "hide" something by not releasing more returns, Romney pointed to the "huge" financial disclosures her husband filed when serving as governor of Massachusetts.

"If people want to really look and see, any question they have ... Mitt is honest. His integrity is just golden,"
Romney said. "We pay our taxes. ... Beyond paying our taxes, we also give 10 percent of our income to charity. ... The only reason we don't disclose any more is because we will become a bigger target."

Echoing what her husband has said on the campaign trail for months, Romney told Morales their investments are managed by a blind trust.
 
I guess their next attempt to diffuse the tax situation is to say that they give to charity.

I'm just not sure why they would go out of their way to reintroduce the topic without having taxes ready to go. So now the discussion is: okay, you gave to charity, but where are your taxes? How does that solve anything for them? How does that put the issue to rest?

Then again, they purposefully chose a VP candidate that gives them just as many problems on budget reform and Medicare, so who the hell knows. This campaign is now almost entirely about questioning the credibility of Mitt Romney. And where it's not about questioning his credibility, it's about questioning his governing principles. And they're the ones introducing these things!
 

Tim-E

Member
It's like they want to be on the defensive. They're so used to it by now that they have to create these situations in order to feel comfortable because that's how they've been the entire campaign.
 

codhand

Member
Give me a break! It's not like their church goes around buying up large shares in companies or anything, all that money is going straight to the needy!

?

I'm saying, it's nice to offset your capital gains with charitable donations. Especially when your religion decrees that you do. Win, win.
 

Mike M

Nick N
No way they leak before the convention, if they are going to leak it will be in September.
Perhaps.

I'm not campaign manager, but if I were sitting on Romney's tax returns, and he made that kind of definitive declaration, I wouldn't be able to resist nailing him to the wall. It'd be devestating.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Perhaps.

I'm not campaign manager, but if I were sitting on Romney's tax returns, and he made that kind of definitive declaration, I wouldn't be able to resist nailing him to the wall. It'd be devestating.

Maybe, but they would definitely do the most damage after the conventions. It could very well be Romney is trying to goad them out now, where they won't hurt quite as bad as after the conventions.
 

Tim-E

Member
Perhaps.

I'm not campaign manager, but if I were sitting on Romney's tax returns, and he made that kind of definitive declaration, I wouldn't be able to resist nailing him to the wall. It'd be devestating.

I would wait until the noise from both conventions had died down so there'd be no other political news to potentially quiet it down.
 

Jackson50

Member
True. Probably better that we consider 'defense cuts' in the mindset of reallocating those funds to, say, infrastructure. Something where society sees more of a benefit.
Absolutely. The absence of urgency is maddening. Our improvidence is only harming our nation. We are already experiencing the costs from inadequate investment in our infrastructure. And the economic loss is only going to accelerate.
I think that we should still be careful about how we go about cutting defense spending. I want a leaner and meaner military, with emphasis on both.



It seems to me that many nations can maintain smaller militaries because we are partly responsible for their defense. I'm not suggesting that a European invasion is coming anytime soon, but if someone did invade Europe, we would certainly be relied upon to lend our full support. I don't really want to play global cop, but it is unfortunately part of what we do.
We should be mindful of our international obligations, but the notion that we might imperil our national security is risible. We could even reduce defense spending by a moderate margin without diminishing our capacity to project power. Our military is bloated without any appreciable benefit. And it's already sufficiently mean; our capabilities are unparalleled. We should prepare for a rapidly evolving world, mind you. But that doesn't require our presently extortionate level of defense spending.
Interesting trend. Chinese investment in Africa since 2010.

Can't say I have ever heard of Mauritania before. It's a rather large country.
What's intriguing is China's profitless efforts to impel private investment in Africa. Most of its investment has been supplied by the public sector. Given the favorable provisions provided by the Chinese government, the tepid response from private equity portends poorly for the fitness of the investments.
 

Tim-E

Member
They get very visibly frustrated anytime they come up. It's amazing how bad Romney is at keeping his cool when something upscripted that he doesn't like comes up. He's been running for office since 1994 and there are STILL issues that get him flustered. Your skin should've thickened to some of this stuff by now.

I just want ONE moment where he raises his voice and gets red-faced during a debate when his taxes, Bain, Romneycare, or now medicare vouchers come up.


I really have to think someone has them just ready to go. I don't know how, but I think the Obama team is just letting him tie his own rope here.

I'm in the same boat. The way democrats have progressively upped the ante on the issue leads me to believe that they wouldn't be doing it unless they had an endgame.
 
truly truly truly outrageous

So who wins the battle between, Mitt's "honest integrity" and Reid's "source"?

Seems pretty clear Romney won't release more taxes, and Reid won't reveal his "source" assuming he's not bullshitting. Unless something big leaks that forces him to respond.
 
Has Romney done enough to muddy the waters on Medicare that now the Obama campaign will be more hesitant to bring it up, or it will give voters doubt that Ryan's plan actually does what it does, since Romney is making the same (false) claim about Obama?
 
They get very visibly frustrated anytime they come up. It's amazing how bad Romney is at keeping his cool when something upscripted that he doesn't like comes up. He's been running for office since 1994 and there are STILL issues that get him flustered. Your skin should've thickened to some of this stuff by now.

I just want ONE moment where he raises his voice and gets red-faced during a debate when his taxes, Bain, Romneycare, or now medicare vouchers come up.

The difference between Obama's sense of political discipline and Romney's thin skin is like night and day. If Romney had to deal with the amount of stupidity Obama faces each day, his head would probably explode from rage.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
I really have to think someone has them just ready to go. I don't know how, but I think the Obama team is just letting him tie his own rope here.

Even if they don't the idea of "me thinks thou dost protest to much" is engraved in the American psyche. There was only ever one solution to Mitt's problem and he's crossed into the point of no return. What the average American can think up is certainly much worse that what the truth likely is. Just look at in here, someone had said something about Mitt getting TARP money of all things. Makes 0 sense and yet here we are. It won't matter what's on Mitt's taxes soon, people's minds will be made up. My neighbor thinks he owns an OIL WELL in the Gulf of Mexico, rumors are going to be way more damaging than the truth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom