Support NeoGAF

[leroidys]

Are you two serious? Believe what you want, but I'm being sincere in stating you should maybe re-evaluate your thinking as the morning after could be brutal. Don't stop supporting your candidates or donating or working hard to GOTV or whatever, but you're mind-fucking yourselves if you think it won't be bad.


A good article out today by the Stuart Rothenberg on the narrative game being waged (link to article):

​

The linked story is interesting. I really see this as the big issue of this election cycle, that we are basically in a fact free zone - a media echo chamber with stories that write themselves form op eds and wingnut radio shows. Just as an example of the bizarreness we are experiencing, Bush's TARP has essentially been an incredible success story in terms of what it set out to do (Soros' speculation of japanese zombie banks not withstanding), but it's hung around Obama's neck as a complete failure and a socialist government overreach. I mean, not only is there a complete lack of objectivity this election cycle, but there is just no interest in facts.

 

[Diablos]

*reads the first page*

Holy shit, is the sky REALLY FALLING?

It looks like a bunch of posts made by me! :lol :lol :lol

So are we fucked for sure now?

edit: Wow, even Gallup is nearly calling it. :|

What have changed over the years are Americans' opinions of the Democratic Party on the same attributes. On all four, Americans were far more positive in their evaluations of the Democratic Party in 2006 than in 1994. An ominous sign for the Democratic Party is that the current results are similar to those from 1994, when Americans ended four decades of Democratic control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

...

Polling on voters' 2010 vote intentions suggests Republicans are within range of taking back control of the U.S. House of Representatives and possibly the Senate. This is surely attributable to the decline in Americans' perceptions of the Democratic Party in recent years, although this has not been accompanied by a surge in positive perceptions of the GOP. Heading into the elections, Americans view both parties about equally unfavorably. This is yet another indication that potential Republican gains may not indicate a Republican mandate as much as a rejection of the Democrats.

Also, the fact that the new campaign finance rules is benefiting the GOP financially by SIX TO ONE is absolutely disgusting. How can this be happening? Seriously, wtf? You have to wonder how greatly the rules have benefited the GOP. If the decision had never been made, for example, how many less seats would the GOP have won as a result after the election?

yep. next thread will be centered around impeachment proceedings.

Are you serious? What could they impeach him for?

 

[Amir0x]

*sigh*

Will be funny to see the self-fulfilling prophecy. Republicans saying Obama is an ineffectual president, and then making him so by defeating any legitimate point on his agenda for the next two years.

Was a fun ride for Obama's presidency

 

[XMonkey]

I can't wait for Obama's 2nd term.

 

[Salazar]

So are we fucked for sure now?

As a blog I was just reading put it, our enemies are publicly flaunting their support for puppy mistreatment, just to rub in the victory of evil.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/07/missouri-plumber-ballot-puppies/

Now, a group of Missouri tea partiers have found a new target: regulations that would mandate more humane conditions in the state’s puppy mills. This November, Missouri voters will go to the polls and decide the fate of Missouri’s Proposition B, which would place new regulations on puppy mills, including mandating that they provide “sufficient food and clean water, necessary veterinary care, sufficient housing, including protection from the elements, sufficient space to turn and stretch freely, lie down, and fully extend his or her limbs, regular exercise, and adequate rest between breeding cycles.”

C'mon, Missouri. Step the fuck up.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Bush's TARP has essentially been an incredible success story in terms of what it set out to do (Soros' speculation of japanese zombie banks not withstanding), but it's hung around Obama's neck as a complete failure and a socialist government overreach.

I don't really believe this to be true. When I hear people complain about Obama it almost always centers around the stimulus, the health care bill and cap and trade. If someone abhors TARP they usually hold both men accountable for that one.

 

[Mercury Fred]

But yeah she was also laying the sarcasm and hyperbole pretty thick at times. In the past I gave her props for arguing with Republicans calmly and intelligently, Jst let them twist by their own words. Tonight she certainly failed at the former. She got too agitated and wouldn't let the guy talk and she wouldn't give him clear concise questions. Fail.

I guess she hasn't had a Republican on the show for such a long time that she got too excited. :lol

Did we watch the same interview?

The lunatic she was trying to talk to wouldn't let her ask a question and refused to answer the most basic stuff she was offering up. I didn't really see her as being sarcastic. Mother fucking Theresa would have been exasperated with that tool.

 

[besada]

Hey Bakuya, when did you get your tag? Either way high five my douchebag brother!

I want to be part of the douchebag crew.

 

[ToxicAdam]

It already says you're an Xbox fan. Why be redundant?

 

[besada]

It already says you're an Xbox fan. Why be redundant?

I don't even post on the gaming side anymore! I need an OT tag. I've been just as big of a douche over here as I ever was over there. You can testify to that.

 

[Puddles]

The Dems are really scraping the bottom for candidates in West Virginia if Krystal Ball is the best they've got. :lol

 

[Evlar]

Very bad unemployment news today. The economy lost 96,000 jobs in September, and in many ways that's nowhere near the worst part.

 

[PantherLotus]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...-show-economy-continues-to-falter.php?ref=fpa

Unemployment Figures Show Economy Continues To Falter
Brian Beutler | October 8, 2010, 8:37AM

New employment statistics released by the federal government this morning continue to show anemic job growth, with 64,000 new private sector jobs unable to offset the loss of 159,000 state government and Census jobs.

The figures show the unemployment rate remained at 9.6 percent and 14.8 million Americans remain unemployed.

The numbers track closely with the estimates of independent experts, who predicted this week that the economy would continue to limp along.

These are the last monthly figures the Department of Labor will release before the November midterms. Republicans will surely seize on them to argue that the Democrats' economic agenda has failed -- though most economists, and the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office agree that unemployment would be about two percent higher than it is without the stimulus.

Over 600,000 people were added to the ranks of the involuntarily part-time work force.

About 2.5 million people, unemployed for more than a month, have stopped looking for work. That number is up from 2.2 million last month.

All told, this brings the number of people without jobs, or who have too little work, to 17.1 percent. That's up from an underemployment rate of 16.7 percent last month -- the highest figure in over a year.​

###

 

[Puddles]

It's okay, we need to reduce the size of government, amirite?

 

[Arkaerial]

Well, it seems whoever wins we lose. From what I've seen under both a Democrat and Republican controlled government is the complete ability to screw things up. Yet we are still voting for these two inept parties...way to go America, way to go.

 

[PantherLotus]

Well, it seems whoever wins we lose. From what I've seen under both a Democrat and Republican controlled government is the complete ability to screw things up. Yet we are still voting for these two inept parties...way to go America, way to go.

I'd like to hear more of this. Which part do you think Republicans screwed up, and which part are Democrats responsible for?

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

I can't wait for our new theocratic overloards.

 

[ToxicAdam]

U6 is back above 17 percent? Bad times.

 

[PantherLotus]

Lou Dobbs And The Nation Reporter Clash Over Illegal Immigrant Controversy On The Last Word
October 8, 2010, 8:51AM

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmem...rant-controversy-on-the-last-word.php?ref=fpb

Lawrence O'Donnell continued his booking hot streak tonight when he had both Lou Dobbs - at the center of this controversy about employing illegal immigrants on his property - and Isabel MacDonald (whose report in The Nation sparked the controversy) onto MSNBC to debate the issue of whether Dobbs once employed illegal immigrants, despite his long-standing hard-line stance against illegal immigration.

O'Donnell strictly mediated - this was Dobbs vs. McDonald. And the first thing to jump out about this segment: it was long, taking up half the program. McDonald thought Dobbs was "holding [him]self to a completely different standard than the standards that [he's] held all other American employers to," while Dobbs thought her piece was "a hit job." At the center of the debate was, seemingly, semantics: Dobbs seemed to be out to prove that he never "directly, knowingly employed any undocumented worker" (and MacDonald admitted she didn't have evidence as such), while The Nation's point wasn't so much that Dobbs even indirectly employing undocumented workers would make him a hypocrite. (It's even right in the title.)

