• 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.
would you rather obama be shackled and possibly lose because of not using them. it would be worse than what if hillary comments. He needs to bring the money to the game and the single donors will bring their game but he needs the SPacs to bring it too.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
Yeah, it was inevitable. The amount of cash flowing into the primary is a sliver of what's going to land in the general; I don't think he had much of a choice, and so I was expecting it at this point. I'm less upset with Obama than I am with the overall mess we're in thanks to Citizens United.
 
its not a flip flop if others are cheating their way to millions using Super PACS. its a matter of running a fair game and losing and running a dirty game and winning. Isnt this what everyone wanted? A Democrat to likes to get in the mud to fight?
 
Yeah, it was inevitable. The amount of cash flowing into the primary is a sliver of what's going to land in the general; I don't think he had much of a choice, and so I was expecting it at this point. I'll less upset with Obama than I am with the overall mess we're in thanks to Citizens United.

I am more angry at the state of money in politics in general, but resided to the reality that the people i want in power need to that money to play.
 
Amazing, the GOP House is going back to Paul Ryan's attempt to do away with Medicare plan. In an election year. When their candidate is going to be Paul Ryan. He's going back to doing away with Medicare! Are these people just straight morons?
 

GhaleonEB

Member
Amazing, the GOP House is going back to Paul Ryan's attempt to do away with Medicare plan. In an election year. When their candidate is going to be Paul Ryan. He's going back to doing away with Medicare! Are these people just straight morons?

Well, they're ideologues. I read that headline and started laughing; it blew up in their face last time around, and will go down even worse in the general. And it throws Romney one hell of an anchor. :lol
 
Well, they're ideologues. I read that headline and started laughing; it blew up in their face last time around, and will go down even worse in the general. And it throws Romney one hell of an anchor. :lol

I have to wonder whether the GOP during 2010 and 2011 were actually astute politically or if the Dems have were just ignorant and terrible politicians. Who brings up such a divisive issue during a presidential election year?
 

GhaleonEB

Member
I have to wonder whether the GOP during 2010 and 2011 were actually astute politically or if the Dems have were just ignorant and terrible politicians. Who brings up such a divisive issue during a presidential election year?

I think it was both. Mitch McConnell was arguing before Obama was inaugurated that the GOP should refuse to support any and all Obama policies, even if he co-opted their own. He knew that regardless of who created the current economy, Dems would be punished for not turning it around. He was correct.

And Dems were idiots for stalling so many jobs bills, agreeing to water down what got passed, and sitting on their hands when they should have taken action in 2010 regarding the economy.
 
I think it was both. Mitch McConnell was arguing before Obama was inaugurated that the GOP should refuse to support any and all Obama policies, even if he co-opted their own. He knew that regardless of who created the current economy, Dems would be punished for not turning it around. He was correct.

And Dems were idiots for stalling so many jobs bills, agreeing to water down what got passed, and sitting on their hands when they should have taken action in 2010 regarding the economy.

So is it that the Dems have just gotten better at playing the game in the last 12 months while the GOP hasn't adapted their gameplan?
 

KtSlime

Member
Amazing, the GOP House is going back to Paul Ryan's attempt to do away with Medicare plan. In an election year. When their candidate is going to be Paul Ryan. He's going back to doing away with Medicare! Are these people just straight morons?

The Republicans are delusional, but not so delusional to think that they actually have a chance at getting a president in seat this year. Got to do something 'productive', might as well try and ruin the lives of millions while they still have a chance.
 

Crisco

Banned
I think it's just that the GOP has no recourse at this point. They have to propose a budget that lowers the deficit without raising taxes or cutting defense, or they look like fools. Well, the money has to come from somewhere, and the only programs they can cut that are big enough to make a significant dent in the deficit are Medicare and Social Security. It's basically a math problem, and their ideology has forced them to solve it in a politically unpopular way.
 

Zoibie

Member
The Republicans are delusional, but not so delusional to think that they actually have a chance at getting a president in seat this year. Got to do something 'productive', might as well try and ruin the lives of millions while they still have a chance.

What makes you so confident that Obama is a lock for a second term? The debates? The campaigns? Romney's... romneyness?
 
I think it's just that the GOP has no recourse at this point. They have to propose a budget that lowers the deficit without raising taxes or cutting defense, or they look like fools. Well, the money has to come from somewhere, and the only programs they can cut that are big enough to make a significant dent in the deficit are Medicare and Social Security. It's basically a math problem, and their ideology has forced them to solve it in a politically unpopular way.
Those motivations pale in comparison to private insurance companies drooling at their mouths to get their hands on Medicare and SS trust fund cash cows. The teabagger no big gubmint politicians combined with libertarian ideologues, combined with bought politicians from insurance corporations makes government safety programs vulnerable. They aren't mutually exclusive either.
 
so sanctions are working. Iran is cash strapped enough to default on its rice payments to india.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/07/us-india-rice-idUSTRE8160CX20120207

There is no way they dont have enough money to pay this bill. That money is being spent ways that do not benefit its citizens. They dont deserve to starve, but they do deserve a better government and pissing them off enough to try even harder to overthrow the current regime would be an adequate affect.
 
so sanctions are working. Iran is cash strapped enough to default on its rice payments to india.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8160CX20120207

There is no way they dont have enough money to pay this bill. That money is being spent ways that do not benefit its citizens. They dont deserve to starve, but they do deserve a better government and pissing them off enough to try even harder to overthrow the current regime would be an adequate affect.
something something leading from behind
 
so sanctions are working. Iran is cash strapped enough to default on its rice payments to india.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/07/us-india-rice-idUSTRE8160CX20120207

There is no way they dont have enough money to pay this bill. That money is being spent ways that do not benefit its citizens. They dont deserve to starve, but they do deserve a better government and pissing them off enough to try even harder to overthrow the current regime would be an adequate affect.

Let's just hope the "containment is working!" sentiment isn't followed up by military intervention within half a year like the last time we were getting "sanctions are working" in the news about a certain Middle Eastern nation.
 
so sanctions are working. Iran is cash strapped enough to default on its rice payments to india.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/07/us-india-rice-idUSTRE8160CX20120207

There is no way they dont have enough money to pay this bill. That money is being spent ways that do not benefit its citizens. They dont deserve to starve, but they do deserve a better government and pissing them off enough to try even harder to overthrow the current regime would be an adequate affect.
Sanctions rarely work. Iran will starve its people and start giving them ration cards. Look at N Korea and Saddam-Iraq.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Government expects lending fund to turn taxpayers a profit
By Jose Pagliery @CNNMoney February 7, 2012: 5:49 AM ET



tim-geithner.gi.top.jpg





NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- An Obama administration lending program set up to funnel cash to small banks was expected to cost taxpayers $1.3 billion. Instead, it will turn a profit of $80 million. But the turnabout isn't all good news: The Treasury Department's Small Business Lending Fund helped far fewer banks than Congress intended.

The government program, one of President Obama's many attempts to pump capital into small firms, disbursed only $4 billion of the $30 billion it was allotted.
Of more than 7,000 community banks small enough to potentially qualify, only 933 applied. And a mere 332 community banks and organizations made the cut.
Treasury, explaining why the 2010 program is expected to cost less than expected, cited fewer banks healthy enough to qualify, weaker demand for small business loans and fewer bank failures.

But some small business leaders and banks bemoan the low participation rate. They say government officials were too stringent about which banks got the money or that banks had trouble navigating the application process.

Under the program, banks seeking an infusion spelled out how they would use taxpayer money to spur lending to small businesses. If Treasury accepted a bank's plan, it essentially became an investor in it -- turning over capital that would spur lending and getting dividend payments in return.

Treasury still holds stakes in most of the banks, and banks say they are continuing to make loans under the program. In fact, the $4 billion infusion could eventually spur $32 billion in lending, according to Independent Community Bankers of America chief economist Paul Merski.


Alma Bank in Astoria, N.Y., received $19 million and reported one of the largest increases in lending to small firms. According to Treasury data, Alma Bank lent $91 million to small businesses in the 12 months ending in June 2010 and $235 million over the next 15 months. "We did need this money," CEO Kirk Karabelas said. "It helped us dedicate more to small business lending, and God knows there are plenty of businesses right now that can use this."

Karabelas said much of the money went to nearby diners and restaurants, as well as Italian foods producer Rienzi Foods.
New Jersey Community Bank President Bob O'Donnell had a different take on the lending fund. O'Donnell said he avoided the program entirely because he feared the funds would allow the government to place restrictions on his bank like those that accompanied the 2008 Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Besides, O'Donnell said, small businesses weren't exactly breaking down his door for loans during the program's term, which ended last September.
But that wasn't the case for First Green Bank in Mt. Dora, Fla., where bank President Paul Rountree had several entrepreneurs asking for loans.

Rountree said his bank was capitalized enough to go without the funds but accepted $4.7 million anyway to bulk itself up. The funds let it lend more to doctors with private practices as well as to a steel fabricator. Rountree said it also allowed the young bank, which started in 2009, to avoid having to raise money from private investors.
"For once, there was a government program put in place that worked," Rountree said
.
And the funds will help small business for several years to come, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told Congress last October.

But Cato Institute economist Mark Calabria questioned the program's effectiveness because it came on the heels of a deep decline in small business lending.
"They've used a very low baseline, which questions whether we actually had an increase in small business lending that wouldn't have happened otherwise," Calabria said.
Some experts said the billions allocated by Congress would have been more effective if directed toward the Small Business Administration's loan programs.
Small biz loan demand up, Federal Reserve says Even Merski of the community bankers group, one of the original proponents of the effort, said more should have been done with the Treasury fund.

"The program filled a niche that was needed: banks that had lending opportunities but needed additional capital," he said. "But more banks should have been included in the program." Merski said several factors slowed down the process, such as lack of coordination between Treasury officials disbursing the funds and regulators that oversee the banks, and a short one-year window for banks to apply.
"A lot banks just ran out of time," Merski said.

Treasury spokesman Anthony Coley defended the program and noted the department worked closely with federal banking agencies to ensure a thorough review of each application. "Early reports indicate [the program] is working well," he said. "More than 60% of participants have already increased their small business lending by 10% or more



#######################


This is one of those small things that work and never gets talked about. I wish it did because maybe it would have put more pressure on the Treasury department to work out the kinks in the program and try to extend it for another year.
 
Re: Obama and Super PACs: Just making sure this little nugget isn't lost in the conversation.
He continues to support a law to force full disclosure of all funding intended to influence our elections, a reform that was blocked in 2010 by a unanimous Republican filibuster in the U.S. Senate. And the President favors action — by constitutional amendment, if necessary — to place reasonable limits on all such spending.
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...super-pac-cash-they-loathe.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

Edit: More
“Should a constitutional amendment be necessary to reverse the worst aspets of the Citizens United law, he would support those efforts,” the official said. “But ultimately as we look at what’s possible this year, we recognize the reality of what the Republican Congress will and won’t support.”

“That doesn’t mean his commitment to reform isn’t there. But we’re recognizing the reality of the political situation. We’re going to need to elect a Democratic majority in Congress.”

The counterargument from campaign finance types: Voicing strong support for an amendment would reinforce the story Obama is trying to tell about the GOP’s wholesale devotion to preserving a system that’s rigged in favor of the rich and corporations, in the face of his fight to restore a level playing field for ordinary Americans.
 
Obama joining in on the SuperPAC game.
We all knew it was going to happen, but it's still sad. I wish they had just focused on what they did last election, but I'd rather they do anything to win. Sad to say.

Question to Poli-GAF, so it's clear the republicans have a 'plan' for Medicare, what's the democrats' plan though? Do they have anything they can counter this reform talk with or are they not going to tackle it at all? Everything I've read indicates something has to change, or am I wrong in believing this?
 
We all knew it was going to happen, but it's still sad. I wish they had just focused on what they did last election, but I'd rather they do anything to win. Sad to say.

Question to Poli-GAF, so it's clear the republicans have a 'plan' for Medicare, what's the democrats' plan though? Do they have anything they can counter this reform talk with or are they not going to tackle it at all? Everything I've read indicates something has to change, or am I wrong in believing this?
PPACA.
 

Jackson50

Member
It's amazing how poor the GOP has run their primaries, with the most recent example being the disastrous Nevada caucus where barely anyone showed up. I guess the party leaders figured the field would be pretty impressive for 2012, including Palin and some other allstars, hence the decision to make it mirror a democrat primary season in terms of proportional delegates.

...yea, that didn't work out. All this is going to do is continue to weaken Romney
This is a prime example of how the primary process weaken political parties; I'll avoid any normative judgements.
so sanctions are working. Iran is cash strapped enough to default on its rice payments to india.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/07/us-india-rice-idUSTRE8160CX20120207

There is no way they dont have enough money to pay this bill. That money is being spent ways that do not benefit its citizens. They dont deserve to starve, but they do deserve a better government and pissing them off enough to try even harder to overthrow the current regime would be an adequate affect.
They are working, sure. But that depends on the goal. Are the sanctions effectively constricting Iran's economy thereby hurting the populace? Yes. Are the sanctions deterring Iran's enrichment process? No.
It was discussed a couple pages ago. The general consensus was that it'd be an all around bad idea.
Right. I'd read the debate from the previous pages. It's not a feasible endeavor.
 
If we don't stop these liberal activist judges from undermining the democratic process and impinging on our religious freedoms, it's going to be Sodom and Gomorrah all over again.
I came to basically make this exact joke. I'm sure at some campaign event today, Newt Gingrich will say that and mean it.
 
Gay marriage to the SC, contraception wars...looks like social issues are back, baby. Another reason I don't believe republicans will stay at home and let Romney lose
 

Allard

Member
Gay marriage to the SC, contraception wars...looks like social issues are back, baby. Another reason I don't believe republicans will stay at home and let Romney lose

You really are a broken record lol, especially considering there are plenty of people who oppose gay marriage on the democrat side who willing voted for Obama and likely will continue too. The only things these 'social' issues will ignite is more local and state political wars especially considering how far Obama has kept away from even discussing social issues the right cares about in the past couple elections.
 
They also increase Evangelical turnout. I'm not saying Obama will lose because of these issues, just that I do not believe conservatives will stay at home instead of taking the opportunity to oust Obama
So nutballs will come out and vote for banning the pill. What about the rest of the electorate? This election is about economy. Everything else is noise.
 
They also increase Evangelical turnout. I'm not saying Obama will lose because of these issues, just that I do not believe conservatives will stay at home instead of taking the opportunity to oust Obama

I get the feeling that Evangelicals isn't Romney's only base problem anymore
 
predictions for todays primaries/caucus'?

Minessota & Colorado - Romney
Missouri - Santorum
Minnesota and Missouri Santorumed
Colorado will go for Romney

Edit:
The surveys by Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling show Santorum possibly headed for a victory tonight in Missouri, where he leads Mitt Romney, 45% to 32%. The former Pennsylvania senator is also leading Romney in Minnesota, 33% to 24%.

Romney's best showing in the PPP surveys is in Colorado, where he has a 10-point lead over Santorum, 37% to 27%. Newt Gingrich is at 21% in Colorado, followed by Ron Paul at 13%.

"Rick Santorum has the potential to firmly establish himself as the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney today," said Dean Debnam, president of Public Policy Polling. "If he can pick up two wins and a second, it will raise significant questions about both Romney's inevitability and about the purpose for Newt Gingrich's continued presence in the race."
Source
 
I seriously doubt that the people of Iran are willing to go full North Korea for a nuke.

I think you are wrong, a lot of people in Iran absolutely fawn over their leaders and eat up all the anti American/Israel brainwash they are given.

A country as radical as Iran could easily manipulate its people into believing exactly what they wanted them too.

On a related note how twisted is it that people in North Korea actually think they have it made over there...
 
I think you are wrong, a lot of people in Iran absolutely fawn over their leaders and eat up all the anti American/Israel brainwash they are given.

A country as radical as Iran could easily manipulate its people into believing exactly what they wanted them too.

On a related note how twisted is it that people in North Korea actually think they have it made over there...

You really don't have any clue about Iran, do you? The people of Iran aren't idiots who just drink up the propaganda being fed to them by the religious elites. The Iranian nation has a huge youth movement that is very Americanized. You want to unite them with the religious ideologues? No better way to do it than to attack their country with bombs whether its to stop a nuclear program or not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom