• 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.
Getting public support for an Iran war after just winding down fruitless conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan is basically impossible, no matter what Israel says.

And Iraq only happened because the right wing was able to tie it to the (totally unrelated) september 11th attacks. Good luck with that this time around. I could see a President Romney pushing for one, but Obama? nooooooooooo

How are you not seeing the parallels between Iraq and Iran? Bush in 2002 was all about WMD this and WMD that. Now we are hearing Iran´s nuclear weapons from the administration every week. The media campaign has intensified significantly. Obama won´t do anything before the election, he will wait until after his reelection to bomb Iran.
 
How are you not seeing the parallels between Iraq and Iran? Bush in 2002 was all about WMD this and WMD that.

And was only successfully able to gain support for the war, by convincing the public that Iraq was responsible for the Sept 11th terror attacks. He was also probably helped out by the fact that Gulf War I was generally viewed as a success, and most were convinced that it would be easy to walk in and be greeted as liberators.

Now that we have 10+ years of war to convince us that's NOT the case, and an administration that has neither the ability nor desire to use the september 11th bogeyman to drum up public support- it's not happening.

Now we are hearing Iran´s nuclear weapons from the administration every week. The media campaign has intensified significantly. Obama won´t do anything before the election, he will wait until after his reelection to bomb Iran.

Obama does not want a conflict in Iran. Look at how the administration handled regime change re: the arab spring uprisings, and Libya. That approach was far more successful with minimal american casualties, so don't expect the administration to abandon it.
 
If he did, Santorum could shine a huge spotlight on how Mormons are a bizarre cult that post-humously baptizes Jews.

yeah, I don't think calling santorum out on religious grounds is going to work very well for Mitt Romney.

most americans consider mormons just another protestant sect, and they'd be pretty surprised to learn mormons are about as close to mainstream christians as muslims are.
 

Re: Obama Administration Wouldn’t Defend Blocking Military Benefits From Same-Sex Couples

This is all well and good, but there's more than a few liberal GAFers who defend some of the bullshit laws the Obama Justice Dept. does defend as, "He has to do that, it's the law!" I'm sure Gaborn can provide specifics.
 
Re: Obama Administration Wouldn’t Defend Blocking Military Benefits From Same-Sex Couples

This is all well and good, but there's more than a few liberal GAFers who defend some of the bullshit laws the Obama Justice Dept. does defend as, "He has to do that, it's the law!" I'm sure Gaborn can provide specifics.

They're no longer defending that because they believe they have constitutional justification to ignore it.

That's not the case with every case the justice department deals with.
 

Snake

Member
How are you not seeing the parallels between Iraq and Iran? Bush in 2002 was all about WMD this and WMD that. Now we are hearing Iran´s nuclear weapons from the administration every week. The media campaign has intensified significantly. Obama won´t do anything before the election, he will wait until after his reelection to bomb Iran.

Obama has so far shown that he is uninterested in attacking Iran, and he has endured intense political opposition based on this for most of his first term. If he had wanted to intervene, he would have done so when Iran was undergoing its election unrest. Look at how Israel's leadership, Congressional Republican Hawks, and "Democrats" like Joe Lieberman treat Obama. It is clear, including from countless op-eds from them, that they are loudly saying "we have been relentless in our public disdain, but attack Iran and this will stop and we will support your re-election!" Despite this, the Obama admin is not only resisting unilateral action, but has signaled that it disapproves of Israel from acting unilaterally as well.

On the other side of things, covert action is certainly in use to a great degree, both as a means to stem Iran's progress and to demonstrate that military force is not needed. Additionally, sanctions are not peachy and harmless, but they as well serve as an alternative tool to direct military intervention.

You are right that the media is running with a lot of anti-Iran stories. It certainly does not help the situation. But to say that the administration is doing what the Bush admin did with Iraq is not accurate. There is a difference between saber rattling and manufacturing a war. And we've been saber rattling with Iran for decades.

The danger is in returning Bush's foreign policy team to the White House (they are with Romney). I would like to believe that even they have learned some lessons, but it's not worth the risk to give them the chance.
 
Not even Bush went along with Israel's pleas to do something about Iran; he specifically ruled out helping with an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities in early 2008.

I think Obama is more vulnerable on Israel than Bush (or just about any modern president), and his own party has already shown a willingness to side with Israel over him; the freak out over border lines was one of the most disgusting displays I've seen in politics, given how blatant the distortions were supported in order to smear a United States President by members of his own party and country. With that in mind, the political and military pressure will be tough to stand up to.

I think we're heading for another case of Obama being rolled here. Obviously if Israel attacks first it can't be blamed on Obama though
 
This is mostly local to AZ politics, but staunchly Conservative Pinal Co. Sherriff Paul Babaeu is being forcibly outed by his immigrant boyfriend.

You may know him as the Sherriff in the McCain '08 "build the dang fence" ad and heir apparent to Sherriff Joe Arpiao.

You can't make the stuff up!
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsme...ons_of_alleged_immigrant_ex_boyfriend.php?m=1
I think you could write an interesting case study about closeted gays growing up in conservative environments, ascending to power and fucking dudes behind the curtain.

Now, 99% of these people are also assholes, but it doesn't help growing up somewhere that 1) carries strong hatred for gays and 2) will use that against you if you ever want to become a prominent political or business leader.

He's holding a press conference and admitted he's gay, but claims it never happened. It's a half-confession like Weiner's "I don't know if those pictures are of me"
 

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
This is mostly local to AZ politics, but staunchly Conservative Pinal Co. Sherriff Paul Babaeu is being forcibly outed by his immigrant boyfriend.

You may know him as the Sherriff in the McCain '08 "build the dang fence" ad and heir apparent to Sherriff Joe Arpiao.

You can't make the stuff up!
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsme...ons_of_alleged_immigrant_ex_boyfriend.php?m=1

WOW! Yet another conservative self-loathing gay. How long has this list gotten so far?
 

DCKing

Member
Santorum has apparently said that elderly are being euthanized involuntarily here in the Netherlands. Furthermore, euthanasia was to account for 10% of all death cases in NL (real figure is less than 3%), of which 50% is involuntarily . It gets even more rich when he says that Dutch elderly apparently have to wear bracelets that say "don't euthanize me" and need to evade Dutch hospitals to prevent being killed.

I like how the Tea Party thinks the Netherlands is liberal hell on earth. They even make up their own hell myths about it. I dislike how someone who thinks like this can run for most powerful man on the planet. How can someone so delusional be so popular?
 

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
Santorum has apparently said that elderly are being euthanized involuntarily here in the Netherlands. Furthermore, euthanasia was to account for 10% of all death cases in NL (real figure is less than 3%), of which 50% is involuntarily . It gets even more rich when he says that Dutch elderly apparently have to wear bracelets that say "don't euthanize me" and need to evade Dutch hospitals to prevent being killed.

I like how the Tea Party thinks the Netherlands is liberal hell on earth. They even make up their own hell myths about it. I dislike how someone who thinks like this can run for most powerful man on the planet. How can someone so delusional be so popular?

Santorum is running for Chairman of Monsanto?
 
Santorum has apparently said that elderly are being euthanized involuntarily here in the Netherlands. Furthermore, euthanasia was to account for 10% of all death cases in NL (real figure is less than 3%), of which 50% is involuntarily . It gets even more rich when he says that Dutch elderly apparently have to wear bracelets that say "don't euthanize me" and need to evade Dutch hospitals to prevent being killed.

I like how the Tea Party thinks the Netherlands is liberal hell on earth. They even make up their own hell myths about it. I dislike how someone who thinks like this can run for most powerful man on the planet. How can someone so delusional be so popular?

Ah, sounds like you're new to conservative politics.

The right wing is notorious for inventing a falsehood, and repeating it enough times in hopes the general populace will assume it's true.

They did the same thing in the US with Obamacare and "Death Panels," and claiming that "over 90% of what planned parenthood does is abortion."
 

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
Ah, sounds like you're new to conservative politics.

The right wing is notorious for inventing a falsehood, and repeating it enough times in hopes the general populace will assume it's true.

They did the same thing in the US with Obamacare and "Death Panels," and claiming that "over 90% of what planned parenthood does is abortion."
Foreign aid is 15% of the US budget. It should be cut to something more reasonable, like 10% or even 5%.

it's less than 1%
 
This is mostly local to AZ politics, but staunchly Conservative Pinal Co. Sherriff Paul Babaeu is being forcibly outed by his immigrant boyfriend.

You may know him as the Sherriff in the McCain '08 "build the dang fence" ad and heir apparent to Sherriff Joe Arpiao.

You can't make the stuff up!
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsme...ons_of_alleged_immigrant_ex_boyfriend.php?m=1

I don't think it's fair to point him out as a hypocrite or anything. He hasn't been anti-gay. Not every republican is, in fact this guy seems almost entirely focused on border issues.

I watched the press conference and was impressed
 
I think we're heading for another case of Obama being rolled here. Obviously if Israel attacks first it can't be blamed on Obama though

I don't think Israel and the US can so easily be separated. Anything Israel does will be done with the support of the US. The US certainly has the power and leverage to prevent Israel from doing anything it doesn't want Israel to do. It may well be that Obama institutionally and personally lacks the power to control the US executive bureaucracy, however. I think few people ever really consider that a President is constrained by the professional bureaucracy, which has its own ideological ethos that won't necessarily align with official policy as dictated by elected (and appointed) officials and which it will frequently pursue notwithstanding that official policy. It requires a strong and bold president to exert full control over, e.g., the intelligence bureaucracy. That president has to be prepared to not tolerate and deal harshly with professional mutiny.
 
Santorum: Obama believes in 'phony theology' not based on Bible

"It's not about you. It's not about you," Santorum said at a Tea Party rally, directing his comments at the president. "It's not about your quality of life. It's not about your job. It's about some phony ideal, some phony theology. Oh, not a theology based on the Bible, a different theology, but no less a theology."
“[O]bviously, he is now forcing people to do things that he believes that they have the right, that they should do," Santorum continued to say about Obama. "The Catholic church has a Theology that says this is wrong, and he’s saying no I’ve got a different, I’ve got a different -- you may want to call it a theology, you may want to call it secular values, whatever you want to call it, it’s a different moral values. And the president of the United States is exercising his values and trumping the values of the church. If you don’t want to call it a theology, I’m fine, you can have them let me know what they want to call it, but it is a different set of moral values that they are imposing on people who have a constitutional right to have their own values within the church, and that’s not a new low. That’s a reflection of exactly what ... it is a new low."

He continued, "The president has reached a new low in this country’s history of oppressing religious freedom that we have never seen before. If he doesn’t want to call his imposition of his values a theology that’s fine, but it is an imposition of his values over a church who has very clear theological reasons for opposing what the Obama administration is forcing on them.”
Asked why he's ramping up his rhetoric on this now, Santorum said, "I’ve been pretty clear that the left in America has their own moral code in which they want to impose on this country. You can call it a theology. You can call it a moral code. You can call it a world view, but they have their own moral code that they want to impose on everybody else. While they insist and complain that somehow or another that people of Judeo Christian faith are intolerant of their new moral code that they want to create here. I’m just saying they the ones who are intolerant in imposing their will on in this case the Catholic church.”
 
On the one hand, Obama shouldn't be dignifying Santorum's presence in the race by responding to this. But on the other hand, this would be a good opportunity to make some remark about the religious intolerance of the right.

I don't think it's fair to point him out as a hypocrite or anything. He hasn't been anti-gay. Not every republican is, in fact this guy seems almost entirely focused on border issues.

I watched the press conference and was impressed
Wrong hypocrisy.
 
Saw my first campaign ad today, on a facebook side bar.

Some "slash the government" tea party type....who relies on huge amounts of federal funding to support his agricultural routes.

I clicked.

And will click every time I see it.

I will bleed the tea party dry, 10 cents at a time.
 

Jackson50

Member
Getting public support for an Iran war after just winding down fruitless conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan is basically impossible, no matter what Israel says.

And Iraq only happened because the right wing was able to tie it to the (totally unrelated) september 11th attacks. Good luck with that this time around. I could see a President Romney pushing for one, but Obama? nooooooooooo
It would be difficult to generate public support for an invasion, certainly. But the prospective campaign would be limited to surgical strikes on Iran's nuclear infrastructure. And public support would not be necessary for such a campaign; even Congressional support would be unnecessary considering precedent on similar past strikes. Fortunately, the Administration has reacted tepidly to the prospect of a military strike, whereas the Bush Administration conducted the charge against Iraq. Thus, a military strike, while not implausible, is unlikely. Still, the current discourse is disconcertingly fraught with actors encouraging military action. Some are just itching to blitz Iran.
An attack would be foolish. Iran's nuclear program is already dispersed and I doubt the intelligence community is certain they have all the sites inventoried. I'm confident that Obama wouldn't agree to a pre-emptive strike on their facilities considering the lack of any plausibly beneficial exit strategy, but I wouldn't put it past Nety to order an attack and drag the US unwillingly into this.
Undoubtedly. But the foolishness of an action has not prevented U.S. action in the past. And while I think an attack unlikely, I just wanted to take the opportunity to criticize our foreign policy establishment.
I'd say there's considerable convergence between Santorum and Evangelicals on the state of mainline protestantism. From the ordination of homosexuals to permissive doctrines regarding abortion, they view social liberalism as diametric to God's word. Thus, they attribute the substantial decline in membership to the various church's abandonment of Biblical precepts. That is, the churches are not viable because the Spirit has abandoned them.
 

SolKane

Member
I. Lincoln, FDR, Washington
II. Teddy, Jefferson
III. Truman, Wilson, Obama <--
IV. Clinton, Eisenhower, Jackson
V. Kennedy

I know I'm late to this, but what is this list supposed to be? I'm not sure how Wilson and Obama would be comparable unless we're talking about civil rights abuses. Or maybe the irony of them both receive Nobel Peace Prizes?
 
Some more analysis on Obama's budget:

http://www.epi.org/blog/presidents-jobs-package-create-jobs/

•$95 billion in the payroll tax cuts (employee-side)
•$80 billion in other business tax cuts (including a $25 billion hiring credit)
•$45 billion in emergency unemployment benefit extension
•$25 billion in transportation infrastructure investments ($50 billion over ten years)
•$20 billion in school facility repair and modernization
•$30 billion in retaining or rehiring teachers and first responders
•$25 billion miscellaneous neighborhood stabilization, job training, energy efficiency, VA conservation jobs, infrastructure bank, and manufacturing incentives

About 85 percent ($300 billion) of the package would hit the economy in the next year and a half. Using standard macroeconomic multipliers for the various policy categories, we find that the president’s job creation proposals would create 1.5 million jobs in fiscal year 2012 and 1.3 million jobs in fiscal year 2013 (through Sept. 2013).

m
 

Averon

Member
http://twitter.com/#!/ppppolls

Santorum still up about 10 points on Romney in Washington state through 2 days of our polling there

The first night of our polling in Arizona was pretty much a tie between Romney and Santorum

Santorum leading on the first night of our new Michigan poll, but much closer than we found there a week ago

Romney's Super Pac splash in Michigan working? Or maybe it's Santorum's embarrassing comments towards women. Probably a combination of both.
 

Clevinger

Member
http://twitter.com/#!/ppppolls

Santorum leading on the first night of our new Michigan poll, but much closer than we found there a week ago

Romney's Super Pac splash in Michigan working?

God, this annoys the shit out of me. Voters obviously dislike Romney, then he throws millions at the state and turns it around in a week or two. He must thank Jesus every night for that Citizen United ruling, because without it he would have been completely fucked.
 
God, this annoys the shit out of me. Voters obviously dislike Romney, then he throws millions at the state and turns it around in a week or two. He must thank Joseph Smith every night for that Citizen United ruling, because without it he would have been completely fucked.
Fixed that for you.

I guess one thing to look for going towards the general is how much pull Romney's money has had on states with open primaries. Something tells me he won't be able to bury his stink with moolah come November.
 

Jackson50

Member
http://twitter.com/#!/ppppolls



Romney's Super Pac splash in Michigan working? Or maybe it's Santorum's embarrassing comments towards women. Probably a combination of both.
It could be the inevitable correction after Santorum's unsustainable boost. Regardless, it's evident Santorum's momentum has been arrested. He has nowhere to go but down.
Foreign aid is 15% of the US budget. It should be cut to something more reasonable, like 10% or even 5%.

it's less than 1%
Speaking of foreign aid, I was reminded of a new fund proposed in the president's budget designed to induce structural and institutional reforms in "transitional" regimes in the Middle East/North Africa. First, I approve of employing positive rather than punitive mechanisms. Nevertheless, the fund is inadequate; it was budgeted ~$1 billion. And although that seems substantial, it's likely insufficient to have an appreciable effect on the targeted regimes. Moreover, it suffers from the same deficiency as other aid programs by imprecisely targeting the aid. It attempts to influence the behavior of a clique from the old regime while dispersing the aid throughout society. A noble effort, but probably a waste.
 

Jackson50

Member
Santorum should have begged his bundlers to put it all on the line for Michigan. If he wins the state, he doesn't win the nomination but would clearly prove Romney is too weak to nominate. It would also force everyone to reconsider Santorum's electability
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/top-gop-...-michigan-he-will-publicly-call-for-jeb-bush/
I wonder which mooncalf intimated this. It could be any of them. And the best part is it whipped the deadlocked convention junkies into a frenzy.
 
The other problem Santorum has is delegate math too. For example, even though he won the popular votes in the 3 states of Colorado, Minn and MO, majority of the delegates in Minn and MO were Paul Supporters.

The Republican Delegate math is a nightmare and nobody really knows who has how many delegates.
 

ToxicAdam

Member
I just think PPP's initial poll was way out of wack. Most polls had Romney as a single digit underdog, but PPP had him down double digits (15 points).
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
I just think PPP's initial poll was way out of wack. Most polls had Romney as a single digit underdog, but PPP had him down double digits (15 points).

Possible, but unlikely given their status as a pollster. But, then again polling this primary must be a nightmare.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom