• 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 |OT4|: Your job is not to worry about 47% of these posts.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why would this discourage anyone? This is like putting up a giant sign that said, "eating children is a felony." There is no voter fraud.

I'd say what a waste of money but that looks like it cost 3 dollars.

It would indeed dissuade voters, especially those in urban neighborhoods distrustful of law enforcement (read: minorities). For example, they may think it is not legal to vote without an ID. If they don't have an ID, they may not want to risk what is presented to them as several years in jail just to vote. So they will stay home. That is the very purpose of these signs. They should be taken down.
 
Its hillarious how whatever Ryan does is twisted by libgaf. When Ryan does sth nice: yeah pffff he only do it for the PR....inside he wants to end mankind....when Obama sends out a mass email asking for donations...in a down to earth language: woooooow Obama is really a nice guy!!!!



yes gaf...Obama is really so nice for saying Whats up [insert your name] in an email begging for 500 usd, written by his PR staff....


You guys do know Obama is a truly selfish person who wants to do everything in his own way...so much that he did not even take the advices of his staff when prepping for the debate....even the nicest dudes gets weird when 150 million people see him as some Cult of personality type among mere mortals...

he is just a damn politician....thats it...i would be disgusted by myself if i behave like many of his die hard fans....in europe they would call him right wing nutjob....but in USA you either call him communist or hero of the people....

there is not even anything particularily left about him...he is rather a moderate democrat...period....


not the utilarian gandhi some of you want him to be....



heck Bill Gates is a better candidate for that title....i mean the man basically given billions upon billions for charity...


your man anyway is prob. in the independent green party....


i cant blame Obama for becoming a megalomaniac who is not human enough to even debate Romney....i would also stick to the cozy teleprompter speeches of he oval office...if i had 30000 ppl. hailing me like i won ww2 single handidly, everytime i holds a speech....

I like you more than Kosmo.
 

coldfoot

Banned
Obama has to get the message across that investors really aren't "job creators" but the American public is via being consumers. No one would invest on anything regardless of tax rates if there wasn't any demand so that the business would not make money. In fact, I'd say the true job creators are the scientists, engineers, and innovators (like Steve Jobs) etc, not people like Romney who don't do crap or Wall St, where their "innovative" financial products doomed us all. And that's why we need to invest in education and science, etc.

He can say himself or Romney makes as much money as 1000 families, but they don't have 1000 TV's, cars, so to generate demand, drive business, and strengthen the economy, more taxes have to be put on him and Romney and less on the middle class. Also, if the middle class isn't paying an arm and a leg for health insurance, they'd have more money to spend and drive the economy.
 

kingkitty

Member
read something on Huffypo that the campaigns are not so hot on Crowley potentially showing a moderating backbone during the next debate. but those MOU things for the debates have always been smelly. Crowley needs to become Raddatz and rain hell in tomorrow's debate, town hall format be damned.

but she probably wont.
 
I think it just showcase that we are dealing with a closet communist....why dont we just name it the Kreml House?!

after all if Obama got to chose everyone who are not socialist fanatics would be sent to slave gulag camps and the Stars and Sprangled Banner would be the Communist and Sprangled Banner

this charity thing is just a cover for prepping Comintern agents part of his plan to crush Russia and make it an USA colony just like they tried with Cuba



not literal comintern agents but firing up the poor ppl is the first step to communism

Communist Countries:

Britain
France
Germany
Japan
South Korea
Italy
Spain
Canada
Cuba
China

The Land of the Free:

United States
Somalia
 

gkryhewy

Member
Obama has to get the message across that investors really aren't "job creators" but the American public is via being consumers. No one would invest on anything regardless of tax rates if there wasn't any demand so that the business would not make money. In fact, I'd say the true job creators are the scientists, engineers, and innovators (like Steve Jobs) etc, not people like Romney who don't do crap or Wall St, where their "innovative" financial products doomed us all. And that's why we need to invest in education and science, etc.

He can say himself or Romney makes as much money as 1000 families, but they don't have 1000 TV's, cars, so to generate demand, drive business, and strengthen the economy, more taxes have to be put on him and Romney and less on the middle class. Also, if the middle class isn't paying an arm and a leg for health insurance, they'd have more money to spend and drive the economy.

Enough with your cheesy debate fanfic. You totally jinxed us last time.
 

CygnusXS

will gain confidence one day
She's allowed but if she were wearing that at church or other places where church people were around they'd raise eyebrows, as in seen in this dude I met.

I see. As a follow up, did that guy say he was going to vote for Obama instead, or is he just not voting now?
 

jiggle

Member
read something on Huffypo that the campaigns are not so hot on Crowley potentially showing a moderating backbone during the next debate. but those MOU things for the debates have always been smelly. Crowley needs to become Raddatz and rain hell in tomorrow's debate, town hall format be damned.

but she probably wont.

all the praises rained on raddatz could influence her in some way?
 

Cloudy

Banned
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/15/us/clinton-benghazi/index.html

- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the buck stops with her when it comes to who is to blame for security ahead of a deadly assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya.

"I take responsibility" for what happened on September 11, Clinton said in an interview with CNN's Elise Labott soon after arriving in Lima, Peru, for a visit. The interview, one of a series given to U.S. television networks Monday night, was the first she has given about the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

Clinton insisted President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden are not involved in security decisions.

"I want to avoid some kind of political gotcha," she added, noting that it is close to the election.

This is about a month late. Then again it was pretty blatantly political that the GOP would bypass the State Dept. and attack the WH directly
 
Well, she did, pretty much, because it's the truth. Embassies and consulates are the State Department. She's the SecState. I mean, Obama is the top guy and he shares the responsibility because he appointed her and he's supposed to stay on top of things. But at the same time, this was something that was supposed to be handled by her office.

And it's not like this even directly involved her, either. Some undersecretary didn't make the right call or was too slow. And Foreign Service in a post-revolutionary country is still dangerous, no matter how good security is. Still, Hillary was right to own this. The Foreign Service is hers.
 
She did. For some reason the media is taking the GOP's cue and blaming the WH for mid-level decisions at state. All the while Clinton escaped any scrutiny or criticism. WTF?

I think the media narrative is more than just the security issue - the bigger question seems to be why the White House stuck by the "movie" narrative for almost 2 weeks when it was apparent the day after that it was a planned terrorist attack. I can give the WH a pass on the security issue, since that was probably internal to the State Dept, but the movie story is just wacky.
 

Cloudy

Banned
I think the media narrative is more than just the security issue - the bigger question seems to be why the White House stuck by the "movie" narrative for almost 2 weeks when it was apparent the day after that it was a planned terrorist attack. I can give the WH a pass on the security issue, since that was probably internal to the State Dept, but the movie story is just wacky.

What probably happened is since both attacks (and others) happened the same day, everyone just assumed they were related. There was pressure to speak on it and nobody really knew all the details.

Movie protest or not, 4 Americans died. Whatever the initial story was wouldn't subject them to any less criticism from the GOP. And to be fair, everyone who spoke couched it with, "based on what we know now". The Director of Intelligence said as much a few weeks back.

Or do you think the WH would make up a story based on no intelligence? Why would they do that when all the Republicans at DOD would just leak the truth to Fox? You don't really think they're that stupid, do you?
 

Zabka

Member
She did. For some reason the media is taking the GOP's cue and blaming the WH for mid-level decisions at state. All the while Clinton escaped any scrutiny or criticism. WTF?

I don't think it will change the media narrative at all. Now we just have an extra layer of Obama shirking responsibility.

The media is fucking dumb.
 

Owzers

Member
I don't think it will change the media narrative at all. Now we just have an extra layer of Obama shirking responsibility.

The media is fucking dumb.

The media trying to make up for going along with weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The president waited twelve days to say it was a terrorist attack! TWELVE DAYS! IMPEACH THIS MAN!
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Hm...I think I'd rather she not have mentioned it. Can you really say, "The buck stops here" and expect people to listen?
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Well, this is a good move on Hillary's part overall, but there goes her chances in 2016.
 

demon

I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
What effect might this have on her future political career or chances at the presidency?
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
What effect might this have on her future political career or chances at the presidency?

Probably nothing. Almost no one cares now (and according to the Ohio poll, people prefer Obama on Libya anyway). In four years this will be like a tiny speck.

I still wouldn't have done it.
 

Zabka

Member
What effect might this have on her future political career or chances at the presidency?

Republicans would try to bring it up in 4 years but I doubt the public will care, especially if we're in the middle of an economic recovery.

ETA: I think this wouldn't have happened if Biden didn't say "We were not told of requests"
 

RDreamer

Member

Crowley—the first female moderator of presidential debate in 20 years—was asked how she is preparing for the event.

Uh... didn't we have a female moderator last week?


I'd love to know how Bill is responding to this

He's probably not there for her. Doesn't it make you sad to think about Hillary? I bet she just feels so alone in the world right now.
 

ISOM

Member
What effect might this have on her future political career or chances at the presidency?

Nobody really cares about libya lets be honest here, republicans are just using it as political opportunism. If hilary wants to run in 2016 it won't have any effect imo.
 

jiggle

Member
Come on now. Romney ... Ryan. Romney ... Ryan.

tumblr_maz02mOLEu1rwzsbso1_500.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom