• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Mitt Romney the next new leader of the free world!!!

Richie said:
I quite strongly disagree with Obama on his stance on welfare and government spending but fudge me it'd be tough to vote Republican with the brick they spew.

Someone did however make a good point, which is that abortion is really a bigger issue in the media than it is in reality. The only way it can be made illegal is by the Supreme Court overruling Roe v Wade and deeming it unconstitutional, which isn't likely and is completely out of the Republicans hands. It's really not an issue that should affect someones vote, since nothing is going to change.
Click to expand...

Agree with the first paragraph. The modern Republican Party is not one that Reagan would recognose. He believed in small government, but he wanted effective government. He believed in individuals and responsibility, not "corporations are people" and corporate power without responsibility. The modern party would rather government fail than try and reform it effectively (note Ryan's completely unrealistic blueprint for cutting the deficit).

I disagree with the second. While if you live in the liberal parts it may seem a minor issue, there are huge swathes of the US were abortion is no longer available. While the SCOTUS doesn't look too keen to look at RvW at the moment, the position of the current court is far from certain. Chances are it would narrowly uphold it as Roberts seems more moderate than hoped for by his backers. But its close. We have already seen some of Scalia's comments on the role of religion. Another Republican presidency and one or two more conservative nominations would likely tilt the balance. The Republican party is run by extremists and they would propose fairly extreme people and vigorously oppose any moderate nomination.
 
Richie said:
I quite strongly disagree with Obama on his stance on welfare and government spending but fudge me it'd be tough to vote Republican with the brick they spew.

Someone did however make a good point, which is that abortion is really a bigger issue in the media than it is in reality. The only way it can be made illegal is by the Supreme Court overruling Roe v Wade and deeming it unconstitutional, which isn't likely and is completely out of the Republicans hands. It's really not an issue that should affect someones vote, since nothing is going to change.
Click to expand...

They won't overrule Roe vs Wade - it'll send the national crime statistics back through the roof. Obviously it would take 15-20 years to do so, but no party wants to do that.
 
Skinhead in a Suit said:
When you factor in the Citizens United decision and the Voter Registration limits Republican-controlled states have implemented, it makes a lot more sense.

Personally, I would have liked for Obama to have shunned any pro-Obama Super-PACs in this election to show what a croc of brick the Citizens United decision was. He could have taken the moral high road instead of getting into a mud-slinging contest with Romney. If Obama spent as much time selling the country on what he has achieved as he (and his PACs) do on tearing down Romney (which isn't particularly difficult IMO), then he should be able to win this comfortably. Unfortunately, he has lowered himself somewhat to their level and is now fighting them using their strategies.

My bags might be packed if Romney wins and the Republicans gain control over both Houses :(
Click to expand...

The worst thing about it is that the Super-PACS are pointless anyway. There's a huge misconception in the US about money and elections - mostly a confusion between cause and effect.

The scary truth is that whilst most believe that the candidate with the most funds will win (causing funding to be treated like an arms race), in reality the money goes to the candidate likely to win. A small distinction, but one that makes most of the whoring for funding worthless.
 
scaramanga said:
They won't overrule Roe vs Wade - it'll send the national crime statistics back through the roof. Obviously it would take 15-20 years to do so, but no party wants to do that.
Click to expand...


Assuming that the thesis is correct and note merely " a confusion between cause and effect", neither party cares about 15-20 years in the future. That's why they have crises in national debt, Medicare, etc.. The Republicans would probably see it as a potential vote winner as they are perceived as tough on crime and would naturally assume that all the future criminals would be democrats.
 
jts1882 said:
Assuming that the thesis is correct and note merely " a confusion between cause and effect", neither party cares about 15-20 years in the future. That's why they have crises in national debt, Medicare, etc.. The Republicans would probably see it as a potential vote winner as they are perceived as tough on crime and would naturally assume that all the future criminals would be democrats.
Click to expand...

It's certainly no confusion of cause and effect - I'm not entirely sure how a low present crime rate would begin to legalise abortions 16-18 years into the past. The beauty of the US when it comes to stats is that there are separate states that all pass laws in their own time (some not at all) so you have a lot of test cases.

Future criminals are rarely even voters, so no party is interested in them, the Republicans don't want the crime because it's their voters who are worst affected by it (more perception than fact, but a strong one) and the Democrats don't want it as they want to reduce the prison populations. Crime is bad for every party no matter who is in power when it rises - especially in the US where a president can only sit for 8 years, that's not enough time to even begin reversing things like crime stats.
 
Last edited:
Leeds Spur said:
You've read Freakonomics as well then?

Quality book
Click to expand...

Excellent. Planning to get around to Super Freakonomics at some point soon, and the podcasts are really good for passing the time on long drives.

I have to admit to being a bit of a stat analysis geek.
 
There is quite alot of controversy over that analysis though.......as you will know, correlation doesn't mean causation! Although the correlation in this instance is striking!
 
Leeds Spur said:
There is quite alot of controversy over that analysis though.......as you will know, correlation doesn't mean causation! Although the correlation in this instance is striking!
Click to expand...

There's mainly controversy over it because it's a fairly short path from there to the issue of Eugenics. Most people don't want to believe it because it's a hard thing to want to believe. Any sensible arguments I've heard against the updated version of the paper are either rebutted fully or reduce the effect but not by a huge amount.

The issue of correlation is discussed in the book, but different states enacted the law at different times. The crime rate dropped at different times matching that of the law enactment. The stats also show that states with a greater increase in abortions had a greater decrease in crime levels.
 
scaramanga said:
The worst thing about it is that the Super-PACS are pointless anyway. There's a huge misconception in the US about money and elections - mostly a confusion between cause and effect.

The scary truth is that whilst most believe that the candidate with the most funds will win (causing funding to be treated like an arms race), in reality the money goes to the candidate likely to win. A small distinction, but one that makes most of the whoring for funding worthless.
Click to expand...

Romney's Super PAC is pulling in the money. There's a lot of wealthy backers (Poch brothers, et al) that want Obama out. And in response to Skinhead's post, I honestly believe Obama had no other choice to raise money, on top of some other logistical things Super PACs can spend their money on that a campaign cannot. Citizens United is my favourite buttplug though. Requiring state-issued IDs to vote to combat "voter fraud", which is essentially non-existent is also a travesty.

Policy is not based on conviction, but on what will get a person re-elected. And to many, that path lies in campaigning for social values since some Americans aren't bothered with anything else. The economy feels like a sideshow at this point since it's so vague and ties in with Wall St. There are skilled jobs out there, but no people with skills. It's as if people expect Obama to show up to their house, help them write their resume and help get a job despite lacking all qualifications for their dream job.

I really do wish Obama was more of a rebel, but as much as I hate to say it, he is part of the establishment. ALL politicians/judges need to get flushed out. They're like cancers. New rules need to be written to keep them in check because when the branches of government keep each other in check, we don't get anything done. This truly has been the worst congress in history.
public-law-congress.jpg

That's what you get when you try to repeal Obamacare 34 times.

Sorry for going OT there... Romney's a fudgewit.
 
MEGADETH mainman Dave Mustaine, who recently made headlines when he told Canadian television and radio personality George Stroumboulopoulos that he is certain that Barack Obama "was born somewhere else than America," has now gone even further in his condemnation of the current president.

During MEGADETH's August 7 performance at Fort Canning in Singapore, Mustaine took an opportunity to address the crowd after someone threw a shoe onstage. The four-minute speech, which can be seen below, began innocently enough, with the frontman calling out the person that threw the shoe ("that's what happens when cousins fudge") and playfully making fun of a fan who kept interrupting him during his speech. He then launched into a brief rant against Obama, saying, "Back in my country, my president [makes puking sign with his finger in his mouth], he's trying to pass a gun ban, so he's staging all of these murders, like the 'Fast And Furious' thing down at the border; [the massacre in] Aurora, Colorado, all the people that were killed there; and now the beautiful people at the Sikh temple [near Milwaukee, Wisconsin]."

He continued, "I was talking to J.D., our promoter here tonight… What a great guy. I was saying, 'I don't know where I'm gonna live if America keeps going the way it's going because it looks like it's turning into Nazi America. And he said, 'Move down here to Singapore.'"

In a recent interview with conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, Mustaine said he was "disgusted" with Obama.

"See, the thing that I laugh about when I hear Obama say, 'Give the folks a chance,'" Mustaine said, responding to comments Obama made about small businesses at a campaign stop in Virginia. "'Give everybody a chance. Take away from the rich people.' Well, what happens when the folks that he's giving a chance gets a chance, becomes successful, is rich. Well, then all of a sudden, you're Obama's enemy now."

"I'm disgusted with this guy," he added. "He's my president, I respect the office of the presidency, but I think as a person and the things that he says, I've never heard anything this offensive ever come out of the mouth of a president. And I'm 50 — I've heard a lot of presidents talk in my life."

Mustaine then went on to again question the president's American citizenship and slam the first lady for her fashion choices.

"Why hasn't somebody moved to impeach this man?" Mustaine said. "With all of the proof about his birth certificate being fake. And you see the signs in Kenya that say 'the birthplace of Barack Obama.' Hello?! C'mon, guys. How stupid are we right now? I guess the best revenge is when you look back in history at what Michelle [Obama] wore at his inauguration and she had a black dress on with two red triangles, so she looked like a black widow turned upside down. So there's gotta be some symbology there. You just don't wear something like that to some event like that without there being some kind of future message being told."

http://www.blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=178194
 
fudging birthers are retarded......he was born in Hawaii FFS........nothing will make these numpties give in......it's the only way they can win......it's blatant racism IMO.
 
Leeds Spur said:
fudging birthers are retarded......he was born in Hawaii FFS........nothing will make these numpties give in......it's the only way they can win......it's blatant racism IMO.
Click to expand...

Yup, I'd say they're actually worse than the everyday conspiracy theorists because their 'conspiracy' is tinged with racism. Also, the whole refuting the birther claim not once, but TWICE (with both forms of the birth certificate).
Oh, by the way, 50% of Republicans are birthers. Again, I don't like to generalize, but I can easily say that at least half of the Republican base is full of stubborn xenophobes. When presented with evidence and facts, they whip up some flimflam for fear of having their worldviews shattered. Everyone has biases, but these people need to all get on a boat and fudge off somewhere else.
 
Leeds Spur said:
There is quite alot of controversy over that analysis though.......as you will know, correlation doesn't mean causation! Although the correlation in this instance is striking!
Click to expand...

The correlation isn't that striking, or even visible, without various normalisations. From my reading in the past, this claim has been thoroughly debunked. The end of the crack epidemic seems a much better explanation.
 
papaspur said:
Yup, I'd say they're actually worse than the everyday conspiracy theorists because their 'conspiracy' is tinged with racism. Also, the whole refuting the birther claim not once, but TWICE (with both forms of the birth certificate).
Oh, by the way, 50% of Republicans are birthers. Again, I don't like to generalize, but I can easily say that at least half of the Republican base is full of stubborn xenophobes. When presented with evidence and facts, they whip up some flimflam for fear of having their worldviews shattered. Everyone has biases, but these people need to all get on a boat and fudge off somewhere else.
Click to expand...

A ridiculously high % think Obama is a Muslim......like that should be an issue anyway?!!

A muslim would never be President anyway......but then neither would an athiest!
 
Leeds Spur said:
A ridiculously high % think Obama is a Muslim......like that should be an issue anyway?!!

A muslim would never be President anyway......but then neither would an athiest!
Click to expand...

That's too bad... although I think Obama is an atheist in private. For him, saying GHod Bless America is obligatory.
 
Leeds Spur said:
Not sure about that mate - he's been attending the same Chicago church for 20 years!
Click to expand...

Well if you were a secret Muslim, wouldn't you seek out a controversial pastor, foster a long relationship, and defend him as a person after accusations of anti-semitism and anti-Americanism. Perfect cover.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back