• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Where do you get that Obama wanted a bigger stimulus? As I recall, his proposal was 850 billion over two years. One New York Times article characterized House Democrats as describing 850 billion as a "limit" imposed on Congress by the Obama Administration.

That's the House bill. The actual one he signed was estimated at $787b at the time (since revised up) when he requested higher. And he wanted more stimulus after the 2 years were up which he never got outside of UE benefits and tax cuts.

Furthermore, $100 billion of the stimulus became the AMT extension via negotiation which was happening regardless so it was actually $100 billion less than originally planned (The stimulus was really $700 billion as a result, with only like $500 billion in spending when it should have been $600b). And the economic team went far to make sure it didn't touch the sacred $1 trillion mark because of politics.

But I think what was most important was they believed after 2 years they would get more after seeing the progress. Whoops!

One of the Obama Administration's economic advisers concluded that 1.8 trillion would be needed. I don't know where the idea that "nobody" foresaw the need for greater stimulus comes from. It isn't true.

Yeah, and that number was still too small at the time. It ended up being higher than that after January's losses. There was belief at that time that $800 billion would cover a greater portion than what it actually did .
 
Obama announced measures/ways to reduce the cost of college. Wonblog.
The core of President Obama’s plan to cut higher-ed costs is “pay-for-performance.” The idea is to use federal financial aid to move colleges away from the current pay-for-enrollment model and toward a model in which they make more money if they graduate more students, hold tuition costs down, etc. (This is, in a sense, bringing the cost-control theories of Obamacare to the higher-ed sector.)

The problem with this plan is the problem that bedevils all pay-for-performance schemes: How do you define “performance”? Is it raw graduation rates? If so, how do you account for colleges that sign up more disadvantaged kids? Is it post-college salaries? Then how do you account for colleges that send kids into teaching rather than Wall Street? So far, the White House is only offering the broad outlines:​
 

Wilsongt

Member

Voices opposing immigration law muted this August


RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — It was the kickoff of a "Stop Amnesty Tour" organized by the Tea Party Patriots and other groups. But the crowd was so sparse that immigrant advocates were soon gleefully circulating photos of the featured speaker, Republican Rep. Steve King of Iowa, standing alone on an empty stage.

The rally at a public park in Richmond, Va., earlier this month, along with the subsequent cancellation or postponement of several similar events, points to an emerging reality during Congress' five-week summer recess: Opposition to overhauling immigration laws appears notably muted, almost tame. Meanwhile, advocates who support comprehensive overhaul legislation are claiming they've changed at least a handful of minds among House Republicans.

During Congress' last attempt to remake the immigration system, in 2007, public backlash helped kill the bill as angry calls overwhelmed the Senate switchboard. This summer, other issues, notably President Barack Obama's health care law, seem to be topping the list of voters' concerns.

Constituents opposed to citizenship for immigrants in this country illegally are loudly voicing their views at Republican House members' town hall meetings this month. But advocates of immigration legislation that offers a path to citizenship are having some success getting their supporters to show up, too, even in heavily Republican districts.

"In a sort of immediate sense, Obamacare is what the party has decided they want to make a big deal of in these town halls, so that's frankly siphoning off a lot of outrage because the people ticked off about Obamacare are the same people ticked off about amnesty,"
said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which opposes higher immigration levels.


Plus, the pro-immigration reform side is better organized and funded this time around and many establishment Republicans are on board. "All of that put together means you're not going to see the same level of frantic activity," Krikorian said.


What's less clear is how much it will matter once lawmakers return to Washington in September.

Immigration overhaul legislation, a top second-term priority for Obama, is in limbo after the Democratic-led Senate in June passed a far-reaching bill that includes tens of billions of dollars for border security, new visa programs to bring more high- and low-skilled workers to the country, requirements for employers to check all workers' legal status, and a 13-year path to citizenship for the 11 million immigrants already in the country illegally.

GOP House leaders have rejected that approach, vowing instead to proceed with bills addressing individual immigration issues, beginning with border security. And although by advocates' count more than 20 House Republicans have now declared their support for some kind of citizenship path, the majority of House Republicans remain opposed, creating a potentially unbridgeable divide between the House and the Senate. Congress also faces looming deadlines on the debt ceiling and spending bills to keep the government running. It all adds up to a tough environment for getting an immigration bill to Obama's desk.

Nonetheless, pro-immigrant advocates are claiming success in their August recess efforts to pressure House Republicans to act on immigration in the fall. An unusual and deep-pocketed alliance of Catholics and evangelicals, labor unions, business groups and others have been targeting dozens of GOP members viewed as open to hearing them out, and say they'll have momentum on their side when Congress reconvenes.

"The big story I think of the August recess is that we haven't seen what some had predicted, this major anti-immigrant movement where members of Congress would be heckled into inaction," Galen Carey, vice president of government relations at the National Association of Evangelicals, said on a media call this week to announce a $400,000, 14-state radio ad campaign in support of immigration reform. "We've seen very much that that has been a muted voice, but actually the pro-immigrant voice has been rather prominent at many of the town halls that we have observed."

Although there have been no giant public rallies to draw national attention, pro-immigrant advocates have kept up a drumbeat of activity nationwide. They sent some 1,500 supporters into House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy's Bakersfield, Calif., district last week; delivered a 10,000-signature petition to Rep. Blake Farenthold, R-Texas; and launched a statewide tour through Wisconsin, among other activities.

They're pointing to comments in the past few weeks from a handful of House Republicans, including Reps. Daniel Webster of Florida, Aaron Schock of Illinois and Dave Reichert of Washington, indicating qualified support for eventual citizenship for immigrants here illegally. So far, though, such comments have not become too widespread, and it's uncertain they'll add up to a real impetus for action in the fall.

But immigrant activists who'd been concerned that this summer could be a repeat of the last immigration fight — or of 2009, when irate voters trashed Obama's health care bill at unruly town hall meetings across the country — are starting to breathe easy.

The Stop Amnesty Tour event Aug. 12 in Richmond was to have been followed by events in other states, several of which subsequently disappeared from the Tea Party Patriots' website, according to an archived version circulated by the pro-immigrant group America's Voice. Organizers said most were going forward or rescheduled and disputed the claim by America's Voice that events were being canceled due to lack of interest.

"I think that when I heard about what happened at the Richmond event, we just look at what can we do to improve going forward, and one thing would be to give people more than 72 hours' notice," said Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of Tea Party Patriots. The group is working on the events with others, including NumbersUSA, which advocates lower immigration levels.

The Black American Leadership Alliance, which opposes allowing more immigrants into the country to compete for jobs, canceled a series of rallies, according to cached copies of Facebook postings collected by America's Voice. But Leah Durant, the group's founder, said those events were being held by local groups and the Black American Leadership Alliance was just trying to help support them.

"When I look at the focus of what's going on, I wouldn't say that there's no enthusiasm," Durant said. "I hear from people every day who say they are very concerned about this."

Nice to know that people are in support of immigration reform, and that Republicans are actually keeping quiet about a battle they know they cannot win.

But, the BALA anti-immigration stance is... odd...
 
Eh? It's virtually dead in the House...
It's lose/lose for the GOP. Pass immigration reform and endure the wrath of their base, entering unelectable candidates in primary elections who go onto lose. Or stonewall it and face the moderates and independents who will vote them out in November.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
It's lose/lose for the GOP. Pass immigration reform and endure the wrath of their base, entering unelectable candidates in primary elections who go onto lose. Or stonewall it and face the moderates and independents who will vote them out in November.

Well it seems like the GOP thinks its better for them to just pass the bill, but tea partiers in the house don't want to lose their job in the primaries for the sake of the GOP.
 

Wilsongt

Member
Well it seems like the GOP thinks its better for them to just pass the bill, but tea partiers in the house don't want to lose their job in the primaries for the sake of the GOP.

The Tea partiers are on their last breath. I highly doubt a lot of them survive the (hopefully) blood bath that will be 2014.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Good news. Jim Demint finally releases the Republican alternative to Obamacare:

"This might be that last off-ramp to stop Obamacare before it becomes more enmeshed in our culture," he said. "This is not about getting better health care."

DeMint said uninsured Americans "will get better health care just going to the emergency room."
 
The Tea partiers are on their last breath. I highly doubt a lot of them survive the (hopefully) blood bath that will be 2014.

Gerrymandering will keep them alive. Dems could pick up 7-12 seats, but remember they'll certainly lose some seats too. I don't think the election will be definitive either way, but republicans should hold the House until 2020. Maybe 2016 if Hillary has an Obama-esque wave election.
 

Dartastic

Member
From the Obama email I just received RE: College Education.

"My plan won't be popular with everybody, especially those who profit from the way things are. But we owe it to our students to make sure that our colleges are working for them."

OBAMA, YOU'RE PROFITING FROM THE COLLEGE SYSTEM. YOU ARE. THE GOVERNMENT. THE GOVERNMENT IS PROFITING FROM IT. UGH.
 

Tamanon

Banned
From the Obama email I just received RE: College Education.

"My plan won't be popular with everybody, especially those who profit from the way things are. But we owe it to our students to make sure that our colleges are working for them."

OBAMA, YOU'RE PROFITING FROM THE COLLEGE SYSTEM. YOU ARE. THE GOVERNMENT. THE GOVERNMENT IS PROFITING FROM IT. UGH.

The government never really profits.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Actually, he was probably more neutered in Congress than where he is now. Now he has a more direct role of pushing the Republicans even further right.

Yea but there he could actually write it up and try to do something with it, now all he can do is yap. Which is preferable.
 
Hey Dax and other poligaffers, I just wanted to say that I'm glad you're in the Manning thread. On Monday I'm going to Bangkok for three weeks with a trans friend so she can get surgery she doesn't have access to here. It hurts to read the things some people say about this stuff (and I try to do what I can to help them understand), but it's also really wonderful seeing people who do get it and are taking the time to engage and educate. I know it's a long, frustrating slog, and I appreciate it. I'll be emitting warm fuzzies at you all from thirty thousand feet!

I know this doesn't really belong here, so sorry. But also thanks.
 

Dartastic

Member
The government never really profits.
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/25/reaping-profits-off-student-loans/?_r=0

From the article.

"For example, the loan program will generate about $185 billion for the federal coffers over the next decade. How much money is that? According to Shahien Nasiripour of The Huffington Post, annualizing the $185 billion figure through 2023 places 'the U.S. student loan program among the 20 most profitable public companies in the world.'"

Elizabeth Warren, save usss. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...arren-profits-from-student-loans-are-obscene/
 

ISOM

Member
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/25/reaping-profits-off-student-loans/?_r=0

From the article.

"For example, the loan program will generate about $185 billion for the federal coffers over the next decade. How much money is that? According to Shahien Nasiripour of The Huffington Post, annualizing the $185 billion figure through 2023 places 'the U.S. student loan program among the 20 most profitable public companies in the world.'"

Elizabeth Warren, save usss. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...arren-profits-from-student-loans-are-obscene/


Doesn't warren's plan still provide profit to the federal government?
 
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/25/reaping-profits-off-student-loans/?_r=0

From the article.

"For example, the loan program will generate about $185 billion for the federal coffers over the next decade. How much money is that? According to Shahien Nasiripour of The Huffington Post, annualizing the $185 billion figure through 2023 places 'the U.S. student loan program among the 20 most profitable public companies in the world.'"

Elizabeth Warren, save usss. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...arren-profits-from-student-loans-are-obscene/

I think he's making a more philosophical point, which is correct. Governments don't profit. They spend or tax. The government is taxing higher education to the tune of $185 billion over the next decade. It taxes past students and pays current students.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
The Tea partiers are on their last breath. I highly doubt a lot of them survive the (hopefully) blood bath that will be 2014.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...14#Pre-election_analysis_and_selected_results

That looks really tough man.

Even if every single "Leans R" from just a single one of those 3 sources goes Democrat, the Democrats would only pick up 16 seats, while they need 17 to take majority control. And 16 is extremely optimistic.

Most we could hope for is a slaughter in the popular vote to really bring attention to the gerrymandering problem.
 

