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

Half-baked Republican Presidential Fruitcakes (and fellow confections)

Options
12526283031137

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    jank wrote: »
    Many? I have yet to see the same out cry or protests anywhere about this..

    I doubt you've looked. You don't seem to have bothered noting the difference in the scale of casualties either.
    jank wrote: »
    Irish people love the democrats so I suppose its to be expected. Got to love the hypocrisy..

    Irish people do tend to vote democrat when in the states, as do their descendants. As noted above, there are major differences between the two thus no hypocrisy.
    jank wrote: »
    The only one I am aware of is that he restricted federal money to be spent on Stem cell research. Also, I am no fan of bush you are well aware of this and my posting history but he is not a pantomime villain...

    Faith based initiatives? cutting UN funding?

    jank wrote: »
    So that by that reasoning the moderate wing of the GOP won. So much for those crazy wing nuts....

    ...which doesn't change their influence on policy.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    To be perfectly honest, I find the idea of a man who doesn't appear to have any consistency in opinions or political stances to be a frightening individual to get into the office of president. It's not clear if he is actually a centrist or from the far right, he simply panders to whatever has to be said at that point in time.

    I do think that America needs an overhaul in its political parties, there's no reason why it should be just 2 parties that get the attention. Plus I suspect that the more moderate republicans must want out of the republican party which seems to be becoming the voice of the Tea Party as the years go on.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    jank wrote: »
    I think you will find in my original post in which I quoted that you mentioned Ireland, specifically. You know where most Irish people live... that place of the West coast of Britain.

    I did mention Ireland, specifically. We are talking about Irish people, specifically. We are not though only talking about how Irish people think this election will effect other Irish people in Ireland. That is your unfounded assumption. Why do you think Irish people only care about other Irish people, would only care about the effect Obama or Romney would have on other Irish people in Ireland?
    jank wrote: »
    Now I am well aware that there are Irish people all over the world I am one of them. I said originally Irish people have more to fear from Obama than Romney. I see that you don't dispute this so I will take it you agree.
    God its like trying to explain purple to a blind man.

    Irish people only have more to fear from Obama if Irish people only care about the effect of the election on other Irish people in Ireland who rely on American business.

    Since that isn't the case, Irish people actually care a lot about others not just other Irish, you are arguing from the position of a category error.

    Just because you think like this doesn't mean anyone else does.
    jank wrote: »
    What negative affect would this be? You are very adapt at dismissing arguments without actually putting across why. So please explain away.

    Of the top of my head, Romney wants to significantly cut the powers of the EPA.

    But that doesn't effect Irish people I hear you scream! Exception Irish people care about the American environment even if you don't.

    Romney is also opposed gay marriage and other gay rights. But that doesn't effect Irish people you again scream! Exception Irish people care about the rights of non-Irish people (Ireland championed civil rights throughout the world, including in the USA and South Africa).


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    jank wrote: »
    Classic Nodin, always pontificating like a school headmaster.
    You're within a whisker of a card for that -- cut it out.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    The Salt Lake Tribune take a look at Mitt and doesn't much like what it sees:

    http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/55019844-82/romney-obama-state-president.html.csp
    Nowhere has Mitt Romney’s pursuit of the presidency been more warmly welcomed or closely followed than here in Utah. The Republican nominee’s political and religious pedigrees, his adeptly bipartisan governorship of a Democratic state, and his head for business and the bottom line all inspire admiration and hope in our largely Mormon, Republican, business-friendly state.

    But it was Romney’s singular role in rescuing Utah’s organization of the 2002 Olympics from a cesspool of scandal, and his oversight of the most successful Winter Games on record, that make him the Beehive State’s favorite adopted son. After all, Romney managed to save the state from ignominy, turning the extravaganza into a showcase for the matchless landscapes, volunteerism and efficiency that told the world what is best and most beautiful about Utah and its people.

    Sadly, it is not the only Romney, as his campaign for the White House has made abundantly clear, first in his servile courtship of the tea party in order to win the nomination, and now as the party’s shape-shifting nominee. From his embrace of the party’s radical right wing, to subsequent portrayals of himself as a moderate champion of the middle class, Romney has raised the most frequently asked question of the campaign: "Who is this guy, really, and what in the world does he truly believe?"

    The evidence suggests no clear answer, or at least one that would survive Romney’s next speech or sound bite. Politicians routinely tailor their words to suit an audience. Romney, though, is shameless, lavishing vastly diverse audiences with words, any words, they would trade their votes to hear.

    More troubling, Romney has repeatedly refused to share specifics of his radical plan to simultaneously reduce the debt, get rid of Obamacare (or, as he now says, only part of it), make a voucher program of Medicare, slash taxes and spending, and thereby create millions of new jobs. To claim, as Romney does, that he would offset his tax and spending cuts (except for billions more for the military) by doing away with tax deductions and exemptions is utterly meaningless without identifying which and how many would get the ax. Absent those specifics, his promise of a balanced budget simply does not pencil out.

    If this portrait of a Romney willing to say anything to get elected seems harsh, we need only revisit his branding of 47 percent of Americans as freeloaders who pay no taxes, yet feel victimized and entitled to government assistance. His job, he told a group of wealthy donors, "is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

    Where, we ask, is the pragmatic, inclusive Romney, the Massachusetts governor who left the state with a model health care plan in place, the Romney who led Utah to Olympic glory? That Romney skedaddled and is nowhere to be found.

    And what of the president Romney would replace? For four years, President Barack Obama has attempted, with varying degrees of success, to pull the nation out of its worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression, a deepening crisis he inherited the day he took office.

    In the first months of his presidency, Obama acted decisively to stimulate the economy. His leadership was essential to passage of the badly needed American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Though Republicans criticize the stimulus for failing to create jobs, it clearly helped stop the hemorrhaging of public sector jobs. The Utah Legislature used hundreds of millions in stimulus funds to plug holes in the state’s budget.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    For one thing, the drone strikes haven't been plastered all over the news, unlike images of US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that most posters in here would prefer Obama to Romney and would also condemn the US drone strikes.

    Ah so its he media's fault but since Obama is carrying out the drone strikes we will give him a free pass.
    Who started Gitmo? And which party has made it their number one goal, since Obama was elected, to make him a one term POTUS? Mitch McConnell, looking out for his country. Type 'obstructionism' into Google images.

    LOL, didnt Obama and the Democrats have both houses of Congress and the white house for TWO years.... much easier to blame those republicans eh than actually point to a failure of policy.:rolleyes:


    What? Are you suggesting Ireland get it's act together and increase defence spending. More horses and bayonets should suffice. "Giddy Up!"

    No, all I am saying is that it is easy to abdicate responsibility of self defense when you have the American military might stationed on both sides of the Atlantic. Then its much easier for the like of you to point fingers and tut away.


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Moderate Republicans should vote Obama, and get rid of that Tea Party. There's plenty of RINO's who aren't as ignorant as Bachmann, Santorum, Gingrich et al.

    I actually agree with that line of thinking. They should be striving to cut the crazy out of their party, even if it means forgoing this election. If Romney got hammered at the polls there would be calls to shake things up and remove the tea Party which is reducing American Republicanism to a laughing stock. If Romney lost by a narrow margin I see no reason why the party would carry on as it does now.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    Galvasean wrote: »
    I actually agree with that line of thinking. They should be striving to cut the crazy out of their party, even if it means forgoing this election. If Romney got hammered at the polls there would be calls to shake things up and remove the tea Party which is reducing American Republicanism to a laughing stock. If Romney lost by a narrow margin I see no reason why the party would carry on as it does now.

    In a similar vein, I was thinking that the silver lining of a Republican win would be that they are so insane, incompetent and extreme that they'd only last a term and it would shatter confidence in the Republican party for a generation (a la Fianna Fail).


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    75% of Europeans Would Vote for Obama: Report

    I guess that includes us.

    Since Europeans are relatively impartial regarding allegiance to either the Dems or the GOP, would you not say that Europe is in a better position to judge the best candidate? Some fresh eyes if you will.

    You got to be kidding, your telling me that Europeans are a better judge in who gets elected to the white house? You do know that half of the European countries you speak of are close to bankruptcy including our own Island here?

    How about we give them Bertie or Cowen to tell them how to run their affairs.
    Politics at EU level makes Washington look like Greece in the golden age.

    People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones as they say. I would like American to stay as it is NOT turn into Europe. Isn't that why 75 million of them left to the new world over the past 200 years? I suppose when we Europeans are not too busy slaughtering each other in record numbers and then living of each others graft we have it OK. Sadly Europe's day is done and dusted.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Nodin wrote: »

    Irish people do tend to vote democrat when in the states, as do their descendants. As noted above, there are major differences between the two thus no hypocrisy.

    Used to vote democrat. Many who made it now vote for the GOP. Its a recognized demographic pattern.

    Nodin wrote: »
    Faith based initiatives? cutting UN funding?

    Well if that is all he did then he must have been a pretty bad president for social conservatives. I would have thought he would have passed laws banning homosexuality or abortion or gay marriage, opps the last one was Clinton right? ;)


    Nodin wrote: »
    ...which doesn't change their influence on policy.

    Which federal policy is this now?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    jank wrote: »

    You and many here think that idiocracy exists only on one side of the aisle, I know that it exists on both sides of the isle. (who is right, me or you?) If you are a high school dropout you are many times more likely to vote for the democratic party than the GOP. What does that say about idiocracy?

    It probably says more about poverty. Dropping out of high school is more likely to be caused by social factors than stupidity, and the GOP is no friend to the poor.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Zombrex wrote: »
    I did mention Ireland, specifically. We are talking about Irish people, specifically. We are not though only talking about how Irish people think this election will effect other Irish people in Ireland. That is your unfounded assumption. Why do you think Irish people only care about other Irish people, would only care about the effect Obama or Romney would have on other Irish people in Ireland?


    God its like trying to explain purple to a blind man.

    Irish people only have more to fear from Obama if Irish people only care about the effect of the election on other Irish people in Ireland who rely on American business.

    Since that isn't the case, Irish people actually care a lot about others not just other Irish, you are arguing from the position of a category error.

    Just because you think like this doesn't mean anyone else does.



    Of the top of my head, Romney wants to significantly cut the powers of the EPA.

    But that doesn't effect Irish people I hear you scream! Exception Irish people care about the American environment even if you don't.

    Romney is also opposed gay marriage and other gay rights. But that doesn't effect Irish people you again scream! Exception Irish people care about the rights of non-Irish people (Ireland championed civil rights throughout the world, including in the USA and South Africa).


    Sigh, well of course one can be concerned with these "laws" Romney may pass but maybe they should be far more concerned with laws passed in China or Russia or Sadui Arabia and so on.

    Fairy dust and sparkles aside most people are self interested whether you like it or not. If that were not the case we would be living in a vastly different world now and communism would work!

    So, would the average Irish person care about their own job or some non existent threat to peoples rights in the US.

    Again, I will say it again. Romney will not be in any shape or form be the social conservative that many would fear him to be. He will be elected purely on the basis on getting the economy back on the right path. All else is just idle speculation and fear mongering.

    Obama was against gay marriage at first yet now he is for it. Change or heart or just playing politics? Did many Irish people really give a **** that Obama was against gay marriage back in 2008. Id say very very few did. So, whats your point other than being deliberately obtuse?


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Gbear wrote: »
    In a similar vein, I was thinking that the silver lining of a Republican win would be that they are so insane, incompetent and extreme that they'd only last a term and it would shatter confidence in the Republican party for a generation (a la Fianna Fail).

    I dunno about that re: Fianna Fail. It seems people here have short memories and their popularity is surging :o


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Galvasean wrote: »
    I actually agree with that line of thinking. They should be striving to cut the crazy out of their party, even if it means forgoing this election. If Romney got hammered at the polls there would be calls to shake things up and remove the tea Party which is reducing American Republicanism to a laughing stock. If Romney lost by a narrow margin I see no reason why the party would carry on as it does now.

    Let me get this straight

    The party that is by all intents and purposes neck and neck at the polls with the Democrats for the White House, is odds on favourite to take the House and may even take the Senate should totally disband, go home and give up politics if Romney loses the election......

    WTF??

    128.png

    People, I give you exhibit A of the echo chamber affect. Feed someone the same line of thought they lose the ability to think rationally about a topic.

    We could be in two weeks time be talking about the GOP having the keys to power to all of Washington yet some are predicting they are the next version of the Irish Progressive Democrats. :pac:


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    jank wrote: »
    Did many Irish people really give a **** that Obama was against gay marriage back in 2008. Id say very very few did. So, whats your point other than being deliberately obtuse?
    Jank -- this is your second warning today.

    Calm down or cards will be handed out.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    It probably says more about poverty. Dropping out of high school is more likely to be caused by social factors than stupidity, and the GOP is no friend to the poor.

    Maybe it says more about government and the failure to tackle poverty. Much easier to keep a community on welfare and rely on their votes in exchange for handouts rather than educate them and make them successful citizens of their community. The democrats are notorious for this in many urban areas in the US. They like to spend other peoples money to keep them in power.

    Reminds me of FF in some ways.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,384 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    jank wrote: »
    Let me get this straight

    The party that is by all intents and purposes neck and neck at the polls with the Democrats for the White House, is odds on favourite to take the House and may even take the Senate should totally disband, go home and give up politics if Romney loses the election......

    How did you come to that conclusion from what Galvasean said? He merely said that if they lost by a large margin, it would cause them to maybe rethink some of the aspects which might be putting people off voting for them (like the Tea Party, or cutting some members who cause controversy), whereas if they only lost by a little bit, they probably wouldn't change anything. Same would go if the roles were reversed, if the Democrats lost by a huge margin, they would have to rethink some of the aspects of their own party.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    jank wrote: »
    Used to vote democrat. Many who made it now vote for the GOP. Its a recognized demographic ,........... is this now?

    The policies I referred to earlier, the use of local party resources to institute legislation at state level, take over school boards, have conservatives appointed to high level office like the supreme court.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    jank wrote: »
    Sigh, well of course one can be concerned with these "laws" Romney may pass but maybe they should be far more concerned with laws passed in China or Russia or Sadui Arabia and so on.

    I wasn't aware they weren't.
    jank wrote: »
    Fairy dust and sparkles aside most people are self interested whether you like it or not. If that were not the case we would be living in a vastly different world now and communism would work!

    So let me get this straight, you are complaining that Irish people are supporting Obama because according to you they should be support Romney because his election will (may?) have greater economy benefit for Ireland and when it is pointed out to you that this is not the highest priority for everyone your argument is that it should be because most people are self interested.

    Brilliant :rolleyes:
    jank wrote: »
    Did many Irish people really give a **** that Obama was against gay marriage back in 2008.

    Yes.

    You seem to think you must support the person who matches entirely your ideology or you must support no one. That isn't how it works, it is a choice between two candidates. You support the one that more closely matches your ideology and out look.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,537 ✭✭✭joseph brand


    jank wrote: »
    Maybe it says more about government and the failure to tackle poverty. Much easier to keep a community on welfare and rely on their votes in exchange for handouts rather than educate them and make them successful citizens of their community. The democrats are notorious for this in many urban areas in the US. They like to spend other peoples money to keep them in power.

    Reminds me of FF in some ways.

    Haha. See, I knew you had a sense of humour. Coming out with stuff like this when you know of and probably condone, the teaching of creationism in US schools. It should be classed as child abuse, infecting kids minds with such ignorance.


    According to creationuts, a young Triceratops pulled the plough while the Brontosaurus allowed the kids slide down it's tail. Good times.

    526893292_e95eb57c10.jpg

    Romney isn't shy about taking full credit for the high standard of education in MA. And since he believes in mormonism, it's not exactly a stretch for him to believe that he himself, founded MIT in 1861.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Penn wrote: »
    How did you come to that conclusion from what Galvasean said?

    Jank in completely (and most likely deliberately) missing the point shocker.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    So what is your point! You dont like their policies so they should disband?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭fitz0


    jank wrote: »
    So what is your point! You dont like their policies so they should disband?
    Nobody mentioned the Republican party disbanding. I believe what galvasean was saying was that they should rethink their core message and their party's direction if it is rejected by the voting American public this November.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,384 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    fitz0 wrote: »
    Nobody mentioned the Republican party disbanding. I believe what galvasean was saying was that they should rethink their core message and their party's direction if it is rejected by the voting American public this November.

    Not even their core message, but just elements of the party (such as the Tea Party) which might be putting off voters. That's it. That's what every single political party in the world would do if they lost by a large majority; find out what is putting people off and try to fix it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 34,351 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    You're expecting the GOP to act rationally when they're in thrall to Tea Party nutcases and bible-bashing fundamentalists.

    If they lose next month, according to them it'll be because Romney was 'too liberal', 'not a true conservative', etc. :rolleyes:

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    ninja900 wrote: »
    If they lose next month, according to them it'll be because Romney was 'too liberal', 'not a true conservative', etc. :rolleyes:
    Quite true.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,537 ✭✭✭joseph brand


    Bachmann is a joke. (literally)



  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Penn wrote: »
    Not even their core message, but just elements of the party (such as the Tea Party) which might be putting off voters. That's it. That's what every single political party in the world would do if they lost by a large majority; find out what is putting people off and try to fix it.

    The tea party movement (which I think is a bit of a fraud personally) was much more vocal in the mid terms elections of 2010. In those the GOP retook the house. Again the hypothesis here doesn't relate to actual election results. Echo chamber effect again.

    If for example the GOP lost the white house but retook the house and the senate would that be a failure? What about the democrats, if they lose the house and the senate what should they do policy wise? Become more liberal or move to the center?


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,384 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    jank wrote: »
    The tea party movement (which I think is a bit of a fraud personally) was much more vocal in the mid terms elections of 2010. In those the GOP retook the house. Again the hypothesis here doesn't relate to actual election results. Echo chamber effect again.

    If for example the GOP lost the white house but retook the house and the senate would that be a failure? What about the democrats, if they lose the house and the senate what should they do policy wise? Become more liberal or move to the center?

    Again.... "...if they lost by a large majority..."

    If = Hypothetical
    Large Majority = approx. 70%

    That's it. If, hypothetically speaking, any party lost an election by a large majority and maybe only got 30% of the vote, they would probably have to take a look at their own party and try to find out what is putting off voters and how they could fix that, without completely abandoning their own principles and beliefs.

    You're seriously trying to find an argument where there is none.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Penn wrote: »
    Again.... "...if they lost by a large majority..."

    If = Hypothetical
    Large Majority = approx. 70%

    That's it. If, hypothetically speaking, any party lost an election by a large majority and maybe only got 30% of the vote, they would probably have to take a look at their own party and try to find out what is putting off voters and how they could fix that, without completely abandoning their own principles and beliefs.

    You're seriously trying to find an argument where there is none.

    Well we are talking about a scenario that will not happen as this election will have a breakdown of 47/48/49 - 51/52/53 ..... so it appears how ever crazy you think the tea party or the GOP is they are not going to be dramaticly changing tact anytime soon.


    And nobody mentioned a defeat of that size, in fact many posters mention that a Romney defeat alone should be cause enough to dramaticly change their position, so i guess there is no clear train of thought here other than hypothetical scenarios.


Advertisement