Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Following the Last Lion: MA Senate Elections

13637383941

Posts

  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    hjparcins wrote: »
    I don't think they were thrown out, so much as a choice between experience coupled with a poor candidate and inexperience coupled with a decent candidate.

    I mean, sure McCain was experienced as all get out, but he still blew pretty damn hard. It's not like there were two equally nice candidates and the American people got a boner for inexperience.

    No, no. They were thrown out. Otherwise we would have our first female president rather than our first black president right now, because Hillary Clinton was far, far more qualified than Obama.

    Right, but again, not a very excellent candidate.

    So there are two things that people find important: Degree of Experience (XP) and Degree of Excellence (HP).

    Obama had less XP than either Clinton or McCain, but apparently had more HP, so he won the battle as it became protracted.

    I mean I feel like it's silly to say people "threw out" XP, as though they really loved the idea of an inexperienced person. If that were true, more people would have been jazzed up by Palin. I feel like they felt an ideal candidate would be experienced and excellent, which is why Clinton/Obama got thrown around a lot.

  • 2 lazy2 lazy __BANNED USERS
    edited January 2010
    So Obama could pretty much lose 2012

  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    2 lazy wrote: »
    2 lazy wrote: »
    Hillary Clinton is still probably one of the most qualified candidates for President in the Democratic party

    I mean, after Obama is done who the fuck is left?

    Which is scary, considering how poorly she ran her campaign. But then, we're kinda seeing with Obama that running a good campaign doesn't translate to governing well.

    Has everybody here pretty much come to agree that Obama is shit

    I haven't completely given up on him, but I am very unhappy with his performance this first year.

    Yeah he only accomplished more in his first year than anyone else. What a shitty President.

    You're thinking of health care only, he signed Ledbetter, credit card reform, the stimulus, started funding stem cell research again, opened up needle exchange again...

    There's lots of good shit he has done. Yes he is still trying to stick way too close to being bipartisan and for whatever reason not realizing the Republicans will never sign onto anything he wants. But very unhappy? Come on, think outside health care reform and he's done pretty damn good.

    Except for financial reform. He's definitely done shitty with that.

    metroid_sig.jpg
  • Tiger BurningTiger Burning (poster is a bear)Registered User, SolidSaints Tube regular
    edited January 2010
    2 lazy wrote: »
    So what would you guys grade him?

    D-?

    F?

    Sounds like a good thread. Belie your name. Make a new thread.

    (Not being snarky - it really would make a good thread.)

    “You could tell by the way he talked, though, that he had gone to school a long time. That was probably what was wrong with him.”
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    And civil liberties/executive power where he's been fucking pathetic.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • SavantSavant Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    2 lazy wrote: »
    So what would you guys grade him?

    D-?

    F?

    Sounds like a good thread. Belie your name. Make a new thread.

    (Not being snarky - it really would make a good thread.)

    It's another alt, so it's probably best just to ignore him.

  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Death Groupie Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Except for financial reform. He's definitely done shitty with that.
    Shame that's probably the most important thing on his plate at the moment. :(

    steam_sig.png
  • 2 lazy2 lazy __BANNED USERS
    edited January 2010
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    2 lazy wrote: »
    2 lazy wrote: »
    Hillary Clinton is still probably one of the most qualified candidates for President in the Democratic party

    I mean, after Obama is done who the fuck is left?

    Which is scary, considering how poorly she ran her campaign. But then, we're kinda seeing with Obama that running a good campaign doesn't translate to governing well.

    Has everybody here pretty much come to agree that Obama is shit

    I haven't completely given up on him, but I am very unhappy with his performance this first year.

    Yeah he only accomplished more in his first year than anyone else. What a shitty President.

    You're thinking of health care only, he signed Ledbetter, credit card reform, the stimulus, started funding stem cell research again, opened up needle exchange again...

    There's lots of good shit he has done. Yes he is still trying to stick way too close to being bipartisan and for whatever reason not realizing the Republicans will never sign onto anything he wants. But very unhappy? Come on, think outside health care reform and he's done pretty damn good.

    Except for financial reform. He's definitely done shitty with that.

    Where the fuck is this credit card reform?

    The stimulus was shit and is not working fast enough again.

    Stem Cell research? That shit should have been done ages ago anyway and is not a big deal anymore

    Ledbetter? What the fuck that literally is pretty damn useless for most people.

    Why the fuck isn't gitmo closed

    why the fuck are we not out of Iraq right now

    where are the jobs

    and healthcare holy shit

    COPENHAGEN!!!!

  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    And civil liberties/executive power where he's been fucking pathetic.

    I'm not gonna grade him on that in his first year. If he still hasn't done anything about that after this year, I'll think differently.

    metroid_sig.jpg
  • hjparcinshjparcins Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Done a lot? Maybe. But I don't think 'throw a bunch of shit at the wall and see what sticks' is a very good platform for gauging the success of a president.

  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    I don't know why anyone would be particularly disappointed by Obama's first year. He hasn't been much of anything except a decent President. I think people forget how little a President is actually supposed to be doing. I mean, even Bush, who I thought was a bag of nutsacks, wasn't able to ruin all that much in 8 whole years no matter how much he tried.

  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    2 lazy wrote: »
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    2 lazy wrote: »
    2 lazy wrote: »
    Hillary Clinton is still probably one of the most qualified candidates for President in the Democratic party

    I mean, after Obama is done who the fuck is left?

    Which is scary, considering how poorly she ran her campaign. But then, we're kinda seeing with Obama that running a good campaign doesn't translate to governing well.

    Has everybody here pretty much come to agree that Obama is shit

    I haven't completely given up on him, but I am very unhappy with his performance this first year.

    Yeah he only accomplished more in his first year than anyone else. What a shitty President.

    You're thinking of health care only, he signed Ledbetter, credit card reform, the stimulus, started funding stem cell research again, opened up needle exchange again...

    There's lots of good shit he has done. Yes he is still trying to stick way too close to being bipartisan and for whatever reason not realizing the Republicans will never sign onto anything he wants. But very unhappy? Come on, think outside health care reform and he's done pretty damn good.

    Except for financial reform. He's definitely done shitty with that.

    Where the fuck is this credit card reform?

    The stimulus was shit and is not working fast enough again.

    Stem Cell research? That shit should have been done ages ago anyway and is not a big deal anymore

    Ledbetter? What the fuck that literally is pretty damn useless for most people.

    Why the fuck isn't gitmo closed

    why the fuck are we not out of Iraq right now

    where are the jobs

    and healthcare holy shit

    COPENHAGEN!!!!

    Is this a joke post?

    Are you Obs again? Godammit, Obs.

    metroid_sig.jpg
  • Bionic MonkeyBionic Monkey Registered User, ClubPA
    edited January 2010
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    2 lazy wrote: »
    2 lazy wrote: »
    Hillary Clinton is still probably one of the most qualified candidates for President in the Democratic party

    I mean, after Obama is done who the fuck is left?

    Which is scary, considering how poorly she ran her campaign. But then, we're kinda seeing with Obama that running a good campaign doesn't translate to governing well.

    Has everybody here pretty much come to agree that Obama is shit

    I haven't completely given up on him, but I am very unhappy with his performance this first year.

    Yeah he only accomplished more in his first year than anyone else. What a shitty President.

    You're thinking of health care only, he signed Ledbetter, credit card reform, the stimulus, started funding stem cell research again, opened up needle exchange again...

    There's lots of good shit he has done. Yes he is still trying to stick way too close to being bipartisan and for whatever reason not realizing the Republicans will never sign onto anything he wants. But very unhappy? Come on, think outside health care reform and he's done pretty damn good.

    Except for financial reform. He's definitely done shitty with that.

    Almost all of that was straight out of the gate. Once he settled in, the picture has been a lot murkier.

    sig_megas_armed.jpg
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    It was pretty obviously Obs.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • Greg USNGreg USN Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    hjparcins wrote: »
    I don't think they were thrown out, so much as a choice between experience coupled with a poor candidate and inexperience coupled with a decent candidate.

    I mean, sure McCain was experienced as all get out, but he still blew pretty damn hard. It's not like there were two equally nice candidates and the American people got a boner for inexperience.

    No, no. They were thrown out. Otherwise we would have our first female president rather than our first black president right now, because Hillary Clinton was far, far more qualified than Obama.

    Right, but again, not a very excellent candidate.

    So there are two things that people find important: Degree of Experience (XP) and Degree of Excellence (HP).

    Obama had less XP than either Clinton or McCain, but apparently had more HP, so he won the battle as it became protracted.

    I mean I feel like it's silly to say people "threw out" XP, as though they really loved the idea of an inexperienced person. If that were true, more people would have been jazzed up by Palin. I feel like they felt an ideal candidate would be experienced and excellent, which is why Clinton/Obama got thrown around a lot.

    McCain had lots of MP because he was a wise old wizard but his spells took to long to cast and got ko'd

    sorry, i couldn't resist

    FFXIV Petra Ironheart
    Clockwork Mog the smaller, quieter Penny-Arcade free company on Sargatanas. Recruiting 21 and older members. PM for details
    Join Raidcall 7779399 (open to all that want to chat!)
    https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/729901127059317/
  • HachfaceHachface Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    It was pretty obviously Obs.

    God damn it why hasn't he been IP banned

  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Hachface wrote: »
    It was pretty obviously Obs.

    God damn it why hasn't he been IP banned

    Posting from the library like a hobo I imagine.

  • Bionic MonkeyBionic Monkey Registered User, ClubPA
    edited January 2010
    It was pretty obviously Obs.

    That's like three alts in two days.

    sig_megas_armed.jpg
  • Tiger BurningTiger Burning (poster is a bear)Registered User, SolidSaints Tube regular
    edited January 2010
    I like him. But then I'm a centrist, and a pragmatist, and I think that he is, too. Also, nuclear disarmament is kind of a thing with me, and I was surprised and thrilled when he made it a priority just out of nowhere.

    “You could tell by the way he talked, though, that he had gone to school a long time. That was probably what was wrong with him.”
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Greg USN wrote: »
    hjparcins wrote: »
    I don't think they were thrown out, so much as a choice between experience coupled with a poor candidate and inexperience coupled with a decent candidate.

    I mean, sure McCain was experienced as all get out, but he still blew pretty damn hard. It's not like there were two equally nice candidates and the American people got a boner for inexperience.

    No, no. They were thrown out. Otherwise we would have our first female president rather than our first black president right now, because Hillary Clinton was far, far more qualified than Obama.

    Right, but again, not a very excellent candidate.

    So there are two things that people find important: Degree of Experience (XP) and Degree of Excellence (HP).

    Obama had less XP than either Clinton or McCain, but apparently had more HP, so he won the battle as it became protracted.

    I mean I feel like it's silly to say people "threw out" XP, as though they really loved the idea of an inexperienced person. If that were true, more people would have been jazzed up by Palin. I feel like they felt an ideal candidate would be experienced and excellent, which is why Clinton/Obama got thrown around a lot.

    McCain had lots of MP because he was a wise old wizard but his spells took to long to cast and got ko'd

    sorry, i couldn't resist

    Somebody break out the Pokemon thing?

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • Greg USNGreg USN Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    I like him. But then I'm a centrist, and a pragmatist, and I think that he is, too. Also, nuclear disarmament is kind of a thing with me, I was surprised and thrilled when he made it a priority just out of nowhere.

    I'm kind of meh on that one.
    Reducing nuclear weapons is a good thing. Eliminating them not so much. We do need some form of deterrence. In a perfect world where everyone wants to play nice then hell yeah scrap them, clearly we are not there yet.

    FFXIV Petra Ironheart
    Clockwork Mog the smaller, quieter Penny-Arcade free company on Sargatanas. Recruiting 21 and older members. PM for details
    Join Raidcall 7779399 (open to all that want to chat!)
    https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/729901127059317/
  • JudgementJudgement Registered User
    edited January 2010
    I like him. But then I'm a centrist, and a pragmatist, and I think that he is, too. Also, nuclear disarmament is kind of a thing with me, and I was surprised and thrilled when he made it a priority just out of nowhere.

    The nuclear disarmament policy was(to me, not trying to be a stick in the mud) a way of keeping his more moderate/liberal base happy and to distract from HC for a minute.

    309151-1.png
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Judgement wrote: »
    I like him. But then I'm a centrist, and a pragmatist, and I think that he is, too. Also, nuclear disarmament is kind of a thing with me, and I was surprised and thrilled when he made it a priority just out of nowhere.

    The nuclear disarmament policy was(to me, not trying to be a stick in the mud) a way of keeping his more moderate/liberal base happy and to distract from HC for a minute.

    Nah, it really is one of his passions, unless he's been planning this since undergrad.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • 2 lazy2 lazy __BANNED USERS
    edited January 2010
    2 lazy wrote: »
    So what would you guys grade him?

    D-?

    F?

    Sounds like a good thread. Belie your name. Make a new thread.

    (Not being snarky - it really would make a good thread.)

    done

  • Tiger BurningTiger Burning (poster is a bear)Registered User, SolidSaints Tube regular
    edited January 2010
    The only arguably justified deterrent use of a strategic nuclear arsenal is to deter another country's strategic nuclear arsenal. If we can eliminate all strategic nuclear arsenals then it would be more than worth the possibility of increasing the probability of conventional wars to eliminate the non-zero possibility of ending human history.

    If Obama could strike a deal to eliminate the world's strategic arsenals, he could kick back and smoke a fatty for the remainder of his term and still make my top 5 presidents list.

    “You could tell by the way he talked, though, that he had gone to school a long time. That was probably what was wrong with him.”
  • JudgementJudgement Registered User
    edited January 2010
    Judgement wrote: »
    I like him. But then I'm a centrist, and a pragmatist, and I think that he is, too. Also, nuclear disarmament is kind of a thing with me, and I was surprised and thrilled when he made it a priority just out of nowhere.

    The nuclear disarmament policy was(to me, not trying to be a stick in the mud) a way of keeping his more moderate/liberal base happy and to distract from HC for a minute.

    Nah, it really is one of his passions, unless he's been planning this since undergrad.

    I'm not saying that wasn't one of his priorities, and I completely agree with it.

    It's timing, however, was a bit suspicious to me, as I felt we had a slightly more pressing issue(like, say, HC). The time he announced he wanted to finally rid us of the e-penises was in the troughs of trying to get UHC with idiot Repubs and sleeping Dems? Just makes me feel it was a political tool. Good overall, mind you, but still...

    309151-1.png
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    The President can multitask.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • JudgementJudgement Registered User
    edited January 2010
    The President can multitask.

    ...
    ...
    ...
    ...Touche.

    309151-1.png
  • Greg USNGreg USN Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    The only arguably justified deterrent use of a strategic nuclear arsenal is to deter another country's strategic nuclear arsenal. If we can eliminate all strategic nuclear arsenals then it would be more than worth the possibility of increasing the probability of conventional wars to eliminate the non-zero possibility of ending human history.

    If Obama could strike a deal to eliminate the world's strategic arsenals, he could kick back and smoke a fatty for the remainder of his term and still make my top 5 presidents list.

    For sure.
    But with the current world state Israel, Iran, India, Pakistan, and North Korea are not going to give up their weapons\ambitions. Perhaps we could strike a deal with russia.

    Until we live in a world where various powers are not at their throats its a waste of time. Improve world climate before attempting to disarm.

    FFXIV Petra Ironheart
    Clockwork Mog the smaller, quieter Penny-Arcade free company on Sargatanas. Recruiting 21 and older members. PM for details
    Join Raidcall 7779399 (open to all that want to chat!)
    https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/729901127059317/
  • Bionic MonkeyBionic Monkey Registered User, ClubPA
    edited January 2010
    The only arguably justified deterrent use of a strategic nuclear arsenal is to deter another country's strategic nuclear arsenal. If we can eliminate all strategic nuclear arsenals then it would be more than worth the possibility of increasing the probability of conventional wars to eliminate the non-zero possibility of ending human history.

    If Obama could strike a deal to eliminate the world's strategic arsenals, he could kick back and smoke a fatty for the remainder of his term and still make my top 5 presidents list.

    Shit, if he actually succeeded in not just reducing, but eliminating the world's nuclear arsenals, he'd be listed in the same breath as Washington and Lincoln for centuries to come.

    sig_megas_armed.jpg
  • ronyaronya Arrrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Even if we miraculously found a way to guarantee that a country isn't hiding a few hundred warheads in a mountain somewhere - which isn't really possible - countries bound by a disarmament agreement would just sit in a "ready state", preparing to crank up production again the moment with a few month's notice.

    Reducing armament from their present ridiculous levels is pretty good, though. Wait until the PRC decides to increase its stockpile, if it ever does so. Until then, being able to waste all of humanity at a moment's notice is rather overkill.

  • SavantSavant Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    ronya wrote: »
    Even if we miraculously found a way to guarantee that a country isn't hiding a few hundred warheads in a mountain somewhere - which isn't really possible - countries bound by a disarmament agreement would just sit in a "ready state", preparing to crank up production again the moment with a few month's notice.

    Reducing armament from their present ridiculous levels is pretty good, though. Wait until the PRC decides to increase its stockpile, if it ever does so. Until then, being able to waste all of humanity at a moment's notice is rather overkill.

    I'd be happy just to reduce it to a level where you can't nuke any potential enemies 10 times over, if only for the reason of not needing to expend resources to keep that massive of a nuclear arsenal.

    From what I've been able to gatherl, China thinks that having enough nukes to take out some major cities is enough deterrence, and being able to completely obliterate the enemy is overkill.

  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Savant wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    Even if we miraculously found a way to guarantee that a country isn't hiding a few hundred warheads in a mountain somewhere - which isn't really possible - countries bound by a disarmament agreement would just sit in a "ready state", preparing to crank up production again the moment with a few month's notice.

    Reducing armament from their present ridiculous levels is pretty good, though. Wait until the PRC decides to increase its stockpile, if it ever does so. Until then, being able to waste all of humanity at a moment's notice is rather overkill.

    I'd be happy just to reduce it to a level where you can't nuke any potential enemies 10 times over, if only for the reason of not needing to expend resources to keep that massive of a nuclear arsenal.

    From what I've been able to gatherl, China thinks that having enough nukes to take out some major cities is enough deterrence, and being able to completely obliterate the enemy is overkill.

    the amount of damage that you can do is irrelevant. What matters is second strike capability- you need to make sure you have at least some nuclear weapons survive a nuclear attack. With submarine missiles, you don't need as many for that as you do with ground-based ones.

  • AneurhythmiaAneurhythmia Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Greg USN wrote: »
    WRT the army. While there is lots of room for debate about the need for the Iraq war, I don't agree that Afghanistan was a war of choice. The way it was executed is debatable, but one can simply not take action after a spectacularly horrific attack/opening move like 9/11. If we acted sooner on intel, more covert means could have been used to naturalize the threat though.
    I know what you meant, but this would be hilarious.

    1LRdqui.png
  • Greg USNGreg USN Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Greg USN wrote: »
    WRT the army. While there is lots of room for debate about the need for the Iraq war, I don't agree that Afghanistan was a war of choice. The way it was executed is debatable, but one can simply not take action after a spectacularly horrific attack/opening move like 9/11. If we acted sooner on intel, more covert means could have been used to naturalize the threat though.
    I know what you meant, but this would be hilarious.

    I was thinking we could have planted some trees and what not.

    FFXIV Petra Ironheart
    Clockwork Mog the smaller, quieter Penny-Arcade free company on Sargatanas. Recruiting 21 and older members. PM for details
    Join Raidcall 7779399 (open to all that want to chat!)
    https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/729901127059317/
  • AneurhythmiaAneurhythmia Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    Greg USN wrote: »
    Greg USN wrote: »
    WRT the army. While there is lots of room for debate about the need for the Iraq war, I don't agree that Afghanistan was a war of choice. The way it was executed is debatable, but one can simply not take action after a spectacularly horrific attack/opening move like 9/11. If we acted sooner on intel, more covert means could have been used to naturalize the threat though.
    I know what you meant, but this would be hilarious.

    I was thinking we could have planted some trees and what not.

    Oh, I was thinking naturalize, like bring them inside our borders, give them fair trials, and upon the inevitable release of some innocents, offer them work visas while they sort out their immigration status and adapt to our culture...

    1LRdqui.png
  • Greg USNGreg USN Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    A green Afghanistan is a good Afghanistan!

    FFXIV Petra Ironheart
    Clockwork Mog the smaller, quieter Penny-Arcade free company on Sargatanas. Recruiting 21 and older members. PM for details
    Join Raidcall 7779399 (open to all that want to chat!)
    https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/729901127059317/
  • AneurhythmiaAneurhythmia Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    There's only one plant in Afghanistan I'm interested in.

    1LRdqui.png
  • HacksawHacksaw J Duggan Wrestler at LawRegistered User regular
    edited January 2010
    There's only one plant in Afghanistan I'm interested in.
    You and Kurt Cobain.

    Well, if he were still alive.

  • Greg USNGreg USN Registered User regular
    edited January 2010
    There's only one plant in Afghanistan I'm interested in.

    Well played sir.
    Well played.

    FFXIV Petra Ironheart
    Clockwork Mog the smaller, quieter Penny-Arcade free company on Sargatanas. Recruiting 21 and older members. PM for details
    Join Raidcall 7779399 (open to all that want to chat!)
    https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/729901127059317/
Sign In or Register to comment.