spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I think the 50% of independents thinking Obama is too liberal is the most interesting statistic there. How do you get them to vote for a Democrat when such a centrist is too liberal?
I think the 50% of independents thinking Obama is too liberal is the most interesting statistic there. How do you get them to vote for a Democrat when such a centrist is too liberal?
Buy a cable channel and run propaganda labeled as news 24/7.
That said a Santorum bid followed by a resounding loss could in theory drive the GOP back to sanity because they couldn't use the excuse of "he just weren't conservative enough." I'll stress that might not be 100% given that 10% of Michigan voters thought he was liberal and the fringe taking over the GOP is really got at revisionist history. I'm pretty sure with Romney as the nominee, they will write the loss off as "he just wasn't conservative enough!" At which point in 2016, they just kick the borrow to the said and scrap up whatever oozed out of into the ground for presidential candidate material.
66% of Republicans consider Santorum liberal or moderate. They are already geared up to chalk his loss up to him not being Conservative enough.
I love how the "About Right" row for both Romney and Santorum are identical.
Which... actually says a lot about Republican candidates and their interchangability.
Don't kid yourself, people. It doesn't matter whether or not Romney or Santorum wins the nomination. Either one will be a puppet to the Cheney-esque secret Republican masters if they become president.
It's like in Babylon 5. Once you've been pledged into the Shadows, you're never quite the same again, but you do what you're told.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
That said a Santorum bid followed by a resounding loss could in theory drive the GOP back to sanity because they couldn't use the excuse of "he just weren't conservative enough." I'll stress that might not be 100% given that 10% of Michigan voters thought he was liberal and the fringe taking over the GOP is really got at revisionist history. I'm pretty sure with Romney as the nominee, they will write the loss off as "he just wasn't conservative enough!" At which point in 2016, they just kick the borrow to the said and scrap up whatever oozed out of into the ground for presidential candidate material.
66% of Republicans consider Santorum liberal or moderate. They are already geared up to chalk his loss up to him not being Conservative enough.
I love how the "About Right" row for both Romney and Santorum are identical.
Which... actually says a lot about Republican candidates and their interchangability.
Don't kid yourself, people. It doesn't matter whether or not Romney or Santorum wins the nomination. Either one will be a puppet to the Cheney-esque secret Republican masters if they become president.
It's like in Babylon 5. Once you've been pledged into the Shadows, you're never quite the same again, but you do what you're told.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around more Democrats believing Romney is too conservative than believe Santorum is too conservative. o_O
That said a Santorum bid followed by a resounding loss could in theory drive the GOP back to sanity because they couldn't use the excuse of "he just weren't conservative enough." I'll stress that might not be 100% given that 10% of Michigan voters thought he was liberal and the fringe taking over the GOP is really got at revisionist history. I'm pretty sure with Romney as the nominee, they will write the loss off as "he just wasn't conservative enough!" At which point in 2016, they just kick the borrow to the said and scrap up whatever oozed out of into the ground for presidential candidate material.
66% of Republicans consider Santorum liberal or moderate. They are already geared up to chalk his loss up to him not being Conservative enough.
I love how the "About Right" row for both Romney and Santorum are identical.
Which... actually says a lot about Republican candidates and their interchangability.
Don't kid yourself, people. It doesn't matter whether or not Romney or Santorum wins the nomination. Either one will be a puppet to the Cheney-esque secret Republican masters if they become president.
It's like in Babylon 5. Once you've been pledged into the Shadows, you're never quite the same again, but you do what you're told.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around more Democrats believing Romney is too conservative than believe Santorum is too conservative. o_O
I would chalk that up to the fact that Santorum likely has a much larger appeal to socially-conservative Democrats than Romney does.
Conservative Democrats are terrible.
0
Options
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
It's pretty awesome how you went from a poll of American voters to secret Republican overlords in four short sentences.
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
It's pretty awesome how you went from a poll of American voters to secret Republican overlords in four short sentences.
I also worked in a Babylon 5 reference. I'm good at the writing!
I've...never seen Babylon 5. Do I have to turn in my nerd card?
I haven't read most of this thread, so if I missed it, have voters shown signs of starting to tire of Santorum now that he's had the spotlight for a while?
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
It's pretty awesome how you went from a poll of American voters to secret Republican overlords in four short sentences.
I also worked in a Babylon 5 reference. I'm good at the writing!
I've...never seen Babylon 5. Do I have to turn in my nerd card?
It's... got clunky dialogue sometimes and the first season kinda blows, but it's got a way better payoff than most series Sci-Fi. Of course, the good guys end up being Secessionists, but it's only because the President turns out to actually be evil...
I haven't read most of this thread, so if I missed it, have voters shown signs of starting to tire of Santorum now that he's had the spotlight for a while?
So you're saying that the debate questions should be "Who are you?" and "What do you want?"
...
You know, those might actually be better questions than some of the ones I've heard.
I just realized that, in B5 terms, the Democrats work out to the Shadows (evolution, change) while the Republicans end up being Vorlons (stasis, strict hierarchies). We may have to kick both of them out of our galaxy. Eventually.
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
Obviously there are only two ways to deal with troublesome foreign nations
1. Bomb the shit out of them
2. Nuke the shit out of them
wtf, Obama? I don't see "feed the shit out of them" on that list.
I'm pretty sure it won't matter who wins the GOP nomination at this point because whoever wins is likely going to lose to Obama.
Keep saying this - it's important to fabricate an air of inevitability!
Also, I'm lol'ing at you guys and this 'popular vote' fiction. Like somehow a candidate is weak because all the others put together got more of this tiny, unrepresentative pie. Where do you even come up with this stuff? In 20 years of watching these races, I have never heard anyone try to spin primary vote totals as "the popular vote" or act like it matters.
See, I only say this because all four of them are fucking terrible and they continue to attack one another while gleefully sprinting to the right and quite possible off a cliff. Last time around I wasn't saying such things about either party's primary, for the record I didn't care for Hilary, because they weren't terrible and the one that did drag on didn't get this heated. Hell McCain might have won last time if he had picked someone other than Palin, but she was fucking crazy and he was at that age where you just never know when he'll kick the bucket.
Hell, given that they can't even consistently coalesce around one or two guys at this points says plenty. Who can argue that Ron Paul and Gingrich aren't terrible to begin with, I'd say Santorum is as well but people can argue that he just isn't well know (I'd say that's garbage but not everyone can be bothered to do a little research on these guys). That just doesn't bode well for Romney, he's running against three terrible opponents and he has been incapable of knocking any of them out.
I think it's most people not having heard of Santorum, or anything about his policies
You know it reminds me of the teabaggers and how Fox News made all these sophomoric teabagging jokes (because most of them are former frat douchebags and think it's hilarious) and the backlash when the little bluehair teabaggers realized what the term meant. Fox News is currently making subtle (ish) Santorum jokes because they've finally consolidated behind Romney. I am pretty sure that a large portion of their viewers would be offended if they knew what those jokes meant, but since they don't know dick about him...
Of course if they *did* find out what it meant they would blame The Liberal Conspiracy for not telling poor manipulated Fox News what it was actually doing.
I mean speaking as a former Republican, I don't think most of the voting public pays anything other than cursory attention to politics. Maybe they watched one primary debate, whatever.
Most voters won't have strong opinions about any candidate until much closer to November, and after the presidential debates. If Obama were against Santorum, and took him to task on his 18th century views on women, Santorum's approval among independents would drop like a rock.
I'll put my money on the safe bet of "wasteful government spending on foreign aid to nations that hate us"
Yeah! We've been giving billions of dollar and military equipment to their tyrannical leaders, on top of the necessary know-how to crush any hopes of an uprising, and they don't even thank us? What a bunch of ungrateful assholes! We should just stop exporting "freedom"!
So is the media spinning this as doom for Santorum?
Even if it is fairly obvious Romney will ultimately win, that doesn't really stop Santorum or Newt from fucking shit up. It was fairly obvious in many of races where a person was fucking shit up for the front runner.
On one hand, if Romney gets the nom and loses, then the fractured GOP potentially limps on into the 2016 election.
On the other hand, that means GOP crazies can still act crazy in Congress and still have some job security.
The idea is that if Romney wins the nomination and loses, the social conservatives will go "See? We can't win on economics! We need to run on birth control and hating women!"
But if Santorum wins the nomination and loses, the sane Republicans will go, "See? We can't win on pretending this is the 40s!"
On the other hand, I kind of want Romney to be the (potential) whipping boy because I feel like with the Occupy movement coming back in force, we are at a time where we can have a serious national discussion about the policies Romney supports as a super fucking rich dude.
The Occupy movement isn't going to do a goddamn thing because it's a collection of idiotic hippies who are unwilling to do anything.
0
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
On one hand, if Romney gets the nom and loses, then the fractured GOP potentially limps on into the 2016 election.
On the other hand, that means GOP crazies can still act crazy in Congress and still have some job security.
The idea is that if Romney wins the nomination and loses, the social conservatives will go "See? We can't win on economics! We need to run on birth control and hating women!"
But if Santorum wins the nomination and loses, the sane Republicans will go, "See? We can't win on pretending this is the 40s!"
On the other hand, I kind of want Romney to be the (potential) whipping boy because I feel like with the Occupy movement coming back in force, we are at a time where we can have a serious national discussion about the policies Romney supports as a super fucking rich dude.
The Occupy movement isn't going to do a goddamn thing because it's a collection of idiotic hippies who are unwilling to do anything.
yeah
they didn't shift the focus of the national conversation from deficit reduction to jobs and income inequality or anything
nope
just a bunch of smelly hippies who refuse to get a job
So going to more local GOP primaries, apparently Olympia Snowe is retiring.
I saw that, too. Does anyone know if there's any chance to flip her seat blue? Or is this going to be another instance of replacing a relatively sane person with a crazy person?
So going to more local GOP primaries, apparently Olympia Snowe is retiring.
Good. I mean, I appreciate her position and everything, but her existence allowed Republicans to claim a bigger tent than they were due. I hope she writes a tell-all book about all the RNC bullshit she had to swallow as a moderate.
So going to more local GOP primaries, apparently Olympia Snowe is retiring.
I saw that, too. Does anyone know if there's any chance to flip her seat blue? Or is this going to be another instance of replacing a relatively sane person with a crazy person?
Unless there's another Cutler/Mitchell/LePage situation, the seat will almost certainly go to a liberal Democrat instead of a faux-moderate Republican.
On one hand, if Romney gets the nom and loses, then the fractured GOP potentially limps on into the 2016 election.
On the other hand, that means GOP crazies can still act crazy in Congress and still have some job security.
The idea is that if Romney wins the nomination and loses, the social conservatives will go "See? We can't win on economics! We need to run on birth control and hating women!"
But if Santorum wins the nomination and loses, the sane Republicans will go, "See? We can't win on pretending this is the 40s!"
On the other hand, I kind of want Romney to be the (potential) whipping boy because I feel like with the Occupy movement coming back in force, we are at a time where we can have a serious national discussion about the policies Romney supports as a super fucking rich dude.
The Occupy movement isn't going to do a goddamn thing because it's a collection of idiotic hippies who are unwilling to do anything.
yeah
they didn't shift the focus of the national conversation from deficit reduction to jobs and income inequality or anything
nope
just a bunch of smelly hippies who refuse to get a job
They're a bunch of smelly hippies who refuse to implement any kind of message discipline or endorse candidates that would move their goals forward, and I really think the role OWS played in "shifting the narrative" is incredibly overblown. Deficit reduction was a huge talking point because it was the focal issue of the debt ceiling standoff and Walker and Christie firing a bunch of people; with those issues (mostly) resolved one way or the other, the media went back to "unemployment still fucking sucks." Income inequality has gotten approximately zero air time, and I see no real sign that it will in the future.
If OWS would fucking organize, implement a platform, kick out the anarchists, and take part in the political process, rather than bitching about how Obama is just as bad as Bush, maybe they'd have some impact. But they won't, so they won't.
On one hand, if Romney gets the nom and loses, then the fractured GOP potentially limps on into the 2016 election.
On the other hand, that means GOP crazies can still act crazy in Congress and still have some job security.
The idea is that if Romney wins the nomination and loses, the social conservatives will go "See? We can't win on economics! We need to run on birth control and hating women!"
But if Santorum wins the nomination and loses, the sane Republicans will go, "See? We can't win on pretending this is the 40s!"
On the other hand, I kind of want Romney to be the (potential) whipping boy because I feel like with the Occupy movement coming back in force, we are at a time where we can have a serious national discussion about the policies Romney supports as a super fucking rich dude.
The Occupy movement isn't going to do a goddamn thing because it's a collection of idiotic hippies who are unwilling to do anything.
yeah
they didn't shift the focus of the national conversation from deficit reduction to jobs and income inequality or anything
nope
just a bunch of smelly hippies who refuse to get a job
What legislation was proposed or passed that in any way addresses the issues and concerns of economic opportunity?
Having a 'national conversation' is nice and all, but I'd much rather we have national action. A protest movement that actively disdains the legislative process intentionally cannot do this. It's almost as if they studied the successes of the Civil Rights Movement and became determined to do the exact opposite.
It's pretty awesome how you went from a poll of American voters to secret Republican overlords in four short sentences.
I also worked in a Babylon 5 reference. I'm good at the writing!
So you're saying that the debate questions should be "Who are you?" and "What do you want?"
...
You know, those might actually be better questions than some of the ones I've heard.
I can see it now. The next debate moderated by Sebastien who keeps on asking the two questions to the candidates.... you know I think we might be onto something here.
Posts
I feel the same way when I pass a busy Whole Foods.
:bz
Buy a cable channel and run propaganda labeled as news 24/7.
I think that every time I pass by a Planned Parenthood and see the Pro-lifers and Pro-choicers yelling in each other's general direction.
Where else can I get my grass-fed bison steaks?
The farmers market. What, you still go to Whole Food? Get with the times, you corpofacsist!
I love how the "About Right" row for both Romney and Santorum are identical.
Which... actually says a lot about Republican candidates and their interchangability.
Don't kid yourself, people. It doesn't matter whether or not Romney or Santorum wins the nomination. Either one will be a puppet to the Cheney-esque secret Republican masters if they become president.
It's like in Babylon 5. Once you've been pledged into the Shadows, you're never quite the same again, but you do what you're told.
The farmer's market here doesn't routinely stock European cheeses or local wine varietals! What am I, a neanderthal?
I'm still trying to wrap my head around more Democrats believing Romney is too conservative than believe Santorum is too conservative. o_O
I would chalk that up to the fact that Santorum likely has a much larger appeal to socially-conservative Democrats than Romney does.
Conservative Democrats are terrible.
I also worked in a Babylon 5 reference. I'm good at the writing!
I've...never seen Babylon 5. Do I have to turn in my nerd card?
I haven't read most of this thread, so if I missed it, have voters shown signs of starting to tire of Santorum now that he's had the spotlight for a while?
So you're saying that the debate questions should be "Who are you?" and "What do you want?"
...
You know, those might actually be better questions than some of the ones I've heard.
This will be glorious! (Unless they ignore it)
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
It's... got clunky dialogue sometimes and the first season kinda blows, but it's got a way better payoff than most series Sci-Fi. Of course, the good guys end up being Secessionists, but it's only because the President turns out to actually be evil...
They only see that his name isn't Romney.
I just realized that, in B5 terms, the Democrats work out to the Shadows (evolution, change) while the Republicans end up being Vorlons (stasis, strict hierarchies). We may have to kick both of them out of our galaxy. Eventually.
1. Bomb the shit out of them
2. Nuke the shit out of them
wtf, Obama? I don't see "feed the shit out of them" on that list.
I'd add in a fairly large dose of "we've fell for this trick before, how could Obama be tricked again".
Wouldn't it be "feed the shit into them"?
See, I only say this because all four of them are fucking terrible and they continue to attack one another while gleefully sprinting to the right and quite possible off a cliff. Last time around I wasn't saying such things about either party's primary, for the record I didn't care for Hilary, because they weren't terrible and the one that did drag on didn't get this heated. Hell McCain might have won last time if he had picked someone other than Palin, but she was fucking crazy and he was at that age where you just never know when he'll kick the bucket.
Hell, given that they can't even consistently coalesce around one or two guys at this points says plenty. Who can argue that Ron Paul and Gingrich aren't terrible to begin with, I'd say Santorum is as well but people can argue that he just isn't well know (I'd say that's garbage but not everyone can be bothered to do a little research on these guys). That just doesn't bode well for Romney, he's running against three terrible opponents and he has been incapable of knocking any of them out.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
You know it reminds me of the teabaggers and how Fox News made all these sophomoric teabagging jokes (because most of them are former frat douchebags and think it's hilarious) and the backlash when the little bluehair teabaggers realized what the term meant. Fox News is currently making subtle (ish) Santorum jokes because they've finally consolidated behind Romney. I am pretty sure that a large portion of their viewers would be offended if they knew what those jokes meant, but since they don't know dick about him...
Of course if they *did* find out what it meant they would blame The Liberal Conspiracy for not telling poor manipulated Fox News what it was actually doing.
Most voters won't have strong opinions about any candidate until much closer to November, and after the presidential debates. If Obama were against Santorum, and took him to task on his 18th century views on women, Santorum's approval among independents would drop like a rock.
Yeah! We've been giving billions of dollar and military equipment to their tyrannical leaders, on top of the necessary know-how to crush any hopes of an uprising, and they don't even thank us? What a bunch of ungrateful assholes! We should just stop exporting "freedom"!
"WELFARE QUEENS"
Even if it is fairly obvious Romney will ultimately win, that doesn't really stop Santorum or Newt from fucking shit up. It was fairly obvious in many of races where a person was fucking shit up for the front runner.
"BACKROOM SECRET DEALS WITH OUR ENEMIES!"
(with a dash of 'Secret Korean Muslims in South America')
Probably. I imagine there are many people in the Republican party very frustrated with the race being so close this far in.
The Occupy movement isn't going to do a goddamn thing because it's a collection of idiotic hippies who are unwilling to do anything.
Obama negotiates with terrorists!
yeah
they didn't shift the focus of the national conversation from deficit reduction to jobs and income inequality or anything
nope
just a bunch of smelly hippies who refuse to get a job
I saw that, too. Does anyone know if there's any chance to flip her seat blue? Or is this going to be another instance of replacing a relatively sane person with a crazy person?
Good. I mean, I appreciate her position and everything, but her existence allowed Republicans to claim a bigger tent than they were due. I hope she writes a tell-all book about all the RNC bullshit she had to swallow as a moderate.
They're a bunch of smelly hippies who refuse to implement any kind of message discipline or endorse candidates that would move their goals forward, and I really think the role OWS played in "shifting the narrative" is incredibly overblown. Deficit reduction was a huge talking point because it was the focal issue of the debt ceiling standoff and Walker and Christie firing a bunch of people; with those issues (mostly) resolved one way or the other, the media went back to "unemployment still fucking sucks." Income inequality has gotten approximately zero air time, and I see no real sign that it will in the future.
If OWS would fucking organize, implement a platform, kick out the anarchists, and take part in the political process, rather than bitching about how Obama is just as bad as Bush, maybe they'd have some impact. But they won't, so they won't.
What legislation was proposed or passed that in any way addresses the issues and concerns of economic opportunity?
Having a 'national conversation' is nice and all, but I'd much rather we have national action. A protest movement that actively disdains the legislative process intentionally cannot do this. It's almost as if they studied the successes of the Civil Rights Movement and became determined to do the exact opposite.