Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Mannahnin wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
In current US plitics, its extremely difficult to push out an incumbent, well at any level actually. I think the heavy hitters are waiting until its an even playing field.

Really? This from the guy who confidently told us for months how Obama's second term was in the toilet if the unemployment numbers were above... what number, again?

Is it just that incumbents have some kind of unfair advantage, or is it maybe possible that more of the US electorate doesn't think he's incompetant?

Hey its not my fault the Republicans put up a string of potential candidates about as exciting as lukewarm dishwater, but only half as useful.
I still may be surprised. I think Romney and Obama aren't terribly different in reality. I just think Romney would be more competent about actually running things.
Not like I'm voting for either of them.

 Frazzled wrote:
I have no beef with Europe. .

You should do, less growth hormones and.... hmm ?... oohh....

Clarification : I was under the impression that Mr. David Brooks -- quoted/referenced above -- was/is a conservative commentator irregardless or whichever deadtree press printed his opinions here ?

 reds8n wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
I have no beef with Europe. .

You should do, less growth hormones and.... hmm ?... oohh....

Clarification : I was under the impression that Mr. David Brooks -- quoted/referenced above -- was/is a conservative commentator irregardless or whichever deadtree press printed his opinions here ?

He's not. He works for the NYT.

Beef wise F that. If I want good beef I'll go to Argentina. Now thats quality.

Fine.

.. Fund the invasion and conquest of the Falkland islands then !

hatemongerer !

There's oil in the Falklands?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/9457323/US-risks-Argentine-wrath-as-as-American-firm-signs-Falklands-oil-deal.html

 reds8n wrote:
Fine.

.. Fund the invasion and conquest of the Falkland islands then !

hatemongerer !

Hey if funding war between Britain and Argentina is a cost of obtaining excellent steaks, then thats a price I'm willing to pay.

LOL rich.....so rich....both the oil and the beef.....--->insert diabolical laugh<----

 reds8n wrote:

Clarification : I was under the impression that Mr. David Brooks -- quoted/referenced above -- was/is a conservative commentator

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

 Frazzled wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Europe, somehow managing to work less hours per week and still be more productive than us.

Even with taking vacation every other month they are still more productive than the USA.

No they're not. Not sure what you're smoking there.
But thats ok. I have no beef with Europe. They can do what they want. I just don't want to be Europe. Nor do I want to be Asia, or Africa. Ok maybe Australia. The whole killer drop bear/crocodile combo is intriguing.

It's about 300 years too late to decide you don't want to be European.

So just 47%.....wonder what it'll be like at 67%

 Testify wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Europe, somehow managing to work less hours per week and still be more productive than us.

Even with taking vacation every other month they are still more productive than the USA.

No they're not. Not sure what you're smoking there.
But thats ok. I have no beef with Europe. They can do what they want. I just don't want to be Europe. Nor do I want to be Asia, or Africa. Ok maybe Australia. The whole killer drop bear/crocodile combo is intriguing.

It's about 300 years too late to decide you don't want to be European.

We're not, no more than Brazil is.

Interestingly, the 47% includes about 7,000 millionaires who paid no federal income tax last year, or so I have read.

It would most ironic if one of them turned out to be Romney himself.

 Jihadin wrote:
So just 47%.....wonder what it'll be like at 67%

May I advise food storage before then?

 reds8n wrote:


Clarification : I was under the impression that Mr. David Brooks -- quoted/referenced above -- was/is a conservative commentator irregardless or whichever deadtree press printed his opinions here ?

He's a Republican which is no longer the same thing as being a conservative evidently.

David Brooks is as conservative as much as I am a Democrat.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Yeah, whats the problem here?

People should stop being so dependent on the government giving out handouts, on the taxpayer's dollar no less.

Welfare is supposed a temporary thing. Way too many people abuse the system and just stay in their apartment drinking beer doing nothing.


Romney could have worded it a little better. he's not the best speech giver, but thats not whats important when running the country.

47% of Americans not paying federal taxes does not mean that they are on welfare.

From the article
Many of the Americans who owe no income tax are reprieved because basic exemptions — such as the "standard deduction" — took their taxable income below the cutoff levels. The other half rely mainly on a variety of tax breaks, such as the credit that helps offset child care costs.

These Americans range from the very poor to solidly middle-class families with jobs, homes, cars and vacations. The Tax Policy Center says "relatively few nontaxable households" have incomes exceeding $100,000; families that make between $50,000 and $100,000 often owe no income tax because of breaks for their kids and for education.

Americans who pay no federal income tax still often pay an array of other taxes. They include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare, sales taxes, property taxes and state and local taxes.

A handful of extremely wealthy families do not pay federal income taxes. This summer the Internal Revenue Service reported that six of the 400 highest-earning households in America owed no federal income tax in 2009.

Still, many are low-income Americans. According to the August 2010 AP-GfK poll, a majority of Americans who make less than $30,000 a year are Democrats. But 27 percent identify as Republicans, and 15 percent say they're independents. About 57 percent say they will vote for Obama, while 38 percent back Romney. About 43 percent identify themselves as conservatives.

This is a classic example of a candidate saying what the audience wanted to hear. He doesn't believe it, hell, I doubt most of the people in the room believe it. but it makes everybody feel good, much like casting all republicans as heartless titans of industry feels good.

Support for Romney in lower middle class and working class homes is certainly significant, much as support for Obama in the lower upper class is significant.

In many ways it's similar to various Obama statements (the clinger bit in particular). What's going to be slightly more damaging to Romney is that he was explicit in 1) how many people he was talking about, and 2) how they felt, thought, and acted. Also, Romney may have offended, and lost the votes of, people in the group he was speaking of, who had previously supported him. Obama's comments probably didnt' describe anybody voting for him.

 Ouze wrote:
After posting for the last few months that I thought it would be neck and neck to November, and that it's impossible to call who'd win: At this point I no longer think Mitt Romney has a real chance of winning the election*. He really is a truly awful candidate; doing a truly awful job campaigning.

IMHO I think that republicans who actually think they have a good chance at becoming president are sitting this cycle out.

After Obama oversaw the killing of Osama Bin Laden, I think that solid republican candidates like Chris Christie or Mike Huckabee decided not to run this time because they knew if they were nominated they would have to run against the president who oversaw the killing of America's biggest enemy for a generation.

As such, we got sub-par republican candidates this time. There is a reason the republican base was crying out for a decent person to run. Here are some funny quotes to remind you of the primaries

Herman Cain :
I love this guy and enjoy watching him on TV -- yet he would make a poor president.


Newt Gingrich :
Wow....this guy was a bit to far from moderate to have any chance of getting independents to vote for him.


Rick Perry
Comedy gold here -- I still laugh when watching this.

 Ouze wrote:
After posting for the last few months that I thought it would be neck and neck to November, and that it's impossible to call who'd win: At this point I no longer think Mitt Romney has a real chance of winning the election*. He really is a truly awful candidate; doing a truly awful job campaigning.

*barring an unknown unknown.

I actually don't agree. I'm not saying he's an inspiring candidate. He's certainly not. But I don't know that he's awful.

I think his campaign has been doing a fairly awful job. I think the GOP has gotten awfully twisted for making an electable moderate like Romney have to behave otherwise.

Although it does have to be said that campaigns are reflections of candidates to some degree. The candidate picks his staff, after all.

 Frazzled wrote:
Beef wise F that. If I want good beef I'll go to Argentina. Now thats quality.

I found a farm that sells Beefalo from their own pasture. Ill go there once every few months and buy enough to stock up my freezer and use that.

That's the best meat I've ever had, and I can drive by it anytime and see the animals on the pasture. If you can manage to find a local farm like that, I highly reccomend buying from it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beefalo

 reds8n wrote:
I was under the impression that Mr. David Brooks -- quoted/referenced above -- was/is a conservative commentator irregardless or whichever deadtree press printed his opinions here ?

That is correct.

I really need to learn how to troll and derail a thread when the topic is not advantageous for my beliefs.

But, yeah, Romney is great. People overstate how weak President Obama is, the vast majority of the nation still blames President Bush for our economic problems, but Romney still manages to out-John-Kerry John Kerry.

 Manchu wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
I was under the impression that Mr. David Brooks -- quoted/referenced above -- was/is a conservative commentator irregardless or whichever deadtree press printed his opinions here ?

That is correct.

Nah, only igf you're a lefty yourself, lefty.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
I was under the impression that Mr. David Brooks -- quoted/referenced above -- was/is a conservative commentator irregardless or whichever deadtree press printed his opinions here ?

That is correct.

Nah, only igf you're a lefty yourself, lefty.

Or if you are so far right that anyone left of you is considered liberal, regardless of whether they are actually right of center or not.

Yep. It's pretty great that I'm an actual socialist, but those on the right have no words to describe me since anyone that wants a progressive income tax is a Bolshevik to them.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
I was under the impression that Mr. David Brooks -- quoted/referenced above -- was/is a conservative commentator irregardless or whichever deadtree press printed his opinions here ?

That is correct.

Nah, only igf you're a lefty yourself, lefty.

Or if you are so far right that anyone left of you is considered liberal, regardless of whether they are actually right of center or not.

True that. After all the world really went to crap when Mussolini went all soft and lefty.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TheHammer wrote:
Yep. It's pretty great that I'm an actual socialist, but those on the right have no words to describe me since anyone that wants a progressive income tax is a Bolshevik to them.

Its been a long time since I've been called a communist. Ah, quite refreshing.

It's almost like you are intentionally vague about your beliefs, so when you do say ugly and hateful things you can fall back on that vagueness as a shield!

4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years! 4 More Years!

 Frazzled wrote:
Nah, only igf you're a lefty yourself, lefty.

Hmm, consider reading deeper. Brooks is as skeptical of the libertarian bread and circuses as many Democrats but he is a committed disciple of Milton Friedman. Brooks's greatest crime from the Republican perspective is that Democrats actually listen to him.

TheHammer wrote:
It's almost like you are intentionally vague about your beliefs, so when you do say ugly and hateful things you can fall back on that vagueness as a shield!

I'm a lawyer, or maybe this guy.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Nah, only igf you're a lefty yourself, lefty.

Hmm, consider reading deeper. Brooks is as skeptical of the libertarian bread and circuses as many Democrats but he is a committed disciple of Milton Friedman. Brooks's greatest crime from the Republican perspective is that Democrats actually listen to him.

No no, its the glasses. They just don't cut it.

I can't be arsed to read the NYT frankly - more than the ten free articles a month