Hobbestetrician
Member
Nate trying to get the Unskewed peoples' heads to explode.
-
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 |OT3| If it's not a legitimate OT the mods have ways to shut it down
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
Nate trying to get the Unskewed peoples' heads to explode.
I can just hear him saying, "Unskew this, motherfuckers."
RustyNails
Member
I dunno who thought 2010 wasn't gonna be a Republican sweep. It was clear.
speculawyer
Member
Byakuya769
Member
Only one of us, that I can remember. He will go unnamed.
Unrelated, what's Aaron Strife been up to lately?
NullPointer
Member
373%?!
Thats more like it, hah. All the points.
Thats more like it, hah. All the points.
Byakuya769
Member
Voter fraud is proven by that polling. That and we now know for a fact that anchor babies are voting with their parents.
The full story of how the financial tsunami failed to strike has yet to be untangled, but bits and pieces have dribbled out over recent days.
The Democratic Superpacs, reports the New York Times today, have gotten their act together, even if they cant match the Republican effort. The GOP Superpac effort may have underwhelmed in part because it offers a more scattered message, not controlled by the campaign, that fails to drive the central theme as effectively.
Whats more, Obama seems to be getting way more bang for his buck. Republicans are paying their staff twice the rate Democrats are paying theirs, allowing Obama to have twice as many people working for him for the same amount Romney is spending. And the Washington Post today reports the little-known fact that campaigns, by federal law, can command lower advertising rates than Superpacs, giving Obama consistent, and occasionally huge, savings:
In one Ohio ad buy slated to run just before the election, for example, Obama is paying $125 for a spot that is costing a conservative super PAC $900.
Most of the reporting until recently has focused on inputs, like the financial imbalance between the two sides. But the outputs are a different story.
I found this interesting, and it helps explain why Obama has kept parity or better on advertising compared to the greater wave of SuperPAC cash.
I'm liking Bams' chances...
Here's my final prediction for what the map will look like:
http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=ClR
eBay Huckster
Member
Didn't that glitch also have Romney's chance of victory at 227%?
Aaron Strife
Banned
Obama is even more favorable with money.
Byakuya769
Member
Will this story get flipped into proof positive of a media bias on the conservative blogosphere...
cartoon_soldier
Member
I will also say that Priorities USA has been far far better in their ads and targeting than GOP Super PACs.
And that could be the result of them having too much money, so they just threw whatever they could hoping something would stick. Priorities USA with their little coffer just one goal - Paint Romney as out of touch and not for the middle class.
Dat fiscal conservatism.
Dude Abides
Banned
I can get "deep background" political gossip without lining Mark Halperin's pockets. That's what Wonkette is for!
The Republicans live in a strange bubble. They think they can run things that appeal to 20% of the country that are racist bigoted hard core conservatives and think that it resonates with the entire country. They can't, for the life of them, understand why anyone would vote for a Muslim-Kenyan-Socialist-Nazi-Illegitimate President and so they keep pushing those narratives and they fall on deaf ears to everyone outside of their rabid base.
Thequietone
Member
Aggressive behavior = not lady like = voters like gender roles.
Obvious BS but what do you expect coming from Akin's mouth?
Black Mamba
Member
If Akin wins after all this, it's time to ship Missouri off to Antarctica.
I read this last night. I think he used the same tactic to pump up his IRA and shelter it from taxes that way as well; add non-public stakes into the IRA, which balloon once the companies went public. So he gets millions in a vehicle designed to have annual limitations in the thousands.
NathanMcMahon
Banned
I know you cried hacky tears of love while masturbating to this scenario.
A lot of people vote for more then just their senator but who controls the senate. Although less so now that his campaign is starting to implode its big part of Warrens message against senator Brown; its not about who represents your state but what you want you want your state to vote for. There is little individualism left in the political climate, its an us vs them problem and its letting people like Akin still have a chance when he shouldn't.
cartoon_soldier
Member
Dayum...want to know the figures now.
Black Mamba
Member
Agree, but I honestly couldn't vote for someone like Akin even if it's against my party. Dude is a sexist POS.
Obama up 8+ in the RAND daily poll, now. Eight!
Officerrob
Banned
Bullshit, Dick Morris said Romney would win by four or five points if the election was today
The Librarian
Banned
BAD NEWS
George Soros sent them $1 Million
cartoon_soldier
Member
That happened even before this fund raiser today. It was just announced at the fund raiser.
Hobbestetrician
Member
Are we sure it wasn't Glenn Beck sending them $1 million in Soros' name?
PhoenixDark
Banned
Poligaf cheering Super PAC spending and the ruin of our election process due to money? Is there nothing you guys won't flip flop on if it helps Obama...
Glorified G
Member
They did a great expose about the issues along the Syrian/Turkish border this morning. CNN in general is a hit & miss.
We learned a long time ago, sometimes to fight evil, you have to be willing to go as far as evil is willing to go.
Not to get too philosophical, but that's kind of why evil ever wins in the first place. It's because the forces of evil are willing to go a few steps further on the morally reprehensible scale of actions than the forces of good are.
And you either wait to get nuked, or say fuck it, use nukes, and then feel bad about it later but know it was a necessity.
I've said from the beginning that I want dems to fight fire with fire but I still support overturning citizens united.
There is nothing worse than the ME coverage in the United States. In particular the issues regarding Israel and Palestine. And its a reflection of the politicians who are always in a competition with each other to prove how much they love Israel. Hell 90% of the dialogue is over who can suck Israel's dick the most with the remaining 10% centering on condemnation of violence.
PD may be a just tugging your guys chain all the time, but on this he is right. SuperPAC money is fucked up, and it's fucked up no matter who does it. The whole 'fight wrong by doing more wrong' is just a dumb philosophy, even if it is a cynical assessment of what is likely the reality.
But one thing is for sure: if we ever want this money out of politics, we're going to need a full Dem house/senate that can push back on this issue. But I'm unsure that were such a scenario to happen, they'd feel compelled to push a constitutional amendment like that, so it's not worth the risk right now.
But one thing is for sure: if we ever want this money out of politics, we're going to need a full Dem house/senate that can push back on this issue. But I'm unsure that were such a scenario to happen, they'd feel compelled to push a constitutional amendment like that, so it's not worth the risk right now.
cartoon_soldier
Member
You realize the candidates we are supporting also want to introduce laws to limit the effect of Citizens United.
They changed the rules. We didn't like that, but everyone is still playing the same game. If they fall prey to their own shenanigans that's just poetic justice.
NullPointer
Member
Which side are we on? We're on the side of the demons, chief. We're evil men in the gardens of paradise, sent by the forces of death to spread devestation and destruction wherever we go.
This is the same lame argument conservative use for taxes. If they vote to raise taxes, it doesn't matter how rich they are or if they don't overpay taxes -- it's not hypocritical to be a rich Democrat who pays only the taxes they owe. If they want to overturn Citizens United, it doesn't matter if they use Super PACs to do it -- they still want to overturn Citizens United.
Shadow Hog
Member
We see now what we have to become to stop men like them.
That will be the best analysis of the election I think.
Also, I still am continually amazed this guy worked for Bill Clinton for twenty years. TWENTY YEARS. It's like he's trolling an entire audience because he knows it's an extremely profitable way to--- oh
If someone held a position you genuinely felt was detestable, and then got a law passed to support said position, it still would not change how detestable that position is.
To be extreme for a moment, if murder was the name of the game, and everyone was out murdering on the other side in order to win votes, you'd say "well, murder is in order. Gotta fight fire with fire!"
Slippery slopes are slippery slopes for a reason. I understand that it is still a perfectly reasonable position to feel that the only way to eradicate this particular position is to get people in power to limit the power of Citizens United, but I don't think that makes PhoenixDark wrong. Cheering Democrats getting more SuperPAC money is sad no matter how one slices it, if individuals were truly against the law.
RustyNails
Member
Romney campaign raises the white flag already on the first debate
Edit: I like this post by a cnn poster
What a pathetic campaign. Someone just put this campaign out of it's misery, and release the Rombot to go back firing people, hang out with Nascar owners, shoot varmints or whatever he likes doing.
Edit: I like this post by a cnn poster
- Status