• 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 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Trouble said:
Yeah it's gray and overcast during the winter (but rarely below the 40s), but we do get about 3 absolutely gorgeous months of no rain and sunny days during the summer without it getting overbearingly hot.
Click to expand...

Well, it's good to see that you guys do in fact have sunny days in the Summer. But for the other 9 months of the year? Overcast days literally make me depressed, and I would have no doubt that as a Californianite, I'd be pretty miserable.

Basically clouds (or as scientists refer to them: sky demons) are evil.



In other news, I certainly didn't see this coming. The poverty report from teenage prodigy, Paul Ryan has data that's been mangled to fit his agenda:

Ryan’s paper, for example, cited a study published in December by the Columbia Population Research Center measuring the decline in poverty in the U.S. after the implementation of Lyndon Johnson’s “War on Poverty.”

One of the study’s authors, Jane Waldfogel, a professor at Columbia University and a visiting scholar at the Russell Sage Foundation, said she was surprised when she read the paper, because it seemed to arbitrarily chop off data from two of the most successful years of the war on poverty.

Waldfogel and her colleagues looked at an alternative measure of the poverty rate known as the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), which factors in government benefits like food stamps and programs like the earned-income tax credit. That alternative measure is thought to present a more accurate and realistic gauge of the poverty and the real-world effects of government programs aimed at combatting it.

The Columbia researchers found that, using their model of the SPM, the poverty rate fell from 26 percent in 1967 to 15 percent in 2012. Ryan only cites data from 1969 onward, ignoring a full 36 percent of the decline.
Click to expand...

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/paul-ryans-unfortunate-poverty-report
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
@GrahamBlog
It started with Benghazi. When you kill Americans and nobody pays a price, you invite this type of aggression. #Ukraine
Click to expand...

tumblr_lz5ijqZCuH1qdeocv.gif
 
L

leroidys

Member
speculawyer said:
That 'Canadian oil for China' meme is quite popular but it doesn't really make much sense. The oil will hit the international market but since it is on the Gulf Coast, it isn't easy to ship to China. Much will be refined and sent to Latin America and perhaps Europe though.

I still find the most amusing thing to be that a lot of Rocky Mountain state and mid-West conservatives that support the Keystone Pipeline XL will end up paying more for gasoline if/when it is built since that pipeline will eliminate the oil glut they currently enjoy from all that oil stranded around that region.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's quite shocking how poorly people understand energy markets.

It's going to be fun to see people freak out in the next few years when the LNG export facilities go online and our natural gas prices double overnight. Drill baby, drill!
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
http://freebeacon.com/blog/anti-koch-rhetoric-reveals-disturbing-pro-cancer-sentiment-on-the-left/

here’s something deeper at work here. How else can we explain this disturbing trend of pro-cancer rhetoric? Since when does surviving cancer, and spending millions to find a cure, make someone a “famously evil” person? This has all the symptoms of a sinister dogwhistle campaign to rile up the cancer skeptic wing of the Democratic base and delegitimize the Koch brothers.
Click to expand...
I can't tell if this is parody or not.
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
I saw this discussed a little some days ago, but I'm starting to think my TPM reading days are waning. There are a lot of important stories ongoing right now, and their front page is largely filled with inside the beltway click bait garbage. They've been on that trajectory for a couple years now but it only really hit home the past couple weeks how bad it's gotten.

I used to read them for some very solid policy and political reporting, mixed with the occasional fun/frivolous story. Now the latter is taking up increasingly large proportions of their output.

Anyone have suggestions on where to fill the void?
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
GhaleonEB said:
I saw this discussed a little some days ago, but I'm starting to think my TPM reading days are waning. There are a lot of important stories ongoing right now, and their front page is largely filled with inside the beltway click bait garbage. They've been on that trajectory for a couple years now but it only really hit home the past couple weeks how bad it's gotten.

I used to read them for some very solid policy and political reporting, mixed with the occasional fun/frivolous story. Now the latter is taking up increasingly large proportions of their output.

Anyone have suggestions on where to fill the void?
Click to expand...

Twitter.
 
C

Chichikov

Member
GhaleonEB said:
I saw this discussed a little some days ago, but I'm starting to think my TPM reading days are waning. There are a lot of important stories ongoing right now, and their front page is largely filled with inside the beltway click bait garbage. They've been on that trajectory for a couple years now but it only really hit home the past couple weeks how bad it's gotten.

I used to read them for some very solid policy and political reporting, mixed with the occasional fun/frivolous story. Now the latter is taking up increasingly large proportions of their output.

Anyone have suggestions on where to fill the void?
Click to expand...
A New York Times subscription.
 
A

Armoured Priest

Member
speculawyer said:
That 'Canadian oil for China' meme is quite popular but it doesn't really make much sense. The oil will hit the international market but since it is on the Gulf Coast, it isn't easy to ship to China. Much will be refined and sent to Latin America and perhaps Europe though.

I still find the most amusing thing to be that a lot of Rocky Mountain state and mid-West conservatives that support the Keystone Pipeline XL will end up paying more for gasoline if/when it is built since that pipeline will eliminate the oil glut they currently enjoy from all that oil stranded around that region.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. More appropriately, I was under the impression that like 10% of the oil was already ear-marked for the Chinese market. The rest obviously would go on the world market...which, of course doesn't mean crap for lowering gas prices in the US.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
GhaleonEB said:
I saw this discussed a little some days ago, but I'm starting to think my TPM reading days are waning. There are a lot of important stories ongoing right now, and their front page is largely filled with inside the beltway click bait garbage. They've been on that trajectory for a couple years now but it only really hit home the past couple weeks how bad it's gotten.

I used to read them for some very solid policy and political reporting, mixed with the occasional fun/frivolous story. Now the latter is taking up increasingly large proportions of their output.

Anyone have suggestions on where to fill the void?
Click to expand...

NY Times, maybe the New Republic website. And I like reading Chait at the New Yorker. Also Slate has a host of good stuff.

TPM has really gone to shit since Brian Beautler left. Sahil Kapur constantly writes some of the most boring, obvious articles IMO. "5 Reasons Why X Is Likely/Unlikely." Yea...no thanks.

I don't visit new sites to chuckle at republicans saying dumb things, or to be bombarded with forced "X accidentally shoots Y" news articles, or an onslaught of Chris Christie news.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
I don't understand the mental gymnastics one has to go through to somehow link Benghazi to Russia, but this is the GOP we are talking about, and it is Miss Graham.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
Now that I'm back, I need to share the hilarity from this stupid human I went to school with:

‏@LordGRTR 10h
fact that markets are rallying after Putin's speech shows world respects him as a leader when @BarackObama speaks no 1seems 2 give a fuck
Click to expand...

‏@LordGRTR 10h
2/2 it's truely unfortunate that @BarackObama's lack of action in the past has strongly diminished our voice as worlds number 1 superpower
Click to expand...

And then he tweeted this gem. Not safe for your eyes/mind?

http://www.tomatobubble.com/putin_obama.html

Have fun!
 
T

TacticalFox88

Banned
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) blamed President Obama’s handling of the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, tweeting Tuesday afternoon that it somehow emboldened the Russians to attack.
Click to expand...

KuGsj.gif
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
Metaphoreus said:
I haven't had (and likely won't have) an opportunity to research the tax statistics from the article you linked to, even though I'm skeptical of them. However, this particular comparison bothers me. What useful information is provided by comparing net interstate migration into a state with the total population of the nation? It would make much more sense to compare the net interstate migration into Texas with the net interstate migration into (or out of) every other state. Like so (source):

0O2Subv.png
Click to expand...

This doesn't make much sense, either. Rhode Island gaining 1k is more significant than Texas gaining 2k, for example, because the size of the states are vastly different. Would make more sense to compare the percentage of a state's population that changed.

This puts net migration into Texas--not to mention the much-disdained Florida--in a quite different light. (The claim that positive net interstate migration into Texas has been falling ever since it peaked in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina also seems suspect. In 2010, the net positive into Texas was about 75,000; in 2011, it was about 109,000; in 2012, 105,000. I didn't check further back than that, and it's possible that that claim fairly represents the general trend of the prior decade. However, the data for years earlier than 2009 weren't presented with aggregate in- and outflows, and I didn't take the time to create such aggregates. Someone with the time to compile the information from the other spreadsheets at the above link should feel free to do so.) See also the following chart, which shows the percentage of total positive net interstate migration among the states having a positive net (sorry for the wonky labels):

http://i.imgur.com/ht19lUB.png

So, among all states having a positive net interstate migration during 2012, net interstate migration into Texas accounts for 18% of the total. That seems fairly significant--maybe even rising to the level of background noise! Third-place Colorado doesn't even account for half of that.[/quote]


As a final note, I'm not sure where the author of the article is getting his net migration statistics. For starters, he says the migration he's tracking is only that involving "native-born Americans." The data I found don't seem to be so limited. Also, it should be noted that the author appears to be discussing a one-year period, not a two year period covering both 2010 and 2011--the article seems ambiguous to me on that point.[/QUOTE]

You admit the article is looking at native-born migration and yet you post stats that include other people, which the point of the article is the remove those people to make a more fair assessment of the migration.

His point is that the migration is quite small and really insignificant. Perry and Texas have been claiming great job growth and why people are moving there. The reality is that people are moving there and the job growth seems to partially be a result of that (The UE rate has basically followed the job migration). The two main factors why this is happening is the boom in oil/gas and cheap housing (which isn't because of free market but it's actually heavily regulated in Texas). And a lot of population growth comes from Mexico.

Also, of course Texas is going to make up most of the positive migration since it's one of the biggest states. RI can't handle 150k a year moving in.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
PhoenixDark said:
NY Times, maybe the New Republic website. And I like reading Chait at the New Yorker. Also Slate has a host of good stuff.

TPM has really gone to shit since Brian Beautler left. Sahil Kapur constantly writes some of the most boring, obvious articles IMO. "5 Reasons Why X Is Likely/Unlikely." Yea...no thanks.

I don't visit new sites to chuckle at republicans saying dumb things, or to be bombarded with forced "X accidentally shoots Y" news articles, or an onslaught of Chris Christie news.
Click to expand...

I really like Weigel at Slate and Ezra and Yglesias' new site will be great. They tend to go beyond the obvious stuff. Business Insider has some good stuff with Josh Barro but most of their other stuff is click bait.

I still say following writers and reporters on twitter is the best. You get to see them respond real time to stories and go back and forth which really gets you thinking. There's a couple of conservatives worth it to follow that always engage Beautler, Hayes, etc Like Timothy Carney, Philip Klein, etc.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
HAHAHAHAHA. Oh god, so how does teenage prodigy, Paul Ryan react to the claims that he's been intentionally misinterpreting the data in his report?

Asked about the criticism, a spokesperson for Chairman Ryan said, “We’re glad to hear the report is encouraging a debate on the performance record of federal anti-poverty programs.”
Click to expand...

That is such a fucking typical Paul Ryan-esque response.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
Oblivion said:
HAHAHAHAHA. Oh god, so how does teenage prodigy, Paul Ryan react to the claims that he's been intentionally misinterpreting the data in his report?



That is such a fucking typical Paul Ryan-esque response.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, what was that about Ryan's budget? I can't hear a thing the gop is saying over the sound if the collective putin cock sucking the gop is doing.
 
W

WayneMorse

Banned
I love how liberals who got so mad at people saying "Criticizing Bush means supporting Saddam!" now say "Criticizing Obama means supporting Putin!"
 
S

speculawyer

Member
WayneMorse said:
I love how liberals who got so mad at people saying "Criticizing Bush means supporting Saddam!" now say "Criticizing Obama means supporting Putin!"
Click to expand...
No, that is not what we saying. They are literally cheering on Putin and saying how he is such a great leader. Their criticism of Obama is reflexive and to be expected. But they are really directly complimenting Putin a lot. It is bizarre.
 
S

Snake

Member
WayneMorse said:
I love how liberals who got so mad at people saying "Criticizing Bush means supporting Saddam!" now say "Criticizing Obama means supporting Putin!"
Click to expand...

This is an absurd false equivalency. Even if you mean it as trolling/joking, there's no way anyone with half a brain should let it stand.

On the issue of Bush, Americans, including liberals and Democrats, were plenty supportive of the President after 9/11, Afghanistan, and even Iraq for a time. Some guy in the Ukraine thread was posting quotes from Democrats criticizing Bush, and they were all from 2007 or later. Yeah, four years into the Iraq War Democrats criticized Bush for getting us into a stupid war which claimed many American lives and many more Iraqi lives, de-stablized the region, and weakened America's credibility throughout the world. After the fact. For something disastrous that Bush initiated himself, not something that was unfolding on the world stage independently.

Now, Republicans aren't claiming that Obama is doing something dangerous and aggressive. They are saying Obama is weak because he won't do "X." And the thing is, there is no "X." There is no military solution that they can endorse. There is nothing whatsoever that they are endorsing. They have nothing substantive to add. They are just playing politics. It's concern trolling.

And what's more, they are appealing to right-wing power fantasies. So they say, "If we had a Republican president this would have never happened! Um, Georgia? Never heard of it!?" And when they use Putin as a foil to Obama, all they are demonstrating is that an authoritarian dictator with no accountability sure has a lot more leeway in certain matters than a democratically-elected leader. Wow, so profound.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
speculawyer said:
No, that is not what we saying. They are literally cheering on Putin and saying how he is such a great leader. Their criticism of Obama is reflexive and to be expected. But they are really directly complimenting Putin a lot. It is bizarre.
Click to expand...

Some examples:

QUOTE OF THE DAY: “People are looking at Putin as one who wrestles bears and drills for oil. They look at our president as one who wears mom jeans and equivocates and bloviates.” -Sarah Palin

After chuckling dismissively at the idea of merely leveling sanctions against Russia in response to its transgression, Giuliani laid it out as simply as he could: “Putin decides what he wants to do, and he does it in half a day, right? He decided he had to go to their parliament — he went to their parliament, he got permission in 15 minutes.”

Cavuto then awkwardly interrupted, noting that Putin’s move was “perfunctory” since Russia’s parliament is essentially a dummy rubber-stamp for the Putin regime. Giuliani completely ignored this point from Cavuto and continued.

“[H]e makes a decision and he executes it, quickly. And then everybody reacts. That’s what you call a leader,” Giuliani said.

Giuliani next compared Putin’s decisiveness to President Obama’s leadership. In this regard, he found the American president lacking: “President Obama [has] gotta think about it, he’s got to go over it again, he’s got to talk to more people about it,” Giuliani joked.
Click to expand...
http://mediamatters.org/video/2014/03/03/on-fox-giuliani-praises-putin-hes-what-you-call/198316


Again . . . I expect them to call Obama a wimp & what not (even though the partisanship is supposed to stop at the water's edge, right?) . . . . but the ball-licking of a KGB Agent dictator is amazing.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
The most shocking thing about the Palin comment is that she was able to correctly pronounce "bloviates" without choking.
 
T

Touchdown

Banned
Wilsongt said:
I don't understand the mental gymnastics one has to go through to somehow link Benghazi to Russia, but this is the GOP we are talking about, and it is Miss Graham.
Click to expand...

There are no mental gymnastics involved I'm pretty sure. A long while ago polling showed Obama with pretty high marks on foreign affairs/policy. Then Benghazi happened. The GOP will without a doubt, no matter how little a connection there is, bring up Benghazi when it comes to any international affair where United States involvement is discussed just as a way to lessen Obama's stature on foreign policy. Even if it doesn't make sense. They just want to get the quick talking points out - Obama -Benghazi- weak - bad - Russia - strong.. etc.
 
T

TacticalFox88

Banned
Touchdown said:
There are no mental gymnastics involved I'm pretty sure. A long while ago polling showed Obama with pretty high marks on foreign affairs/policy. Then Benghazi happened. The GOP will without a doubt, no matter how little a connection there is, bring up Benghazi when it comes to any international affair where United States involvement is discussed just as a way to lessen Obama's stature on foreign policy. Even if it doesn't make sense. They just want to get the quick talking points out - Obama -Benghazi- weak - bad - Russia - strong.. etc.
Click to expand...

The GOP is more salty on Benghazi than Gaming side on Bayonetta 2.
 
T

TacticalFox88

Banned
B-Dubs said:
I thought the shocking bit was the fact she knew about that word in the first place.
Click to expand...

What if it turns out that Palin is like South Park version where she's extremely fucking intelligent, and just says all this shit just to laugh her way to the bank.

Made John McCain lose on purpose for the lulz.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
TacticalFox88 said:
What if it turns out that Palin is like South Park version where she's extremely fucking intelligent, and just says all this shit just to laugh her way to the bank.

Made John McCain lose on purpose for the lulz.
Click to expand...

Man, if that were true I'd tip my hat to her. Sure she's done unspeakable damage to our politics but you just have to respect crafty shit like that on some level.
 
A

Aaron

Member
What's really strange is for a while Republicans have been saying "Obama is a dictator! He's coming for your guns!" Now they're making it clear Obama has nothing even approaching that power by comparing him to an actual dictator.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
Sounds about right

Gay marriage opponents don’t know they’re on the wrong side of public opinion


What happens when a vocal minority thinks it’s a silent majority?

According to a new survey by the Public Religion Research Institute, only 41 percent of Americans oppose allowing same-sex couples to marry. But that same 41 percent has a highly skewed perception of where the rest of the country stands: nearly two-thirds of same-sex marriage opponents erroneously think most Americans agree with them. And only two in 10 same-sex marriage opponents realize that the majority of Americans support marriage equality.
Click to expand...

gay-marriage_v1.png
 
S

Sirpopopop

Member
Back from a long vacation.

Hope the media blowhards don't get their way on Crimea.

The last thing we need to do is get embroiled in Cold War shit. Alienating an ally close to him over paranoia is going to hurt him more than us, if we use soft diplomacy to handle the situation.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Wait, so how will this eventually work? Do we get to pick our own partners who we'll be forced to gay marry or will it be done by lottery?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom