• 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.

GhaleonEB

Member
Seems like it is painting a more accurate picture.

Doesn't Michigan have early voting? That will give Romney a big edge here I think.

Yeah, this poll is more in line with the others that have come out of Michigan. I think it brings PPP in line with the others, which have shown this kind of margin for Santorum for over a week now. Which actually should worry Romney, not much time left to drag Santorum down.
 
Yeah, this poll is more in line with the others that have come out of Michigan. I think it brings PPP in line with the others, which have shown this kind of margin for Santorum for over a week now. Which actually should worry Romney, not much time left to drag Santorum down.

Add to that according to PPP the negative ads against Santorum are not really working. So, Romney has to build up his position here.

The Feb 22nd debate will once again play an important role. Gingrich will go after Santorum, so will Paul I think. Santorum will go after Romney (or should at least).

Any serious republican has to be concerned about Romney here. He has shown a complete inability to beat anyone unless he heavily floods the market with negative ads; Citizen's United is literally the only reason he's not bailing out his own campaign with personal cash right now.

On that note, Romney's fundraising had been driven by Rich donors. As opposed to Obama or Santorum who have relied more on small donors. As a result, there was an article last week with a theory that combination of Romney's reliance on the Rich and extended Primary will result in Romney eventually having to spend his own money:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/zekejmiller/is-romney-going-to-run-out-of-money
 
So...apparently Texas has...wait for it...Death Panels. Well that's the scary way to put it. In actuality, Texas has the kind of end of life care that Republicans used to scare voters when it came to Obamacare.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...irectives-act/2011/08/25/gIQA7KkZNR_blog.html

When families demand treatments that have an exceedingly low likelihood of success or that sustain life of such low quality that one might reasonably say it is of no benefit to the patient, Texas law allows physicians to refuse to provide such treatments. Under the Texas legislation, demands by families for treatments that appear to meet these criteria are adjudicated by a hospital-based committee, and if the committee agrees with the clinicians, and if other providers cannot be located who are willing to provide such care, then treatment may be withdrawn without the permission of the patient’s surrogate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance_Directives_Act
 
Hey guys. I was watching my liberal programming on PBS tonight, Masterpiece Theater, and noticed an ad at the end for this: Clinton: An American Experience. Apparently PBS is going to run a two part documentary on Clinton's life Monday and Tuesday. Since he was the last major Democratic President and experienced a similar polarized society, I thought some might be interested in seeing it to compare to today's reality. It should come on at 9 pm EST. Check your local listings. I know I'm going to be watching because OK City bombing was the first news story I remember from my childhood, and the 2000 election happened my senior year of high school. I'll post a reminder before it starts tomorrow.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
So wait conservatives want Obama to do something about Syria after shitting all over him about Libya (first for doing nothing, then for doing something) bwahaha
 

Kabouter

Member
Japan? Scheduled to lose a third of their population. Though I admit that I overlooked Korea's population decline.

Indonesia? Too poor. And going nowhere from what I understand.

Pakistan? I have doubts
Japan's population by 2050 will have declined by less than 1/4, at which point it will still have a population that is twice that of South Korea. Indonesia is poor right now, and sure, it's not growing as fast as, say, Vietnam or other developing nations in the region, but it is a nation that still has quite a lot of potential. It is likely to attract more investment as labour costs in the rest of Asia continue to rise. Pakistan of course is unstable, but it is still a nuclear power, and will have some 350 million citizens by 2050, which makes it a strange omission.
 
Nobody commented on my videogame sprite post :(

Japan's population by 2050 will have declined by less than 1/4, at which point it will still have a population that is twice that of South Korea. Indonesia is poor right now, and sure, it's not growing as fast as, say, Vietnam or other developing nations in the region, but it is a nation that still has quite a lot of potential. It is likely to attract more investment as labour costs in the rest of Asia continue to rise. Pakistan of course is unstable, but it is still a nuclear power, and will have some 350 million citizens by 2050, which makes it a strange omission.

Good point.
 
Very interesting.

Though the article did seem to have some sort of, well I won't say bias but tied to opinions.

I am shocked that China gets so much of its revenue from state ran companies. I thought 2/3rds of the nations companies were private?

The Economist is a neoliberal magazine, so it is unsurprising that they would be opposed to state capitalism.

I'm afraid I don't know how many of China's corporations are privately owned, but I remember reading that 1 and 5 Chinese workers now work for a private company.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Check this shit out, yall:

[Top Adviser David] Plouffe urged the president to give [entitlement reform] a shot. "I said he [Obama] should be big on entitlements," Plouffe told one former administration official, by which he meant reining in these budgetary elephants. Sure, this would enrage the party's base. But the political upside with the rest of the country would more than make up for it ... "Plouffe is pretty big on accomplishments trump normal politics," said one White House colleague. "Plouffe's view is that big trumps the little."

