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!

2010 Midterm Elections, or: Barnum Was Right

1535456585962

Posts

  • jungleroomxjungleroomx Aaron Hernandez shot me through the heartRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010

    I just saw a "I'm Joe Miller and I improved this message." that was just Obama going "Yes we can" interspersed with Lisa Murkowski (Who I will remind people is a republican) going "Yes we can." and then the music get's all dramatic and 'UBER DOOMY.' and the words "WALL. STREET. BAILOUT." appear when Obama says "YES. WE. CAN." finished with "Don't be fooled again".

    I would have been pissed at it if I honestly didn't find it so hilariously lame. :D

    Does... does nobody remember the fact that Bush spearheaded the efforts to do the Wall Street Bailout?

    Does nobody get the fact that these investment banks... if they fail, they take the vast majority of our economy with them?

    I mean, what the fucking hell?

    Spoiler:
  • juice for jesusjuice for jesus Registered User
    edited October 2010
    The anti-bailout sentiment is pure emotion, classic cutting off your nose to spite your face. They never give an alternative. It's super duper retarded now since the bank part of TARP is in break-even status.

    Lanlaorn wrote: »
    That's just insulting, I think DBZ is bad but I'm not going to insinuate that it only appeals to people who are equal parts retards and psychopaths.
  • jungleroomxjungleroomx Aaron Hernandez shot me through the heartRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I've tried numerous times to explain to people that FDIC-insured consumer banks should not be lending out sub-prime mortgages, and CDS's shouldn't have been given out on such a risky venture. If the deregulation of the late 90's hadn't happened, the environment in which the country went sub-prime crazy couldn't have existed.

    But its easier to blame people for not paying their bills and socialism.

    I'm... I'm just soooooooo angry right now. I think I may go stomp a womans head.

    Spoiler:
  • Professor PhobosProfessor Phobos Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    The anti-bailout sentiment is pure emotion, classic cutting off your nose to spite your face. They never give an alternative. It's super duper retarded now since the bank part of TARP is in break-even status.

    Isn't TARP on track to be a net revenue gain for the government? I heard that somewhere. Even if not, we got almost all of it back already!

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I've tried numerous times to explain to people that FDIC-insured consumer banks should not be lending out sub-prime mortgages, and CDS's shouldn't have been given out on such a risky venture. If the deregulation of the late 90's hadn't happened, the environment in which the country went sub-prime crazy couldn't have existed.

    But its easier to blame people for not paying their bills and socialism.

    I'm... I'm just soooooooo angry right now. I think I may go stomp a womans head.

    Excuse me, that kind of behavior is never acceptable when done in anger.

    Only acceptable if she's saying something you don't like.

  • Alchemist449Alchemist449 Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    As an intern for one of the major senate races (one that stands a serious chance), I am looking at the busiest four days of my life. WOOOOOOOOOOOOO

  • juice for jesusjuice for jesus Registered User
    edited October 2010
    The anti-bailout sentiment is pure emotion, classic cutting off your nose to spite your face. They never give an alternative. It's super duper retarded now since the bank part of TARP is in break-even status.

    Isn't TARP on track to be a net revenue gain for the government? I heard that somewhere. Even if not, we got almost all of it back already!

    Possibly. I heard a quote from someone TARP-related (Geithner maybe), the gist of which was "the government isn't in the business of making profit", which makes me think they'll be satisfied with breaking even or taking a (relatively) small loss. Some of the TARP bailouts will lose money, AIG was and is a fucking disaster. Fannie/Freddie were technically separate, but they are even bigger money pits. The money that went into actual banks should make a profit, though.

    Keep in mind also, the same people complaining about TARP and bailouts in general also complain about unemployment! Jeez, employment would be so much better if a bunch of banks and the auto industry went under.

    Lanlaorn wrote: »
    That's just insulting, I think DBZ is bad but I'm not going to insinuate that it only appeals to people who are equal parts retards and psychopaths.
  • a5ehrena5ehren AtlantaRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    WMain00 wrote: »
    Watching the daily show with Obama I can't help but feel its a little...odd...

    I've always considered the daily show to be a satirical political comedy show. I've never seen it as a front end debate program, so the use of it otherwise to push forward a message from the president of the united states seems...silly.

    Perhaps this is a british thing. There's no such thing as talk shows over here, nor would we ever see the pm be on one, referring such political debates to question time stuff.

    Edit: I mean any seriousness is ruined by a silly title screen to the show.

    We don't have question time so all campaigning and "debate" is done through the media.

    I'd say TDS used to be more of a The Onion-style of satire (pointing out the absurdities of current events with fake news - you still get some of this with the correspondent reports), but the main focus of the show for the last several years has been to directly reply to stupid shit from politicians and media with contradictory evidence (usually a video clip of the same person saying something completely opposite in the past).

    That said, it is certainly unusual for a sitting POTUS to go on a show of this type, but this was a pretty calculated move for the Democratic party - TDS viewers are mostly young liberals and the party needed to remind them to vote.

  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    The anti-bailout sentiment is pure emotion, classic cutting off your nose to spite your face. They never give an alternative. It's super duper retarded now since the bank part of TARP is in break-even status.

    Isn't TARP on track to be a net revenue gain for the government? I heard that somewhere. Even if not, we got almost all of it back already!

    tarp was signed by bush, it's perfect in every way

    now as for the other bailouts...

  • Brian KrakowBrian Krakow Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    What a half-assed voter suppression racket:
    "Republicans are trying to trick us!" the flier reads. "When you vote straight ticket Democrat, it is actually voting for Republicans and your vote doesn't count. We are urging everyone to VOTE for BILL WHITE. A VOTE for BILL WHITE is a VOTE for the ENTIRE DEMOCRATIC ticket. We have fought too hard to let Republicans use voting machines to deny us our basic rights. We must guard the change and NOT VOTE STRAIGHT TICKET DEMOCRAT!"

    They couldn't come up with a better story than that? Really?

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    NOVEMBER 2 IS OPPOSITE DAY!

  • lonelyahavalonelyahava One day, I will be able to say to myself "I am beautiful and I am perfect just the way I am"Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Love the Lawrence O'Donnell interview going on right now.

    I'm really kinda getting into the way his show is being set up. Well, I'm warming up to it at least.

    My Little Corner of the World || I am ravelried! || My Steam!
    You have to fight through some bad days, to earn the best days of your life.
  • SavantSavant Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    The anti-bailout sentiment is pure emotion, classic cutting off your nose to spite your face. They never give an alternative. It's super duper retarded now since the bank part of TARP is in break-even status.

    Isn't TARP on track to be a net revenue gain for the government? I heard that somewhere. Even if not, we got almost all of it back already!

    A fair number of the more egregious bailouts were handled outside of the TARP framework, particularly the AIG bailout. I think that that was handled more directly through the Fed.

    Also, some of the remaining after effects of the response to the financial meltdown is that a lot of the garbage got moved to the government's or Federal Reserve's books, and never got written down to a realistic valuation. So we're still on the hook for a whole lot of potential downside.

  • SammyFSammyF Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Savant wrote: »
    The anti-bailout sentiment is pure emotion, classic cutting off your nose to spite your face. They never give an alternative. It's super duper retarded now since the bank part of TARP is in break-even status.

    Isn't TARP on track to be a net revenue gain for the government? I heard that somewhere. Even if not, we got almost all of it back already!

    A fair number of the more egregious bailouts were handled outside of the TARP framework, particularly the AIG bailout. I think that that was handled more directly through the Fed.

    Also, some of the remaining after effects of the response to the financial meltdown is that a lot of the garbage got moved to the government's or Federal Reserve's books, and never got written down to a realistic valuation. So we're still on the hook for a whole lot of potential downside.

    True. Also another one of those things done in September of 2008, I.E. during the other guy's term.

    The part that gets me about TARP is that we already tried doing things the tea-baggers way on that. We tried not passing TARP; it failed its first floor vote in the House of Representatives in September 2008. That same day, the stock market lost eight percentage points. The Dow Jones Industrial Average saw its largest single-day points loss in the history of the index. We've tried the Tea Bagger's policies, so we don't even have to speculate about the results. We know definitively and from experience that the results would be economic collapse.

  • HenroidHenroid Nobody Nowhere fastRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    From James Urbaniak's Twitter:
    Um, it was universally condemned. RT @ChristineOD Tonight my campaign posted a response to the universal condoning of the Gawker Story
    O'Donnell staff alerted "condone" is opposite of "condemn." Facebook headline changed, text still says "condoning." http://on.fb.me/bABQLC
    .@ChristineOD campaign manager Matt Moran threatening to "crush" Twitter if O'Donnell "condone" error is archived.

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog (6/15/14)
  • juice for jesusjuice for jesus Registered User
    edited October 2010
    Is Matt Moran wearing a Guy Fawkes mask, poised to unleash his DDoS attack?

    Lanlaorn wrote: »
    That's just insulting, I think DBZ is bad but I'm not going to insinuate that it only appeals to people who are equal parts retards and psychopaths.
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    The anti-bailout sentiment is pure emotion, classic cutting off your nose to spite your face. They never give an alternative. It's super duper retarded now since the bank part of TARP is in break-even status.

    Isn't TARP on track to be a net revenue gain for the government? I heard that somewhere. Even if not, we got almost all of it back already!

    I think the number I've seen is that it's going to cost around 38 billion. Fair price for avoiding catastrophic meltdown.

    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.")
  • ImperiusVImperiusV Registered User
    edited October 2010
    A fairly clever reaction to the fact that her name has to be wrote in. I like it.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQSy6GRsuuo&p=3E0F25782E3C38DD&index=5&playnext=2

  • Armored GorillaArmored Gorilla Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I hate everything about that commercial. It's like the complete opposite of a mudslinging ad, but completely vapid, empty of any point or meaning beyond blatant name recognition.

    "I'm a mad god. The Mad God, actually. It's a family title. Gets passed down from me to myself every few thousand years."
  • BlackjackBlackjack Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    That is actually really clever. Well done, Murkowski ad people.

    steam_sig.png

    3DS: 1607-3034-6970 | Let's Play Avadon 2!
  • Armored GorillaArmored Gorilla Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Feh, I guess there's the whole write-in thing too.

    "I'm a mad god. The Mad God, actually. It's a family title. Gets passed down from me to myself every few thousand years."
  • ImperiusVImperiusV Registered User
    edited October 2010
    She's got better ads than Joe Miller. He's focused on throwing Republican buzzwords and trying to appear hip. Although the beginning of the Halloween ad made me laugh.

    "She-who-must-not-be-named" (Amusingly, she isn't)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uapr1khsy78

    "Hello Voters" (That splash you just heard was the meme jumping the shark)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEL5UKQxsUE

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't actually seen Christine O'Donnell or her campaign deny the veracity of the article...?

    She's the pro-slut-shaming candidate in the race, so I don't think she gets to complain about it when it happens to her. Good on Gawker for bringing in the big guns, and exactly the kind of story that a Republican wouldn't hesitate to use against a Democrat to attack their "family values" credentials.

  • Brian KrakowBrian Krakow Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't actually seen Christine O'Donnell or her campaign deny the veracity of the article...?

    She's the pro-slut-shaming candidate in the race, so I don't think she gets to complain about it when it happens to her. Good on Gawker for bringing in the big guns, and exactly the kind of story that a Republican wouldn't hesitate to use against a Democrat to attack their "family values" credentials.
    Christine O'Donnell is down by so much that it's just petty to publish a not-very-scandalous article about how she showed her vajayjay to some bro. Yeah, it shows that she's a hypocrite, but I don't see the point of shaming her when she's already a national laughingstock.

    I'm all for bringing in the big guns, but only when it accomplishes something.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't actually seen Christine O'Donnell or her campaign deny the veracity of the article...?

    She's the pro-slut-shaming candidate in the race, so I don't think she gets to complain about it when it happens to her. Good on Gawker for bringing in the big guns, and exactly the kind of story that a Republican wouldn't hesitate to use against a Democrat to attack their "family values" credentials.
    Christine O'Donnell is down by so much that it's just petty to publish a not-very-scandalous article about how she showed her vajayjay to some bro. Yeah, it shows that she's a hypocrite, but I don't see the point of shaming her when she's already a national laughingstock.

    I'm all for bringing in the big guns, but only when it accomplishes something.
    Maybe it will make the next slut-shaming, anti-choice, right-wing religious zealot who is a huge fucking hypocrite think twice before running for office.

  • ImperiusVImperiusV Registered User
    edited October 2010
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't actually seen Christine O'Donnell or her campaign deny the veracity of the article...?

    She's the pro-slut-shaming candidate in the race, so I don't think she gets to complain about it when it happens to her. Good on Gawker for bringing in the big guns, and exactly the kind of story that a Republican wouldn't hesitate to use against a Democrat to attack their "family values" credentials.
    Christine O'Donnell is down by so much that it's just petty to publish a not-very-scandalous article about how she showed her vajayjay to some bro. Yeah, it shows that she's a hypocrite, but I don't see the point of shaming her when she's already a national laughingstock.

    I'm all for bringing in the big guns, but only when it accomplishes something.
    Maybe it will make the next slut-shaming, anti-choice, right-wing religious zealot who is a huge fucking hypocrite think twice before running for office.

    Thanatos, let's be realistic. First we have to get Tea Partiers to think once.

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't actually seen Christine O'Donnell or her campaign deny the veracity of the article...?

    She's the pro-slut-shaming candidate in the race, so I don't think she gets to complain about it when it happens to her. Good on Gawker for bringing in the big guns, and exactly the kind of story that a Republican wouldn't hesitate to use against a Democrat to attack their "family values" credentials.

    Yeah, I'm basically all for it. Regardless of whether it's true.

    The only reason it's a story is because of the social climate and values O'Donnell herself supports. It should never have been a story, but it is because O'Donnell wants it to be...she just wants it to be for, you know, other people. If it weren't for puritanical fucktards like O'Donnell, Gawker wouldn't have wasted internets on such a (comparatively) tame story.

    This may or may not make me a bad person.

    EDIT: Of course, I do have to wonder why you'd waste time digging up an October Surprise on a candidate that had no chance of winning anyway.

  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Death Groupie Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    ImperiusV wrote: »
    A fairly clever reaction to the fact that her name has to be wrote in. I like it.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQSy6GRsuuo&p=3E0F25782E3C38DD&index=5&playnext=2

    Fake ad from an alaska comedy group: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mSOWywupmA


    They also did this, which I think is simply awesome: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKXwf-cQ278

    steam_sig.png
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't actually seen Christine O'Donnell or her campaign deny the veracity of the article...?

    She's the pro-slut-shaming candidate in the race, so I don't think she gets to complain about it when it happens to her. Good on Gawker for bringing in the big guns, and exactly the kind of story that a Republican wouldn't hesitate to use against a Democrat to attack their "family values" credentials.
    Christine O'Donnell is down by so much that it's just petty to publish a not-very-scandalous article about how she showed her vajayjay to some bro. Yeah, it shows that she's a hypocrite, but I don't see the point of shaming her when she's already a national laughingstock.

    I'm all for bringing in the big guns, but only when it accomplishes something.

    Nuke her from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't actually seen Christine O'Donnell or her campaign deny the veracity of the article...?

    She's the pro-slut-shaming candidate in the race, so I don't think she gets to complain about it when it happens to her. Good on Gawker for bringing in the big guns, and exactly the kind of story that a Republican wouldn't hesitate to use against a Democrat to attack their "family values" credentials.
    Yeah, I'm basically all for it. Regardless of whether it's true.

    The only reason it's a story is because of the social climate and values O'Donnell herself supports. It should never have been a story, but it is because O'Donnell wants it to be...she just wants it to be for, you know, other people. If it weren't for puritanical fucktards like O'Donnell, Gawker wouldn't have wasted internets on such a (comparatively) tame story.

    This may or may not make me a bad person.

    EDIT: Of course, I do have to wonder why you'd waste time digging up an October Surprise on a candidate that had no chance of winning anyway.
    I almost added in a part about not caring whether or not it's true. Like, hit the edit button, wrote it up, then thought better of it. :P

    But frankly, I feel pretty much exactly the same way. I'm tired of Democrats losing because they take the high road; I'd rather they be in charge and feel bad about how they got there than they be not in charge, but feel good about not mudslinging quite as much as the Republicans.

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Thanatos wrote: »
    I almost added in a part about not caring whether or not it's true. Like, hit the edit button, wrote it up, then thought better of it. :P

    But frankly, I feel pretty much exactly the same way. I'm tired of Democrats losing because they take the high road; I'd rather they be in charge and feel bad about how they got there than they be not in charge, but feel good about not mudslinging quite as much as the Republicans.

    I mean sure, lying about this would be fucked up, and true or not the guy spreading the story is a dirtbag.

    But still, I'm okay with it. Because absent O'Donnell and her ilk, there's be no reason to make up such a story...it wouldn't work. So even assuming it's a lie, it's a lie only worth telling because O'Donnell wants to live in a world where it is.

    Enjoy it, dumbass.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I'd be happier if they did it to a candidate with a chance.

    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.")
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Like Pat Toomey, who seems headed for a several-point victory after Sestak had a brief spike.

  • XeddicusXeddicus Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Is the entire 'story' about Christine Odonell that she didn't have sex with some guy at some party 3 years ago? Or is there actually something damning involved? She doesn't seem to have a chance in hell, so why are they spinning a non-story like this?

    "For no one - no one in this world can you trust. Not men. Not women. Not beasts...this you can trust."
  • jungleroomxjungleroomx Aaron Hernandez shot me through the heartRegistered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Because fuck the Tea Party.

    Spoiler:
  • Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited October 2010
    Salt the Earth.

    Some days I just want to smack people with a rolled up newspaper. Or a phone book.
    A folding chair is looking like an attractive option right now too...
  • Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited October 2010
    On another note, Sheriff Joe writes to let us know that he has the polls covered. No slimy illegals will steal our elections!
    Spoiler:

    Some days I just want to smack people with a rolled up newspaper. Or a phone book.
    A folding chair is looking like an attractive option right now too...
  • MalkorMalkor Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    FACT: When you say something is a fact it is.

    14271f3c-c765-4e74-92b1-49d7612675f2.jpg
  • Just_Bri_ThanksJust_Bri_Thanks Seething with rage from a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited October 2010
    FACT: It's true!

    Some days I just want to smack people with a rolled up newspaper. Or a phone book.
    A folding chair is looking like an attractive option right now too...
This discussion has been closed.