US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes they do. Their party is the Democrats.

If you believe that the Democratic party have anything other than a superficial interest in Occupy or their goals you are very naive.

As long as the Democrats rely on corporate money to compete with Republicans the party will serve corporate interests.

The Tea Party supports policies that benefit corporate donors ergo they get a seat at the table.
 
Random Dumb Hypothetical Question of the Day

If you had to choose between United winning the Treble, and Obama getting re-elected - which would you choose?
 
If you believe that the Democratic party have anything other than a superficial interest in Occupy or their goals you are very naive.

As long as the Democrats rely on corporate money to compete with Republicans the party will serve corporate interests.

The Tea Party supports policies that benefit corporate donors ergo they get a seat at the table.

Put it this way. Imagine if the Occupiers got bored of their drum circles and decided to vote in the election. Ignore the irrelevant third parties, which of the two do you think would get the vast majority of votes? Watch the coverage, whose side is Olbermann/Maddow/O'Donnell on? Whose side is Hannity/Beck/O'Reilly on?

It's a waste of time to argue that the Occupy movement is not related to Democratic interests (or whatever phrasing). They obviously are.
 
[T]he last-minute nature of the call for donations left some in the campaign concerned that they would end up with an empty truck. So the night before the event, campaign aides went to a local Wal-Mart and spent $5,000 on granola bars, canned food, and diapers to put on display while they waited for donations to come in, according to one staffer. (The campaign confirmed that it "did donate supplies to the relief effort," but would not specify how much it spent.)

As supporters lined up to greet the candidate, a young volunteer in a Romney/Ryan T-shirt stood near the tables, his hands cupped around his mouth, shouting, "You need a donation to get in line!" Empty-handed supporters pled for entrance, with one woman asking, "What if we dropped off our donations up front?" The volunteer gestured toward a pile of groceries conveniently stacked near the candidate. "Just grab something," he said. Two teenage boys retrieved a jar of peanut butter each, and got in line. When it was their turn, they handed their "donations" to Romney. He took them, smiled, and offered an earnest "Thank you."
..
 
Put it this way. Imagine if the Occupiers got bored of their drum circles and decided to vote in the election. Ignore the irrelevant third parties, which of the two do you think would get the vast majority of votes? Watch the coverage, whose side is Olbermann/Maddow/O'Donnell on? Whose side is Hannity/Beck/O'Reilly on?

It's a waste of time to argue that the Occupy movement is not related to Democratic interests (or whatever phrasing). They obviously are.

Why ignore the 'irrelevant' third parties? If they genuinely represent their concerns then the Occupy movement could be a substantial asset to these parties if they rallied their votes towards them.

You're essentially equating Occupy with The Democrat party because they see them as the lesser of two evils when compared to the GOP. That doesn't equate to them representing their interests. The Democrat party are as much a corporate tool as the GOP is, and its that status quo which the Occupy movement object to, (amongst other things).
 
If you had to choose between United winning the Treble, and Obama getting re-elected - which would you choose?

Obama! I think he'll genuinely go down as an excellent president if he's re-elected.
 
They obviously are.

only in a superficial way.

The democrats run to the left to pick up votes from their base at election time, but govern from the centre or centre-right- with the exception of social issues. Not as extreme as Republicans but nowhere near representing Occupy.

Watch it- when Obama gets reelected he will lower corporate taxes, cut entitlements and not cut military spending (beyond the drop in spending from ending the wars).

If he gets a couple of % tax increases on the top rate It'll be very interesting what he has to 'compromise' to get it- probably funding for the EPA or another regulatory body- maybe not get rid of some corporate tax loopholes or so on.
 
:lol: Liberal love-in. I'm glad you can predict the future.

If it weren't for the economy - and he's already done a fair bit to prevent a second Great Depression - that opinion wouldn't really be widely contested.

Getting healthcare passed (which even Clinton couldn't manage) is among the bigger legislative achievements of any President.
 
If you had to choose between United winning the Treble, and Obama getting re-elected - which would you choose?

The treble. Obama hasn't impressed me, had this been 2008 I would have picked Obama a million times over.
 
Jaz is slightly to the right of Skeletor in fairness.
 
The treble. Obama hasn't impressed me, had this been 2008 I would have picked Obama a million times over.

Fair enough. What could he have done differently over the past four years to change your opinion?
 
Dick Morris predicts 5-10 point popular vote win for Romney and 300+ electoral vote win.

I wonder how he'll weasel out of it when he's proven wrong.
 
That's actually insane.

Reading his site is... amusing. Particularly reading the comments section (which is done via Facebook). A guy named Ricardo Davila explains to Rick how he's wrong, and ol' American Dick Walker retorts:

Davila, you're getting nervious aren't you? Maybe you should pray Romney leaves you a few food stamps to feed your 15 children. Get ready to go to work pal the gravy train in coming to a stop and your getting off.


Dwight Weidman, who is the Chairman for the Franklin County Republican Party gets right to the hot topic on the NYT polls:

Polls such as these are nothing more than attempts at voter suppression.


It goes on and on.


Dick, I also pray you are correct. I cannot stomach the muslim at 1600 another month....

I have 5 friends who never voted, all are voting this time for Romney>LANDSLIDE.

Please God, make Dick Morris a prophet and ensure that his predictions are right. I believe them and continue to cling to his optimism. I pray every day that Romney wins. 4 more years of Obama and this country is truly ruined.

God does care who wins this election. He does not want another socialist/neo-communist gov't elected again.

This is actually better than RAWK. I can't wait to read all of these sites when Obama wins.
 
Fair enough. What could he have done differently over the past four years to change your opinion?

Foreign policy and civil liberties were issues I think he turned his back on. More specifically its his drone attacks, diplomatic vetoing of resolutions against WB colonisation, him turning back on closing down Gitmo, and failing to repeal the Patriot Act.

I don't have a problem with him personally, but I'm now convinced that neither of the two parties can produce a president who upholds their own genuine views when in office. Thats just my opinion though.
 
That's actually insane.

Some members of Romney's campaign staff were saying similar things talking to the press earlier on. Romney to win by double digits in Florida, good chances to win states like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Minnesota, 300 EVs.

It's either: a massive desperate bluff; widespread delusion; a planned conspiracy that has directed Republican voters not to answer pollsters for the last year or so. It's slightly concerning that I consider all three of those options possible.
 
Foreign policy and civil liberties were issues I think he turned his back on. More specifically its his drone attacks, diplomatic vetoing of resolutions against WB colonisation, him turning back on closing down Gitmo, and failing to repeal the Patriot Act.

I don't have a problem with him personally, but I'm now convinced that neither of the two parties can produce a president who upholds their own genuine views when in office. Thats just my opinion though.

Civil liberties, the Patriot Act, and the WB, I agree with you on. Re Gitmo, he didn't have the votes in Congress. Conservative Dems who feared for their re-election used it as an opportunity to signal to their districts that they didn't support the big, scary, black man.

Drones is a more tricky issue for me. While I come down as quite a bit to the left of Jill Stein on that graph, I do support the use of drones. That said, I'm appalled by how they've been used indiscriminately and with the labelling of any males in the target areas as 'enemy combatants.' Al-Awlaki I'm fine with though.
 
Some members of Romney's campaign staff were saying similar things talking to the press earlier on. Romney to win by double digits in Florida, good chances to win states like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Minnesota, 300 EVs.

It's either: a massive desperate bluff; widespread delusion; a planned conspiracy that has directed Republican voters not to answer pollsters for the last year or so. It's slightly concerning that I consider all three of those options possible.

His reasoning was that all the swing state polls are using 2008 level turnout and turnout will be nowhere near that. He did his own calcs so he says, by averaging out the turnout over the last 4 elections and Romney wins these states by 5-8 points.

His performance was very convincing. If you weren't a clued up watcher like most Fox News watchers you'd believe him.
 
Civil liberties, the Patriot Act, and the WB, I agree with you on. Re Gitmo, he didn't have the votes in Congress. Conservative Dems who feared for their re-election used it as an opportunity to signal to their districts that they didn't support the big, scary, black man.

Drones is a more tricky issue for me. While I come down as quite a bit to the left of Jill Stein on that graph, I do support the use of drones. That said, I'm appalled by how they've been used indiscriminately and with the labelling of any males in the target areas as 'enemy combatants.' Al-Awlaki I'm fine with though.

I'm certainly not sad to see Al-Awlaki go, but its the dangerous precedence his killing set which I think liberty-conscious Americans should be concerned with. This has essentially created a precedent where any US citizen can be simply taken out if the government's deems it to be necessary.
 
His reasoning was that all the swing state polls are using 2008 level turnout and turnout will be nowhere near that. He did his own calcs so he says, by averaging out the turnout over the last 4 elections and Romney wins these states by 5-8 points.

His performance was very convincing. If you weren't a clued up watcher like most Fox News watchers you'd believe him.

Yup, it's the same process that unskewedpolls.com uses (and gets widely mocked for). Rasmussen does something similar with its own samples.
 
Yeah, I keep hearing from Republicans who are convinced that they'll win a landslide victory, and they keep citing this 2008 level turnout in polls.

They've set themselves up for a tremendous fall though, so it'll be funny if the Mittster loses.
 
Word.

Jon Chait had nice summaries of his take on the two candidates today. Though the Romney one's a bit of a stretch, by the end he's basically accusing him of going bonkers.

The Case for Obama: Why He Is a Great President. Yes, Great

The Case Against Romney: At Heart, He’s a Delusional One-Percenter

Superb pieces, and I think he's the on the money about Romney.

Incidentally, these do not show up in my Author page bookmark. It's now got me paranoid that I've missed a bunch of his posts.
 
Dick Morris predicts 5-10 point popular vote win for Romney and 300+ electoral vote win.

I wonder how he'll weasel out of it when he's proven wrong.

His face and voice make me think of Whoopi Goldberg in The Associate



EDIT: Could some kind soul tell me how to fix the YouTube link...
 
His face and voice make me think of Whoopi Goldberg in The Associate



EDIT: Could some kind soul tell me how to fix the YouTube link...


It's just the mental letters after the "v=" you put between the tags, in this case "OD8VmrzqZwM".

Surprised 538 hasn't ticked up much today, although I suppose the polls have just been confirming more or less the gaps of before.
 
Word.

Jon Chait had nice summaries of his take on the two candidates today. Though the Romney one's a bit of a stretch, by the end he's basically accusing him of going bonkers.

The Case for Obama: Why He Is a Great President. Yes, Great

The Case Against Romney: At Heart, He’s a Delusional One-Percenter

Puff piece. Obama is the preferred choice as he's not Romney, but a Great President? The best President of our lifetime?Please. Barack ain't even the best President since 1992.
 
If you had to choose between United winning the Treble, and Obama getting re-elected - which would you choose?

The Treble was improbable enough, so why choose. I would have both! Though I think Obama will win much easier that the multiple squeaky bum/cardiac arrest moments of 99.
 
[T]he last-minute nature of the call for donations left some in the campaign concerned that they would end up with an empty truck. So the night before the event, campaign aides went to a local Wal-Mart and spent $5,000 on granola bars, canned food, and diapers to put on display while they waited for donations to come in, according to one staffer. (The campaign confirmed that it "did donate supplies to the relief effort," but would not specify how much it spent.)

Quote:
As supporters lined up to greet the candidate, a young volunteer in a Romney/Ryan T-shirt stood near the tables, his hands cupped around his mouth, shouting, "You need a donation to get in line!" Empty-handed supporters pled for entrance, with one woman asking, "What if we dropped off our donations up front?" The volunteer gestured toward a pile of groceries conveniently stacked near the candidate. "Just grab something," he said. Two teenage boys retrieved a jar of peanut butter each, and got in line. When it was their turn, they handed their "donations" to Romney. He took them, smiled, and offered an earnest "Thank you."

Sooo fake all the way around.
 
I'm certainly not sad to see Al-Awlaki go, but its the dangerous precedence his killing set which I think liberty-conscious Americans should be concerned with. This has essentially created a precedent where any US citizen can be simply taken out if the government's deems it to be necessary.

I'm a bit curious regarding this comment. Why should "liberty-conscious Americans" be particularly concerned that a US citizen can be "taken out"? That is, assuming that you mean it as opposed to a non-American citizen being taken out.

I'm not objecting to the selective take-out of national security threats. I really never reflected much on the matter to have an opinion. I'm just wondering how (if that's the case) can someone be of the opinion that it it's more legitimate to assassinate foreigners than national citizens.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.