In fact, as O'Donnell himself said to Dobbs at one point:

"Well, what they're calling you on this case is a hypocrite if you did that. You do, what I'm agreeing to is you absolutely didn't commit a crime if you did that. I'm agreeing to that. But when you take to the pulpit and preach what you preached you got to be, you got to understand why people think this is a hypocritical outcome."

This gets at the heart of it: Dobbs at one point said, "If you want to hold me to...a different and higher standard, you go right ahead." And that "different and higher standard" is the price of making illegal immigration a pet cause for so long. Dobbs also mentioned during the interview his ultimate goal is a "rational, effective, humane immigration policy." That's a tall order, and after The Nation's piece - "hit job" or not - the pressure is on for him to contribute significant ideas toward just that.

[VIDEOS]​

###

 

[Evlar]

NSA Director is resigning: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/donilon-to-replace-jones-as-national-security-adviser/

President Obama will announce on Friday that Gen. James Jones, the national security adviser, is resigning and will be replaced by Thomas E. Donilon, the principal deputy national security adviser, senior administration officials said.

General Jones’s departure had been long rumored, and he had previously indicated to his staff that he intended to leave by the end of the year. But the schedule was accelerated, and in recent weeks White House staff had been increasingly critical of General Jones for statements that he apparently made to Bob Woodward, the author of “Obama’s Wars,” an account of the internal decision making on policy Afghanistan and Pakistan.

 

[LosDaddie]

SENATE:
Dems 52
Teabaggers 48

HOUSE:
Teabaggers control with +5 seats


Local Predictions: Rubio, Scott, and Mica win in FL.

It's going to be a bloodbath. The only thing Obama will accomplish in the next 2yrs is tax cuts. Expect 2yrs of nothing but gridlock, subpeonas, hearings and witch hunts.



Also, another great OP, LS! Well done.

 

[Puddles]

It really makes me sad that the only functioning part of our entire government right now is the one that's likely to flip Red.

Edit: after visiting Krystal Ball's website, I've changed my mind. She looks pretty great, actually. A little young, but whatever. She seems like a real person, not a career politician.

 

[Incognito]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...-show-economy-continues-to-falter.php?ref=fpa

Unemployment Figures Show Economy Continues To Falter
Brian Beutler | October 8, 2010, 8:37AM

New employment statistics released by the federal government this morning continue to show anemic job growth, with 64,000 new private sector jobs unable to offset the loss of 159,000 state government and Census jobs.

The figures show the unemployment rate remained at 9.6 percent and 14.8 million Americans remain unemployed.

The numbers track closely with the estimates of independent experts, who predicted this week that the economy would continue to limp along.

These are the last monthly figures the Department of Labor will release before the November midterms. Republicans will surely seize on them to argue that the Democrats' economic agenda has failed -- though most economists, and the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office agree that unemployment would be about two percent higher than it is without the stimulus.

Over 600,000 people were added to the ranks of the involuntarily part-time work force.

About 2.5 million people, unemployed for more than a month, have stopped looking for work. That number is up from 2.2 million last month.

All told, this brings the number of people without jobs, or who have too little work, to 17.1 percent. That's up from an underemployment rate of 16.7 percent last month -- the highest figure in over a year.​

###

that about wraps it up. *heads to goldline*

 

[PantherLotus]

It really makes me sad that the only functioning part of our entire government right now is the one that's likely to flip Red.

This is actually a really interesting thought. Assuming you're talking about the House, why do you say it's the only part functioning? Or do you mean it's the only part where an overwhelming Democratic majority is passing legislation? Because as far as I can tell, the Senate and Supreme Court and the President all seem to be functioning.

I know I'm being semantic here, but it's important that we're distinct. Assuming you mean, "the only part working towards a progressive liberal agenda of which I approve," I think you're right. Though it's just as likely that the reason they're able to do so in the first place is the exact reason they're looking at heavy losses.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Job market likely worse than being reported.

Supporting our belief that the government’s payroll data are overestimating actual job growth was the announcement that the preliminary estimate of the size of the upcoming benchmark revision to the March 2010 nonfarm payroll level was -366K (-0.3% of total payrolls, and an average of 30K per month). While much smaller than the -902K (-0.7%) reported last year for the March 2009 benchmark (the bulk of which was due to failure of the “birth/death adjustment” to accurately reflect real-world conditions in the midst of a credit-crunch), this is still a sizable revision, particularly coming on the heels of such a huge one in the preceding year. (The historical average size of benchmark revisions, regardless of direction, is 0.2% of total payrolls.)

We would not be surprised if further analysis by the Labor Department again pins much of the blame on the birth/death model. The benchmarked data will be released in early February with the January jobs report.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/looking-back-even-more-jobs-lost/?src=busln

 

[Averon]

My predictions

Senate
Dems 52
GOP 48

House
Dems 220
GOP 215

I'm not that miffed if the Dems lose the House. Dems have been wimps despite having huge majorities in both houses of Congress. They deserve huge loses. The only shitty thing about this is that voters are about the reward the GOP for two years' worth of obstruction, hypocrisy and down right insane behavior. If you bitch and yell as loud as you can long enough, you'll get rewarded apparently. As I said before, America gets the government it deserves. And I won't feel the least bit sympathetic when it all goes downhill.

 

[Puddles]

This is actually a really interesting thought. Assuming you're talking about the House, why do you say it's the only part functioning? Or do you mean it's the only part where an overwhelming Democratic majority is passing legislation? Because as far as I can tell, the Senate and Supreme Court and the President all seem to be functioning.

I know I'm being semantic here, but it's important that we're distinct. Assuming you mean, "the only part working towards a progressive liberal agenda of which I approve," I think you're right. Though it's just as likely that the reason they're able to do so in the first place is the exact reason they're looking at heavy losses.

I don't think I really need to defend the idea that the Senate is a non-functioning body. The White House has been failing on all cylinders for over a year now, to the point where it makes you wonder if Obama actually believes a lot of the stuff he talked about in his campaign. Here you have one of the most charismatic, inspiring campaigners in history who hasn't even attempted to use the bully-pulpit, a guy who bargains away massive pieces of his agenda so that corporations won't take out negative ads against him... when he has essentially an unlimited supply of free advertising every time he calls a press conference... I don't think I really need to defend that position either.

The SCROTUS has recently handed down a decision that surpasses even Gonzales v. Raich as far as idiotic, bone-headed decisions go and threatens the very existence of American democracy as we know it. I suppose you can say that they are "functioning", just not very well.

 

[Krauser Kat]

FUUUU those numbers are shitty. Given our circumstances, i think our country is doing as best as it can. The right really think their is some magical way for us to get back on our feet and be back like it was the 60s.

 

[Incognito]

T... I think you're right. Though it's just as likely that the reason they're able to do so in the first place is the exact reason they're looking at heavy losses.

the house facing the prospect of heavy losses isn't because they've enacted a liberal agenda; it's simply a numbers game. pure and simple. if more democrats were up for reelection in the senate, they'd be swept away, too.

 

[ToxicAdam]

FUUUU those numbers are shitty. Given our circumstances, i think our country is doing as best as it can. The right really think their is some magical way for us to get back on our feet and be back like it was the 60s.

Wait, I thought the left wanted to revert to tax code back to the 60's.

 

[ShOcKwAvE]

FUUUU those numbers are shitty. Given our circumstances, i think our country is doing as best as it can. The right really think their is some magical way for us to get back on our feet and be back like it was the 60s.

Um, life is quite a bit better for many people than it was in the 60s....

 

[HomShaBom]

NSA Director is resigning: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/donilon-to-replace-jones-as-national-security-adviser/

He is not the director of the NSA...He is National Security Advisor...

 

[PantherLotus]

1. But neither of you clarified how they're non-functioning.

2. The reason the house is facing heavy democratic losses is the same reason they're able to get their agenda through more easily: they are more subject to the feeling of the moment than the Senate is. That is NOT to say they are facing heavy losses because they worked toward a liberal agenda. Nuanced, but there is a difference.

 

[Puddles]

Really?

I guess I could say that the Senate is non-functioning since it doesn't do what it's supposed to do. It doesn't vote on a substantial number of Presidential appointments. It doesn't vote on a substantial number of pieces of legislation. It doesn't even debate on most of these issues. It's completely broken and non-functioning.

 

[PantherLotus]

Really?

I guess I could say that the Senate is non-functioning since it doesn't do what it's supposed to do. It doesn't vote on a substantial number of Presidential appointments. It doesn't vote on a substantial number of pieces of legislation. It doesn't even debate on most of these issues. It's completely broken and non-functioning.

Again, I'm not debating that they're not getting a liberal agenda through (though I might note there was this little historic healthcare bill that passed), I'm debating that doesn't mean they're not functioning. Outside of some qualms with how the filibuster is being used, it looks like they're completely functioning--just not functioning the way we would like.

Last, you said the House was the ONLY part of government functioning. I assume you didn't mean that.

 

[Puddles]

A legislative body that is supposed to confirm or deny a President's appointees, but refuses to hold a vote or even debate their qualifications is non-functioning.

A legislative body that is supposed to debate the merits of major pieces of legislation and then hold votes on whether or not to pass them, but refuses to even open debate, let alone hold a vote, is non-functioning.

 

[PantherLotus]

A legislative body that is supposed to confirm or deny a President's appointees, but refuses to hold a vote or even debate their qualifications is non-functioning.

A legislative body that is supposed to debate the merits of major pieces of legislation and then hold votes on whether or not to pass them, but refuses to even open debate, let alone hold a vote, is non-functioning.

You're talking about political gridlock and using that to suggest that is not how the legislative body was designed or intended, and I disagree. I believe that it's working exactly as intended.

Political gridlock =/= Non-Functioning

 

[Skiptastic]

Political gridlock =/= Non-Functioning

Hmmm, this is scary. I'm agreeing with PantherLotus again. :O

 

[otake]

SENATE:
Dems 52
Teabaggers 48

HOUSE:
Teabaggers control with +5 seats


Local Predictions: Rubio, Scott, and Mica win in FL.

It's going to be a bloodbath. The only thing Obama will accomplish in the next 2yrs is tax cuts. Expect 2yrs of nothing but gridlock, subpeonas, hearings and witch hunts.



Also, another great OP, LS! Well done.

Rubio may win, but I don't think Scott will.

Pantherlocusts loves to argue semantics. In a way, he reminds me of Bill O'Reilly. He lathes on to some detail and becomes obsessed with it to the detriment of the overall discussion. :lol

 

[PantherLotus]

Hmmm, this is scary. I'm agreeing with PantherLotus again. :O

Oh stop with that already. We're pretty much the same person, except I'm a liberal loudmouthed schmuck and you're keep-to-yourself conservative schmuck.

 

[Puddles]

You're talking about political gridlock and using that to suggest that is not how the legislative body was designed or intended, and I disagree. I believe that it's working exactly as intended.

Political gridlock =/= Non-Functioning

A legislative body that refuses to hold votes is somehow functional...

A legislative body meant to prevent passionate surges of opinion from instantly becoming legislation through the use of unlimited debate that constantly refuses to even start debating is functional...

That makes absolutely no sense.

Btw, if you're saying that today's Senate is working the way the Founders intended, then you're also saying that for the first 150+ years of its existence the Senate did NOT work the way the Founders intended.

 

[Incognito]

You're talking about political gridlock and using that to suggest that is not how the legislative body was designed or intended, and I disagree. I believe that it's working exactly as intended.

Political gridlock =/= Non-Functioning

except the senate was never designed or intended that way.

 

[Skiptastic]

Oh stop with that already. We're pretty much the same person, except I'm a liberal loudmouthed schmuck and you're keep-to-yourself conservative schmuck.

That's probably true, though I would mention that I go to my local newspaper forums, and compared to those people, I'd be liberal. But I believe that governments should be more liberal the closer they are to the people.

 

[PantherLotus]

A legislative body that refuses to hold votes is somehow functional...

A legislative body meant to prevent passionate surges of opinion from instantly becoming legislation through the use of unlimited debate that constantly refuses to even start debating is functional...

That makes absolutely no sense.

Btw, if you're saying that today's Senate is working the way the Founders intended, then you're also saying that for the first 150+ years of its existence the Senate did NOT work the way the Founders intended.

Why do you say it's refusing to hold votes? It's obvious they know the outcome and are saving time.

And your last 'graph is a logical fallacy. It was working then, and it's working now.

 

[besada]

You're talking about political gridlock and using that to suggest that is not how the legislative body was designed or intended, and I disagree. I believe that it's working exactly as intended.

Then you need to brush up on your history, since the filibuster was not part of the design of the Senate. The founding fathers neither designed, nor intended to create a filibuster capable of shutting down the majority party.

Edit: For that matter, they didn't intend for Senators to be popularly elected, either.

 

[otake]

Then you need to brush up on your history, since the filibuster was not part of the design of the Senate. The founding fathers neither designed, nor intended to create a filibuster capable of shutting down the majority party.

Edit: For that matter, they didn't intend for Senators to be popularly elected, either.

Don't start the filibuster discussion, it won't end well!

 

[PantherLotus]

Then you need to brush up on your history, since the filibuster was not part of the design of the Senate. The founding fathers neither designed, nor intended to create a filibuster capable of shutting down the majority party.

Edit: For that matter, they didn't intend for Senators to be popularly elected, either.

Even the quickest of wiki searches indicates the filibuster was possible as early as 1806, and was used as early as the 1830s. C'mon.

Regardless, some are arguing intent, some are arguing function, some are arguing about not getting specific legislation completed. I'm saying that the greatest legislative body on the planet is functioning just fine.


PS - the "brush up on your history" thing is unneeded. We can have a completely logical discussion without doing that. I intend on doing the same and hope I'm called out when I slip into the same pattern. Thanks.

PPS - I'm quite aware of history, and when wrong, am proud to admit it. We all have access to the internet.

 

[Puddles]

Why do you say it's refusing to hold votes? It's obvious they know the outcome and are saving time.

And your last 'graph is a logical fallacy. It was working then, and it's working now.

No dude.

They're not voting because a minority of Senators can prevent a vote from taking place. That's not the way it was intended.

They're not using their privilege of unlimited debate; oftentimes they're not even debating at all because a minority of Senators can prevent a debate from even taking place. That's not the way it was intended.

A legislative body meant to debate and vote that does not debate and vote is non-functioning.


For over 150 years, it did work the way it was intended. The Senate debated bills and voted on them. If the minority party was REALLY dead-set against a bill, they could stall it by extending the debate indefinitely, but they had to, you know, actually be saying something that entire time.

Today's Senate is a mockery of what the Founders intended.

This has been well-established time and time again. Not sure why you're one of the few voices of dissent on this matter.


In 1806 the filibuster was simply unlimited "debate".

Today's filibuster is a complete lack of debate.

The difference is night and day.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Yea, but legislation passed by the House dying (or being butchered) in the Senate isn't a new phenomenon. That's been going on for as long as I've been politically aware. Most of the Contract with America met a similar fate.

 

[Incognito]

I'm saying that the greatest legislative body on the planet is functioning just fine.

how could anyone say this?