Jump to content

US Politics: Elecciones Generales 8 De Noviembre, 2012


NestorMakhnosLovechild

Recommended Posts

I've been asking myself if, after an Obama victory, the GOP will come to its senses, but after weeks of reflection I have to say I am not confident. There are simply too many structural incentives for them to misbehave. Three minutes after Obama's victory (should he have one) is announced, the Republicans will be plotting how they can f*ck around with him to cash in for 2014.

The Republicans will absolutely not come to their senses. We can only hope for an unending stream of electoral punishment in response.

I agree, sadly. I suspect they'll even be looking for any inch for impeachment that they can find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, sadly. I suspect they'll even be looking for any inch for impeachment that they can find.

I think Issa's already been trying to find something for two years now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been asking myself if, after an Obama victory, the GOP will come to its senses, but after weeks of reflection I have to say I am not confident. There are simply too many structural incentives for them to misbehave. Three minutes after Obama's victory (should he have one) is announced, the Republicans will be plotting how they can f*ck around with him to cash in for 2014.

Precisely. That's why so many talking heads on the right are already projecting such a massive victory for Romney. Because then they can tell their viewers - who either watch Fox solely or due to their mindset view any other news as untrustworthy - that this election was a sham. And while they can't do anything to change this outcome because Obama's Chicago thugs won't allow it, they can stay angry for 2014.

The entire GOP has gone all-in on their irrational Obama hate. They have demonized anyone who even looks at Obama without glaring. Hell, Chris Christie was a hero of the right up until three days ago and now he's a pariah. They have taught their minions that Obama is evil so working with Obama is evil. And if they turn around and start working with Obama, the machine will undoubtedly turn on them as well.

I'd love to see internal memos in the future about how McConnell, Boehner and the rest of the stooges are kicking themselves in the asses for not crushing the tea party when they had the chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Republicans will absolutely not come to their senses. We can only hope for an unending stream of electoral punishment in response.

The really vexing aspect of all this is how unaware the voting public is of Republican shenanigans. The media don't always report very well, saying "Senate blocked a bill" and not "Republicans filibustered a bill." Even when there is decent coverage, many Americans, instead of sorting through the facts, resort to false equivalency and throw up their hands, dismissing any conflict as the two parties throwing sand. Thus, GOP intransigence pays off.

If in a democracy voters do get the government they deserve, then we've been even worse than I thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if this has came up previously, but I spotted it in my regular spam subscriptions today from Motley Fool: http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2012/10/24/the-best-presidents-for-the-economy.aspx

It has a ranking of performance of presidents on:

  • stock market performance
  • corporate profits
  • real GDP per capita
  • inflation
  • unemployment rate

Seems to be sourced from www.bea.gov and Robert Shiller from Yale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if this has came up previously, but I spotted it in my regular spam subscriptions today from Motley Fool: http://www.fool.com/...he-economy.aspx

It has a ranking of performance of presidents on:

  • stock market performance
  • corporate profits
  • real GDP per capita
  • inflation
  • unemployment rate

Seems to be sourced from www.bea.gov and Robert Shiller from Yale.

At first glance, and admitting other boarders have a better handle on this, isn't this just correlation taken out of context?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At first glance, and admitting other boarders have a better handle on this, isn't this just correlation taken out of context?

Sure, but isn't that all we pretty much talk to in modern politics: http://www.weeklysta...ion_660073.html

"With the latest jobs report, it is now the case that "Under Obama, Food Stamp Growth [is] 75 Times Greater Than Job Creation," according to statistics compiled by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee."

--edit added some text from the link referenced

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how much a jobs report on the Friday before the election actually matters. Sure, it's something the media may focus on, but does anyone have any data on how much this specific report counts? I know there's some data out there suggesting that the overall feeling about the trend of the economy as the election nears is important, but how much does a Novermber 2nd job report matter itself within that trend?

At any rate, it seems like this month's report is the best one in some time which obviously means that BLS is cooking the books and it's good for Obama and bad for Romney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pew is out with a new study. it purports to show that MSNBC is more partisan than Fox. As evidence, it cites a higher percentage of negative stories about Romney and positive stories agout Obama on MSNBC than the opposite on Fox.

I don't really know who's more biased, although lefty that I am I tend to assume it's Fox. But this certainly isn't a worthwhile metric. Maybe there are more negative stories about Romney on MSNBC because he's shitty and has it coming.

MSNBC initally drew me in because, despite its much more liberal bent, they weren't afraid to take pot shots at Democrats occasionally rather than simply praising for praising sake especially when praise was the exact opposite reaction some things deserved.

That conservatives like Scarbourgh were there helped because it seemed a way to maintain something that actually was "fair and balanced". The last 10 days or so, Joe's simply grated. His ability to stand up and say straight out what the issues were with Romney's campaign were with the eye of someone who quite obviously disliked the entire idea of Romney in the first place seems to have dissolved as the election grows closer and he's more likely to preen and gloat over polling numbers that make little sense. Like someone replaced him with a pod person more in lock and step with the rest of the conservative movement.

I've been asking myself if, after an Obama victory, the GOP will come to its senses, but after weeks of reflection I have to say I am not confident. There are simply too many structural incentives for them to misbehave. Three minutes after Obama's victory (should he have one) is announced, the Republicans will be plotting how they can f*ck around with him to cash in for 2014.

Before the first debate, I almost asked the question: If Obama truly takes Romney out behind the woodshed in this election, and considering the disdain and nose holding Republicans have engaged in about the Romney nomination, could this help lead to a breaking of the party? Figured you political thread regulars would scoff thoug. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how much a jobs report on the Friday before the election actually matters. Sure, it's something the media may focus on, but does anyone have any data on how much this specific report counts? I know there's some data out there suggesting that the overall feeling about the trend of the economy as the election nears is important, but how much does a Novermber 2nd job report matter itself within that trend?

At any rate, it seems like this month's report is the best one in some time which obviously means that BLS is cooking the books and it's good for Obama and bad for Romney.

I don't think it'll do much. Especially given all the damn voting that's already happened.

A bad report might have swung a few people away from Obama though, but maybe that's just me searching for an effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before the first debate, I almost asked the question: If Obama truly takes Romney out behind the woodshed in this election, and considering the disdain and nose holding Republicans have engaged in about the Romney nomination, could this help lead to a breaking of the party? Figured you political thread regulars would scoff though. :P

Nah, they will label Romney as "too liberal" and blame his loss on that. Conservatism can never fail, it can only be failed.

And more then that, the coalition still holds to some extent because they've got nowhere else to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, they will label Romney as "too liberal" and blame his loss on that. Conservatism can never fail, it can only be failed.

And more then that, the coalition still holds to some extent because they've got nowhere else to go.

A potential wrinkle is that the coalition is fractured due to Sandy, and many/most of the NYC financiers and businessmen ally behind Bloomberg on the Global Warming Issue and provide a necessary and well funded pushback to the Big Oil Misinformation Campaign by the Kochs et al. Severing some of Wall Street from Republicans because Republicans refuse to engage with Climate Change is perhaps the most probable change in political coalitions in the near future.. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A potential wrinkle is that the coalition is fractured due to Sandy, and many/most of the NYC financiers and businessmen ally behind Bloomberg on the Global Warming Issue and provide a necessary and well funded pushback to the Big Oil Misinformation Campaign by the Kochs et al. Severing some of Wall Street from Republicans because Republicans refuse to engage with Climate Change is perhaps the most probable change in political coalitions in the near future.. ;)

Neil deGrasse Tyson often says something to the effect of "I'm not that worried about republican administrations being anti-science, because I know that no republican wants to die poor".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, they will label Romney as "too liberal" and blame his loss on that. Conservatism can never fail, it can only be failed.

And more then that, the coalition still holds to some extent because they've got nowhere else to go.

You don't think the fundamental differnces between a "Republican" and a "Tea Party Republican", and there are quite a few it seems at least in terms of how to handle things, won't eventually break the party in such a way that two disctinct entities couldn't arise from the ashes?

Isn't that how, and I may be remembering incorrectly, how the Republican Party essentially came into being with differences with the Whig Party?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rasmussen's march to the sea continues, he now has:

tie in Ohio (was claiming R+2 only a couple days ago)

O+5 in Michigan (what swing state?, oh and FYI, two other polls today have that at +6 and +7)

Donnelly +3 over Mourdock (guess the rape thing did hurt)

Tester +1 over Rehberg (hmm, maybe Republicans won't take any of the swing Senate seats)

and, WeAskAmerica, one of the other heavily GOP outfits, is taking a page outta Rasmussen's book. They now have:

O+4 in Ohio

O+7 in Wisconsin

O+1 in Virginia

What fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't think the fundamental differnces between a "Republican" and a "Tea Party Republican", and there are quite a few it seems at least in terms of how to handle things, won't eventually break the party in such a way that two disctinct entities couldn't arise from the ashes?

Isn't that how, and I may be remembering incorrectly, how the Republican Party essentially came into being with differences with the Whig Party?

What is the fundamental difference at hand here?

It seems to met he only distinction is one is a genuine believer in the party platform and one isn't. And the second group (the "Republicans" if you would) will not leave the Tea Partiers because without them, they have no power at all. It's why they courted the crazy motherfuckers in the first place after all. (southern strategy, value voters, tea partiers, etc)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...