• 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 Thread of First Debate Election 2008 - GAF doesn't know shit

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've been waiting for the presidential debates for so long; can't believe the first one is tomorrow.

Having to wait so long and then the possibility of the first debate not happening comes up within days of the damn thing saddens me.
 

gkryhewy

Member
Xavien said:
You think that will happen? I think banks will do less risky lending, but they won't stop altogether. Look at the banks that are unaffected by this whole crisis, they are the banks that didn't get into subprime in the first place.

Yes, it will happen. You are wrong - all banks are interconnected. None can operate without the ability to borrow funds from others.

You are thinking long-term - fine.

I am telling you that there is a very real risk of long-term becoming moot next week.
 
RubxQub said:
The house Republicans bailed on the meeting tonight...fucking despicable.
Awww . . . that ain't puttin' the "Country First"? Couldn't POWman get the people of his own party to put "Country First" or are they doing it simply to give him a reason to bail on the debate.

I say debate the empty chair or debate the bail-out bill on live TV.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
StoOgE said:
I think there is an upside. I think every major financial leader is going to come out and roast his ass. They have to.

I actually feel slightly ill right now. This could completely and totally fuck us. I cant tell you how bad this could get. I just hope WaMu survives tommorow. Im really not kidding, if WaMu goes, the FDIC could run out of capital.

Holy fuck he may have fucked us already. JESUS TAPDANCING CHRIST.


Hey StoOge how do you feel now with the new WaMu breaking news? What does this mean for you and the FDIC?
 

RubxQub

φίλω ἐξεχέγλουτον καί ψευδολόγον οὖκ εἰπόν
AniHawk said:
All of them bailed? Or what was needed?
Apparently they all walked out on the 8:00 EST regathering because they now reject the proposed plan.
 
speculawyer said:
Awww . . . that ain't puttin' the "Country First"? Couldn't POWman get the people of his own party to put "Country First" or are they doing it simply to give him a reason to bail on the debate.

I say debate the empty chair or debate the bail-out bill on live TV.

"Campaign First"
 

DenogginizerOS

BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
Most Americans don't want this bailout. Bush proposed it. Dems have tried to push it through. And the Maverick comes on the scene and he and House Repubs save the day. Christ.
 

Sharp

Member
RubxQub said:
The house Republicans bailed on the meeting tonight...fucking despicable.
The Maverick needs to talk things over with them to make sure everyone's on the same page. Not like that other time everyone was on the same page, that time it seemed like McCain's assistance wasn't needed so it was probably the wrong page anyway.
 

Pancakes

hot, steaming, as melted butter slips into the cracks, drizzled with sticky sweet syrup OH GOD
AniHawk said:
All of them bailed? Or what was needed?

House republicans can't agree with everyone else, try to push their own bill with more deregulation and basically don't want to negotiate, from what I just saw on MSNBC.
 

so_awes

Banned
Freedom = $1.05 said:
Does anyone have that Michael Douglas "suspenders" pic from a day or two ago? That actually made me lol. Wanted to show it to my roommate.
s-LOLSUSPENDAGAIN-large.jpg
 

Xisiqomelir

Member
speculawyer said:
Awww . . . that ain't puttin' the "Country First"? Couldn't POWman get the people of his own party to put "Country First" or are they doing it simply to give him a reason to bail on the debate.

I say debate the empty chair or debate the bail-out bill on live TV.

For 5 and a half years, John McCain didn't have the luxury of bailing on debates.
 

gkryhewy

Member
DenogginizerOS said:
Most Americans don't want this bailout. Bush proposed it. Dems have tried to push it through. And the Maverick comes on the scene and he and House Repubs save the day. Christ.

Most Americans want it now, and they will want it more tomorrow.
 
Diablos said:
Well if the past two desperate McCain "no wait, me too"-isms are an indication:

-The public will be like wtf at first and stay neutral

-The media will jump on it, initially giving the campaign a chance

-A select few gifted individuals in the country will bump the polls a bit to either tie it or let McCain move a couple points ahead of Obama

-Nothing changes for a few days

-Media starts calling McCain out on how stupid his actions actually were

-Not enough people continue to support his decisions and the polls are tied or have Obama leading again.

I think we might be past that stage. While Palin did give McCain a bump, even then Americans realized it was a political move. Now people have totally turned sour on her, and question her qualifications as well as McCain's judgment. This bailout fiasco is another question of that, and I think we might see a swift rejection if the cards are played right - IE Obama doesn't pussy out with weak attacks at the debate ("Americans are tired of that game...those are the politics of the past...I want to be above the fray" fuck that shit), the media continues to hammer McCain and doesn't fall for this bullshit, etc.

He's playing politics with people wallets now. That's a key point that needs to be hammered home tomorrow and into the weekend. The democrats and republicans came to agreement without Obama, Bush, or McCain. Then McCain swooped in with Phil Gramm's wish list in hand
 

adg1034

Member
Xisiqomelir said:
52Bachmann%5B1%5D.jpg


sorry man ;)

GOD FUCKING DAMMIT GET HER OUT OF HERE

Seriously, I have no idea how anyone in our 6th Congressional District was stupid enough to elect her over Patty Wetterling. That's Patty Wetterling, as in the mother of Jacob Wetterling.

I hate my state, sometimes.
 

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
Well, the republicans wanted a free market. This is what happens when the free market collapses.
 

RubxQub

φίλω ἐξεχέγλουτον καί ψευδολόγον οὖκ εἰπόν
speculawyer said:
She's available on podcast too . . . various AA affliliates provide her by podcast.
This wasn't part of her show, she was the anchor giving the breaking news.
 

DenogginizerOS

BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
gkrykewy said:
Most Americans want it now, and they will want it more tomorrow.
I think most Americans have no idea what is going on at this point. Hell, I am trying to understand this myself. Some of these guys may have just put the GOP on the table and played "all-in".
 

Sharp

Member
I don't think anyone wants the bailout, but if we do need one passing it with the same mistakes that led to this situation in the first place is a stupid idea. And of course the bill is simply not going to pass without bipartisan support, no party wants to take the blame for the bill in the likely event that it turns out disastrously.
 
gkrykewy said:
Most Americans want it now, and they will want it more tomorrow.
Most Americans want a fix. Most Americans do not want to spend $700 billion++ of taxpayer money to do it.

There has to be an alternative plan.
 

Xavien

Member
gkrykewy said:
Yes, it will happen. You are wrong - all banks are interconnected. None can operate without the ability to borrow funds from others.

You are thinking long-term - fine.

I am telling you that there is a very real risk of long-term becoming moot next week.

After the dust settles, banks will start lending to each other, ofcourse lending to each other right now is bad, the banks don't really know who is stable and who is not right now. But after a while the market will stabilize and things would return to normal.

I'm saying this bailout would set a very dangerous precedent, short-term the bail-out might be the best solution, but long-term its gonna fuck us up more (but that's Wall Street to a tee, short-term, now now now now!).
 

gkryhewy

Member
DenogginizerOS said:
I think most Americans have no idea what is going on at this point. Hell, I am trying to understand this myself. Some of these guys may have just put the GOP on the table and played "all-in".

This is what happens when an entire contiguous part of the country is functionally retarded, and they elect functional retards to represent them. Just watch the fireworks tomorrow if there's no deal by 9:30 am.
 

Guts Of Thor

Thorax of Odin
DenogginizerOS said:
Most Americans don't want this bailout. Bush proposed it. Dems have tried to push it through. And the Maverick comes on the scene and he and House Repubs save the day. Christ.


I was thinking the same thing. Fuck.

On the bright side(for me anyways) the band I play in has been asked to play at an Obama rally in Oct. Should be fun.
 

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
HamPster PamPster said:
Wait wait wait wait

The Republicans are trying to shove a Capital Gains Tax cut into a $700 billion spending bill

??????
With zero oversight and no new regulations to boot!
 

RubxQub

φίλω ἐξεχέγλουτον καί ψευδολόγον οὖκ εἰπόν
gkrykewy said:
This is what happens when an entire contiguous part of the country is functionally retarded, and they elect functional retards to represent them. Just watch the fireworks tomorrow if there's no deal by 9:30 am.
There will be no deal, everyone went home.
 
NullPointer said:
Most Americans want a fix. Most Americans do not want to spend $700 billion++ of taxpayer money to do it.

There has to be an alternative plan.

This. Especially now that the $700 Billion number is known to have been made up.
 

gkryhewy

Member
Xavien said:
After the dust settles, banks will start lending to each other, ofcourse lending to each other right now is bad, the banks don't really know who is stable and who is not right now. But after a while the market will stabilize and things would return to normal.

I'm saying this bailout would set a very dangerous precedent, short-term the bail-out might be the best solution, but long-term its gonna fuck us up more (but that's Wall Street to a tee, short-term, now now now now!).

Good luck keeping your life in order as the "dust settles."
 

Sharp

Member
Think about it this way: if the bailout is a necessary short-term solution we'll know it within the short term and it will be a huge black mark on McCain's campaign. If it's not, then we will have just saved ourselves a $700 billion bailout bill. From a certain perspective, it's win-win!
 
Xavien said:
You think that will happen? I think banks will do less risky lending, but they won't stop altogether. Look at the banks that are unaffected by this whole crisis (the ones buying up other banks and bits and pieces), they are the banks that didn't get into subprime in the first place.

I don't think you understand how banks work. It's not about risky or not, the banks flat out will have no lending power. The flow of money will come to a complete stop.

Take an example: a consulting company makes money when the clients pay them. However, they must also pay their employees and fund day to day operations even before they are paid by the client. In such a scenario, if a company does not have enough cash on hand, they need to borrow money to keep the company going, with the assumption that when the client pays, they will be able to repay the credit. If no one lends them money, the whole thing comes to a halt. Paychecks aren't issued. Utilities might even be turned off. The whole contraption starts to fall apart.
 

teiresias

Member
I dunno, this whole ordeal is so confusing. The electorate is conflicted on whether it supports this bailout (or is completely against it depending on who's polling you choose to believe), so is it a good or bad thing that this fell apart. Which party is actually supporting it since neither seems to really want credit for it, yet everyone in power seems to feel it's actually necessary.

This is such a damn confusing issue - particularly since it's gotten wrapped up in Presidential politics thanks to McCain. Personally, McCain should be docked points for bringing this issue into the presidential election because it didn't really belong there, at least not when it's fresh and a decision needs to be made on whether to take action or not, and if taken which action to take.
 

aceface

Member
Diablos said:
Well if the past two desperate McCain "no wait, me too"-isms are an indication:

-The public will be like wtf at first and stay neutral

-The media will jump on it, initially giving the campaign a chance

-A select few gifted individuals in the country will bump the polls a bit to either tie it or let McCain move a couple points ahead of Obama

-Nothing changes for a few days

-Media starts calling McCain out on how stupid his actions actually were

-Not enough people continue to support his decisions and the polls are tied or have Obama leading again.

Yeah, but what if he does one right before the election and we only get to step 3. :(
 

RubxQub

φίλω ἐξεχέγλουτον καί ψευδολόγον οὖκ εἰπόν
Anderson Cooper: "When we get back, we'll discuss the Sarah Palin interview with Katie Couric....you've gotta see it to believe it"

:lol
 
John McCain's campaign put out an extraordinary memo just now, denouncing a proposal that, by all accounts, was supported by all parties but the House Republicans, promising to return tomorrow, and casting the debate in serious doubt.

Says the memo from press secretary Brian Rogers:

"Despite today's news reports, there never existed a "deal," but merely a proposal offered by a small, select group of Members of Congress. As of right now, there exists only a series of principles, including greater oversight and measures to address CEO pay. However, these principles do not enjoy a consensus in Congress."

The memo -- after the jump -- also denounces "the plan that has been put forth by the Administration."
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/

He's putting all the chips on the table. This is Game Over for him or Obama.
 
I've never seen Ed Rollins so negative (not overtly... but it speaks a lot coming from him) about McCain and seemingly, however subtlely, positive toward Obama. He's likely my favourite guest commentator on CNN but he seemed different tonight... he seemed frustrated or disapointed with McCain.
 

Trurl

Banned
I am hearing two things about what McCain did today. One (which I heard from Paul Begala) is that at the meeting Obama was able to speak at length about where his party stands, but that McCain basically said nothing until asked to do so directly by Obama and that he really didn't contribute anything.

The other is that he fucked everything up by proposing something about deregulation and tax cuts. Was it McCain himself that proposed this? Because, in my mind, these two things sort of contradict each other. The whole situation is pretty confusing at the moment, all I know is that I'm angry at McCain.:lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom