Support NeoGAF

[jamesinclair]

Obamas America

Land of the 1%

 

[smokeandmirrors]

Stock market graph I'm assuming, right?

 

[Oblivion]

So Politifact just hit a new low. They fact checked the "Paul Ryan wants to end Medicare as we know it" claim and said:







I thought it was a joke until I saw the actual page. "Is the sky blue? Well, that seems more opinion than fact. See, color blind people don't see it as blue, so it's all subjective."

What the hell? I thought their whole fucking argument the first time around was that the Dems didn't have the "as we know it" qualifier, and that if they did, then everything would be cool beans?

 

[Guevara]

Stock market graph I'm assuming, right?

abortions




j/k

 

[PhoenixDark]

Medicare isn't being changed - how people pay for it is. I think it's time dems moved away from the "as we know it" jargon and simply call it what it is: a voucher. They are changing the way people pay for Medicare services. That's not as appealing as the "as we know it" line but imo dems should be more specific on this.

Everyone understands what a voucher is. The facts haven't changed since Obama's mini debate with Ryan at the republican retreat two years ago: you get a specific amount of money that does not scale with health care costs - so while the amount you receive from Medicare remains stable, health care costs continue to surpass. Meanwhile the GOP plan does nothing to address health care costs, and if they cut pre-condition coverage you're screwed. Hell, even if they don't cut pre-condition coverage you're still screwed as costs increase due to the lack of a mandate (or public option).

 

[NullPointer]

Medicare isn't being changed - how people pay for it is. I think it's time dems moved away from the "as we know it" jargon and simply call it what it is: a voucher. They are changing the way people pay for Medicare services. That's not as appealing as the "as we know it" line but imo dems should be more specific on this.

But its premium support!*

(*which is almost identical to a voucher except for small details)

 

[thekad]

PD: You're wrong.

 

[Particle Physicist]

Medicare isn't being changed - how people pay for it is. I think it's time dems moved away from the "as we know it" jargon and simply call it what it is: a voucher. They are changing the way people pay for Medicare services. That's not as appealing as the "as we know it" line but imo dems should be more specific on this.

Everyone understands what a voucher is. The facts haven't changed since Obama's mini debate with Ryan at the republican retreat two years ago: you get a specific amount of money that does not scale with health care costs - so while the amount you receive from Medicare remains stable, health care costs continue to surpass. Meanwhile the GOP plan does nothing to address health care costs, and if they cut pre-condition coverage you're screwed. Hell, even if they don't cut pre-condition coverage you're still screwed as costs increase due to the lack of a mandate (or public option).

They are changing how Medicare works, while keeping the same name. It's a different system. It's still a healthcare system, but a different one. Ryan's plan will directly change how people recieve healthcare services, for better or for worse. That is a simple fact.

 

[pigeon]

Medicare isn't being changed - how people pay for it is. I think it's time dems moved away from the "as we know it" jargon and simply call it what it is: a voucher. They are changing the way people pay for Medicare services. That's not as appealing as the "as we know it" line but imo dems should be more specific on this.

Changing Medicare to a voucher system is, in fact, ending Medicare as we know it. That's why it's not a good idea! Really it's basically ending Medicare completely over time, but fine, difficult debating point.

 

[Jackson50]

Not a dagger. You guys overestimate intelligence, memory, or the faculty to care amongst the voting public of America.

The posts are almost annoying.

It's a seductive trap, though. It's the confluence of recency and confirmation bias. When you're engaged in the campaign, it's easy to overestimate the effect of even the most insignificant minutiae. It's most annoying when people attempt to assign causality to the slightest movement in the polls.

I think this stuff does matter. Romney's favorables in pretty well every poll are very low. The problem is that Obama has a low favorability too in them, because of attacks going on with the other side, and because the economy is low. This stuff does matter, and it's what's keeping Obama ahead. I'm not sure if you saw that odd prediction that everyone was laughing at earlier. Well wasn't that modeled mostly on economic reasoning? On purely economic grounds Obama should be dead in the water. Not because of his handling on the economy really, but because people tend to want things to get better and will vote someone else in as another alternative. Well, Romney's that alternative that should be winning this, quite handily. He isn't, and I think it's because these small things pile up. Yes not all of them make it into the mainstream and a normal person probably only heard of a handful of the things we post in here. But the more things happen the more people will hear that new little piece, and the more his favorability goes down. Yes the race is still close, but that's the economy.

The evidence does not support the conclusion that Obama should be losing purely on economic grounds. Rather, most of the economic voting literature educes that voters are influenced by recent economic performance when evaluating a candidate; thus, given the positive trajectory of the economy, even though it's moderate, Obama's enjoying a slight advantage. Moreover, Obama seems to be modestly benefiting from the public partially faulting the Bush Administration for the economy.

Further, your premise assumes the model accurately infers the effect of the economy on vote choice. But as I and others have elucidated, their model is of dubious validity. It's plagued with rank methodological flaws and questionable assumptions. Instead of accurately measuring the effect of the economy, it only models the effect of a few economic measures on vote share. Consequently, a more accurate proposition is that Obama's dead in the water based on the few economic variables they included in their model; really, even those measures are skewed by the questionable assumption that Democrats are disproportionately sanctioned for certain economic measures. But as Nate Silver has previously noted, there are a plethora of economic variables from which to choose. And there are many economic variables which indicate quite positive growth. Also, given their limited data points, it's easy to overfit the data and produce a wonky model. So, it's not true that Obama should be dead in the water based purely on the economy.

 

[Chumly]

Medicare isn't being changed - how people pay for it is. I think it's time dems moved away from the "as we know it" jargon and simply call it what it is: a voucher. They are changing the way people pay for Medicare services. That's not as appealing as the "as we know it" line but imo dems should be more specific on this.

Everyone understands what a voucher is. The facts haven't changed since Obama's mini debate with Ryan at the republican retreat two years ago: you get a specific amount of money that does not scale with health care costs - so while the amount you receive from Medicare remains stable, health care costs continue to surpass. Meanwhile the GOP plan does nothing to address health care costs, and if they cut pre-condition coverage you're screwed. Hell, even if they don't cut pre-condition coverage you're still screwed as costs increase due to the lack of a mandate (or public option).

Isnt what you just posted "changing as we know it"? Frankly I think moving to a voucher system to be a pretty big change.

 

[jamesinclair]

Stock market graph I'm assuming, right?

Dow

 

[Jackson50]

Isnt what you just posted "changing as we know it"? Frankly I think moving to a voucher system to be a pretty big change.

Exactly. They're not changing Medicare except the changes they're making to Medicare.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Polifact says you're wrong so yea, end of story.

anyway Nate Silver calls bs on the U of Colorado model
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/...-S-on-U-of-Colorado-Election-Prediction-Model

 

[Particle Physicist]

Polifact says you're wrong so yea, end of story.

Really PD? You are resorting to this?

Oh, and if you want to be accurate, they actually say, "that's like, your opinion man"

 

[Allard]

Polifact says you're wrong so yea, end of story.

anyway Nate Silver calls bs on the U of Colorado model
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/...-S-on-U-of-Colorado-Election-Prediction-Model

Politifact also said that Reid's hearsay comments were a pants on fire lie based on no facts themselves... Politifact is a piss pot of bullshit and should be disregarded completely.

 

[Clevinger]

Politifact is a piss pot of bullshit and should be disregarded completely.

Politifact is a political fact checking website and has nothing to do with urine or pots. I'm going to rate this post a Pants on Fire Lie.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Politifact also said that Reid's hearsay comments were a pants on fire lie based on no facts themselves... Politifact is a piss pot of bullshit and should be disregarded completely.

They deserved a pants on fire considering they were based on no evidence - I'd give the same rating to a Birther charge - but we've gone over this before.

My only point is that dems should simply focus on the voucher issue, and the cost structure change associated with it

 

[Jackson50]

Polifact says you're wrong so yea, end of story.

anyway Nate Silver calls bs on the U of Colorado model
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/...-S-on-U-of-Colorado-Election-Prediction-Model

It didn't, actually. Nice try.

So, the problems already noted in this thread. What an awful paper.

 

[gcubed]

Wasn't there some thing about politifact where they were told they need to be fair and balanced and match lies?

 

[Chumly]

They deserved a pants on fire considering they were based on no evidence - I'd give the same rating to a Birther charge - but we've gone over this before.

My only point is that dems should simply focus on the voucher issue, and the cost structure change associated with it

But we actually have evidence that the birther charge is a crock of shit. So how can you say its the same?

 

[gcubed]

But we actually have evidence that the birther charge is a crock of shit. So how can you say its the same?

A "someone told me one time..." is no better

 

[Allard]

A "someone told me one time..." is no better

Doesn't mean its a lie though. The idea could be a lie, but you can't say "Someone told me you eat shit" is lie if someone actually told them that lol. Semantics yes but Politifact and no one but Romney can actually 'prove' what Reid said is untrue, nor can politifact know if Reid actually heard the accusation from an actual person or not. No matter how you look at it, the statement Reid said could not 'factually' be considered a lie with no evidence to prove otherwise. Its hearsay no more. The fact they took the time to call it a lie shows just how little they care for the 'fact' part of politifact.

 

[Averon]

http://www.cnbc.com/id/48770752

Republicans Eye Return to Gold Standard

The gold standard has returned to mainstream U.S. politics for the first time in 30 years, with a “gold commission” set to become part of official Republican party policy.

Drafts of the party platform, which it will adopt at a convention in Tampa Bay, Florida, next week, call for an audit of Federal Reserve monetary policy and a commission to look at restoring the link between the dollar and gold.

The move shows how five years of easy monetary policy — and the efforts of congressman Ron Paul — have made the once-fringe idea of returning to gold-as-money a legitimate part of Republican debate.

I assume this is one of the concessions Ron Paul got to not screw up the RNC.

 

[gcubed]

That last paragraph is awesome

 

[Black Mamba]

http://www.cnbc.com/id/48770752

Republicans Eye Return to Gold Standard



I assume this is one of the concessions Ron Paul got to not screw up the RNC.

WHHHHAAAAAAAT!?!?!?

Seriously, WHHHAAAAAT!?!? This is insanity.

::reads more::

"and a commission to look at restoring the link between the dollar and gold."

Does this mean to restore the link or to research into whether this is a good thing. I can accept the latter as indulging the nutters in the base, but the former...WHHHHHAAAT!?

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

http://www.cnbc.com/id/48770752

Republicans Eye Return to Gold Standard



I assume this is one of the concessions Ron Paul got to not screw up the RNC.

Someone should have told him to go fuck his stupid dumbass self. There isn't anything he or his worthless cultists could do.

That or someone should have beat him with a piece of gold like in a mob movie. lol

That last paragraph is awesome

It is.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

http://www.cnbc.com/id/48770752

Republicans Eye Return to Gold Standard



I assume this is one of the concessions Ron Paul got to not screw up the RNC.

 

[Black Mamba]

A commission would have no power except to make recommendations, but Fieler said it would provide a chance to educate politicians and the public about the merits of a return to gold. “We’re not going to go from a standing start to the gold standard,” he said.

Oh thank god. It's just indulging the nutters, nothing more. The commission would come out against the gold standard like the Reagan who did in '81.

Whew. I nearly had to think about donating to a political party for the first time.

 

[PhoenixDark]

A Sleeper Issue?

There seems to be a clear tightening of the presidential race. Whether it will reverse itself or not in a week — as it has numerous times — we don’t know. But I wonder if those phony welfare ads Romney is running in the swing states might not be having a bigger effect than we realize.

They’re apparently pushing them hard, spending lots of money on them. And they wouldn’t be doing that if they didn’t have some numbers showing they were having an effect. Romney Inc. seems relatively content not to have the issue at the forefront in the national conversation. But it’s only the 10 or so swing states that matter.

I wouldn’t have thought they’d drive votes. But I’m looking at the campaign’s actions and what they seem to believe is working for them. The politics of race (not to mention demonstrable falsehood) is strong.

Everybody is talking about Akin. But I wonder if this is where the action — albeit small movements in the numbers — really is.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/08/a_sleeper_issue.php?ref=fpblg

 

[gcubed]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/08/a_sleeper_issue.php?ref=fpblg

what? historically a VP selection comes with a temporary bump so now all of a sudden its being attributed to something completely separate? TPM chicken little

 

[GhaleonEB]

That last paragraph is awesome

"a legitimate part of Repubilcan debate" is a great framing.

By this time in the next cycle, whether men can go back to clubing women over the head and draging them off to their caves will be "a legitimate part of Repubilcan debate".

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/08/a_sleeper_issue.php?ref=fpblg

Polls show clearly that Obama leads on the Medicare issue. Which TPM has reported on...

 

[PhoenixDark]

what? historically a VP selection comes with a temporary bump so now all of a sudden its being attributed to something completely separate? TPM chicken little

I agree but I do think that ad is very effective. We play Pandora at work and that ad will randomly come on during commercial breaks; it's being pushed heavily. I'm in Michigan btw, and while I don't watch tv I see it online all the time.

 

[Clevinger]

Polls show clearly that Obama leads on the Medicare issue. Which TPM has reported on...

Nate Silver retweeted this:

Greg Sargent ‏@ThePlumLineGS
Romney, not Obama, holds edge on Medicare among seniors in Ohio & Florida, new NYT/CBS numbers show: http://wapo.st/MP5fhB

Yeah, it's not all voters, but it's interesting and sad and sort of expected.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Nate Silver retweeted this:



Yeah, it's not all voters, but it's interesting and sad and sort of expected.

ouch. That's game changing

 

[GhaleonEB]

Nate Silver retweeted this:

Yeah, it's not all voters, but it's interesting and sad and sort of expected.

Yeah, that's new to me. Sad.

Our media is so pathetic, and PoliFact is racing to the gutter at full speed.

 

[Allard]

Nate Silver retweeted this:



Yeah, it's not all voters, but it's interesting and sad and sort of expected.

Can't say I am surprised even though like you said its sad, Florida did elect Rick Scott after all.

 

[Aaron Strife]

ouch. That's game changing

How is that a game changer? Seniors voted Republican overwhelmingly in 2010. I don't know how they voted in 2008, but I'd imagine there's a good chunk of them who don't care about Ryan's Medicare plan because fuck the youngins, they got theirs.

And with that being said, the margins are relatively narrow - 48-44 in Florida, 49-43 in Ohio, and in Wisconsin, Obama actually edges Romney by 3. With seniors.

 

[jamesinclair]

Nate Silver retweeted this:

Yeah, it's not all voters, but it's interesting and sad and sort of expected.

Its no surprise, everyone wants Romneycare

Mitt Romney said in an interview Thursday that his plan to provide health insurance to everyone in Massachusetts was superior to the one it inspired, President Obama's much-debated national health care law.

"My health care plan I put in place in my state has everyone insured, but we didn't go out and raise taxes on people and have a unelected board tell people what kind of health care they can have," Romney said in an interview with CBS' Denver affiliate, KCNC.

...

Those who can show they earn too much to qualify for the state's subsidized health care plan, but not enough to afford even the least expensive nonsubsidized plan, are not required to pay the so-called "individual mandate."

State officials say about 400,000 residents have become insured since the law took effect. More than 98 percent of Massachusetts residents are now insured, including nearly all children.

http://news.yahoo.com/romney-mass-health-plan-better-obamas-191012402.html


We ened to repeal the unconstitutional obamacare and implement romneycare ASAP.

 

[el retorno]

Yeah, it's not all voters, but it's interesting and sad and sort of expected.

I really think the 55+ BS is what gets him. Seniors will never be affected. Everyone else will.

The seniors i've talked to say things like "you haven't paid in, i have so i'm entitled, your not."

 

[Aaron Strife]

I really think the 55+ BS is what gets him. Seniors will never be affected. Everyone else will.

The seniors i've talked to say things like "you haven't paid in, i have so i'm entitled, your not."

Of course, everyone else is paying for their medicare. It really is a selfish phenomenon.

 

[Clevinger]

I really think the 55+ BS is what gets him. Seniors will never be affected. Everyone else will.

I don't think so. These voters are low-information. I don't think most even know whose plan is the voucher program (I'm pretty sure there was a poll recently that said exactly that). Seniors just trust Republicans more.

 

[el retorno]

I don't think so. These voters are low-information. I don't think most even know whose plan is the voucher program (I'm pretty sure there was a poll recently that said exactly that). Seniors just trust Republicans more.

Can't the AARP swing their weight around? Mail out some flyers?

That's why I've always figured Ryan was toxic. I remember the AARP fighting hard against Bush's changes in SS.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Can't the AARP swing their weight around? Mail out some flyers?

That's why I've always figured Ryan was toxic. I remember the AARP fighting hard against Bush's changes in SS.

AARP is a non-profit so they can't be overly partisan, although they did endorse PPACA.

 

[Touchdown]

lol I just wanna say I love u guys . Reading through this thread is almost better than watching an episode of John Stewart.

 

[Black Republican]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/08/a_sleeper_issue.php?ref=fpblg

your super pac ads are working!!

 

[speculawyer]

Romney: My health plan superior to Obama's

Oh, OK . . . wait . . . what?

http://news.yahoo.com/romney-mass-health-plan-better-obamas-191012402.html



The Etch-A-Sketch has been shaken?

 

[Stephen Colbert]

Someone please start a separate thread about this news.... this was a massive fuck up

Fox News just outed the name and identify of the chief in the elite Navy SEAL Team 6 who was one of the first men in the room where bin Laden died.

Bin Laden was revered by Muslim fundamentalists everywhere. Now, this hero and his family members will forever be targets of Muslim fundamentalists that wish to avenge Bin Laden's death

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/fox-news-outs-navy-seal-163126050.html;_ylt=A2KJ3CYaezZQvjUAHXnQtDMD

 

[Clevinger]

There's already a thread, Stephen. I don't have a link handy though.

 

[speculawyer]

So this is what passes for GOP policy discussion:
-Legitimate rape
-The Gold standard
-Raise taxes on Middle Class and cut taxes on the wealthy
-Women's bodies have magic rape contraception
-Blame those evil Democrats for trying to destroy our beautiful socialist Medicare program with that $700 Bill cut
-Romneycare is great but terrible but great


I can't follow this anymore. I'm dizzy.