2012 Presidential Election Part 4

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

HUGE advantage: Romney. I knew Bernanke's horribly irresponsible fiscal idiocy was costing us all a few steps on the standard of living meter, but was not aware that Romney had promised to get rid of him (years too late, but better than never). It's actually the best reason yet to vote Romney.
"A dropping tide lowers all boats" seems to be the Obama/Bernanke fiscal policy. In my view, Bernanke (along with Paul Krugman of the NYT, while we're at it) are the most dangerous threats we have to our way of life and should be dropped on an island somewhere. The money printing idiocy has to end very soon, or everything else is moot.

I really do not understand how these presumably college-educated people can see the repeated, disastrous results of "QE", inflationary money-printing, and think, "oh, it failed horribly... we must not be doing it enough; let's try again!" Stop the madness.

I believe that's the definition of insanity, is it not?

 

[DrDemento]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

I believe that's the definition of insanity, is it not?

Although allegedly first said by Benjamin Franklin and often credited to Albert Einstein-I think it was stated better here-In the 1950s, George Kelly, in his book on Personal Construct Theory, wrote, "psychological disorder is any personal construction which is used repeatedly in spite of consistent invalidation".

 

[geezer]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Hey where's Kepler? He didn't pull a Priceless after watching the debates did he?
It's going to be OK buddy.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Hey where's Kepler? He didn't pull a Priceless after watching the debates did he?
It's going to be OK buddy.

The second Obama takes the lead somewhere, he'll be back.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Orlando Sentinal, which endorsed Obama in 2008, endorses Romney in 2012, despite some misgivings:

We have little confidence that Obama would be more successful managing the economy and the budget in the next four years [referring to statistics cited earlier in the editorial]. For that reason, though we endorsed him in 2008, we are recommending Romney in this race.

...

Romney is not our ideal candidate for president. We've been turned off by his appeals to social conservatives and immigration extremists. ....

But the core of Romney's campaign platform, his five-point plan, at least shows he understands that reviving the economy and repairing the government's balance sheet are imperative — now, not four years in the future.

Romney has a strong record of leadership to run on. He built a successful business. He rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics from scandal and mismanagement. As governor of Massachusetts, he worked with a Democrat-dominated legislature to close a $3billion budget deficit without borrowing or raising taxes, and pass the health plan that became a national model.

This is Romney's time to lead, again. If he doesn't produce results — even with a hostile Senate — we'll be ready in 2016 to get behind someone else who will.

We reject the innuendo that some critics have heaped on the president. We don't think he's a business-hating socialist. We don't think he's intent on weakening the American military. We don't think he's unpatriotic. And, no, we don't think he was born outside the United States.

But after reflecting on his four years in the White House, we also don't think that he's the best qualified candidate in this race.

We endorse Mitt Romney for president.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Orlando Sentinal, which endorsed Obama in 2008, endorses Romney in 2012, despite some misgivings:

I thought media outlets have no opinion...

 

[goldy_331]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Hey where's Kepler? He didn't pull a Priceless after watching the debates did he?
It's going to be OK buddy.

I suspect he is wherever Rover went after the last midterm elections in '10.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

I thought media outlets have no opinion...

There's [supposed to be] a difference between the "news" section and the "editorial" section. Newspaper editorial boards have been endorsing candidates since the election of 1800 (Washington ran unopposed during his first two terms).

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

I suspect he is wherever Rover went after the last midterm elections in '10.

This is the referendum on those elections. Many candidates with TEA Party momentum were elected (albeit under the Republican ticket, after all they weren't going to go Democrat) and the 2008 entrants are challenging once again. Much is at stake here in 2012.

 

[DrDemento]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

There's [supposed to be] a difference between the "news" section and the "editorial" section. Newspaper editorial boards have been endorsing candidates since the election of 1800 (Washington ran unopposed during his first two terms).

Probably hard to lose against the Unopposed guy. Who do you debate? Perhaps they just put up a mirror you talk into? Or an empty chair? i would guess it would be pretty embarrassing to run unopposed and lose.

 

[burd]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

I'm grateful there's political disussion like this on a hockey board, but aren't you all tired of how we all seem to take the same position, repeatedly, stubbornly, unmindful of countervailing considerations? I know--it's our way of avoiding cognitive dissonance, but the Axelrods and Roves of the world must see us as willfully ignorant and predictable.

Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

There's [supposed to be] a difference between the "news" section and the "editorial" section. Newspaper editorial boards have been endorsing candidates since the election of 1800 (Washington ran unopposed during his first two terms).

What about the election of 1796? Washington died in 1799, and a Vice-President did not take his place...

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

There's [supposed to be] a difference between the "news" section and the "editorial" section. Newspaper editorial boards have been endorsing candidates since the election of 1800 (Washington ran unopposed during his first two terms).

Yah, I remember when there was much more of a bright line between news and editorials. Very little difference now at most news outlets. More editorializing and less news. Not a good trend.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

I'm grateful there's political disussion like this on a hockey board, but aren't you all tired of how we all seem to take the same position, repeatedly, stubbornly, unmindful of countervailing considerations? I know--it's our way of avoiding cognitive dissonance, but the Axelrods and Roves of the world must see us as willfully ignorant and predictable.

Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest.

Well, I can tell you that
> I have changed my mind on certain issues as the result of a persuasive argument to the contrary. For example, I was skeptical about mandatory helmets for motorcyclists, until I had a conversation with an EMT. He convinced me that those laws are of great benefit to the first responders who show up at the scene of a motorcycle accident.
> I learn from others better arguments to support my positions than my own have been.
> I learn from others how better to respond to criticisms of positions for which I am sympathetic (sort of like # 2 but a little different).
> I discover that people with whom I disagree are not bad, nor evil, nor misguided; generally they merely have different life experiences. What makes sense to them doesn't make sense to me, not because either of us are "right" or "wrong", but because of the context within which those beliefs were shaped.

I don't mind the difference of opinion but I do find some of the vitriol more than a little disappointing. My father and I rarely agreed on anything political, yet our discussions were always civil and enlightening:
"I think X and Y are both important, and I think X is more important than Y, and so I support Z as a result"
"Well, I also think X and Y are both important, and I think Y is more important than X, and so I support something other than Z as a result."

I frequently find the first two clauses of each sentence here in conversations with others. For example, I am very sympathetic to the progressive ideal for society; I merely disagree with them that government compulsion is the way to achieve it (the law of unintended consequences generally assures that government compulsion will be counter-productive, I'd say).

While many others get their knickers in a twist over income inequality, that doesn't bother me very much: as Ethel Merman once sang, "I've been rich, and I've been poor, and I like rich better." My income has fluctuated greatly from year to year at times, as has the income of many others I know: if I can't even manage income inequality in my own life, how can I possibly trust others to handle income inequality in society any better? Yet I also am a proponent of a certain degree of wealth redistribution, which is well-established and widely accepted in the US and has a long, time-honored tradition.*





* I find it amusing that so many academics rail against "the rich" yet manage their 403b plans with TIAA-CREF. Andrew Carnegie started TIAA with a $10 million endowment (probably equivalent to about $250 million in today's dollars).

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Here's a relevant quote:

"if you don't have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare the voters. If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about small things."

And who do you suppose said it? Right, B.H. Obama at his Denver convention. Remarkable how prescient he was, given his record and his campaign. "Small things"? Whatever was he talking about? Big Bird? Binders? Seamus?

 

[Old Pio]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Very true-in fact it has appeared lately that i have been seeing more of Bill on TV than either our incumbent or the Secretary of State. Not sure what that strategy is at all. If trotting out some old timer to bring back the nostalgic good old days-then perhaps the GOP should bring out some Eisenhower descendent and the Dems can find another Kennedy to use. I don't think that either party wants to go back and use Jimmy Carter or Geroge W so maybe they should go back 50 or 60 years.

Among the many good lines they both got off at the Al Smith dinner, Romney said (paraphrasing): "It's nice to have someone you can depend on to come home to at night. I've got Ann. The president has Bill Clinton."

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

Among the many good lines they both got off at the Al Smith dinner, Romney said (paraphrasing): "It's nice to have someone you can depend on to come home to at night. I've got Ann. The president has Bill Clinton."

What's the difference between the Al Smith dinner and the President's first year of Rose Garden press conferences?

Absolutely NOTHING!

 

[SJHovey]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

I'm grateful there's political disussion like this on a hockey board, but aren't you all tired of how we all seem to take the same position, repeatedly, stubbornly, unmindful of countervailing considerations? I know--it's our way of avoiding cognitive dissonance, but the Axelrods and Roves of the world must see us as willfully ignorant and predictable.

Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest.

My principal reason for stopping by this thread is to read the new and creative ways Old Pio has come up with to insult some of the thread regulars.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

My principal reason for stopping by this thread is to read the new and creative ways Old Pio has come up with to insult some of the thread regulars.

My principal reason for stopping by this thread is to read the idiotic diarrhoea the libstain regulars post and note how stupid they sound.

 

[geezer]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part 4

My principal reason for stopping by this thread is to read the new and creative ways Old Pio has come up with to insult some of the thread regulars.

right on! The man has a gift... note my profile.