2012 US Election thread - slowly going nowhere

**Grim** · 2012-04-12

Hey guys, America is under thread from communists again:

At a town hall meeting with constituents in Jensen Beach, West was asked how many members of Congress are "card-carrying Marxists."

According to CNN affiliate WPEC, West responded, "I believe there's about 78 to 81 members of the Democratic Party that are members of the Communist Party."

West was suggested as a possible GOP vice presidential nominee last week by the party's most recent nominee, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...as-communists/

**Bill Schwartzski** · 2012-04-12

The doubling down never gets old. They're realizing they can't demonize women, gays, or minorities anymore; so they're headed toward straight McCarthyism.

**Rer** · 2012-04-12

Originally Posted by Don Peyote

The US performs altruistic actions all the time (US Aid contributions are pretty high), but it rarely goes to war for altruistic reasons - no country does.

Its funny that you mention this because our aid contributions in comparison to the rest of the world are actually pretty abysmal.

**T'Renn** · 2012-04-12

honestly and I'm not trying to troll here but I can't think of a single VP candidate that helps Romney enough at this point. Each potential one has a myriad of electability issues, and some are flat-out retarded. I honestly think that Jeb Bush is his best choice but I know that won't happen because everyone in the GOP is skeered of the Bush name even though one was elected for president 3 times over the past 25 years. Plus Jeb is definitely not his brother and wouldn't lose in a debate to Biden (who is not a very good debater) like Palin did last cycle. Chris Christie and Marco Rubio don't want it, and some re-tread would be a bad idea because people are already meh about Romney in the first place. I just don't see the benefit to the ticket of putting some unknown on the ballot when they've tried that already with horrible results. I'm not one of those liberals who thinks Obama wins going away anymore -- i was before but I believe that the idiots in this country will vote for anyone, and I know Obama is vulnerable in some areas. That's why I put Jeb Bush next to Mitt Romney, because that way the GOP members can look to him and go "yeah we've got Mitt who we really don't like, but Jeb makes it a better ticket (for whatever reason.)" and go out and vote, rather than stay home because of ho hum Mitt. He just doesn't energize anyone. Not like Obama. He needs someone to help mobilize the base of the party and none of the names bandied about so far in serious consideration really do that for him. That is of course except for Paul Ryan. Ryan is very young however and his proposed economic "plan" is a boondoggle that neuters Social Security and Medicare. You just can't win in Florida running on a platform of reduced Medicare.

**Arrador** · 2012-04-12

Jeb won't accept VP.

**Tyrael** · 2012-04-12

Ron Paul for middleground voters

**T'Renn** · 2012-04-12

Originally Posted by Arrador

Jeb won't accept VP.

probably not, but he may be convinced if given a persuasive argument for "do it for the party, Jeb." Obviously he'd rather take his chances against whoever in 2016, but stranger things have happened. I will say that if Romney goes with a no-name candidate then he knows already he has no chance.

**jimmychrist** · 2012-04-12

I don't think Representative West really knows much about communism, communists, or indeed common sense.

**Manfred Hideous** · 2012-04-12

Originally Posted by Tyrael

Ron Paul for middleground voters

He would actually be one of the better choices. He's pretty good at speaking and holds enough differing views from Romney that people who are repulsed by the masshole would MAYBE have their doubts allayed.

**T'Renn** · 2012-04-12

West is another sad reminder of how there are 535 members of congress and a good number of them are absolute imbeciles. Less in the Senate obviously, but apparently all you have to do to win the primary for the GOP in your district is say you'll tow the line drawn by the talking points or teabag it up. Look at that Wertzlenbarger (or whatever) guy -- "Joe the Plumber." This guy is so dumb and it's obvious he has no new ideas and no clue. Is he going to win his district in Ohio? I don't think so, but thanks to some good ol' fashioned gerrymandering by the GOP, Captur and Kucinich had to duke it out for one seat between them in a primary last winter. Captur won and so now she goes up against that moron. Thing is, she won by going super negative on Kucinich, which is a pretty shitty thing to do considering it's Kucinich. Alas, she's the best the Dems have to offer out there, and she's a damn sight better than that stupid bald fuck. Get out the vote, Cuyahoga Falls.

Ultimately, it's not the downright stupidity of these politicians which is the enemy of democracy, but the stupidity of the voters who would vote for them.

**Rer** · 2012-04-13

What about Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana? Different race, can play the "hurting economic woes" card, nothing overtly offensive or crazy about him either as far as I can tell.

**Iratus** · 2012-04-13

Originally Posted by poaw

I am almost certain that you have a national government somewhere in Columbia. They are the one's who decided that putting teenagers in jail for downloading "Pink Friday" was a worth it for a trade agreement with the US. I'm almost equally certain that few, if any, Americans voted those Colombian politicians into office. Therefore it remains your problem what your elected government does.

You know, as long as a country doesn't have oil, it's pretty trivial to tell the US (and the rest of the western world) to fuck off. Whatever influence one country has on another outside of open warfare is because the country being influenced allows it to happen. Instead of complaining about the big mean yankees, you should be identifying the reasons the US has leverage in your country and working to eliminate them.

Hell if you legalized the production of cocaine in your country and taxed it you'd probably end up as the #2 economy in North/South America overnight. As a fringe benefit you wouldn't need the US to give you shit and would be free to pursue a nuclear weapons program or put your flag on the Mars or build the Hanging Gardens or whatever.

And the Kony thing wasn't even the US, the ICC decided he was the most wanted before some asshole put his face on youtube.

We have oil. We have bananas. We have a decent consumer market. You never hear from it because we have been selling and buying stuff from the US, no questions asked, for years. Colombia is, for most intents and purposes, a US colony. The last time we did somethig against US interests, we got a very special chunk of our country "liberated" from us. The talks about legalization you should be seeing on the news if you cared to look are the first voice of protest our government rises against yours since the late 19th century. Your puppet dictators (who casually happen to be deeply tangled with drug dealers) have kept things the way they are for a century or so.

Also, don't you try and teach me how to fight for my country, you obnoxious piece of shit. I know the reasons the US controls my country, and I'm fighting them.

**Matos** · 2012-04-13

Originally Posted by Don Peyote

This part is true though, especially in Africa and India. We're sorry about that!

Speak for yourself

**Manfred Hideous** · 2012-04-13

Originally Posted by Rer

What about Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana? Different race, can play the "hurting economic woes" card, nothing overtly offensive or crazy about him either as far as I can tell.

Doesn't want it. However, Nikki Haley brings much of the same stuff to the table and is a not ugly chick and also seems to be testing the waters for the opportunity.

**Brooks Puuntai** · 2012-04-13

Originally Posted by Manfred Hideous

Doesn't want it. However, Nikki Haley brings much of the same stuff to the table and is a not ugly chick and also seems to be testing the waters for the opportunity.

She also said she didn't want it. Whether she means it or is just playing coy I don't know.

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/vide...ey-vp-16057342

**Manfred Hideous** · 2012-04-13

She's being coy. Come on, she's a girl!

Seriously, she's been doing the run to talkshows thing and talking up Romney. Whatever she says, I think she's applying for the job.

**Grath** · 2012-04-14

I dont understand why the republicans haven't thrown their hands up in frustration and walked away at this point. Instead they seem to have mass brainwashed themselves into believing that this dip shit somehow has a chance.

**somedude76** · 2012-04-14

Originally Posted by Rer

What about Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana? Different race, can play the "hurting economic woes" card, nothing overtly offensive or crazy about him either as far as I can tell.

Oh ya, forgot about Bobby. I liked the way he preformed during the BP oil spill. I think his experiences with the Fed when that was going down would be great for the debates too. There are some great examples with that event of too much centralized power in response to region disasters where a bloated and removed bureaucratic machine is just incompetent, therefore arguing for smaller government.

I do remember a Republican response to some speech, State of the Union a few years ago I think, where he didn't do very well though. It was like he was talking to a class full of 6th graders.

Seems like a decent guy though.

**somedude76** · 2012-04-14

Originally Posted by Grath

I dont understand why the republicans haven't thrown their hands up in frustration and walked away at this point. Instead they seem to have mass brainwashed themselves into believing that this dip shit somehow has a chance.

And walked away to where? Mitt Romney is no more of a dipshit than the guy we have in there right now. Besides, according to polling he does have a chance.

**Hilmar Keller** · 2012-04-14

Polling shows Obama pulling ahead nineteen points among female voters, I have doubts that Romney has anywhere near that much leverage with the male vote.

**Grath** · 2012-04-14

Originally Posted by somedude76

And walked away to where? Mitt Romney is no more of a dipshit than the guy we have in there right now. Besides, according to polling he does have a chance.

I see they got to you too.

So, the poor vote, I know its a shocker, but they vote, many times they vote a LOT, especially when its you know, the sitting black president versus the holier than thou gay hating rich white boy. And that doesn't even come close to the gay population that would at large rather be burned at the stake than see this dude elected.

I mean, tricking yourself into thinking that maybe the republicans would come up with something was cute back in like, October, but now that they've settled on this guy you're still going to go by the "polls" that don't count and are largely made up instead of looking at the base level human biases that are at play here and admitting to yourself how this vote turns out.

The upside is theres no chance you don't get the office in 2016, assuming of course they don't find out all sitting republicans are pedo's with beastial rape fantasies.

**Brooks Puuntai** · 2012-04-15

Last time I checked Romney is trailing Obama in the polls for Latino, Black, Female, and Gay voters. Romney Is only winning slightly in the (white)male category. I honestly don't think anyone who is doing that bad among so many different voting groups could win the election. However it is just random polls, so could be biased and not really a whole indicator of what will happen.

**Hilmar Keller** · 2012-04-15

They don't count 'evangelical' or 'CEO' as minority categories, so if you want to go tat-for-tat, Romney's got those clinched.

**Fartman** · 2012-04-15

Originally Posted by Grath

So, the poor vote, I know its a shocker, but they vote, many times they vote a LOT

yes, each of them votes alot, as in multiple times! also, alot of dead people vote democrat too, so they have that
demographic locked up.

**somedude76** · 2012-04-15

Obama only got 53% of the popular vote IIRC. And he is less popular today than he was then. He is not unbeatable.

EDIT - and ya, no shit, electoral college, so don't bother giving me a lesson, I'm just saying.

**Fartman** · 2012-04-15

alot of dumb college kids voted for him in 2008 and helped put him over the top and this time they're all alot more

**Fartman** · 2012-04-15

Originally Posted by Rer

Person A: Oh hey we're gonna reduce the deficit by a bit.
Person B: YEA BUT ITS NOT THE WHOLE THING WHAT THE FUCK IS THE POINT?!?!?!?

According to the Congressional Budget Office (the same nonpartisan bean-counters who project that on Obama’s current spending proposals the entire U.S. economy will cease to exist in 2027) Obama’s Buffett Rule will raise — stand well back — $3.2 billion per year. Or what the United States government currently borrows every 17 hours. So in 514 years it will have raised enough additional revenue to pay off the 2011 federal budget deficit. If you want to mark it on your calendar, 514 years is the year 2526. There’s a sporting chance Joe Biden will have retired from public life by then, but other than that I’m not making any bets.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...lan-mark-steyn

**Manfred Hideous** · 2012-04-15

Originally Posted by Grath

I dont understand why the republicans haven't thrown their hands up in frustration and walked away at this point. Instead they seem to have mass brainwashed themselves into believing that this dip shit somehow has a chance.

While I would have preferred someone a bit more charismatic, Romney has to be better than Zaphod Beeblebrox running the show today. Unlike Mccain ,who I couldn't vote for to save my life, I'll hold my nose and pull the lever for Romney.

At least he's not a nutter like the Great Santini.

**poaw** · 2012-04-15

Originally Posted by somedude76

And walked away to where? Mitt Romney is no more of a dipshit than the guy we have in there right now. Besides, according to polling he does have a chance.

The Apostle Paul.

I dunno why you think he'll somehow be able to dredge up any kind of fresh support from women, gays, latinos or blacks without causing foamy mouthed backlash from his "base". Or even avoid the inevitable attacks on his flip flopping on issues when he starts trying to win a general election instead out Republican'ing everyone else in a Primary. At this point everyone can only get madder at him.

**Manfred Hideous** · 2012-04-15

Originally Posted by poaw

The Apostle Paul.

I dunno why you think he'll somehow be able to dredge up any kind of fresh support from women, gays, latinos or blacks without causing foamy mouthed backlash from his "base". Or even avoid the inevitable attacks on his flip flopping on issues when he starts trying to win a general election instead out Republican'ing everyone else in a Primary. At this point everyone can only get madder at him.

He may not have to count on more support. As it is, the electorate is fairly spacemad. Many of his supporters will say he's OK and then stay home and watch TV on election day. Real unemployment estimates put us near the same level as the great depression. To quote a phrase "It's the economy, stupid" (not directed at you just a general reason why Romney might win).

**Fartman** · 2012-04-15

**Lysander** · 2012-04-18

Originally Posted by Manfred Hideous

He may not have to count on more support. As it is, the electorate is fairly spacemad. Many of his supporters will say he's OK and then stay home and watch TV on election day. Real unemployment estimates put us near the same level as the great depression. To quote a phrase "It's the economy, stupid" (not directed at you just a general reason why Romney might win).

I'm sorry, but talking about the current recession and the Great Depression in the same sentence is pretty laughable. Take another stab at Grapes of Wrath and tell me we're seeing anything even remotely on that level.

**Bill Schwartzski** · 2012-04-18

Originally Posted by Lysander

I'm sorry, but talking about the current recession and the Great Depression in the same sentence is pretty laughable. Take another stab at Grapes of Wrath and tell me we're seeing anything even remotely on that level.

Are you joking? Why, I had to get my breakfast directly from my mother's teat just this morning. I strangled a baby just to get one position closer in the queue.

**Malaclypse** · 2012-04-18

Originally Posted by Lysander

I'm sorry, but talking about the current recession and the Great Depression in the same sentence is pretty laughable. Take another stab at Grapes of Wrath and tell me we're seeing anything even remotely on that level.

The most terrible and boring book I ever had to read.

**Lysander** · 2012-04-18

Originally Posted by Malaclypse

The most terrible and boring book I ever had to read.

Have you had the pleasure of cracking open Moby Dick? (Literary Derail Incoming!)

**Manfred Hideous** · 2012-04-18

Originally Posted by Lysander

I'm sorry, but talking about the current recession and the Great Depression in the same sentence is pretty laughable. Take another stab at Grapes of Wrath and tell me we're seeing anything even remotely on that level.

Why? Were this WWII, would talking about WWI be laughable?

There's no reason NOT to compare economic downturns to the (thus far) grand daddy of them all. In fact, I think it's laughable that we'd have the 30's off the table.

Did I say anywhere that the sky is falling or that the numbers of squatters and homeless have risen dramatically? Did I say anything about people being put out of their houses by bankers who just took bailouts from the feds?

I said nothing about any of that. Obviously, we're not living through the great depression. For one thing there's no dustbowl, so a depression is nigh impossible.

/yes I was a bit smartassed but there are points of comparison. I don't seriously say we're IN a depression but the monetary crises may put us there in a few years.

E:
Moby dick is nothing.

Beowulf...

**Lysander** · 2012-04-18

Originally Posted by Manfred Hideous

Why? Were this WWII, would talking about WWI be laughable?

There's no reason NOT to compare economic downturns to the (thus far) grand daddy of them all. In fact, I think it's laughable that we'd have the 30's off the table.

Did I say anywhere that the sky is falling or that the numbers of squatters and homeless have risen dramatically? Did I say anything about people being put out of their houses by bankers who just took bailouts from the feds?

I said nothing about any of that. Obviously, we're not living through the great depression. For one thing there's no dustbowl, so a depression is nigh impossible.

/yes I was a bit smartassed but there are points of comparison. I don't seriously say we're IN a depression but the monetary crises may put us there in a few years.

E:
Moby dick is nothing.

Beowulf...

I could compare putting a m-80 in my cousins mailbox with dropping an A-bomb on Hiroshima. Doesn't make the comparison any more logical.

The reason I made the statement in the first place is because you said: "Real (read: "Sources I trust") unemployment estimates put us near the same level as the great depression..." This is a sky-is-falling kind of statement. Fact is all of these cries about: "OMG worst since THE GREAT DEPRESSION!!" are just party politics and rhetoric, the evocation of BIG SCARY WORDS.

I don't deny the economy is bad, really bad, but a recession is a recession and drawing arrows between it something like the Great Depression is the equivalent of saying that "real" estimates of gang violence in America put it on the same level as the Holocaust.

Edit: Also, I've read Beowulf in modern and middle english versions. At least in my case I found Moby Dick to be far more boring. Maybe it's just that it's literally 5 times as long, that and dudes hacking up monsters with swords and shit is more interesting than dudes getting obsessed with whales and setting off for long all-man sea voyages, again it's all a matter of perspective.

**Manfred Hideous** · 2012-04-18

Originally Posted by Lysander

I could compare putting a m-80 in my cousins mailbox with dropping an A-bomb on Hiroshima. Doesn't make the comparison any more logical.

"OMG worst since THE GREAT DEPRESSION!!" are just party politics and rhetoric, the evocation of BIG SCARY WORDS.

I neither said that nor implied that we were IN another depression because the unemployment numbers. I'm saying the employment figures are pretty damned bad. You seem to be projecting a bit here; I'm simply not as prone to histrionics as you seem to be.

You can call it party rhetoric but I'm an independent. Both parties are stupid IMO. I do normally vote GOP but that's usually the lesser of two weevils.

I don't deny the economy is bad, really bad, but a recession is a recession and drawing arrows between it something like the Great Depression is the equivalent of saying that "real" estimates of gang violence in America put it on the same level as the Holocaust.

More hyperbole, you even remembered the scare quotes.

Edit: Also, I've read Beowulf in modern and middle english versions. At least in my case I found Moby Dick to be far more boring. Maybe it's just that it's literally 5 times as long, that and dudes hacking up monsters with swords and shit is more interesting than dudes getting obsessed with whales and setting off for long all-man sea voyages, again it's all a matter of perspective.

Five times as long perhaps but not nearly as long a read as moby Dick. Especially with a teacher who insisted on going through it Middle English style.

**Fartman** · 2012-04-19

1,085 days without a Senate budget, in violation of federal law~

thats a hair under three years~

and counting..

**Rer** · 2012-04-19

Republican Congress meets Democratic White House?

(Not arguing it isn't incredibly stupid or illegal by the way)

**Fartman** · 2012-04-19

Originally Posted by Rer

Republican Congress meets Democratic White House?

(Not arguing it isn't incredibly stupid or illegal by the way)

are you not aware that the Democrats currently control the Senate?

**Rer** · 2012-04-19

I'm aware that Democrats can't agree on anything to save their lives

**Hilmar Keller** · 2012-04-19

And I'm aware that the House and Senate have to both vote on the same bill before it can arrive at the President's desk. So what part of the Buffet Rule was unacceptable for the GOP?

(I know what the answer is, I'm just disgusted that the GOP would turn their nose up at the chance to grab $4.7 bil from the wealthiest Americans because they're still fixated on the $300 million going to Planned Parenthood)

**somedude76** · 2012-04-19

Buffet bill is a joke. It's just political posturing. Yay, Democrats can say; "Look at the GOP, they're for the rich!!" Whoopie-fucking-doodaa!! The amount of money it raises is insignificant! Who gives a fuck!!??

**Brooks Puuntai** · 2012-04-19

Originally Posted by Fartman

are you not aware that the Democrats currently control the Senate?

True, but they don't have a super majority so its not like they can pass anything they want to.

Originally Posted by somedude76

Buffet bill is a joke. It's just political posturing. Yay, Democrats can say; "Look at the GOP, they're for the rich!!" Whoopie-fucking-doodaa!! The amount of money it raises is insignificant! Who gives a fuck!!??

Momma always said "Every little bit counts"

.

**Hilmar Keller** · 2012-04-19

Originally Posted by somedude76

Buffet bill is a joke. It's just political posturing. Yay, Democrats can say; "Look at the GOP, they're for the rich!!" Whoopie-fucking-doodaa!! The amount of money it raises is insignificant! Who gives a fuck!!??

It's a hell of a lot more money than the GOP argues we'll save by pulling the floor out from under Planned Parenthood.

I don't get the 'it's not enough to matter' justification; are you saying the Buffet Rule should've been more costly to the wealthy?

**Manfred Hideous** · 2012-04-19

I just want to pay the same rates these politicians pay. JFC the tax code needs to be simplified. There's no way I could get to the same tax rate paid by most pols.

**Fartman** · 2012-04-19

Originally Posted by Brooks Puuntai

True, but they don't have a super majority so its not like they can pass anything they want to.

budget resolutions can't be filibustered. you only need 51 votes to pass them. Ds have 53 votes. the fact that they don't want to pass
a budget and then have to defend it in an election year isn't an acceptable excuse to break the law. besides, its been three years.. and
in the first of those they had 60 votes and a Democrat House.

Originally Posted by Hilmar Keller

I don't get the 'it's not enough to matter' justification

Giving the Feds more revenue to spend isn't the solution. We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. While steal-
ing more money from "rich people" might make you feel better, it isn't going to solve anything.

**Grim** · 2012-04-19

Its obvious to anyone that the government needs to pay for less "stuff" and people need to pay a little more to balance things out. Pick your favorite spending area and demographic. Only complete idiots say we need to either nuke the budget or bleed the rich dry.