Support NeoGAF

[PhoenixDark]

how do you think he'll do in a debate against romney?

I think the debates will be fairly even, although Obama is a better debater; he'll be defending his record though, which will be hard to do in some areas such as the economy. I thought it was pretty clear Obama crushed McCain in the 08 debates, and the media/viewers felt the same way. Romney is competent enough to hold his own and sway some viewers though.

The problem will be that Romney gets flustered very easily. Assuming the SC upholds the health care law, I think he'll look like a fool during any health care discussion due to the comparisons between Romneycare and Obamacare; Romney's arguments for mandates sounds exactly like Obama's. And I can't wait to see Romney try to attack Obama on foreign policy, it should be laughable (unless something big happens between now and October). I'd imagine Obama will bring up Romney's 08 opposition to going inside Pakistan to get Bin Laden.

 

[Aaron Strife]

I think the debates will be fairly even, although Obama is a better debater; he'll be defending his record though, which will be hard to do in some areas such as the economy. I thought it was pretty clear Obama crushed McCain in the 08 debates, and the media/viewers felt the same way. Romney is competent enough to hold his own and sway some viewers though.

The problem will be that Romney gets flustered very easily. Assuming the SC upholds the health care law, I think he'll look like a fool during any health care discussion due to the comparisons between Romneycare and Obamacare; Romney's arguments for mandates sounds exactly like Obama's. And I can't wait to see Romney try to attack Obama on foreign policy, it should be laughable (unless something big happens between now and October). I'd imagine Obama will bring up Romney's 08 opposition to going inside Pakistan to get Bin Laden.

Actually I'm pretty sure Romney will work his moderate common-man charm against Professor Obama, so he'll win the debates.

 

[Kosmo]

I think the debates will be fairly even, although Obama is a better debater; he'll be defending his record though, which will be hard to do in some areas such as the economy. I thought it was pretty clear Obama crushed McCain in the 08 debates, and the media/viewers felt the same way. Romney is competent enough to hold his own and sway some viewers though.

The problem will be that Romney gets flustered very easily. Assuming the SC upholds the health care law, I think he'll look like a fool during any health care discussion due to the comparisons between Romneycare and Obamacare; Romney's arguments for mandates sounds exactly like Obama's. And I can't wait to see Romney try to attack Obama on foreign policy, it should be laughable (unless something big happens between now and October). I'd imagine Obama will bring up Romney's 08 opposition to going inside Pakistan to get Bin Laden.

It's amazing how much people are downplaying this aspect of the run this time around. Especially if HCR gets shot down by the Supreme Court, what is Obama going to point to? Now he can play the "We're getting X amount of people health insurance" card and if that goes away, he doesn't have a lot to point to that resonates with the American voting public.

Hell, he's already on his third iteration of justifying the Buffet Rule - can't even stick to a coherent argument on that.

 

[AlteredBeast]

Actually I'm pretty sure Romney will work his common-man charm against Professor Obama, so he'll win the debates.

LOL. They both look smug to me when they get cheers. Romney looks more weird though, a combination of uneasiness, smugness, and "hey, I am still talking" annoyance.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Romney's terrible at phrasing. He's awkward through and through.

I read this in the morning, he tried a quip and failed horribly:

The debt number is alarming and gives you great concern, of course, because we're moving toward the Greek-type numbers. My guess is, by the way, at the Democratic convention, he will not be appearing in front of Greek columns like in Denver. He won't want to remind people of Greece."

There's a cute jab in there, but it's so wordy and stilted that it sounds terrible.

 

[Arrowgigantic]

John McCain ‏ @SenJohnMcCain
Good pic of my son Jimmy's bulldog, Apollo - I'm sorry Mr. President, he's not on the menu!
http://www.politico.com/gallery/2012/04/20-pols-and-their-pooches/000079-000844.html

Matthew Gallant @matthewjgallant
@SenJohnMcCain No need to apologize to the President, he's not hungry anyway, after eating your lunch in 2008. Very filling.

Eat that, you piece of shit.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I'd like to believe this will the the topical low point in the campaign, but I know we're just getting started. Obama was a child, in another country.

Edit: the response above :lol

 

[Officerrob]

Actually I'm pretty sure Romney will work his common-man charm against Professor Obama, so he'll win the debates.

Maybe he will break the ice my offering him one of those gourmet 7-11 cookies

Edit: Seriously, fuck McCain for that

 

[Clevinger]

The one thing Romney is truly terrible at in debates is his perpetual smile/stare at the other person while they're talking. It's so creepy. It's supposed to be like a "I'm not reacting to what you're saying. I'm a cool cucumber." But it's so fuckin' weird.

 

[AlteredBeast]

Eat that, you piece of shit.

LOL. I don't know what is more sad, the fact that you responded to a playful jab, that you took offense to it, that you tweeted back to him, or that you then reposted said tweet in here.

Bravo, good sir. I am sure Obama appreciates you sticking up for him.

 

[eBay Huckster]

LOL. I don't know what is more sad, the fact that you responded to a playful jab, that you took offense to it, that you tweeted back to him, or that you then reposted said tweet in here.

I'll tell you what's sad (but likely a smart campaign move given his Biden-like mastery of gaffe-making): the fact that Romney apparently hasn't taken a single question from the media in more than a month.

 

[AlteredBeast]

I'll tell you what's sad (but likely a smart campaign move given his Biden-like mastery of gaffes): the fact that Romney apparently hasn't taken a single question from the media in more than a month.

I don't understand that, he has been on shows all over the place. If by on the stump, there is a valid complaint, but then again, he still reaches far more people in a few minutes by appearing on the radio or on TV, as he has repeatedly done over the last month.

 

[GhaleonEB]

LOL. I don't know what is more sad, the fact that you responded to a playful jab, that you took offense to it, that you tweeted back to him, or that you then reposted said tweet in here.

Bravo, good sir. I am sure Obama appreciates you sticking up for him.

How about: McCain's tweet was pathetic, and instead of commenting or ignoring you're shooting the messenger.

 

[AlteredBeast]

How about: McCain's tweet was pathetic, and instead of commenting or ignoring you're shooting the messenger.

The fact that it was pathetic is self-evident. It was also slightly amusing. People who would take it seriously are just as pathetic.

 

[RDreamer]

The sad thing is there is absolutely nothing wrong with what Rosen said, and the contrived backlash was nauseating. It's a fair point to point out that someone who hasn't worked a day in their life should not be giving out their opinions and what-not about the economy or the working class. Also, did Romney's wife come out of her mother's womb with 5 kids? I like how the discussion is 'ATTACKING MOTHER OF 5'. Did she not have a life before popping out kids? Why did she not work a single day of her life before that? Its an extremely valid point. You can decide to not work a single day in your life, and pop out as many kids as you want, but that doesnt mean you cant be called out on pretending to know a single fucking thing about what it is to actually have to work, maintain a job, and worry about money. Anne Romney has not the faintest clue of what any of that means, so when it comes to this subject she can keep her mouth shut instead of insulting everyone.

Wait... She actually hasn't ever held a job ever? Seriously?

 

[Tim-E]

Wait... She actually hasn't ever held a job ever? Seriously?

She's been with Mitt since they were teenagers, so she was able to ride that gravy train from day one!

 

[RDreamer]

She's been with Mitt since they were teenagers, so she was able to ride that gravy train from day one!

Is this really a true thing though? That's crazy if so, and if true he's right, Rosens comments were fine, and possibly not even far enough. If you've never had to fucking work you absolutely can't be Mitts adviser on what the average woman goes through... Jesus...

I also just can't even imagine never having to have an outside job in my life. That's just insane.

It also proves just how some republican shitty framin works, since even I seemed to be arguing this issue on their terms afterwards... Holy shit

 

[Clevinger]

It's amazing how much people are downplaying this aspect of the run this time around. Especially if HCR gets shot down by the Supreme Court, what is Obama going to point to? Now he can play the "We're getting X amount of people health insurance" card and if that goes away, he doesn't have a lot to point to that resonates with the American voting public.

I'm not sure why I'm bothering, but: even if he didn't have HCR, he'd point to things like the Stimulus, auto bailout, and Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which are filled to the brim with things that resonate with the voting public. In the same breath he'd point to the Paul Ryan budgets, both of which Romney has enthusiastically supported and said he'd sign, which are the antithesis of what resonates with the non-rich voting public. And if the SC upholds the mandate (I don't think they will, but if), then Romney's going to look like a gigantic moron on top of those things.

Hell, he's already on his third iteration of justifying the Buffet Rule - can't even stick to a coherent argument on that.

"The wealthy's taxes need to be raised." Wow, so incoherent. So hard to justify.

 

[Tim-E]

"The wealthy's taxes need to be raised." Wow, so incoherent. So hard to justify.

It's a totally unpopular stance, too. It's not like a majority of Americans support it or anything.

 

[thekad]

Yeah, but did you hear about Obama eating dog meat?

 

[AlteredBeast]

It's a totally unpopular stance, too. It's not like a majority of Americans support it or anything.

Would the majority of Americans support raising their own taxes?

 

[PhoenixDark]

It's amazing how much people are downplaying this aspect of the run this time around. Especially if HCR gets shot down by the Supreme Court, what is Obama going to point to? Now he can play the "We're getting X amount of people health insurance" card and if that goes away, he doesn't have a lot to point to that resonates with the American voting public.

Hell, he's already on his third iteration of justifying the Buffet Rule - can't even stick to a coherent argument on that.

If HCR is overturned I can't think of anything for him to run on domestically, or brag about in a debate. Lowering gas standards? Congratulations, gas is nearly $4 a gallon. Dodd-Frank has never been effectively explained to people, and woe is government when people realize it does nothing to end "too big to fail."

His entire domestic message boils down to "look, things could have been much worse."

 

[Tim-E]

Would the majority of Americans support raising their own taxes?

What does that have to do with the Buffet Rule?

 

[Tim-E]

Yeah, but did you hear about Obama eating dog meat?

He's lost Bo's vote:

http://store.barackobama.com/bo-car-magnet.html

 

[AlteredBeast]

What does that have to do with the Buffet Rule?

I support raising taxes on millionaires, billionaires, and actually damn near everyone else, but I think the framing of the question and who it affects has as much to do with the widespread support for it, as it does the fact that it doesn't affect almost anyone polled.

You could frame the question a variety of ways that would illicit support for or against the Buffett Rule, but why people support it is far more interesting to me.


EDIT: Re: the previous image. A terrible, and possible RNC ad would probably go as far to change the wording to say, "I bake for Barack" I don't think Reince Preibus is above it, that's for sure.

 

[Black Mamba]

I support raising taxes on millionaires, billionaires, and actually damn near everyone else, but I think the framing of the question and who it affects has as much to do with the widespread support for it, as it does the fact that it doesn't affect almost anyone polled.

You could frame the question a variety of ways that would illicit support for or against the Buffett Rule, but why people support it is far more interesting to me.

People support raising taxes on the wealthy.

The Buffet rule only raises taxes on the wealthy.

What's the problem, here?

 

[The Librarian]

This whole government dynamic is so stupid. People hate government spending in the abstract but like it in the specific. Ugh.

 

[PhoenixDark]

I hope the dog eating nonsense takes this "anti-dog" nonsense off the table for both candidates

 

[Tim-E]

I support raising taxes on millionaires, billionaires, and actually damn near everyone else, but I think the framing of the question and who it affects has as much to do with the widespread support for it, as it does the fact that it doesn't affect almost anyone polled.

You could frame the question a variety of ways that would illicit support for or against the Buffett Rule, but why people support it is far more interesting to me.


EDIT: Re: the previous image. A terrible, and possible RNC ad would probably go as far to change the wording to say, "I bake for Barack" I don't think Reince Preibus is above it, that's for sure.

True, but millionaires are only a fraction of the total population, so I don't think their thoughts on it should affect much in the way of opinion polls.

In addition I also support raising taxes on pretty much everyone.

 

[AlteredBeast]

People support raising taxes on the wealthy.

The Buffet rule only raises taxes on the wealthy.

What's the problem, here?

People support a lot of things just because it doesn't affect them. Is it fair that people who make 900k a year still pay far less as a percentage than those underneath them? Simply targeting millionaires is not the best idea, in my opinion. they are basically targeting those who gain a majority of their income from capital gains without having the balls to accurately tax the gains themselves, as should be done.

Regardless, I like the idea that people should pay their fair share, but I think that just targeting an arbitrary point deep into the 1% earners territory is just politics.

I wish Obama had the balls to return taxes to pre-Bush levels.

 

[Tim-E]

People support a lot of things just because it doesn't affect them. Is it fair that people who make 900k a year still pay far less as a percentage than those underneath them? Simply targeting millionaires is not the best idea, in my opinion. they are basically targeting those who gain a majority of their income from capital gains without having the balls to accurately tax the gains themselves, as should be done.

Regardless, I like the idea that people should pay their fair share, but I think that just targeting an arbitrary point deep into the 1% earners territory is just politics.

I wish Obama had the balls to return taxes to pre-Bush levels.

I don't think anyone is saying this is the end-all-be-all fix in tax reform, but it's a step in the right direction. Just because it isn't perfect doesn't mean that it's not better than the current tax code.

 

[Jackson50]

Yeah, the main reason I mentioned that both states are rational actors are that both realize that the costs of an attack by either side would quickly escalate to a prohibitive level - one of the few elements of the conflict between them that is certain, and as such they've tended to be dissuaded from actually embarking on any kind of rollback action.

It also cannot be ignored that some of the elements in Israel's government pushing for a pre-emptive strike - particularly Yisrael Beiteinu's leader and Israel's UN representative - have dialed down or outright ended their calls for military escalation in the past month and a half in light of the fact that Obama concluded talks with Netanyahu (on exactly that) in early March. International pressure, particularly from us, may well keep Israel from waging war until such a war would be irrelevant to the 2012 election.

Yeah, I mostly agree. They both realize the costs would be considerable which inflates their tolerance of behavior normally perceived as antagonistic. I found the conclusion that an attack would only make sense under a breakdown of rationality was spurious. But I now understand your broader point.

Can somebody post that? I remember that and I'm rolling right now.

Brilliant analysis. Incisive.

This is a guy whose own father abandoned him, his mother was distant for much of his life as well. When you add in the racial identity confusion I think we're looking at a person who was not loved as a child to a level many children were by their parents, and has therefore attempted to find acceptance through joining close communities, always being the giver, constantly trying to impress or be accepted by others, etc. Boehner has taken advantage of that for four years, and Obama seems perfectly fine with it. The same could be said of Joe Lieberman and some other people anyone else would shitcan asap.

I'd like to believe this will the the topical low point in the campaignhttp://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/mccain-tweets-sorry-mr-president-my-sons-dog, but I know we're just getting started. Obama was a child, in another country.

Edit: the response above :lol

You know it. Buckle up. It's gonna be a bumpy ride.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

If HCR is overturned I can't think of anything for him to run on domestically, or brag about in a debate. Lowering gas standards? Congratulations, gas is nearly $4 a gallon. Dodd-Frank has never been effectively explained to people, and woe is government when people realize it does nothing to end "too big to fail."

His entire domestic message boils down to "look, things could have been much worse."

It's easy enough to research his record, and there's plenty to run on.

 

[Tim-E]

Seriously. This campaign is going to be non-stop stupid garbage like dog-gate (both sides of it). We've got more than half a year left.

 

[Particle Physicist]

Ehh, just by virtue of not being a disheveled octogenarian (joking, but not by much), he is going to do better than McCain. Bush was actually considered a good speaker before the election in 2000. I remember newspapers and talking heads noting that he had a good deliberate, folksy way about him. It wasn't until he had a few flubs and gaffes that he started to show off more of his goofball, semi-competent public speakerness.

Re: Obama attacking Mitt on things that the others wouldn't, did you not watch the debates? He was called a vulture capitalist, out of touch elitist, and so on. I don't know what Obama will attack him with that will necessarily be worse than what he was attacked with prior, just different.

Yeah, worse than McCain? Come on. And Bush baffles me. Watch old pre-presidential videos of him, and he almost seems like a different person.

 

[Black Republican]

Seriously. This campaign is going to be non-stop stupid garbage like dog-gate (both sides of it). We've got more than half a year left.

i see fox news still trying to turn solundra into a scandal, meh, then again i dont really care/read up on the enviornmental orgs much.

 

[Tim-E]

i see fox news still trying to turn solundra into a scandal, meh, then again i dont really care/read up on the enviornmental orgs much.

They're still trying to make it stick, but all it does is rile up republicans. Independents don't really care.

 

[Tim-E]

wat.

Ron Paul video game in the works

Supporters of Ron Paul are chronically frustrated over an apparent lack of attention given to the presidential hopeful. One supporter is trying to fight the tide by creating a Web video game. "Ron Paul: Road to REVOLution," due later this summer, will illustrate his quest to for the White House in an interactive format.

The game is the brainchild of 27-year-old Daniel Williams, who aside from being a devotee of Ron Paul, is a fan of indie games, and "making liberty sexy." The combination of the three led to the idea for the "Ron Paul: Road to REVOLution," now being pitched on Kickstarter using the following video:




"Ron Paul: Road to REVOLution," is initially slated to launch on the Web later this summer, though it may be headed towards mobile platforms and the Xbox Live Indie Channel shortly thereafter.


The player guides Paul across all 50 states, as he collects delegates and gold (not cash, but real gold, which the game refers to as sound money). Boss battles will occur along the way, 13 in total, each representing a branch of the Federal Reserve.


The fund raiser to help fund the project was launched a few weeks ago, but only in the past few days has the initiative gotten serious attention. The goal was $5,000 and has already been met; it is currently at $7,222 and has 11 days left.


As he notes in the video, Williams is hoping that "Ron Paul: Road to REVOLution" is "something that Libertarians can be excited about." Libertarian through and through, Williams even views indie gaming through that lens:

Through this game, and others, my sincere hope is to perpetuate the spirit of Indie Games, which I feel is sort of the last bastion of 'Free' gaming. There is so much red tape that game developers face in the world of gaming today that destroys what may have been some of our favorite games.


Williams goes on to speculate that indie gaming will hopefully thrive in the "face of dull, spiritless, cloned, big-budget games" by producing that is fun, and how the indie environment, which allows for greater risk via autonomy, will perpetuate this.

http://www.ingame.msnbc.msn.com/technology/technolog/ron-paul-video-game-works-724491#

I think some of the sprites used were stolen from Earthbound and Braid.

 

[eBay Huckster]

I don't understand that, he has been on shows all over the place. If by on the stump, there is a valid complaint, but then again, he still reaches far more people in a few minutes by appearing on the radio or on TV, as he has repeatedly done over the last month.

Think it just means on the stump, yeah.

 

[dead souls]

Mitt Romney is slightly above Bush tier but still below McCain tier when it comes to being a GOP presidential candidate. Including debating skills and on the spot answers.

HOW ABOUT 10 THOUSAND?

I don't even see how Romney is above Bush in debating/press skill. I absolutely hated Bush, and he sounded like an idiot most of the time, but Romney just sounds like he's not even a human being. He's just completely inauthentic all the time.

Hell, that soundbite they played on Colbert the other night of Romney answering a question about who is funnier between him and Obama was painful to listen to.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

I think you guys are still under estimating Romney, and it has more to do with the current economic conditions and media climate.

If this was 2008, Romney would get crushed worse than McCain. But it isn't. Romney with the help of the Media has managed to build this image where he can somehow solve America's economic issues due to him being a CEO (even though his plans would do exactly the opposite), an image where even though he supports radical budget plan like Paul Ryan's he is a moderate because at one point he governed MA and his positions in the primary were just to please GOP voters.

At this point, Obama's re-election will co-relate to economic moves. It goes down, you will see his polling go down, it goes upwards, you will see the same happen to his polls.

Of course, right now, Romney campaign and surrogates are enjoying more Media attention than Obama too. If that changes, things can change.

 

[AlteredBeast]

I think you guys are still under estimating Romney, and it has more to do with the current economic conditions and media climate.

If this was 2008, Romney would get crushed worse than McCain. But it isn't. Romney with the help of the Media has managed to build this image where he can somehow solve America's economic issues due to him being a CEO (even though his plans would do exactly the opposite), an image where even though he supports radical budget plan like Paul Ryan's he is a moderate because at one point he governed MA and his positions in the primary were just to please GOP voters.

At this point, Obama's re-election will co-relate to economic moves. It goes down, you will see his polling go down, it goes upwards, you will see the same happen to his polls.

Of course, right now, Romney campaign and surrogates are enjoying more Media attention than Obama too. If that changes, things can change.

I think Romney would have done better than McCain in 2008, since he hadn't gone full retard in 2008 yet.

 

[Suikoguy]

I think Romney would have done better than McCain in 2008, since he hadn't gone full retard in 2008 yet.

McCain sold his soul to the Hard Right GOP, Romney would have done the same me thinks.

 

[Black Mamba]

People support a lot of things just because it doesn't affect them. Is it fair that people who make 900k a year still pay far less as a percentage than those underneath them? Simply targeting millionaires is not the best idea, in my opinion. they are basically targeting those who gain a majority of their income from capital gains without having the balls to accurately tax the gains themselves, as should be done.

Regardless, I like the idea that people should pay their fair share, but I think that just targeting an arbitrary point deep into the 1% earners territory is just politics.

I wish Obama had the balls to return taxes to pre-Bush levels.

Yeah, I agree with you that $1 million is a political line (should be more along the 200k threshold). But it's at least a start. $1 million sounds unique. Whatever.

But this is the problem. Obama can't endorse taxing capital gains over say $100k at ordinary income or even 28%. The climate won't allow it. Same with $200k earners because doctors don't think they're even wealthy.

We're kind of fucked because as an electorate, we're dumb.

 

[Officerrob]

New NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll has Obama up 6

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/S...s/12336 APRIL NBC-WSJ Poll Release (4-19).pdf

 

[AlteredBeast]

as an electorate, we're dumb.

Agreed. 100%

 

[markatisu]

I think you guys are still under estimating Romney, and it has more to do with the current economic conditions and media climate.

If this was 2008, Romney would get crushed worse than McCain. But it isn't. Romney with the help of the Media has managed to build this image where he can somehow solve America's economic issues due to him being a CEO (even though his plans would do exactly the opposite), an image where even though he supports radical budget plan like Paul Ryan's he is a moderate because at one point he governed MA and his positions in the primary were just to please GOP voters.

At this point, Obama's re-election will co-relate to economic moves. It goes down, you will see his polling go down, it goes upwards, you will see the same happen to his polls.

Of course, right now, Romney campaign and surrogates are enjoying more Media attention than Obama too. If that changes, things can change.

You are giving Romney way too much credit, Romney failed to unseat Ted Kennedy and failed to win the nomination in 2008. There are very strong reasons for that, only reason he is even in this discussion now is because his competitors were that much worse

Romney is not going to get crushed, the GOP has way too much hate for Obama for that to happen. However unless the economy bottoms out or some unseen event happens he will get soundly defeated. Politically Romney does not win, he usually loses

 

[AlteredBeast]

New NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll has Obama up 6

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/S...s/12336 APRIL NBC-WSJ Poll Release (4-19).pdf

Is that survey saying that they don't poll anyone with a landline? and their demographics looked a bit low on the age scale, as well. I may be off.

 

[scorcho]

for a number of reasons - the near total collapse of political civility/discourse and respecting opposing points of view, my see-saw health issues, disappointment with Obama, etc - i've been completely removed from this election cycle and thread. i see the same with a surprisingly large number of my friends, who before volunteered or outright worked for Obama's election campaign the last cycle.

i never thought i'd become so disillusioned with Washington and the state of the country by age 31. i still read and listen to my usual sources to remain engaged, but the passion is gone. going through my RSS and podcast feeds feels like a rote exercise at this point.

how do i get the 2008 mojo back? :/

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

The game is the brainchild of 27-year-old Daniel Williams, who aside from being a devotee of Ron Paul, is a fan of indie games, and "making liberty sexy.

?