Link
The Autumn Wind
You're more than welcome to move to North Carolina and enjoy the Republican-ruled system. Won't matter to you since both parties are the same, right?
-
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 2013 |OT2| Worth 77% of OT1
- Thread starter The Librarian
- Start date
- Status
It's like I'm studying Discrete Mathematics 101 all over again!
you must be trolling
I find (US) News Stations to be terrible in general.
The internet is a much more convenient way to get news.
Carpe Libertatem
Member
That and MSNBC is pretty open about their liberal bias. Their slogan is "Lean Forward," after all, while Fox's is "Fair and Balanced."
Let me rephrase: the people who believe that both parties are the same share the same mentality of people who believe that Fox and MSNBC are the same.
Its a mentality that says if X & Y do terrible things, then X & Y are equally terrible. What is this comparison based on? Is there are objectively perfect political party? An objectively perfect news organisation? No. People need to realise that degree matters. Frequency matters. The degree and frequency of the number of terrible things that X does makes it a different entity than Y. In my judgement, the degree and frequency that Republicans and Fox News say and do stupid, non-factual, or unfair things is far, far greater than that of the Democrats and MSNBC. To say that they are the same is intellectually dishonest.
Mornings? There's this show I need to tell you about.
empty vessel
Member
It's worth checking out. I don't know that I learned anything, but I've read the book that a lot of the analysis comes from. Still, it's well done enough that people should see it.
PhoenixDark
Banned
And before Empty Vessel quotes me, I readily acknowledge all network media is inherently pro-corporation overall, and pro-war.
jamesinclair
Banned
You know how the republicans stand around all day proposing these ridiculous laws that violate rights, make it harder to vote, and generally shit on the american people?
Id like to see some example of dems doing the opposite. You know, like the dems in a state where they have a super-majority doing the exact opposite. Give me more voting. Give me more abortions. Give me more infrastructure. Give me more freedom.
But they dont. They sit around complaining all day that the GOP is fucking shit up when they have control, but when THEY have control, they do nothing.
Sort of makes them the same, doesnt it? In both situations we're moving the wrong way.
JesseEwiak
Member
You mean like, say, California, where they passed online voter registration and increased taxes to close the deficit? Or Colorado, where they passed gun laws the right hated so much that they're trying to recall two State Senators? Or maybe in Washington, where we just passed gay marriage and marijuana legalization? Or fuck, Vermont, where they're trying to get a waiver to attempt single payer?
Can't you see how that makes them both the same? Wake up sheeple!
jamesinclair
Banned
California did pass the tax hike - on a voter initiative. It was a proposition, not the democrat big wigs actually doing anything. Do you think theyll raise a finger to repeal prop 13? ha.
Marijuana legalization? Seriously? Thats your big Democrat trump card? Yeah, lets forget about torture, Guantanamo, domestic spying, out of control military, stagnant wages, the slowest recovery ever because WOO WEEED.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I'm...not sure what legislation the state governments could be passing on those issues
I'll add to this the efforts of Democrats to defend laws already in place. See: abortion rights, civil rights, union rights, the minimum wage, popular social programs ...
jamesinclair
Banned
I remember reading about a series of union-busting laws in the past couple of years.
Could you point to some union-strengthening laws?
Any examples of abortion restrictions being loosened?
I'll give you gay rights, yes, but why are the countries inner cities - democratic strongholds for the past 50 years - still in such shit shape? Newark? Trenton? Scranton? Baltimore? What have the democrats done in terms of economic civil rights?
Huh, didn't know it was based on a book. Will check it out later tonight maybe.
So, I was checking out this table that had annual GDP growth rates since the 1930s and there were several years where we even had double digit growth, which is pretty insane. These happened during times where taxes were of course way higher. Isn't this another metric that the great Reagan failed at with his trickle down "theory"? Shouldn't those numbers be impossible to reach under such crushing taxes? Or at least, shouldn't Reagan's policies have easily surpassed those numbers?
Black Mamba
Member
You can't really lax abortion laws where they already are as lax as possible.
Your criticisms are weird.
Your criticisms are weird.
Avon Barksdale
Member
I didn't want to bump this up, but I was doing a Google search about this and found an Onion piece.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/fiscally-im-a-rightwing-nutjob-but-on-social-issue,20486/
Black Mamba
Member
I've posted this before and too lazy to re-post the chart.
http://epi.3cdn.net/ff1869e11dfc0ef295_xxm6b9cj9.pdf
This will show you how Reagan and W. fare much better than yearly GDP growth rates.
It should also be noted that women entering the workforce in large numbers had a great effect on GDP growth independent of tax policy.
Perhaps he's talking about the states introducing abortion restrictions in North Carolina and Texas. I don't know if that's necessarily a failure of Democrats as that seems to be a part of the plank, but then again there are Democrats in my state who refuse to budge on more rights for gay people.
Though I'm not in the "they're the same category" camp. The GOP is just a cesspool. And I'm not all that enthusiastic about Democrats.
Once again, the operative word from my previous post was “defend”, which was why it was bolded. Compare which states are:
- Right to work vs. union
- Have equal or higher minimum wage laws (and which party is proposing to increase, rather than abolish, MW laws)
- Rushing to limit voting rights after SCOTUS decision to strike down Section 4 of the historic VRA legislation
- Passing marriage equality laws
- Closing down women’s health clinics
- Implementing ObamaCare
Why should I believe “both parties are the same” when the two parties have staked opposing positions on the above issues?
Avon Barksdale
Member
The invisible hand of the free market at work.
JesseEwiak
Member
First, the California legislature would've easily passed a tax hike, but because of the batshit insane initiative process, it was politically smarter to bring it to the people instead of passing it in the legislature where they could be blowback.
In addition, something like repealing Prop 13 not only isn't popular, it's also a big enough deal to cause backlash. The crazies are smart. They either go and do things that are actually politically popular, if stupidly right wing (cuts in spending because household budgets are exactly the same as a state budget) or they attack things which don't effect enough people (ie. abortion laws, unemployment, etc.).
In addition, a lot of these crazy laws are being passed where the GOP has the advantage due to the fact there's only 27 people in those states (South Dakota, here's looking at you) or they're heavily gerrymandered (Texas - yes the GOP would have a majority, but not a near 2/3 majority, North Carolina, Florida, etc.). Where the Democrat's have power either has a stronger Republican party (ie. Washington, Colorado, New York, etc.) due to the fact it's almost impossible to have a supermajority in a state with lots and lots of people. California's an outlier, but only because the California GOP is controlled by the part of California that's like Alabama.
However horrible Obama is on those issues (which again, don't come up on the state level), he's still in the top 25% of people who could possibly be President at the moment. I'm voting for people to best run the Empire, not destroy, because again, wiretapping and drones are popular.
Finally, state governments can't do much to help the economy because they're restricted by balanced budget agreements in 49 of the 50 states. They can't deficit spend, so you have to look to the federal government to do the heavy lifting on that end.
As far as the "OMG Democrat's have controlled the inner cities and they're crap," you can't force people to place businesses there. When there's no tax base, there's not much those mayors can do except triage and on the state level, beyond funding education (which again, states like New Jersey, Maryland, and Connecticut fund well - Scranton's in Pennsylvania - another state that is GOP run via gerrymandering). You want to know how to fix the inner cities? Rebooting the Great Society to LBJ levels, instead of the cuts that immediately came when Nixon came into office.
zero shift
Banned
Between this and Fox ratings being down I really hope this is a turning point for the political media.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Wow, pretty big news. Glenn Beck is somewhere laughing his ass off, not just at this but at Fox's ratings dropping.
But all I see on it is that Dubya got higher corporate profits than prior administrations, but came last or close to last on everything else.
TestOfTide
Banned
Black Mamba
Member
It shows the 80s rankings too (hence Reagan) and they're trash as well.
Great news.
Ah yes, I didn't scroll all the way down, lol.
Life imitating art: there was a South Park episode with exact same concept. Except the over zealous detective took it a little too far.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Just want to give props to my home state, Minnesota for its new Democratic majorities flexing their muscles this year. We've passed gay marriage, a budget that raises taxes and restores funding to schools/libraries/parks/etc. that's been torn to pieces by Pawlenty, and didn't kick the can on an Obamacare exchange. I think there was also an effort to unionize daycare workers, though I don't remember if it actually went through (it was controversial, but jamesinclair was complaining about no one "strengthening" unions so there you go), and an effort to raise the minimum wage fell through but leadership has said it'll be brought up again next session.
To put this in perspective, the Minnesota legislature elected in 2010 were GOP majorities. And Mark Dayton only won by about 9,000 votes. If Emmer had been elected we'd be just as bad as Wisconsin right now. So fucking grateful that didn't happen.
But the most conservative district elected Michele Bachmann so lol Minnesota according to the internet, who doesn't understand congressional districts.
To put this in perspective, the Minnesota legislature elected in 2010 were GOP majorities. And Mark Dayton only won by about 9,000 votes. If Emmer had been elected we'd be just as bad as Wisconsin right now. So fucking grateful that didn't happen.
But the most conservative district elected Michele Bachmann so lol Minnesota according to the internet, who doesn't understand congressional districts.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
MSNBC and Fox News are both terrible enough for me to never want to watch either, so functionally they're the same even if Fox is way worse than MSNBC.
I more just hate it when people use the other side as an excuse to be horrible. Nothing MSNBC does excuses anything about what Fox News does and visa versa.
I more just hate it when people use the other side as an excuse to be horrible. Nothing MSNBC does excuses anything about what Fox News does and visa versa.
Well, the whole edifice of supply-side is that tax rates and tax revenues are distinct. I think you're arguing more with the "taxes are jobs killers" meme of today than Reaganomics, which had a more explicit utilitarian argument (removing taxes from capital leads to more capital investment).
e: Also, the quality of some of this GDP expansion is specious. 75% GDP growth isn't worth 60+ million dead. 8.7% growth isn't that impressive when inflation is 5.9%. Etc.
brianmcdoogle
Member
I agree with this. When I want to watch the news, I watch PBS's Newshour, and that is it. I watch the Sunday morning talk shows because they are topical and sometimes break actual news, but I never understand why people waste their time with O'Reilly, Hannity, Maddow, Hayes, Sharpton, O'Donnell.
Yeah, MSNBC isn't as bad as Fox, but it is still bad, and I certainly get no better grasp or handle on the "news" of the day watching their shows than I do from watching re-runs of a sitcom or whatever.
I read the front pages of the hometown paper, the NYT, the Journal, the Post, and I watch the Newshour. And, a few podcasts like Slate's Gabfest (r.i.p NPR's political podcasts).
The only time I watch cable news is if there is an interview that I really want to see, which is rare, or a "breaking" news story, where they show the unadulterated feed of something important, free of talking heads and non-sensical garbage. And, once in a while, I will turn to Al-Jazeera.
Thread link? I'm guessing its around the DC / Walmart Min Wage issue?
The only thing more embarrassing on GAF than a MW thread is an Anita Sarkeesian thread on Gaming side.
Wait, revenues and job creation were two distinct things under Reaganomics?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=637321
And yeah, agreed on Sarkeesian threads.
I don't know. Those Trayvon Martin threads got pretty ugly.
What does Maddow do that's so egregiously bad that it justifies lumping her in with Hannity and O'Reilly? Her show strikes me as being really strong on state politics coverage and even on national politics she's often pretty good about picking stories that don't get a lot of play elsewhere. Sure, she's redundant as a news source if you have a bunch of others, but, hell, all news sources are redundant if you refresh GAF OT a few times an hour. I can understand not enjoying the fluffier parts of the show, but that's clearly just a personal taste thing; it's not journalistic malpractice. They're always pretty clearly signposted as the fluffy bits.
I don't really enjoy watching Hayes, but I'm likewise unaware of him doing anything terrible, and I think I would be if he had. I've never paid attention to Sharpton and O'Donnell and can't comment on them.
Basically, I think Hannity and O'Reilly are clearly just bad for America. The worst I think someone can say of Maddow and Hayes is that one finds them to be inefficient or annoying sources of a valuable thing that you can get elsewhere.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Maddow is very good. Haven't seen Hayes but my twitter feed is always full of people blaming him for MSNBC's declining ratings; they want Ed back. I'd imagine their ratings are falling because Obama has had a tough second term so far, Hayes isn't working well, and they need a new exciting personality.
My views on Sharpton are well known. Lawrence O'Donnell is pretty bad too. Hardball is lol worthy but I'll always have a soft spot for Chris Matthews.
My views on Sharpton are well known. Lawrence O'Donnell is pretty bad too. Hardball is lol worthy but I'll always have a soft spot for Chris Matthews.
IMO, the worst you could say about Sharpton and O'Donnell is that they suck at reading a teleprompter and are really smug, respectively.
Maybe my absolute hatred of Fox News and irritation at CNN and other "straight news" outlets causes me to give the folks at MSNBC a bigger pass than they may deserve, but I still mainly see their faults as more stylistic than substantive. At the very least you won't hear MSNBC talking about the debt ceiling as a "dems say this, republicans say that' type affair, like every other outlet, including the "good" ones like NPR will.
Maybe my absolute hatred of Fox News and irritation at CNN and other "straight news" outlets causes me to give the folks at MSNBC a bigger pass than they may deserve, but I still mainly see their faults as more stylistic than substantive. At the very least you won't hear MSNBC talking about the debt ceiling as a "dems say this, republicans say that' type affair, like every other outlet, including the "good" ones like NPR will.
zero shift
Banned
The only person who was even somewhat as bad as the Fox News talking heads was Olbermann. The only reason he didn't spout as much misinformation was because he just happened to be on the right side of the fence.
There are people in another thread arguing that making over one million dollars per year isn't being considered "rich"...
But Trayvon acted black! He wasn't a saint. I'm not saying that he deserved to die, just that if he died it wasn't undeservable.
The Librarian
Banned
Hey! It's of paramount importance that the ONE case of voter fraud in the past twelve years of this state NEVER, EVER happens again.
And what are the Democrats doing? They're just content with letting this rampant abuse of our system continue. You're right: both parties aren't the same.
- Status