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/noam-scheiber-escape-artists-6668371#ixzz1muBrQqDr

If this is true, why the fucking fuck is this asshole not fired a million times over? Charlie Pierce has the right take:

Good god in heaven, how does this guy still have a job? "The rest of the country," in every poll I've ever seen, is very happy with Social Security and Medicare. (Who is Plouffe's target audience here? The daily comedy troupe on Morning Joe?) And, yes, if I accomplish the big achievement of driving a busload of nuns off a cliff and into the fiery heart of Moana Loa, I have successfully written the first line of my obituary and entered history. But I've still driven nuns into a volcano. Big trumps little? Yes, and, alas, Big Stupid usually trumps Little Smart. (C.f. — George Walker Bush, 43rd president of these United States.) I am hoping that the events of the past couple of years — the Occupy folks, the increasing political dementia of the Republicans, the political revival of labor in the midwest — have managed to knock this poisonous thinking out of the Obama White House — or, at the very least, that the president has developed some immunity to it.

Fucking seriously. I LITERALLY, and I'm honestly, legitimately not exaggerating, have not seen a SINGLE poll for the past 3 years that had anywhere NEAR 50% of support from the general public. I think I may have seen a few where if only tea baggers were asked, that a 'slight' majority were in favor of such a thing. But even those were rare as fuck. Holy shit.

I think I owe the Chairman an apology. It seems he wasn't shifting to the right on his own, but needed prodding by his idiot advisers.
 
Check this shit out, yall:



http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/noam-scheiber-escape-artists-6668371#ixzz1muBrQqDr

If this is true, why the fucking fuck is this asshole not fired a million times over? Charlie Pierce has the right take:



Fucking seriously. I LITERALLY, and I'm honestly, legitimately not exaggerating, have not seen a SINGLE poll for the past 3 years that had anywhere NEAR 50% of support from the general public. I think I may have seen a few where if only tea baggers were asked, that a 'slight' majority were in favor of such a thing. But even those were rare as fuck. Holy shit.

I think I owe the Chairman an apology. It seems he wasn't shifting to the right on his own, but needed prodding by his idiot advisers.

We don't know what is exaggeration and what is not, actually the WH Messaging has been better since Plouffe became more active. I mean the guy built one of the best managed campaigns of modern times in 2008.

Also, there is a difference between giving entitlement reform a shot vs ending entitlements. The reaction of this guy seems more apt to Paul Ryan's Medicare Plan.
 
Sure, this would enrage the party's base. But the political upside with the rest of the country would more than make up for it
Yup, this does it, I am now convinced there is a large group of people within the administration that has infiltrated it with but one objective: Make Obama do crazy shit that will lose him re-election. Fuck these people.
 
Yup, this does it, I am now convinced there is a large group of people within the administration that has infiltrated it with but one objective: Make Obama do crazy shit that will lose him re-election. Fuck these people.

Obama hires a bunch of ex-corporate lapdogs as his advising base.

He is being advised to bend over to corporate policies.

This shouldnt be a surprise.

Also, the past couple of years, there have been so many "demcorats, wtf are you doing, are you retarded?" moments that its obvious the republicans are coming from inside the white house.
 
Washington Post said:
The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), enacted in 1994 to ensure that members of the military do not face a disadvantage in their civilian careers because of their service, calls on the federal government be “a model employer” for service members.

In fiscal 2011, more than 18 percent of the 1,548 complaints of violations of that law involved federal agencies, according to figures obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/returning-military-members-allege-job-discrimination--by-federal-government/2012/01/31/gIQAXvYvNR_story.html?hpid=z1

This upsets me.
 

Al-ibn Kermit

Junior Member
Conservatives always want Obama to always do something that is the opposite of what Jew is doing currently.

Was this an auto-correct mistake? lol


Well I would expect higher than average simply because Veterans are a lot more likely to apply to government agencies after they retire. But I'm wondering what are the legitimate reasons for discriminating against a veteran? Especially when you work somewhere that already employs a large fraction of veterans.

I'm sorry if this was answered in that article, I only read the first two pages since the last page requires you to set up an account to read it.
 
Well I would expect higher than average simply because Veterans are a lot more likely to apply to government agencies after they retire. But I'm wondering what are the legitimate reasons for discriminating against a veteran? Especially when you work somewhere that already employs a large fraction of veterans.

I'm sorry if this was answered in that article, I only read the first two pages since the last page requires you to set up an account to read it.

Yes, veterans preference is the reason for that. You cannot be fired from your job because you were called to active duty or training by the military. The article goes on to say that much of the problem problem seems to stem from the fact that the law is not being enforced and that supervisors within federal agencies are ignorant of the law. Even if the Labor Department finds evidence of wrong doing, the Justice Department refuses to prosecute in most cases.
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
Least Fascinating Man in the World.

13haN.jpg
 

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
I'm actually excited for the debate on Wednesday. It's been too long :)

Plus, there should be a level on desperation and insanity not seen since the SC debates.
 
Team Romney aint letting no Santorum surge in MI happen:

PPP

Michigan: Santorum 37, Romney 33, Paul 15, Gingrich 10:

http://t.co/cgiGae1U

I kinda feared this would happen, with Romney ultimately being neck and neck with Santorum (dat superpac money). But if Santorum can pull off even a squeeker, it will destroy two arguments this election cycle

1) Superpacs don't completely destroy an election.
2) Romney is not the presumptive nominee of GOP anymore.
 
I kinda feared this would happen, with Romney ultimately being neck and neck with Santorum (dat superpac money). But if Santorum can pull off even a squeeker, it will destroy two arguments this election cycle

1) Superpacs don't completely destroy an election.
2) Romney is not the presumptive nominee of GOP anymore.

I think after this cycle is done, we'll see a serious push to correct citizens united and get rid of superpacs.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
PPP in Arizona:

The Republican race for President in Arizona looks like a close one, with Mitt Romney leading Rick Santorum only 36-33. Newt Gingrich is third at 16% and Ron Paul fourth at 9%.

Santorum is better liked by Arizona Republicans than Romney, but the gap isn't as wide as we're finding in a lot of other states. Santorum's at +34 (61/27), while Romney's at +24 (58/34).

One thing to keep an eye on over the next week is whether Newt Gingrich can hold his support. 16% is pretty good for him compared to what we're finding other places right now, but only 46% of his voters say they're solidly committed to him. 40% of his supporters say that Santorum is their second choice, compared to only 25% for Romney. If Gingrich's supporters see he's not viable and decide to jump ship the race could get even closer.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/02/romney-lead-small-in-arizona.html

Might be a squeaker.
 

Tim-E

Member
I honestly don't understand how Newt is staying in the race. I don't mean financially because even though its getting tight he's still being supported by a big funder via SuperPAC. But surely he see's the numbers. He's not winning. People aren't going to choose him nationally over Santorum and Romney.

I know he wants to bloody Romney, but at this point all he's doing is dividing the "conservative" base between him and Santorum. At this point, his best bet to deliever a blow to Romney would be to drop out and throw all of his support Santorum.
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
I think after this cycle is done, we'll see a serious push to correct citizens united and get rid of superpacs.

And ironically, with some republican support. They never really figured out how it would hurt them personally. And they won't ever be monolithic again. Right now you're watching the party try to shift its demographics to pure corporatism. Problem is the pool of mouth breathers who will go along with that for a long period is a losing proposition demographically. This is the last focused burst of American electoral retardation. Don't get me wrong, it could be twenty years long. But this is it.
 
BJenet_intro.gif
Bison-powaaa.gif
Joe_taunt.gif
Kang_run.gif
ecTUP.gif


I GOT MY OWN RADIO SHOW AT SCHOOL!!!

It was good, but you should have used Guile instead of Captain America to keep the theme going.

I was originally going to use characters from multiple 2D fighting games but only Street Fighter seems to have them defined enough.
 
I know he wants to bloody Romney, but at this point all he's doing is dividing the "conservative" base between him and Santorum. At this point, his best bet to deliever a blow to Romney would be to drop out and throw all of his support Santorum.

That would make sense if he cared about anyone but himself. Just a few weeks ago he argued Santorum should drop out because it was a two man race between himself and Romney. He still stands a decent chance to win some southern states on Super Tuesday, and of course he'll win his home state which carries a lot of delegates.

Andelson recently gave him another $5m for some reason, so I doubt he's getting out anytime soon.
 
I honestly don't understand how Newt is staying in the race. I don't mean financially because even though its getting tight he's still being supported by a big funder via SuperPAC. But surely he see's the numbers. He's not winning. People aren't going to choose him nationally over Santorum and Romney.

Just saw this video that explains GOP rollercoaster polling
I GOT MY OWN RADIO SHOW AT SCHOOL!!!
Sweet dude. First step into journalism? If so, that will look really good in your resume. All I can say is try to be as objective as possible. Bring in people from other sides too.
 
Some notes about the show:

- No swearing.

- Thus I have to change the show's name. Can't be KickASS Political Podcast.

- Talking can only last six minutes MAX and then I HAVE to play a song...(I'll see if I can wiggle around this.

- Still trying to see if I can do stuff via Skype to have some Gaffers on (I will fight for this)

- Is playing 12-1pm...the busiest time for the cafeteria (which is where the show will be playing on campus).
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
Some notes about the show:

- No swearing.

- Thus I have to change the show's name. Can't be KickASS Political Podcast.

- Talking can only last six minutes MAX and then I HAVE to play a song...(I'll see if I can wiggle around this.

- Still trying to see if I can do stuff via Skype to have some Gaffers on (I will fight for this)

- Is playing 12-1pm...the busiest time for the cafeteria (which is where the show will be playing on campus).

When? (timezone)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom