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.
2015/10/20 12:44:55
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Because neither side will admit it's wrong about anything. Even of one side truly is right, the other side will still stubbornly cling to their beliefs and obstruct any opposition. Even if, say, the Ds sweep into 2016 with majorities everywhere, the Rs can still filibuster and otherwise obstruct any significant cuts to military spending. Just like the Ds can do the same to the Rs over social spending. So we remain in a budgetary stalemate because neither side is willing to give in order to get.
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
2015/10/20 14:50:16
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
TheMeanDM wrote: Something interesting I learned in responding to someone elsewhere....
96% of US GDP is DEBT
Very few countries are higher.
Italy
France
Greece
Ireland
(And we all know how poorly they are struggling with this issue!)
So what does that mean?
It means the US is propping up its economy by inflating it with debt. It is a "hollow" economy that really, one could say, is on life support.
This is not a sustainable way to drive an economy!
In then past 14 years ot has risen, so it is both parties fault.
Something interesting to think about when you hear the panderings from both sides.
Clinton lowered the National Deficit to GDP from 66% to 56%
Bush had the national deficit to GDP ratio to 84.2% at the end of his presidency
Obama raised the national deficit to GDP ratio to 102%, and that number is the 2013 number so it might be higher.
In Obama's first 4 years in office he managed to raise the deficit as much as Bush did while fighting 2 wars at the height of them both. I am not lionizing Bush but I am demonizing Obama. A man who campaigned under the idea of fixing the economy managed to destroy it further. You can point to the increase in jobs and economy recovering slightly but at the same time when the government throws literally trillions of dollars into failing enterprises your going to get temporary recovery. I almost want the democrats to win this election and the one after that. With 4 uninterrupted presidencies they can't possibly say that the policies they set forth work. Why can't we as a country just admit failure in some of our ideas instead of doubling down on them. Republicans have a lot of ideas that are failures and so do the democrats, why not learn from these mistakes and better our country as a whole?
Vast majority of the debt that was accumulated under Obama was due to the 2008 financial crisis and the recession. People seem to forget that it was the worst crisis sense the great depression. Borrowing money in the short run and intervening in the economy/financial sector was the right play. Doing the opposite is what Herbert Hoover did, and we all know what happened there.
Also as far as US GDP to debt ratio is concerned we are 24th in the world. We have creditors lined up around the block to buy US bonds at negative real interest rates. I am not saying the debt isn't a problem but isn't the apocalyptic scenario that that some like to pretend it is. link
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/20 19:29:15
2015/10/20 15:11:46
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Tannhauser42 wrote: Because neither side will admit it's wrong about anything. Even of one side truly is right, the other side will still stubbornly cling to their beliefs and obstruct any opposition. Even if, say, the Ds sweep into 2016 with majorities everywhere, the Rs can still filibuster and otherwise obstruct any significant cuts to military spending. Just like the Ds can do the same to the Rs over social spending. So we remain in a budgetary stalemate because neither side is willing to give in order to get.
It's not about being right, it's just about helping themselves and their party keep political power. Every federal dollar spent has a constituency behind it. Whether it's excessive military spending or the continued funding of failed/counter productive social programs the only goal of the spending is to give federal money to people in your state/district in order to encourage them to vote for you. The politician keep the federal spigot open so money flows to their constiuents so that the constituents are incentivized to keep the politicians in office to keep the money coming in. Nobody wants to risk losing an election by forcing the electorate to tighten their belts and do without federal money so they only advocate cutting spending that is going to constiuents of politicians in the other party. Nobody is willing to cut the spending they like and they're willing to authorize the spending they don't like in order to keep up the spending they do like.
Hence, we get a government that spends as much as $60,000,000,000 a day, farcical political theater regarding the debt ceiling and budget submissions and nobody willing to have serious discussions about how we can stop spending money we don't have on things we can't afford. No changes to the tax code can net enough revenue to actually pay for all the federal spending so we're financing it all with debt that we're buying ourselves. It's not sustainable but we can keep going and putting off reform as long as we generate enough revenue to pay the debt service.
Pretty much everything that comes out of DC regarding the economy and the debt is just empty pandering for political gain. Every time somebody comes out with a plan or a budget and touts the CBO scoring it, it's just pandering. The CBO has to evaluate legislation based solely upon how it is written with no regard for the fact that future sessions of Congress aren't beholden to it at all if it's passed. Every new session of Congress has the power to repeal or change previous legislation and budgets, that's why all the plans to reduce spending put the bulk of the cuts in future years, it keeps money flowing in the near future so current politicians don't face backlash and future sessions of Congress can then repeal the cuts, extend the deadlines, authorize more spending etc.
It's also why it's acceptable in DC to refer to an increase in spending as a cut. If the budget increased by 5% last year but is only increasing by 3% this year it will be touted by politicians as a cut in spending because we cut the increase by 2%. Ignoring the reality that an increase of any amount still an increase, they'll purposefully mislead and obfuscate in order to convince the electorate that they're cutting spending when they're actually spending even more.
Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
2015/10/20 15:19:29
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Tannhauser42 wrote: Because neither side will admit it's wrong about anything. Even of one side truly is right, the other side will still stubbornly cling to their beliefs and obstruct any opposition. Even if, say, the Ds sweep into 2016 with majorities everywhere, the Rs can still filibuster and otherwise obstruct any significant cuts to military spending. Just like the Ds can do the same to the Rs over social spending. So we remain in a budgetary stalemate because neither side is willing to give in order to get.
It never used to be this way, but like I said earlier, the rise of China will probably force the R's and D's to co-operate for the greater good.
At least I hope they would!
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
2015/10/20 16:02:09
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
I feel like I have to comment (only a little mods!!)...
The excuse is that the States dept provided this email to Congress, and redacted the name in one line, and not the other. And then the committee staffers missed the second reference, and put it out to the public.
And it is obviously true that the States dept has the first responsibility of protecting US secrets, and *itself* was guilty of a breach here.
However, with HRC's deposition on the 22nd, Gowdy obviously can't hit HRC too hard on her classified intel spillage.
Yep... she's going to skate on her email / 'ghazi scandal now 'cuz all Gowdy can do is say "oops":
And let her go so that *he* doesn't get lasso'ed into being charged himself (or, at least the staffer being charged who missed that second line).
Clinton's "Teflon" characteristics is validated again!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/20 17:48:40
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2015/10/20 18:09:06
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
2015/10/20 18:41:13
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Tannhauser42 wrote: I think too many people are just thinking of tv show Trump and not political Trump, or they're just that desperate for something different.
d-usa wrote: Trump has always been a conspiracy nut, borderline truther, full-fledged birther, anti-vaxxer, and generally just plain nutty.
It's pretty eye-opening how easily people seem to forget that.
Absolutely.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tannhauser42 wrote: I think too many people are just thinking of tv show Trump and not political Trump, or they're just that desperate for something different.
Possibly... I know plenty of folks supporting Trump because it causes palpital fear among the GOP establshiment. (aka, The Let It Burn Crowd™).
I'm not sure I can really say Bush is a defense hawk, he seems like a pretty deliberative nerd to me (a good thing in my book). Hell, I don't event think brother W. was much of a hawk until 9/11 and his cadre of advisers got hold of his brain.
Help me, Rhonda. HA!
2015/10/20 21:13:41
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
well Ooze before you start dropping F bombs, I would tell ya that I was looking at a website that ended with Obama's first term. secondly I would tell you that the website you showed says it changed the estimate. In other words its still guessing. But if thats true, I wonder how he managed to lower the deficit that drastically in a single term unless he is hiding the debt in other ways. And again if he did it completely legitimately I would say that its the biggest victory for his administration and I would actively congratulate him.
I know you believe im a right wing, gun toting nazi but im really not
I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you mess with me, I'll kill you all
Marine General James Mattis, to Iraqi tribal leaders
2015/10/20 23:19:24
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ghazkuul wrote: But if thats true, I wonder how he managed to lower the deficit that drastically in a single term unless he is hiding the debt in other ways.
So in other words, since you're wrong there must be more to the story because... FEELINGS.
And again if he did it completely legitimately I would say that its the biggest victory for his administration and I would actively congratulate him.
Somehow I seriously, seriously doubt that.
I know you believe im a right wing, gun toting nazi but im really not
No one, not even Ouze, is saying that (at least not that I've seen). However, that doesn't change the fact that you have show a clear propensity to actively ignore facts when they get in the way of your opinions.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
2015/10/20 23:53:58
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
I might be late to the party, but what on earth do people see in Carly?
I mean, I just don't look to someone who takes stagnating business and runs them thoroughly into the ground as someone I really want to be President. That's a little too real to me. Frankly though, pretty much all the candidates on red team and blue team kind of seem like lame ducks (in the not-necessarily-political definition of the word). Bernie is really my biggest hope for anything good to come of this, but I don't even know if I'm that excited about him either.
From the article "Under the president's budget, the deficit would shrink through fiscal 2016, then begin growing throughout the 10-year window" So Ghaz isnt completely right, after all he's not hiding the accounting games.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/10/21 00:09:53
2015/10/21 00:38:08
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ghazkuul wrote: But if thats true, I wonder how he managed to lower the deficit that drastically in a single term unless he is hiding the debt in other ways.
So in other words, since you're wrong there must be more to the story because... FEELINGS.
And again if he did it completely legitimately I would say that its the biggest victory for his administration and I would actively congratulate him.
Somehow I seriously, seriously doubt that.
I know you believe im a right wing, gun toting nazi but im really not
No one, not even Ouze, is saying that (at least not that I've seen). However, that doesn't change the fact that you have show a clear propensity to actively ignore facts when they get in the way of your opinions.
I am neither a republican nor a democrat, im a realist. I support Abortion and legalization of Marijuana, I am a firm believer in the 2nd amendment but I believe that in depth back ground checks are absolutely fine.
If you can show me a solid fact I will never just ignore it, what I will do though is attempt to pick apart So called "facts". For instance in this thread, I say i highly doubt Obama managed to lower the deficit that much, and I would have applauded him if it were true. And within 1 post someone posts the statistic that Obama is basically moving the Deficit so that it doesn't effect the end of his presidency but instead makes every following president for the next 10 years (3 elections) look worse as far as the deficit is concerned.
I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you mess with me, I'll kill you all
Marine General James Mattis, to Iraqi tribal leaders
2015/10/21 00:53:12
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Why am I not surprised that Webb is a "stereotypical" Vietnam vet?
@daedalus... I really don't know what the hell people see in Carly. I mean, the woman clearly can't fact check, but she CAN play the indignant and outraged housewife very, very well.
2015/10/21 01:15:31
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
@daedalus... I really don't know what the hell people see in Carly. I mean, the woman clearly can't fact check, but she CAN play the indignant and outraged housewife very, very well.
I don't know about housewife, but I did hear someone call Carly a board room politician. She is used to being the only woman in a room with a bunch of man and having to hold her own. Which is probably why she does so well in the debates.
well Ooze before you start dropping F bombs, I would tell ya that I was looking at a website that ended with Obama's first term. secondly I would tell you that the website you showed says it changed the estimate. In other words its still guessing. But if thats true, I wonder how he managed to lower the deficit that drastically in a single term unless he is hiding the debt in other ways. And again if he did it completely legitimately I would say that its the biggest victory for his administration and I would actively congratulate him.
I know you believe im a right wing, gun toting nazi but im really not
The deficit went down because most of the deficit was due to the recession. Once the economy recovered so the deficit situation got better. It ain't rocket science man.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2015/10/21 01:29:01
2015/10/21 02:14:08
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
@daedalus... I really don't know what the hell people see in Carly. I mean, the woman clearly can't fact check, but she CAN play the indignant and outraged housewife very, very well.
I don't know about housewife, but I did hear someone call Carly a board room politician. She is used to being the only woman in a room with a bunch of man and having to hold her own. Which is probably why she does so well in the debates.
Click to about the :50 mark, and watch from there.... She is a pissed off, ill-informed housewife, passing judgement on something that America generally now knows is a total sham and farce. We generally knew such even when she made these remarks, but the videos have even further been ran through the mud and debunked since then.
2015/10/21 14:24:11
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
@daedalus... I really don't know what the hell people see in Carly. I mean, the woman clearly can't fact check, but she CAN play the indignant and outraged housewife very, very well.
I don't know about housewife, but I did hear someone call Carly a board room politician. She is used to being the only woman in a room with a bunch of man and having to hold her own. Which is probably why she does so well in the debates.
Click to about the :50 mark, and watch from there.... She is a pissed off, ill-informed housewife, passing judgement on something that America generally now knows is a total sham and farce. We generally knew such even when she made these remarks, but the videos have even further been ran through the mud and debunked since then.
Ok I get what you mean with the planned parenthood comments. Carly is a good speaker...until you actually listen to what she is saying.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/10/21 14:24:59
2015/10/21 15:58:24
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
I didn't think I'd ever really feel sorry for Boehner. After seeing this mess, I really do. Poor guy had to deal with this for years. At least the big O' could just stop communicating with them, but he had to try and lead 'em.
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
2015/10/21 17:08:16
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
(CNN)Vice President Joe Biden ended months of intense speculation about his political future on Wednesday by announcing he wouldn't seek the presidency, abandoning a dream he's harbored for decades and putting Hillary Clinton in a stronger position to capture the Democratic nomination.
With his wife, Jill, and President Barack Obama at his side in the White House Rose Garden, Biden said the window for a successful campaign "has closed," noting his family's grief following the death of his son, Beau.
Still, Biden positioned himself as a defender of the Obama legacy and made clear he views himself as the best possible successor to the President. In tone, the remarks sounded like the kind of speech defending staunch Democratic values that he might have given had he reached the opposite conclusion.
'I will not be silent'
"While I will not be a candidate, I will not be silent," he said in a speech that highlighted Democratic themes on income inequality along with a call for a national movement to cure cancer. "I intend to speak out clearly and forcefully, to influence as much as I can where we stand as a party and where we need to go as a nation."
The question of whether Biden, 72, would enter the race has consumed Democrats for months, but in recent days, the vice president's long period of deliberation had begun to frustrate some in the party -- and there was rising pressure for him to declare his intentions.
PHOTOS: Joe Biden's political life
The prospect of a run seemed to decline further after Clinton's commanding performance at the first Democratic presidential debate on October 13. Her poised demeanor and deft handling of tough questions left many analysts convinced that Clinton effectively froze Biden out of the race.
Democratic Senate Minority leader Harry Reid told CNN that Biden would have been a good candidate "but he made the right decision."
Biden's move means that barring unexpected developments, his long political career, which includes nearly 40 years in the Senate and two terms as vice president, will end along with the Obama administration on January 20, 2017.
The task of coming from behind in a campaign that his potential rivals Clinton and Bernie Sanders had already been waging for months seems to have been too steep for Biden.
READ: Biden changes story on bin Laden raid
Had he jumped into the race -- in a move that would have been seen as a direct challenge to Clinton -- Biden would have faced a huge deficit in grassroots organization and fundraising dollars.
No genuine route to the nomination
He did not appear to have a genuine route to the nomination, trailing Clinton and Sanders in every national polls. Biden trailed Clinton by more than 20 points in a CNN/ORC poll released Monday. He stood at 18% compared to Clinton's 45% and Sanders' 29%.
Biden's decision will come as a relief to the Clinton campaign, as the former secretary of state seeks to stabilize her White House push after months on the defensive over the email storm about which she will testify before Congress on Thursday.
It means that the Democratic nomination now comes down to a straight fight between Clinton and Sanders, assuming low-polling candidates such as former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley do not catch fire.
GRAPHICS: Vice presidents by the numbers
And it spares Obama the awkward prospect of watching his vice president and former secretary of state battle to succeed him.
Biden arrived at his decision after a political career that spanned 40 years and was bookended by tragedy. Soon after he won his Delaware Senate seat in 1972, his wife and infant daughter died in a car crash. Then in May 2015, his son Beau, an Iraq war veteran and his family's hope to forge a political dynasty, died.
Though devastated by the loss, Biden's consideration of a White House campaign may have been motivated by his dying son's plea that he make a third run at the presidency.
He went through a highly public period of mourning and testing of the political waters, pouring out his heart on Stephen Colbert's late night show, and emotionally admitting at public events that he simply did not know if his family had the emotional endurance for a race.
I figured after seeing him on Colbert. I respect the man for his decision. Pity because for all the media likes to joke about "Uncle Joe" he really is an accomplished statesman and one I could have considered voting for depending on who steps forward for the republicans.
Best Painted (2015 Adepticon 40k Champs)
They Shall Know Fear - Adepticon 40k TT Champion (2012 & 2013) & 40k TT Best Sport (2014), 40k TT Best Tactician (2015 & 2016)
2015/10/21 20:23:39
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Anyone else think Hillary might actually be the best for the job?
I mean She was the first Lady(She was very close to the president)
She was a Senator
And she has been secratary of the state for 8 years.
I think, beyond all these senators running, she might be the best for the job.
5000pts 6000pts 3000pts
2015/10/21 20:45:38
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
hotsauceman1 wrote: Anyone else think Hillary might actually be the best for the job?
I mean She was the first Lady(She was very close to the president)
She was a Senator
And she has been secratary of the state for 8 years.
I think, beyond all these senators running, she might be the best for the job.
No
Being first lady doesn't mean you're presidential material
Being a senator has pros and cons so I'm calling that a wash
She's not the secretary of state
Best Painted (2015 Adepticon 40k Champs)
They Shall Know Fear - Adepticon 40k TT Champion (2012 & 2013) & 40k TT Best Sport (2014), 40k TT Best Tactician (2015 & 2016)
5000pts 
6000pts 
3000pts