Dartastic

Member
I think he's making a more philosophical point, which is correct. Governments don't profit. They spend or tax. The government is taxing higher education to the tune of $185 billion over the next decade. It taxes past students and pays current students.
Regardless of how it's framed, the argument is the same. The government is receiving too much money at the expense of students.
 
Hey Dax and other poligaffers, I just wanted to say that I'm glad you're in the Manning thread. On Monday I'm going to Bangkok for three weeks with a trans friend so she can get surgery she doesn't have access to here. It hurts to read the things some people say about this stuff (and I try to do what I can to help them understand), but it's also really wonderful seeing people who do get it and are taking the time to engage and educate. I know it's a long, frustrating slog, and I appreciate it. I'll be emitting warm fuzzies at you all from thirty thousand feet!

I know this doesn't really belong here, so sorry. But also thanks.

no problem
 
It's lose/lose for the GOP. Pass immigration reform and endure the wrath of their base, entering unelectable candidates in primary elections who go onto lose. Or stonewall it and face the moderates and independents who will vote them out in November.

I don't think immigration reform passing hurts them with their base to matter, overall. They're not seeing loud opposition to it and as I said, most people (even among the GOP) believe some kind of reform must happen. And by this time next year, no one will even care.

their base cares much more about the ACA right now. They can pass the reform with mostly Dems and safe GOPers from primary challengers and GOPers who are in non-safe districts.
 

Karakand

Member
Wow, I literally don't need to watch Fox News for more than 30 seconds to go from calm to enraged.

Pat Buchanan was asking where obama was to disavow the killing of some white kid because a black kid decided to shoot him in the back of the head "because they were bored". I mean this is the same as Trayvon Martin right?

I guess that means all black people agree with killing white people because they're bored. Just ignore the obvious distinction that Zimmerman was never punished while these kids are going to be convicted for murder 1 (except for the white one), and that you were likely out there asking why there was such a big deal about Trayvon in the first place.

Seriously I watch Fox News for only one segment and I hear the most racist thing I've ever heard said seriously on live TV my entire life. At least the lady host brought up the fact that the white one was getting lesser charges for no discernible reason which Buchanon completely ignored and said it was obviously a hate crime with no reasons to back it up and then went into the list of reasons why you should be afraid of the black man which all rely on crime statistics that get inflated by a racist justice system that the host just proved is racist in the very question he's trying to answer.

So that's why my crassly racist parent was haranguing me about this case the other day. A+ messaging, Murdoch & Friends.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Rich Lowry said:
Democrats and liberal pundits would surely dislike Cruz no matter where he went to school, but his pedigree adds an extra element of shocked disbelief to the disdain. [...] One of the left’s deepest prejudices is that its opponents are stupid, and Cruz tramples on it. [...] Cruz lacks all defensiveness about his positions, another source of annoyance to his opponents, who are used to donning the mantle of both intellectual and moral superiority. [...] He could spend decades making liberals recoil at what Princeton and Harvard hath wrought.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/ted-cruz-traitor-to-his-class-95779.html?hp=l1

I'm glad Rich brought this up because this is something that's been bugging me for a while. People who know Ted Cruz, even liberals who know him personally, have claimed that this dude's a sharp cookie, a really good debater, and is an all around intelligent guy. He went to Harvard, after all!

But sadly, I just don't see it. He comes off no smarter than the average tea bagger. At least with boy genius, Paul Ryan, he would use some big sounding words occasionally. But Cruz? He's indistinguishable from Louis Gohmert imo.
 
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/ted-cruz-traitor-to-his-class-95779.html?hp=l1

I'm glad Rich brought this up because this is something that's been bugging me for a while. People who know Ted Cruz, even liberals who know him personally, have claimed that this dude's a sharp cookie, a really good debater, and is an all around intelligent guy. He went to Harvard, after all!

But sadly, I just don't see it. He comes off no smarter than the average tea bagger. At least with boy genius, Paul Ryan, he would use some big sounding words occasionally. But Cruz? He's indistinguishable from Louis Gohmert imo.

You could be the smartest guy in the world, but if you're delusional (or, I suppose, just plain evil), then it is all for naught. But I don't think Cruz is intelligent at all in any meaningful sense to begin with, because for intelligence to have any real meaning, it has to correlate with arriving at correct answers.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
You could be the smartest guy in the world, but if you're delusional (or, I suppose, just plain evil), then it is all for naught. But I don't think Cruz is intelligent at all in any meaningful sense to begin with, because for intelligence to have any real meaning, it has to correlate with arriving at correct answers.

Right, but I'm not even talking about Cruz being un-intelligent because he tends to be wrong about...well, everything. What I mean is that, not only does Cruz not come off as an intellectual, he doesn't even come off as a pseudo-intellectual. To quote Paul Krugman, Cruz doesn't even sound like a stupid person's idea of a what a smart person sounds like.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Right, but I'm not even talking about Cruz being un-intelligent because he tends to be wrong about...well, everything. What I mean is that, not only does Cruz not come off as an intellectual, he doesn't even come off as a pseudo-intellectual. To quote Paul Krugman, Cruz doesn't even sound like a stupid person's idea of a what a smart person sounds like.

I have to agree. I hear him speak, I hear him make arguments and there's nothing special there. I'm not even talking big words wise, I mean in his reasoning.
 
Cruz knows he can't end Obamacare, but he's willing to ride this wave until the very end regardless of the economic consequences; he is dangerous, unlike a lot of clowns in DC. He's far more genuine than Rubio, who seems to be going along with this stuff as amends for daring to care about illegal immigrants and children.
 

East Lake

Member
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/ted-cruz-traitor-to-his-class-95779.html?hp=l1

I'm glad Rich brought this up because this is something that's been bugging me for a while. People who know Ted Cruz, even liberals who know him personally, have claimed that this dude's a sharp cookie, a really good debater, and is an all around intelligent guy. He went to Harvard, after all!

But sadly, I just don't see it. He comes off no smarter than the average tea bagger. At least with boy genius, Paul Ryan, he would use some big sounding words occasionally. But Cruz? He's indistinguishable from Louis Gohmert imo.
It's just a convenient narrative to set heading into his presidential run. That he went to harvard and doesn't regularly stumble over his own words is enough to get it going.
 
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/ted-cruz-traitor-to-his-class-95779.html?hp=l1

I'm glad Rich brought this up because this is something that's been bugging me for a while. People who know Ted Cruz, even liberals who know him personally, have claimed that this dude's a sharp cookie, a really good debater, and is an all around intelligent guy. He went to Harvard, after all!

But sadly, I just don't see it. He comes off no smarter than the average tea bagger. At least with boy genius, Paul Ryan, he would use some big sounding words occasionally. But Cruz? He's indistinguishable from Louis Gohmert imo.

I think he's smart. Just wrong. I've met many people like that. Theyre very intelligent but their assumptions lead them down the wrong path. I think it shows a lack of humility that he doesn't change but its stubborness not stupidly
 
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/ted-cruz-traitor-to-his-class-95779.html?hp=l1

I'm glad Rich brought this up because this is something that's been bugging me for a while. People who know Ted Cruz, even liberals who know him personally, have claimed that this dude's a sharp cookie, a really good debater, and is an all around intelligent guy. He went to Harvard, after all!

But sadly, I just don't see it. He comes off no smarter than the average tea bagger. At least with boy genius, Paul Ryan, he would use some big sounding words occasionally. But Cruz? He's indistinguishable from Louis Gohmert imo.

He acts the way his base wants him to act. And that is most assuredly not in a "Harvard-educated intellectual" sort of way.
 
I think he's smart. Just wrong. I've met many people like that. Theyre very intelligent but their assumptions lead them down the wrong path.

But isn't making good assumptions part of being smart? And it isn't really about making assumptions, but having just a basic capacity for perceiving the empirical world with relative accuracy. And if you can't get that basic task right, by what right do you have to claim "smartness" or "intelligence"?
 

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
But isn't making good assumptions part of being smart? And it isn't really about making assumptions, but having just a basic capacity for perceiving the empirical world with relative accuracy. And if you can't get that basic task right, by what right do you have to claim "smartness" or "intelligence"?
Smart people are just better at defending positions they arrived at for non-smart reasons.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom