Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

US Election 2012 (Superthread)

2

Comments

  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,650 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Amerika wrote: »
    I figure no more so than you putting on thoe rose colored classes and singing Kumbaya to the socialism mantra.

    Kumbaya is a christian song. In my dreamed of socialist Utopia religion will be a thing of the past. I wake up every morning and sing "The Red Flag".

    I have no idea what a debate on Obama's presidency has to do with Socialism by the way. He's no socialist.

    Hmmm… President Barack Obama forced GM into bankruptcy, fired the executives, and put the government "behind the wheel" of the company. Some would consider that nationalizing GM… I figure Obama calls it just another Monday. And a "success"... perhaps for the unions.

    Some might well consider that nationalising GM, but they'd be flat wrong. The government lent GM enough money to keep operating. This money was then repaid when GM returned to profitability. The entire thing was a huge success. If you want to take pot shots at the Obama presidency, this is a terrible place to start. Didn't the government even turn a profit on the bailout?
    With the arrival of government-run exchanges in 2014, the government will use its regulatory, pricing, and taxing authority to favor its own plan. And would make it difficult, if not impossible for private health plans to compete and prompt businesses to switch to cheaper, public alternative. I’m looking at a $15,000 family play for employees versus a $3,000 penalty. Sadly, just a no-brainer. Just a fancy way of nationalizing health care in my opinion.

    Government health insurance does not equal a nationalised health care system. I think you need to actually look into a nationalised healthcare system like the NHS in Britain to realise just how wide of the mark you are.


    Oh yeah… all those new emissions regulations have now forced coal-fired power plant operators to choose between installing pollution control equipment which is far too costly, switch to natural gas which is again far too costly, or shutting down their plants (BINGO!). "Just fine"… my god, six coal-fired plants are now scheduled to shut down in my state so far… nothing to see here… please move along?


    "So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted." - Barack Obama 2008. At least there’s one campaign promise Obama kept.

    Well now, I admit I could be wrong on that one. But what's your alternative? Allow the pollution to continue? The obvious answer is to spend the money on research into alternative fuels wouldn't you say? I doubt you would say though.

    Again… who shut down gulf coast oil exploration?

    It wasn't shut down for a start. Only some rigs were closed temporarily, the moratorium was lifted.

    http://articles.latimes.com/2010/oct/13/nation/la-na-oil-moratorium-20101013

    Quote from the above:

    The moratorium affected about 36 rigs in the Gulf of Mexico that were exploring new reservoirs of oil and gas in water deeper than 500 feet. Extraction of oil and gas in the gulf, which accounts for a third of domestic oil production, continued largely unabated.

    So I ask you; who shut down the gulf of Mexico oil exploration? When was it shutdown?

    Where have you been? Don’t you remember Obama’s attack on the Supreme Court recently calling them "and unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law," or his constant use of executive powers to sidestep Congress and our laws.

    He didn't attack the Supreme Court, he commented on it's actions. It's complete hyperbole to suggest otherwise.

    Give me specific examples of him "side stepping congress".


    You have taken the position that everything single thing that Obama did was wrong, which as I said before is completely blinkered.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users Posts: 81,114 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Amerika wrote: »
    Again… who shut down gulf coast oil exploration?
    googling Gulf Coast Exploration:

    http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/01/26/obama-administration-announces-new-gulf-oil-exploration-deal


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,900 ✭✭✭InTheTrees


    I have no idea what a debate on Obama's presidency has to do with Socialism by the way. He's no socialist.

    Some might well consider that nationalising GM, but they'd be flat wrong.

    Government health insurance does not equal a nationalised health care system. I think you need to actually look into a nationalised healthcare system like the NHS in Britain to realise just how wide of the mark you are.

    Frustrating isnt it? The amount of misinformation and downright lies Fox News perpetuates.

    The american right wingers have whole new definitions of "socialism" and "democracy" that are solely their own.

    ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,599 ✭✭✭matthew8


    West Virginia held a democratic primary on Tuesday. 2 candidates on the ballot. Barack Obama and Keith Judd. Keith Judd is currently in jail in Texas. The most important thing about Judd is that he's white. Judd got 40%. For those who don't know, WV is full of hillbillies.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Shutting down gulf coast oil exploration - I think you'll find it was BP that sparked that one.

    Hmmm... Now it might appear that the 6 month ban by the White House administration on deepwater drilling after the BP spill, costing 19,000 jobs and $1.1 billion in lost wages might just have been based on the White House's false rewriting of a drilling report so they could mislead the public. Hopefully the House will dig deeper into this, and hopefully the "most transparent" White House adminsitration ever won't continue to thwart continual requests from Congress to get to the bottom of their many questionable moves.

    http://michellemalkin.com/2012/05/11/white-house-lied-jobs-died/


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,650 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Amerika wrote: »
    Hmmm... Now it might appear that the 6 month ban by the White House administration on deepwater drilling after the BP spill, costing 19,000 jobs and $1.1 billion in lost wages might just have been based on the White House's false rewriting of a drilling report so they could mislead the public. Hopefully the House will dig deeper into this, and hopefully the "most transparent" White House adminsitration ever won't continue to thwart continual requests from Congress to get to the bottom of their many questionable moves.

    http://michellemalkin.com/2012/05/11/white-house-lied-jobs-died/

    So that's your only argument with all of the points I made in my post? That the WH lied and you back it up with Michelle Malkin as a source? That's laughable.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    So that's your only argument with all of the points I made in my post? That the WH lied and you back it up with Michelle Malkin as a source? That's laughable.

    Just taking my time, and I’ll tackle them a little at a time when time allows. Don’t want to get the dander up of some all at once.

    Funny, I thought the actual scans of government official correspondence, connected with this apparent scandal, would have been more persuasive than the fact they were displayed by Michelle Malkin… silly me… my bad. But do you really think media outlets like The New York Times, WaPo, Huffington Post, MSNBC or the big three ABC, CBS or NBC would actually take the lead and report on something like this without being forced to? I think not… it doesn’t fit with their ideals and agenda.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,599 ✭✭✭matthew8


    Great news for Romney. His Gallup favourability rating is up to 50%, a big spike. I still think he'll need bad economic news to win, but right now the downballot effect could help the republicans take over the senate.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    matthew8 wrote: »
    Great news for Romney. His Gallup favourability rating is up to 50%, a big spike. I still think he'll need bad economic news to win, but right now the downballot effect could help the republicans take over the senate.

    Its funny really. Romney's hopes rest on his ability to keep his supporters at arms length. If the tea party movement re-emerges in all of its 2010 glory, he will lose. That 50% is very soft indeed. I still think Obama will win comfortably.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,599 ✭✭✭matthew8


    Denerick wrote: »
    Its funny really. Romney's hopes rest on his ability to keep his supporters at arms length. If the tea party movement re-emerges in all of its 2010 glory, he will lose. That 50% is very soft indeed. I still think Obama will win comfortably.
    Right now I think Obama will win all his 2008 states except for Florida, Indiana and North Carolina.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,650 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    matthew8 wrote: »
    Denerick wrote: »
    Its funny really. Romney's hopes rest on his ability to keep his supporters at arms length. If the tea party movement re-emerges in all of its 2010 glory, he will lose. That 50% is very soft indeed. I still think Obama will win comfortably.
    Right now I think Obama will win all his 2008 states except for Florida, Indiana and North Carolina.

    I don't think he'll lose florida. That's based on no real evidence.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users Posts: 9,599 ✭✭✭matthew8


    I don't think he'll lose florida. That's based on no real evidence.

    Based on no real evidence? What about polling and trending?


  • Registered Users Posts: 43,274 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    matthew8 wrote: »
    Great news for Romney. His Gallup favourability rating is up to 50%, a big spike. I still think he'll need bad economic news to win, but right now the downballot effect could help the republicans take over the senate.

    Was reading a piece from Time Magazine suggesting that's largely just keeping out of sight and out of mind!

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,650 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    matthew8 wrote: »
    I don't think he'll lose florida. That's based on no real evidence.

    Based on no real evidence? What about polling and trending?

    Well it's even enough in the polls:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/fl/florida_romney_vs_obama-1883.html

    Romneys social conservatism won't swing it for him in Florida.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Some might well consider that nationalising GM, but they'd be flat wrong.
    Technically you are correct, but that is the feeling by many of the voters, and that’s all that really matters in politics. I doubt the voters keep a copy of Websters Pocket Dictionary to reference when they hit the voting booths.
    The government lent GM enough money to keep operating.
    Is that all they did? Did they not force out the head of GM? Did the stockholders not get screwed and the Labor Union given sizable stock? Did they not force GM to put the foolish Chevy Volt into production? Did not GM go into bankruptcy ANYWAY?
    This money was then repaid when GM returned to profitability.
    Really... it was all paid? So GM doesn’t owe us anything? Hmm.... Why do I keep hearing a number around $14 billion still owed?

    - - - - -

    Also, a couple of recent observations on the election I’ve been hearing about:

    I’ve been hearing more and more chatter in political circles indicating Barack Obama will dump the Biden the lovable buffoon, and go with Hillary Clinton as his Vice President choice for his shot at a second term as POTUS. The decision might be made right around the time the Democratic convention takes place. Supposedly Obama/Clinton bumper stickers have already been produced and stored in a secret bunker in Little Rock, Arkansas. Personally, it makes sense to me as Obama’s polling keeps dropping and adding Hillary to the ticket will only help to energize the Democratic base and women will come back into the fold.

    I’ve also heard there might be a good chance that Romney will win the Electoral College votes, but lose handily in the popular vote because of California, New York, Illinois, and Massachusetts. It seems all Romney needs to do is add about 650,000 votes (to get the 270 votes) to John McCain’s 2008 totals in six decisive states in order to take an Electoral College victory. An amazingly small number given Obama beat McCain by 9 million popular votes. If that happens, or looks like it might happen, I think you’ll be hearing a lot about the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact in the courts (seemingly the new Democratic mantra – if you lose… sue!). If you think things are ugly now between the parties and nothing gets done, just wait and see what happens if we get another split presidential vote.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,706 ✭✭✭Matt Holck


    both major party Candidates are from Harvard



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,650 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Amerika wrote: »
    Technically you are correct, but that is the feeling by many of the voters, and that’s all that really matters in politics. I doubt the voters keep a copy of Websters Pocket Dictionary to reference when they hit the voting booths.

    Technically correct is correct, how voters feel about it means nothing to me. Who needs a copy of a dictionary to know whether GM was nationalised? If the government doesn't own the company lock, stock and barrell it's not nationalised. It's merely Republican dogma and propaganda that suggests otherwise.
    Is that all they did? Did they not force out the head of GM? Did the stockholders not get screwed and the Labor Union given sizable stock? Did they not force GM to put the foolish Chevy Volt into production? Did not GM go into bankruptcy ANYWAY?

    Would you give a struggling company money without having a say in how it operates? GM got into trouble in the first place due to how badly it was run, change was needed to turn it around. It has now been turned around.

    Also, isn't the Chevy Volt a success? Sales have dropped after a surge, but it's still profitable. That can't be said for some of the cars GM produced before they were bailed out.
    Really... it was all paid? So GM doesn’t owe us anything? Hmm.... Why do I keep hearing a number around $14 billion still owed?

    Source? Ok it hasn't all been repaid yet, I was wrong about that. But it will be if GM continues the way it is.[/quote]

    - - - - -

    Also, a couple of recent observations on the election I’ve been hearing about:

    I’ve been hearing more and more chatter in political circles indicating Barack Obama will dump the Biden the lovable buffoon, and go with Hillary Clinton as his Vice President choice for his shot at a second term as POTUS. The decision might be made right around the time the Democratic convention takes place. Supposedly Obama/Clinton bumper stickers have already been produced and stored in a secret bunker in Little Rock, Arkansas. Personally, it makes sense to me as Obama’s polling keeps dropping and adding Hillary to the ticket will only help to energize the Democratic base and women will come back into the fold..

    Joe Biden is a loveable buffoon? That's highly insulting and unnecessary to a man who's spent his life serving his country. God forbid the man says what he thinks every now and then.

    I don't tink Obama needs to drop Biden, the idead that he'll do it to win women back is laughable. The last poll I saw had women 54-39 in favour of Obama.
    I’ve also heard there might be a good chance that Romney will win the Electoral College votes, but lose handily in the popular vote because of California, New York, Illinois, and Massachusetts. It seems all Romney needs to do is add about 650,000 votes (to get the 270 votes) to John McCain’s 2008 totals in six decisive states in order to take an Electoral College victory. An amazingly small number given Obama beat McCain by 9 million popular votes. If that happens, or looks like it might happen, I think you’ll be hearing a lot about the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact in the courts (seemingly the new Democratic mantra – if you lose… sue!). If you think things are ugly now between the parties and nothing gets done, just wait and see what happens if we get another split presidential vote.

    I doubt the Dems will sue if they lose on electoral college votes, it makes no sense for them to do so as it's a losing case. However, the system should be changed to a popular vote system as it's more democratic. Surely you can't deny one person one vote is the fairest system?

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users Posts: 9,706 ✭✭✭Matt Holck


    US foreign policy has been way too aggressive to consider the secretary of state a viable candidate

    they should have nationalized GM

    and hooray for the volt

    >I don't tink Obama needs to drop Biden, the idead that he'll do it to win women back is laughable. The last poll I saw had women 54-39 in favour of Obama.

    I think the Republicans in the roll of "bad guys" got that covered for Obama


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Joe Biden is a loveable buffoon? That's highly insulting and unnecessary to a man who's spent his life serving his country. God forbid the man says what he thinks every now and then.

    That’s what many of us “locals” refer to him as (he’s from what we say... “up the pike,” which means Scranton is a little ways north on the PA turnpike), and the term is much nicer and kinder than what is usually said and printed about him in most of the press here. It's more or less an endearing term.
    I don't tink Obama needs to drop Biden, the idead that he'll do it to win women back is laughable. The last poll I saw had women 54-39 in favour of Obama.

    The latest CBS News/New York Times poll shows Obama's support among female voters at 44%, and Romney at 46%.
    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/14/poll-romney-up-obama-down-among-women/
    I doubt the Dems will sue if they lose on electoral college votes, it makes no sense for them to do so as it's a losing case.
    They did it with Bush – Gore didn't they? As I remember it went all the way to the Supreme Court.
    However, the system should be changed to a popular vote system as it's more democratic. Surely you can't deny one person one vote is the fairest system?

    No it shouldn't and No I think a Constitutional Republic to be most fair. In a democracy, minorities (whether they be people, states, or any other form) can become taken advantage of by a pure majority vote.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Also, isn't the Chevy Volt a success? Sales have dropped after a surge, but it's still profitable. That can't be said for some of the cars GM produced before they were bailed out.

    If your definition of "success" means paying $40,000 and getting a $7,500 rebate back from the government (which really means the taxpayers are paying the $7,500) for a vehicle that costs $40,000 to manufacture (forgetting about such things as marketing and advertising costs, dealer selling percentages, recalls... etc), then perhaps so. But definitely not in my book!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 579 ✭✭✭Kilkenny14




  • Registered Users Posts: 510 ✭✭✭Madd Finn


    The reporter might have added that the Arizona governor, a gun-nut Republican incidentally, has vetoed this legislation. Fair play to her.

    But it is breathtaking that these lunatics would still try and bring this up in this day and age.

    It's not a crime per se to be born outside the United States. But it WOULD have been a crime, or at least clear prima facie evidence that a crime had been committed, had Mr Obama been born on the day he was in nearly half the states of the Union. Including Arizona!

    In 1961 no fewer than 24 US states still had Nuremberg-law-like legislation forbidding marriage between black men (such as Mr Obama's father) and white women (like his mum).

    Arizona's was one of the most malicious. It had updated its legislation in 1931 (yes 1931. You think it was only the Germans who brought in racial/eugenic legislation in the 1930s?) to add Filipinos and "Hindus" to the list of people prohibited from marrying whites. Apparently, an anomaly in the wording of the Arizonan legislation prohibited people classified as "mixed race" from marrying anybody at all!!! Clearly they wanted "mongrels" to die out and quick.

    This fiendish legislation was only repealed in Arizona in 1962, the year after President Obama was born. Good job he wasn't born there.

    What an ugly country America was in the 20th century. Why do these "birther" idiots seem so keen to shed light on it?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    "gun-nut Republican," "lunatics," and "idiots"... how classy. And it boggles the mind how so many people from all over the world still wanted to emigrate to that 20th century ugly America, eh?


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,706 ✭✭✭Matt Holck


    yep US only pays 41% of the total world military budget

    World Military budget in Billions (percent total) by Nation

    + 1,630 World Total
    + 711 United States 41%
    + 143 China 8.2%
    + 71.9 Russia 4.1%
    + 62.7 United Kingdom 3.6 %
    + 62.5 France 3.6%
    + 54.5 Japan 3.3&
    + 48.2 Saudi Arabia 2.8%
    + 46.8 India 2.5%
    + 46.7 Germany 2.8%
    + 37.0 Italy 2.3%

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

    _________________________________

    Global Arms Sales By Supplier Nations

    39% United States

    18% Russia

    8% France

    7% United Kingdom

    5% Germany

    3% China

    3% Italy

    11% Other European

    5% Others

    http://www.globalissues.org/article/74/the-arms-trade-is-big-business#GlobalArmsSalesBySupplierNations
    _________________________________

    TOP 10 Arms Produces

    Notes: An S denotes a subsidiary company. A dash (–) indicates that the company did not rank among the SIPRI Top 100 for 2009

    + Lockheed Martin USA 35,730 33,430 78
    + BAE Systems UK 32,880 32,540 95
    + Boeing USA 31,360 32,300 49
    + Northrop Grumman USA 28,150 27,000 81
    + General Dynamics USA 23,940 23,380 74
    + Raytheon USA 22,980 23,080 91
    + BAE Systems Inc. (BAE Systems, UK) USA 17,900 19,280 100
    + EADS Trans-European 16,360 15,930 27
    + Finmeccanica Italy 14,410 13,280 58
    +L-3 Communications USA 13,070 13,010 83
    + United Technologies USA

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/mar/02/arms-sales-top-100-producers


    Amerika wrote: »
    If your definition of "success" means paying $40,000 and getting a $7,500 rebate back from the government (which really means the taxpayers are paying the $7,500) for a vehicle that costs $40,000 to manufacture (forgetting about such things as marketing and advertising costs, dealer selling percentages, recalls... etc), then perhaps so. But definitely not in my book!

    perhaps an engine to retrofit old car models would be worth looking into


  • Registered Users Posts: 510 ✭✭✭Madd Finn


    Amerika wrote: »
    "gun-nut Republican," "lunatics," and "idiots"... how classy. And it boggles the mind how so many people from all over the world still wanted to emigrate to that 20th century ugly America, eh?


    Point 1. I was at pains to praise Governor Brewer for her common sense action in vetoing that asinine bill. If you are unfamiliar with the Irish vernacular, "Fair play to her" translates loosely into American as "You go, girl!"


    Point 2. It is a simple fact that she IS a representative of the Republican party and I think that describing as a "gun nut" somebody who plays host to the "NRA Celebration of American Values Leadership Forum" and kicks off her welcome speech with the declaration "Arizona is NRA Country!", or who says in an official letter to the Secretary of State for Arizona "one of my goals over ..[my term in office] ..is to advance the Second Amendment agenda in Arizona" is pretty fair comment. (You can find both those little tidbits on her own website)


    Point 3. If I offend you by describing as "Idiots" and "Lunatics" those so keen to make an issue out of Mr Obama's birthplace despite the overwhelming documentary evidence that there is no issue to address, then I invite you to suggest a more appropriate description.

    Point 4. If you baulk at the suggestion that the anti Miscegenation Laws which a majority of US states still retained at the end of the second world war, and which were not finally done away with until 1967,were a hideously ugly blemish on the face of a country styling itself "the land of the free" then can we take it that you would like to see them reinstated?

    Just to pretty the country up a little. :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,355 ✭✭✭Belfast


    BOHtox wrote: »
    Can anyone see Paul running as an independent when Romney gets the Republican nomination?

    Paul won't drop out of the Republican race as it will hurt Rand's chances if he does.

    I think Paul's only chance of winning the nomination went with Santorum and Gingrich dropping out. Gingrich, Santorum and Paul combined might have gotten more than half the delegates meaning a brokered convention. Then delegates could vote without be bound. Candidates would drop out and then he might have had a chance then

    No chance of Ron Paul running as an independent.

    too hard to get on the ballot.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,706 ✭✭✭Matt Holck


    I'm writing in NO WAR


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,416 ✭✭✭Jimmy Iovine


    Haha Romney released an app the other day. Unfortunately they managed to misspell America. I've no idea how you could manage to do that but it doesn't really look great. It won't/shouldn't affect him too much but it's pretty funny to see.

    Also someone has already set up a Tumblr site where everything is spelt incorrectly :D.

    r-MITT-ROMNEY-APP-AMERCIA-large570.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,186 ✭✭✭✭IvySlayer


    Yeah saw that app, what a cock-up. Say the Democrats will have some fun with that.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,324 ✭✭✭Cork boy 55


    I don't follow USA politics much this year anyway...

    Who are the Vice Prez's picks going to be?
    Why is there no selection process on the Democratic side?
    Which one of the two canidates or party is best for Eire's interest?


Advertisement