• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cloudy

Banned
Politico is hilarious. Everytime there's some controversy, you can count on some article about how it's bad news for Obama

I love how JPM is Obama's headache when the bankers, GOP and many Dems have fought like crazy to water down any regulation. Dimon's overt hostility towards the WH after originally backing Obama even shields him from attack ads linking him to this mess
 
T

thefro

Member
AlteredBeast said:
Truth. I don't know if you guys didn't watch the last 3 debates (I wouldn't blame you, but I am a masochist) but Romney actually performed really well. Jokes, zingers, retorts, and clear, nuanced speaking. Not saying everything he said was factual, but he said it very well. If Romney can somehow make enough of a convincing and mostly-factual debate performance, it could be pretty convincing for a lot of independents.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the Romney that's likely to show up for the fall debates is going to be a much bigger challenge for Obama than Zombie McCain. He's not a pushover.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
All Obama needs to ask Willard is "Mittens, how are your economic policies different than George W Bush's?" because we all know that no moderator has journalistic integrity to ask that question.
 
M

Manmademan

Member
RustyNails said:
All Obama needs to ask Willard is "Mittens, how are your economic policies different than George W Bush's?" because we all know that no moderator has journalistic integrity to ask that question.
Click to expand...

He doesn't even have to go there. Romney hung himself with "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt."
His weak attempts to take credit (?!) for the success of the auto bailout are a concession to this.

In addition, Romney backed Austerity over Stimulus re: economic recovery. How's that working out for the Eurozone?
 
R

Rocket Scientist

Member
I had to check the url on my browser to make sure I wasn't on Politico instead of GAF. Obama is going to be amazing in the debates. Romney will not 'win' a single one.
 
M

maximum360

Member
Clevinger said:
I'm not so sure. Romney is very good at being coached to throw out counter talking points lightning fast. He's going to have some zinger or comeback for every claim Obama makes. I bet you that whenever he's not at events or sleeping, he's practicing debating. And he actually seems to debate better under pressure. Every time in the primary where the narrative was that Mitt had to have a good showing, or else, he did with flying colors. When it mattered, he slapped around Gingrich like he was nothing.
Click to expand...

Romney also has a pretty short fuse though so I'm sure Obama will try to exploit that as well.
 
J

Jackson50

Member
AlteredBeast said:
Truth. I don't know if you guys didn't watch the last 3 debates (I wouldn't blame you, but I am a masochist) but Romney actually performed really well. Jokes, zingers, retorts, and clear, nuanced speaking. Not saying everything he said was factual, but he said it very well. If Romney can somehow make enough of a convincing and mostly-factual debate performance, it could be pretty convincing for a lot of independents.

I still think, no matter what, Obama wins the elections by 5 or 6%
Click to expand...
Yeah. He improved noticeably in the last few debates. And the general election debates should be slightly more felicitous. In the primary debates, he had to maintain a fine distinction between defending his record while not alienating conservatives. He was being assailed from the right. And considering he was positioned as the conservative option in 2008, I think he was poorly prepared for the onslaught. Further, the raucous partisan crowds only compounded the problem. Of course, Obama will be a considerably tougher opponent than man-on-dog or Newt. Ultimately, I think Romney will perform middlingly. He'll not impress anyone. But I doubt he'll implode as Perry did, for example.
Black Republican said:
so the romney team are seriously considering picking a "boring white guy" according to politico

http://politi.co/JP7L1w
Click to expand...
Well, the Republican Party is not exactly replete with viable alternatives.
 
P

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
Tamanon said:
The easiest way for Romney to go would require some sincerity on his part. Spin it as having to make the hard decisions for the good of the future.

It'd be tough for him, I'm thinking, if only because I don't think Bain was ever in it for the companies involved just to raise the value enough to make a good profit before offloading.
Click to expand...

Romney also has issues with sincerity
 
A

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
Jackson50 said:
Well, the Republican Party is not exactly replete with viable alternatives.
Click to expand...

They just nominated a guy whose positions as a one-term politician include - Raising taxes, passing and heavily endorsing universal healthcare, and so on. His nomination might be the most incredible thing about this election cycle if it weren't for the complete and utter retardation of his peers, their level of funding, and his own wealth.

At this point, ANYONE is a viable alternative, even one-term or less politicians, hispanic women, black women, hispanic men, boring white men, etc.
 
M

Mike M

Nick N
Eh, I fully expect the GE debates to be a dull affair. Romney will benefit from everyone's lowered expectations and succeed by virtue of not imploding live on stage, Obama will "fail to go for the kill" by not overtly provoking Romney.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Clevinger said:
I'm not so sure. Romney is very good at being coached to throw out counter talking points lightning fast. He's going to have some zinger or comeback for every claim Obama makes. I bet you that whenever he's not at events or sleeping, he's practicing debating. And he actually seems to debate better under pressure. Every time in the primary where the narrative was that Mitt had to have a good showing, or else, he did with flying colors. When it mattered, he slapped around Gingrich like he was nothing.
Click to expand...

Good point. Romney dismantled Gingrich when he had to, and let Santorum implode. He's a smart guy who prepares well, which is reflected on his business career. He will do well enough against Obama to convince almost half the electorate that he can be president

Obama won't have a positive jobs record by the time the debates start, and I don't think people will buy his excuse. He's very vulnerable on the economy due to how bad it is, and I'd things slow down he's finished
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
Surest sign so far that Walker will likely win his recall election: Wisconsin Dems are already blaming the DNC for not investing money in the race, preemptively blaming them for their loss.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...walker-recall/2012/05/14/gIQAj6lxOU_blog.html

Top Wisconsin Democrats are furious with the national party — and the Democratic National Committee in particular — for refusing their request for a major investment in the battle to recall Scott Walker, I’m told.

The failure to put up the money Wisconsin Dems need to execute their recall plan comes at a time when the national Republican Party is sinking big money into defending Walker, raising fears that the DNC’s reluctance could help tip the race his way.
Click to expand...
 
J

Jackson50

Member
AlteredBeast said:
They just nominated a guy whose positions as a one-term politician include - Raising taxes, passing and heavily endorsing universal healthcare, and so on. His nomination might be the most incredible thing about this election cycle if it weren't for the complete and utter retardation of his peers, their level of funding, and his own wealth.

At this point, ANYONE is a viable alternative, even one-term or less politicians, hispanic women, black women, hispanic men, boring white men, etc.
Click to expand...
Absolutely not. A terrible running mate would only compound his problems. The risk isn't worth it.
 
M

markatisu

Member
PhoenixDark said:
Good point. Romney dismantled Gingrich when he had to, and let Santorum implode. He's a smart guy who prepares well, which is reflected on his business career. He will do well enough against Obama to convince almost half the electorate that he can be president

Obama won't have a positive jobs record by the time the debates start, and I don't think people will buy his excuse. He's very vulnerable on the economy due to how bad it is, and I'd things slow down he's finished
Click to expand...

Gingrinch was not hard to dismantle, he was a walking contradiction whose only debate success against Romney was when he challenged the moderator and used that to basically fly the rest of the debate.

Romney stinks when pushed, he always has and if his contradictions and flip flopping are pushed on his he gets visibly upset.

Its like all you guys forgot about how much demeanor means in a debate, did you forget McCain's "this one" comment and point in 2008 or George HW Bush looking at his watch against Clinton in 1992.

That is where Romney's robotness is going to hurt him, the nationally televised debates serve 2 functions (to sell yourself to the public and to show your stand on the positions). Romney if pushed is going to have a hard time doing both.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
cartoon_soldier said:
They should have never moved ahead with the Recall, unless they could time it with the Presidential Elections.
Click to expand...

Yup, has been blatantly obvious for half a year if not more. As I keep saying, Wisconsin's economy is good, unemployment is low. Walker was always going to have major advantages barring some scandal or economic crash.

His ascension as GOP Jesus continues. Too bad he doesn't have a chin, he'd be even more potent if he was handsome
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
GhaleonEB said:
Surest sign so far that Walker will likely win his recall election: Wisconsin Dems are already blaming the DNC for not investing money in the race, preemptively blaming them for their loss.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...walker-recall/2012/05/14/gIQAj6lxOU_blog.html
Click to expand...
Yeesh. I think I might walk back my prediction of Walker losing, but I'll wait until PPP's poll of the race tomorrow before doing so.

On one hand the recall is a good tool for organizing, collecting voter lists, volunteering etc. so even if they fail it strengthens the party somewhat. And they still have a good chance at reclaiming the State Senate. On the other, if they keep picking battles they can't win, it won't look good for the party's image, and Republicans will have a field day if they win.

Still, I'm sure it'll be close either way. Those one million voters aren't going anywhere. But if Walker's base is more excited to turn out than Democrats are, it's game over.

PhoenixDark said:
As I keep saying, Wisconsin's economy is good, unemployment is low.
Click to expand...
See, this bothers me though. Wisconsin's had a net jobs loss since Walker took office. Unemployment is dropping because people are leaving the work force, yet it looks good on Walker.

But when unemployment drops nationally, it's bad for Obama because it just means people are leaving the work force.

Do you ever think about the hoops you have to jump through to reach your conclusion?
 
A

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
markatisu said:
Gingrinch was not hard to dismantle, he was a walking contradiction whose only debate success against Romney was when he challenged the moderator and used that to basically fly the rest of the debate.

Romney stinks when pushed, he always has and if his contradictions and flip flopping are pushed on his he gets visibly upset.

Its like all you guys forgot about how much demeanor means in a debate, did you forget McCain's "this one" comment and point in 2008 or George HW Bush looking at his watch against Clinton in 1992.

That is where Romney's robotness is going to hurt him, the nationally televised debates serve 2 functions (to sell yourself to the public and to show your stand on the positions). Romney if pushed is going to have a hard time doing both.
Click to expand...

Bush didn't lose against Clinton as much as a viable 3rd party conservative came along. If Perot weren't there, Bush would have won. The same could be said for Nader in 2000, although he received FAR fewer votes than Perot, it definitely would have tipped the EC scale.
 
T

Tamanon

Banned
AlteredBeast said:
Bush didn't lose against Clinton as much as a viable 3rd party conservative came along. If Perot weren't there, Bush would have won. The same could be said for Nader in 2000, although he received FAR fewer votes than Perot, it definitely would have tipped the EC scale.
Click to expand...

So, let's say the Paul convention nonsense is about pushing people to Gary Johnson instead.(This is all just wacky pie-in-the-sky theorizing). Do you think Johnson could be viable enough to swing the election?

It'd be an interesting demographic at least.
 
R

RDreamer

Member
PhoenixDark said:
His ascension as GOP Jesus continues. Too bad he doesn't have a chin, he'd be even more potent if he was handsome
Click to expand...

He just has a look at a way of talking that makes me want to outright punch him. Even if he was somehow saying things I agree with there'd be an urge to punch him. He just looks and sounds like a scummy weasel. It just so happens that he actually is a scummy weasel also.

Aaron Strife said:
Still, I'm sure it'll be close either way. Those one million voters aren't going anywhere. But if Walker's base is more excited to turn out than Democrats are, it's game over.
Click to expand...

I think it's game over then. Walker's base is insane. I know this is terrible anecdotal evidence, but the amount of yard signs with that guy's name on it here is freakishly astounding. I just went to a job interview, and I swear in the 30 miles there and back (different routes) I saw at least 80-100 of those signs (and 1 for the recall). It's like every other house has one here, and it's not just the tiny ones either. There are all sorts of giant ones that people have. And businesses have 'em too. It's crazy. His base is excited as hell.

Also, I saw my first Ron Paul yard sign, oddly enough... right next to a Walker one.
 
M

markatisu

Member
AlteredBeast said:
Bush didn't lose against Clinton as much as a viable 3rd party conservative came along. If Perot weren't there, Bush would have won. The same could be said for Nader in 2000, although he received FAR fewer votes than Perot, it definitely would have tipped the EC scale.
Click to expand...

I was in no way implying the debate issues caused the election results, but for people who already dislike or are unsure of Romney, physical signs of anger and being upset would make the already existing disconnect grow even more.
 
G

gcubed

Member
AlteredBeast said:
Bush didn't lose against Clinton as much as a viable 3rd party conservative came along. If Perot weren't there, Bush would have won. The same could be said for Nader in 2000, although he received FAR fewer votes than Perot, it definitely would have tipped the EC scale.
Click to expand...

yeah, not sure why this keeps getting repeated, but its not true.
 
D

Dr. Pangloss

Member
The problem with Romney's Republican challengers is that they could not go into full populist mode. Gingrich got hammered from the right for his Bain ads. Breaking the eleventh commandment and all that. Also they did not have as much money as Obama will have.

I also don't agree with the Bain ads. You have to assume that they were the only private equity firm in the 80s. If Romney did not do it, then someone else would have. Globalization was going to crush those companies regardless. But this is politics.
 
I

Invisible_Insane

Member
Ron Paul no longer campaigning in primaries
Texas Rep. Ron Paul (R) announced today that he is scaling back his presidential campaign operation.

He said in a statement that he will continue to fight former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney for delegates at state conventions around the country, but he will no longer spend any money on upcoming primary contests.

“Our campaign will continue to work in the state convention process,” Paul wrote in an e-mail to supporters.“Moving forward, however, we will no longer spend resources campaigning in primaries in states that have not yet voted. Doing so with any hope of success would take many tens of millions of dollars we simply do not have.”

In the near future, Paul added, “my campaign leadership will lay out to you our delegate strategy and what you can do to help.”

Paul supporters have successfully increased the candidate’s delegate share in multiple caucus states by flooding state conventions and mastering arcane rules.

While Paul has already cut back his campaign significantly, as recently as two weeks ago he was airing ads in Rhode Island and Texas.

Upcoming primaries in Arkansas, Kentucky, and Texas might actually provide fertile ground for Paul. But his fundraising has dried up.
Click to expand...
 
C

Clevinger

Member
Dr. Pangloss said:
I also don't agree with the Bain ads. You have to assume that they were the only private equity firm in the 80s. If Romney did not do it, then someone else would have. Globalization was going to crush those companies regardless. But this is politics.
Click to expand...

That's really not an excuse that would work with anything. "Someone else would have done this loathsome thing to them anyway, most likely, so I did it first."
 
T

Tim-E

Member
Dr. Pangloss said:
I also don't agree with the Bain ads. You have to assume that they were the only private equity firm in the 80s. If Romney did not do it, then someone else would have. Globalization was going to crush those companies regardless. But this is politics.
Click to expand...


Those people aren't running for president and aren't trying to convince middle class voters that they empathize with them. Those people aren't using their time as corporate raiders as the main focal point of their argument as to why they understand the economy and why they should be elected. Mitt Romney is.

Romney is using his Bain experience as the linchpin of his economic experience. It's absolutely relevant and it absolutely should be talked about. If he's going to use it as a significant aspect of his campaign, then it's fair game that Obama criticize it.
 
D

Dr. Pangloss

Member
Clevinger said:
That's really not an excuse that would work with anything. "Someone else would have done this loathsome thing to them anyway, most likely, so I did it first."
Click to expand...
I didn't offer it as an excuse. Those businesses were not going to last. What Romney did was not morally wrong either as you equate it. It is just the way capitalism works. Or are you suggesting that he/government should prop up failing industries?
 
B

Blergmeister

Member
Dr. Pangloss said:
I didn't offer it as an excuse. Those businesses were not going to last. What Romney did was not morally wrong either as you equate it. It is just the way capitalism works. Or are you suggesting that he/government should prop up failing industries?
Click to expand...

I think the critique is that Bain did this to more than just failing business, especially as the 90s went on.
 
T

Tim-E

Member
Dr. Pangloss said:
I didn't offer it as an excuse. Those businesses were not going to last. What Romney did was not morally wrong either as you equate it. It is just the way capitalism works.
Click to expand...

Well, considering plenty of immoral acts can be conducted through unregulated capitalism, I'm going to have to disagree with you.
 
B

Bulbo Urethral Baggins

Banned
Tim-E said:
Those people aren't running for president and aren't trying to convince middle class voters that they empathize with them. Those people aren't using their time as corporate raiders as the main focal point of their argument as to why they understand the economy and why they should be elected. Mitt Romney is.

Romney is using his Bain experience as the linchpin of his economic experience. It's absolutely relevant and it absolutely should be talked about. If he's going to use it as a significant aspect of his campaign, then it's fair game that Obama criticize it.
Click to expand...

Great. Let's talk about it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2w7iXazNso&feature=player_embedded
 
D

Dr. Pangloss

Member
Tim-E said:
Those people aren't running for president and aren't trying to convince middle class voters that they empathize with them. Those people aren't using their time as corporate raiders as the main focal point of their argument as to why they understand the economy and why they should be elected. Mitt Romney is.

Romney is using his Bain experience as the linchpin of his economic experience. It's absolutely relevant and it absolutely should be talked about. If he's going to use it as a significant aspect of his campaign, then it's fair game that Obama criticize it.
Click to expand...
Yeah that is why I said the argument only devolves into a political direction. Romney doesn't have to empathize with the middle class anyway. It just helps to get elected. He does have to deliver results. All politicians do. And to say his time at Bain gave him no experience in understanding markets and the forces in play there is ludicrous. Romney did his job at Bain and did it well. He insured his shareholders got a decent return for their money. Others lost out for that to happen. Competition is a bitch today in the global economy. I feel sorry for the workers, but nothing is forever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom