Support NeoGAF

[MBison]

Oh, he's allowed. We're also allowed to express our opinions on it.

Personal insults included or no?

 

[KHarvey16]

Oh, he's allowed. We're also allowed to express our opinions on it.

Our Chinese overlords will see to this shortly. Enjoy it while it lasts!

 

[RDreamer]

Wait so he's a joke cause he's "a partisan".... Like the dozens of Mitt Romney hidden camera or Fox News sucks lulz threads that get started daily? Are they partisans and jokes also?

Help me RDreamer! I need your wisdom.

He's a joke because he desperately tried to grasp at anything and everything in order to turn a tragedy into some sort of game winning score for his candidate. He had no idea what the details were and kept responding with nothing but "EIGHT FUCKING DAYS!!!!!" Most people understood what was going on there.

 

[Gotchaye]

He's not allowed to post what he believes? Is that just because you don't agree with it?

???

So, first, I wasn't suggesting he be banned, and I don't think anyone else was either.

And, no. I thought it was really obvious from what I posted that I was making a distinction between people/posts I disagree with and people/posts I don't respect. Was I actually unclear about that?

 

[FINALBOSS]

Been posted yet? I love this video--from Romney's Ohio rally. Interviews with some people there.


The answers these fuckers give rofl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nY0M7IdNl7U

 

[heliosRAzi]

He's not allowed to post what he believes? Is that just because you don't agree with it?

Oh, he's allowed. We're also allowed to express our opinions on it.

Or are you one of those "FREE SPEECH MEANS YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CRITICIZE WHAT I SAY!!!" people?

Yeah, I hate it when people say "He's just expressing his opinion" like it's a sacred text and can't be criticized. If he can expresses his views or opinions, we can express our views or opinions about them. That's how discussion works

 

[Fantastical]

Been posted yet? I love this video--from Romney's Ohio rally. Interviews with some people there.


The answers these fuckers give rofl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nY0M7IdNl7U

These videos make me cringe.

 

[Hawkian]

Yeah, I hate it when people say "He's just expressing his opinion" like it's a sacred text and can't be criticized. If he can expresses his views or opinions, we can express our views or opinions about them. That's how discussion works

i think this opinion sucks and you're terrible

 

[heliosRAzi]

i think this opinion sucks and you're terrible

Well I like your opinion and agree with it.

 

[SteveWinwood]

i think this opinion sucks and you're terrible

NO FUCK YOU GET BANNED

 

[pigeon]

IOWA

Polls close: 10 pm ET

Pundits say:

Why is a state with only six electoral votes getting such attention? It’s a swing state in every sense of the word. First, Iowa has an approximately equal number of registered Republicans and registered Democrats. Second, it is one of the most elastic states, with a large swath of unaffiliated voters who are persuadable, and could plausibly vote for either Mr. Obama or Mr. Romney.

Iowa’s competitiveness is partly a function of demographics, but the state’s current political dynamic is also a consequence of Iowa’s prominent role in the presidential nominating process, according to Mr. Yepsen. “The caucuses have helped contribute to the creation of a healthy two-party system,” he said. “Every four years, one party or the other or both, was really doing some intense grass-roots political work.”1

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...racially-homogeneous-but-politically-diverse/

The pundits have sure struggled to get a handle on Iowa this year. In the spring, NBC News classified the state as “Lean Romney” because the disappointment of the Obama presidency was apparently felt most acutely in the state where expectations were highest. Of course, there was never any data to back up the assertion that Iowa leaned Romney, and eventually the state moved back into the toss-up column. After NBC/Marist and other pollsters showed Obama with a growing lead in September, the conventional wisdom on Iowa shifted again—and seemingly strong early voting numbers for Democrats reinforced that view. Then yesterday, Politico reported that Priorities USA internal polling shows a one point race in Iowa—probably Obama’s worst result with respect to expectations—leaving the pundits baffled again by Iowa’s elusiveness. But there’s not much of a mystery about Iowa. It's close and it should be close.

The state is overwhelmingly white and Obama is extremely dependent on the support of white working class voters. Nationally, Obama has suffered considerable losses among these voters, and he has also suffered considerable losses among them in Iowa. And if Democratic caucus-goers held a special connection with the president, it didn’t extend to the general electorate. Obama won Iowa by nearly 10 points in 2008—a fine performance, but hardly exceptional. Bush won Iowa by less 1 point in 2008, so Obama’s 10-point improvement there was exactly the same as Obama’s 10-point improvement nationally. Put differently: there was nothing special about Obama’s performance in Iowa.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/electionate/109363/theres-nothing-wrong-iowa

Early voting: Iowa's early voting began way back at the end of September. To date, 41.5% of the 2008 electorate has cast an early vote, up from 36% back then. Democratic party advantage is down to 10 points from 16 -- but given that Obama won by ten points in 2008, that's still a good sign for him.

Voter ID: Iowa's legislature is still considering passing voter ID, so we won't be seeing it this year.

Polls say: 538 gives Obama an 81% chance to win Iowa with a 2.9-point margin -- it's basically lined up next to Ohio. The RealClearPolitics average suggests a 2.4-point margin instead.

Watch for: The bellwether. If Cohn's analysis above is accurate, Iowa's very close to being representative of America, politically speaking -- so the margin of victory in Iowa should give us a pretty good hint at the national margins. If Obama wins Iowa quickly (suggesting a decent margin), he'll probably have a pretty sizable chunk of the national vote as well -- and if we're going to see a PV/EV split, Iowa might be a good state to let us know.

edit:: As 538 switches to suggesting a 3-4 point PV margin for Obama, it's also switched to suggesting a 3.4-point margin in Iowa, with an 86% chance of winning.

 

[FINALBOSS]

These videos make me cringe.

I know but they are so fascinating to watch.

It's like going to a people zoo.

 

[Hunter S.]

Pigeon's post on Colorado is awesome. It could not have described me better as an Indy. Of course, I would never vote red.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

Personal insults included or no?

Why do you want people to be unable to express their opinions? "Tolerance" my ass, amirite guys?

 

[Pctx]

http://dels.nas.edu/Materials/Report-In-Brief/4323-ACC-Final
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

Frabricaded bullshit. I thought people got the memos.

 

[Fantastical]

I know but they are so fascinating to watch.

It's like going to a people zoo.

I almost wish the guy wouldn't challenge them. He says "Mhmmm... yep" and then asks them to back up their statement and I almost want to turn off the video at that point. It's so damn awkward. Also, I remember in some of the past ones he would ask some people to back up their statements and one person gave an answer that was basically "I actually don't even really believe in conservative values... why the fuck am I here?"

 

[CoffeeJanitor]

Frabricaded bullshit. I thought people got the memos.

Pctx: confirmed troll

 

[Evlar]

Frabricaded bullshit. I thought people got the memos.

That's it? That's all you have to say?

Well. Welcome to ignore.

 

[Stumpokapow]

This is a weird trivia question -- taking into account all levels of politics (Presidential vote, Senates, House delegation, State governor, State Lt Gov, State Secretary of State, State House, State Senate, any other relevant factors like partisan municipal elections) -- which state is the most dominated by a single party, today?

I think the answer is Connecticut, but I'm not sure. Vermont and Utah throw up bigger margins, but Vermont has a (R) Lt Gov and Utah has a Democratic house member.

Connecticut:
- 60%-39% Obama in 2008
- D Gov
- D Lt Gov
- D Secretary of State
- Close to D supermajority in State House
- D Supermajority in State Senate
- 5xD in House of Representatives
- 2xD in Senate (and has been since 1990)

 

[Pctx]

Pctx: confirmed troll

What role does climate play in this election, please I'd love to know.

 

[speedline]

It feels like this thread is turning into Dr. Sheldon Cooper's Fun with Flags.

 

[Trigger]

Been posted yet? I love this video--from Romney's Ohio rally. Interviews with some people there.


The answers these fuckers give rofl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nY0M7IdNl7U

I love these videos. Awkward, but honest.

 

[HylianTom]

Man. We're getting salty already, even before Ohio is called for Our President? Haha. Delicious.

 

[Gary Whitta]

The words fabricated bullshit and the Romney avatar complement one another perfectly.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

What role does climate play in this election, please I'd love to know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZENtH3psXl4

 

[Karl2177]

I'm glad I live in a swing state for one reason: I know my vote matters. Also, I'm one of those early Iowa voters.

 

[legacyzero]

If it hasn't been posted.

Epid Rap Battles of History: Mitt vs Barack

 

[MidgarBlowedUp]

Frabricaded bullshit. I thought people got the memos.

Ah, so you are one of those people that believes Hurricane Katrina and Sandy were "created" by the government's Weather Dominator. That explains why so many people were laid off and forced to buy COBRA health insurance, they had to fund it somehow.

 

[RDreamer]

So Bushes plan lead by Bush huh? Romney is a little higher up the IQ chain than W.

So you're saying the plan itself was good, but it didn't work because Bush was an idiot? Alright, that's a new argument...

2ndly, no... why should I and why do you? This all ties into our debt and how we will not have money to pay for such fluff in the coming years because by default it is bankrupting us for paying for shit we cannot afford.

Look, if a society can't at least give you the minimum amount of healthcare you need, especially when you're in your old age and you've contributed to it, then it's a shit society. We band together to help the least of us, and if we can't even do that then game over.

We can do it. We have the real resources (people want jobs, and these are jobs!) to do it. We also can afford it. Even if you look at our national debt in the false way and think you have to actually pay that scorecard number off, you can fix social security through a few tweaks like lifting the cap. Hell, both Mitt and Obama don't seem to think social security is that broke, so I'm not sure why you're trying to say it. Medicare could be fixed through universal healthcare. Also, we can help it by letting it bargain with drug companies for better prices.

To your point about old people dying in the streets, such hyperbole that it's a joke.

When social security was implemented the poverty rate of the elderly was above 50%.

So how is Obama's plan different from Romney's?

Well for one it's actual legislation that the tax policy center doesn't say is impossible. He also doesn't start a deficit reduction plan by lowering tax rates by 20%....

Obama's plan is more of an all-in approach. He raises taxes on some of the wealthy, and cuts spending in spots where we can afford it (like the "cut" to medicare which was really just us paying out too much). He cuts defense compared to Romney (though he should go further on this). He cuts taxes to small business. He invests in future energy technologies that also mean jobs here that can't be outsourced.

Romney's tax plan just doesn't work. Until he tells us which of his points he'll give up on it, or specifically which loopholes he actually wants to close, I can't really comment on how good or bad it'll be. It's kind of like guessing what's behind the mystery door.

 

[indigo-cyclops]

Any NYers; what's the deal with this Executive order Cuomo signed? I'm reading that is allows NYers to vote at any polling place, but further reading reveals that it's for voters affected by Sandy (NYC voters, and rightfully so). I ask because one of my professors sent the link saying that we would get a "free pass" from class tomorrow if we vote and "show proof"; problem is is I'm not registered in this county. Would be very convenient if I could vote here and not have to drive to registered county.

I didn't want to deal with absentee ballot, but thinking now I should have.

 

[Pctx]

Ah, so you are one of those people that believes Hurricane Katrina and Sandy were "created" by the government's Weather Dominator. That explains why so many people were laid off and forced to buy COBRA health insurance, they had to fund it somehow.

What the fuck?

 

[B-Dubs]

Any NYers; what's the deal with this Executive order Cuomo signed? I'm reading that is allows NYers to vote at any polling place, but further reading reveals that it's for voters affected by Sandy (NYC voters, and rightfully so). I ask because one of my professors sent the link saying that we would get a "free pass" from class tomorrow if we vote and "show proof"; problem is is I'm not registered in this county. Would be very convenient if I could vote here and not have to drive to registered county.

I didn't want to deal with absentee ballot, but thinking now I should have.

If your area was affected by Sandy (you're polling place got destroyed or you can't get to it or whatever) you can go vote at a location that you can get to. A lot of polling places in NYC got changed due to the storm so it's just go vote wherever you can find an open place.

 

[C.Dark.DN]

What the fuck?

I haven't read your arguments, but just to chime in certain Ron Paul supporters had weather manipulation conspiracy theories.

 

[RDreamer]

I haven't read your arguments, but just to chime in certain Ron Paul supporters had weather manipulation conspiracy theories.

Seriously? Lol

 

[C.Dark.DN]

Seriously? Lol

yeah there's you tube videos with people freaking out. It peaked around the Japan incident.

 

[Pctx]

So you're saying the plan itself was good, but it didn't work because Bush was an idiot? Alright, that's a new argument...



Look, if a society can't at least give you the minimum amount of healthcare you need, especially when you're in your old age and you've contributed to it, then it's a shit society. We band together to help the least of us, and if we can't even do that then game over.

We can do it. We have the real resources (people want jobs, and these are jobs!) to do it. We also can afford it. Even if you look at our national debt in the false way and think you have to actually pay that scorecard number off, you can fix social security through a few tweaks like lifting the cap. Hell, both Mitt and Obama don't seem to think social security is that broke, so I'm not sure why you're trying to say it. Medicare could be fixed through universal healthcare. Also, we can help it by letting it bargain with drug companies for better prices.



When social security was implemented the poverty rate of the elderly was above 50%.



Well for one it's actual legislation that the tax policy center doesn't say is impossible. He also doesn't start a deficit reduction plan by lowering tax rates by 20%....

Obama's plan is more of an all-in approach. He raises taxes on some of the wealthy, and cuts spending in spots where we can afford it (like the "cut" to medicare which was really just us paying out too much). He cuts defense compared to Romney (though he should go further on this). He cuts taxes to small business. He invests in future energy technologies that also mean jobs here that can't be outsourced.

Romney's tax plan just doesn't work. Until he tells us which of his points he'll give up on it, or specifically which loopholes he actually wants to close, I can't really comment on how good or bad it'll be. It's kind of like guessing what's behind the mystery door.

You taxing the wealthy is a shell game that no one can win right? I don't get why people think that is going to work.

To my first point, the executer of the plan is different, therefore by default we will get a different result. Not withstanding that the environmental factors of the economy are different, it'll work... We may disagree on that but more people working = more taxes coming in which gives us more spending power per dollar.

 

[indigo-cyclops]

If your area was affected by Sandy (you're polling place got destroyed or you can't get to it or whatever) you can go vote at a location that you can get to. A lot of polling places in NYC got changed due to the storm so it's just go vote wherever you can find an open place.

That's what I thought. Thank you.

 

[SteveWinwood]

You taxing the wealthy is a shell game that no one can win right? I don't get why people think that is going to work.

To my first point, the executer of the plan is different, therefore by default we will get a different result. Not withstanding that the environmental factors of the economy are different, it'll work... We may disagree on that but more people working = more taxes coming in which gives us more spending power per dollar.

If our plan is to go to the airport, do you think picking two different drivers will really get you two different places?

 

[-PXG-]

Raaaaaaaaaaaaaage tiem

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nY0M7IdNl7U

I'm seriously shaking. How in the hell do you breed ignorance this severe? Jesus.

 

[Pctx]

If our plan is to go to the airport, do you think picking two different drivers will really get you two different places?

Private jet or coach ticket?

 

[Xplatformer]

Been posted yet? I love this video--from Romney's Ohio rally. Interviews with some people there.


The answers these fuckers give rofl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nY0M7IdNl7U

"was his father a muslim, a communist or an atheist?"
" he was all three"

LOL

 

[Gary Whitta]

Raaaaaaaaaaaaaage tiem

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nY0M7IdNl7U

I'm seriously shaking. How in the hell do you breed ignorance this severe? Jesus.

When I watch that video benevolent dictatorship doesn't seem quite so bad.

 

[RDreamer]

You taxing the wealthy is a shell game that no one can win right? I don't get why people think that is going to work.

And letting inequality grow and grow like it has the last ~30 years is a game we all lose.

And I don't get what's not going to "work" about it? The levels Obama is doing are barely a fucking scratch, so sure it isn't going to do a lot, but it's not nearly as bad as what Romney is proposing, like eliminating the estate tax...

 

[Gary Whitta]

Silver has Obama at 91.4% now.

 

[DrForester]

 

[Felix Lighter]

Raaaaaaaaaaaaaage tiem

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=nY0M7IdNl7U

I'm seriously shaking. How in the hell do you breed ignorance this severe? Jesus.

That is the republican base that will drag the party into irrelevance. At some point the GOP will be forced to abandon them.

 

[Amir0x]

So Bushes plan lead by Bush huh? Romney is a little higher up the IQ chain than W.

I just wanted to try to seriously address something for a moment here, beneath the piling on. Because the shallow talking point is "Romney's 5 point plan is the same as Bush's." This is absolutely not the important thing at issue here. And we'll put aside that you think Romney is a "leader", for the moment, considering the way he has run his campaign at every step of the game save for the first debate.

Here is Romney's so-called 5 point plan. Because of how ridiculous it is to suggest it actually IS a plan, I'd suggest we walk you through it.

Part one of Mitt’s plan is to achieve energy independence on this continent by 2020. America is blessed with extraordinary natural resources, and developing them will create millions of good jobs – not only in the energy industry, but also in industries like manufacturing that will benefit from more energy at lower prices. America’s economy will boom when the billions of dollars we send overseas for our oil are kept here at home instead.

Here is what this says: WE NEED TO DEVELOP OUR ENERGY RESOURCES. Let's put aside that aggressive development of our resources has surged during the Obama administration for a second. What exactly is the detail in this plan that tells us HOW Romney is going to exploit our resources? What is he, in his role of president, going to do to expedite this process? Is he going to give yet more tax breaks to oil companies? Is he going to try to approach any of the green resources we have? Is he going to accelerate natural gas production (it's already at record highs) or drill more (we're already drilling at record levels)?

This is not a "plan." It's a vague reference to a positive thing that most people would probably nod their head about if they didn't really dig any deeper. It's a bell ring.

Part two of the plan is trade that works for America. Mitt believes that trade can offer enormous opportunities for American businesses and workers, but only if they are given a level playing field on which they can compete and win. That is why he will work to open new markets for American goods and services, while also confronting nations like China that cheat on trade and steal American jobs.

This is even more ridiculous. What, precisely, does "trade that works for America" mean? Can you explain it to me? Ah-Ah-Ah... not yet. Explain it to me without bringing any of your own ideas into your head, and only the details provided in the 5 point plan. Let's see... "Level the playing field" (Read: How?), "Work to Open new markets" (Read: How?), "Confront China" (Read: How? Specifically, how is he going to do this any differently than Obama, which has been extremely success in leveling tariffs against China?). This is once again not a plan, it's a positive assertion of a GOAL. Everyone has these goals! It's not a fucking plan.

Part three is to provide Americans with the skills to succeed through better public schools, better access to higher education, and better retraining programs that help to match unemployed workers with real-world job opportunities.

This shit is fucking hilarious. Guys guys, I'm running for president. My plan is BETTER SCHOOLS, MORE ACCESS, BETTER TRAINING, BETTER EVERYTHING! The way I will do this is magic. Black magic! Again, this is not a plan. It's a goal. It's the vaguest, most ridiculously obvious, pie-in-the-sky goal ever in history. Romney can no more achieve this goal than the boil on my ass can; he knows as well as everyone else that the only way to tackle this is with spending, and he's already promised TAX CUTS FOR EVERYONE while simultaneously promising no rise in the deficit, so obviously this shit is off the goddamn table. Even as a wish!

Part four is to cut the deficit, reducing the size of government and getting the national debt under control so that America remains a place where businesses want to open up shop and hire.

More not-a-plan nonsense. Reciting Republican talking points does not a plan make. As every objective analysis of Romney's ACTUAL legitimate tax plan knows, there is no possible way he can do what he says and cut the deficit. Nor is there any possible way he can do what he says and reduce the size of the government, even as we just explode the size of our military. These are not plans. It's an affirmation of a goal he wants to achieve, with absolutely no detail whatsoever. And heck, you can even look at the more detailed version of his jobs plan - one, it's demonstrably clear it will raise the deficit and increase the size of the government. But putting that aside, it's also clear his more "detailed plan" doesn't even address the majority of the other 4 points!

Finally, part five of Mitt’s plan is to champion small business. Small businesses are the engine of job creation in this country, but they will struggle to succeed if taxes and regulations are too burdensome or if a government in Washington does its best to stifle them. Mitt will pursue comprehensive tax reform that lowers tax rates for all Americans, and he will cut back on the red tape that drives up costs and discourages hiring.

Ah, he will "champion" small businesses, quite unlike the man who cut taxes on small businesses some 14 times in these 4 years. But who cares? This is actually more vague nonsense from Romney. It once again restates the talking points - REGULATIONS AND TAXES ARE BAD - and then says the ultimate throwaway line... "Mitt will pursue comprehensive tax reform that lowers tax rates for all Americans." Do you know how loaded that term is? It means nothing. Looking at his more "detailed" plan, it means even more of nothing. He just states he will do it. How? What aspects of the tax code will he reform? Flat tax? How much? Who? What? Where? How? He changes his mind, by the way, on how he will approach this some two dozen times this election cycle, so if you have the definitive answer on this I'd actually like to know.





Long story short, Pctx, it's not that you support Romney. It's that you support him with absolutely no self-awareness whatsoever. You support him just because it feels right, and Obama feels wrong. You don't actually know a fucking thing you're talking about.

 

[SteveWinwood]

Private jet or coach ticket?

Which has to do with...

edit: woah go easy on him ami he's just an independent

 

[IJoel]

I just finished looking up the judge races in my state. All set to vote tomorrow morning.

 

[Anno]

Until today I hadn't received a single call from a Democrat-based pollster and probably 10 Republican calls. Just in the last five hours I've received 3 of each. Feels good to be in the middle of the battle!