US Elections 2012 Part II: The Conventions, Debates and Election results

[synaesthetic]

Ignorance is thinking the National Defense Authorization Act could ever not be passed. It's the bill that funds the entire goddamned military. Sticking a rider inside it is pretty much a guaranteed sneaky way of passing it.

There's no way anyone could have stopped that, short of revamping our entire ruleset so that riders can't be allowed.

[Ithekro]

Considerng it passed the Senate will I think 99 votes...there was absolutely no way it would not pass. Veto or no veto. It also had well more than 3/4 of the House supporting the Act as well.

Which, in looking at everything else in that Act makes perfect sense why it passed. it pays for the military. Not only new projects but also those in service, plus I believe there was something for veterans as well. There was no way it would not pass. The rider made some people object to it in Congress, but only to the point they rewrote it a little.

That particular power is one the military does not want. Nor it is one the President wants. But it is there anyway.

[GundamFan0083]

Which shows that Obama is as much a puppet of the Military Industrial Complex as was Bush and every other president since LBJ.

Obama promised he wouldn't sign the NDAA with the Gitmo detention provision in it, yet he went back on that anyway.

The NDAA didn't need to be passed in the way it was, and if any of these politicians were beholden to the American people, it wouldn't have been.

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Isn't that the GOP's new policy push? IP regulation/deregulation? How is the Fox New mass media push on that going?

I was curious, so I dug around reddit (unbiased source, I know) and found this techdirt article: Hollywood Already Browbeat The Republicans Into Retracting Report On Copyright Reform. Techdirt's original "say what!?" article: House Republicans: Copyright Law Destroys Markets; It's Time For Real Reform.

The report in question is now posted on a bunch of websites. One example: http://publicknowledge.org/files/wit...form_brief.pdf [WARNING: PDF] I skimmed and, um, it's not that well written, to be honest. Very good ideas, though. We bloody well need that four-points reform.

Note as always that techdirt is, like torrentfreak, one of those bastions of the Free Internet radicals. It's not unbiased and doesn't pretend to be. It knows exactly what it stands for and what its audience stands for.

So the GOP-reddit alliance lasted approximately five minutes before the former figured out they'll never convince a single liberal their way while losing millions of Hollywood contributions, or something. Despite us tech-savvy youngsters' growing radicalism and disdain for IP laws, and the display of power during the SOPA debacle, we're still a small minority and the issue isn't even our first concern, so there is too much baggage, too much powerful opposition, and too little political gain. The right timing and right people are not yet there.

Fox News...belongs one of the big contents anyway. Murdoch, remember? The asshole you guys sent our way?

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

So the GOP-reddit alliance lasted approximately five minutes before the former figured out they'll never convince a single liberal their way while losing millions of Hollywood contributions, or something. Despite us tech-savvy youngsters' growing radicalism and disdain for IP laws, and the display of power during the SOPA debacle, we're still a small minority and the issue isn't even our first concern, so there is too much baggage, too much powerful opposition, and too little political gain. The right timing and right people are not yet there.

Fox News...belongs one of the big contents anyway. Murdoch, remember? The asshole you guys sent our way?

Sad to hear. So it seems the GOP is so disorganised that they haven't got a new goal yet.

I believe they really can't get back in the game without first deciding on a new leader. This whole IP rights incident is proof that no one is steering the ship right now.

[Ithekro]

They will probably get a new one come January when the 113th Congress starts up.

[Ithekro]

It comes a question of when to fight and when not to fight.

What are we fighting for? That is an important question. While the more recent wars have there own reasons, that question was one of the ones that got us a massive social problem during Vietnam. (Politician: "To stop Communism". Soldier:"...Where is it going to go...the Sea?")

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Lost Cause

To the first part, the entire Democratic party had the entire government in there hands! Yet all they did was pass the things I mentioned. Obama DID do something, he got in 16 billion in debt! They might have done more but didn't.
Actors playing politician, politicians being actors=the same thing only different.
And as to us being good at killing, I think you missed all the humanitarian aid theses soldiers, airmen, sailors, and Marines are also doing, passing out food, water, distributing new clothes, and materials, rebuilding towns and villages, patrolling same said towns, and villages. Basically policing the area. Funny I don't see any U.N. "Blue Helmets" wandering around doing said jobs.
And as far as body counts are concerned, ever really look at what terrorists target and their body counts are? I'm rather appalled at your statement, as my husband did three tours in Iraq and came home alive. So take your superior attitude and stick it, at least we will fight!

I already deleted my comments because I thought I was out of line, but I will reply to you anyway.

No one was going to decrease debt. Least of all the GOP who don't even care that they haven't got any sort of economic plan at all. Obama did cut spending severely, but that's not well publicised. Currently there is no way to decrease debt without causing a Greece scale riot in the streets.

As for humanitarian aid? You might need to realise that it is not the real job of the US army. The only reason they are used for that purpose is because the money is already spent on paying the salaries and maintaining floating warships, so their hands had to be kept busy. I remember someone elsewhere once had the nerve to claim American wars are FREE because the military budget i already allocated for it. That it shouldn't count as spending because it is money that would have been used up anyway. How is that as proof that the military is too big?

As for bodycount, I am simply stating the obvious. Your "America is a Superpower" comment is not a praise of American superiority. Because that is only military superiority, like the Soviets once were. It is not a label that anyone should wear with pride, because that only showed dominance and few other qualities.

I am happy to hear that your husband returned safe and sound from his dangerous calling. I wish harm on no one. Just remember that there is a difference between defending your country and controlling foreign nations.

[Frenchie]

I feel like what I've been hearing and seeing from the Republican party is an attempt to move away from the Tea Party. The problem with the absolute purity and the hard-headed principles they drum up as major issues is that the Republicans can't really be 'moderates' without risking recall and being replaced in the midterms.

Then, when the wide majority of the vote comes out during the presidential elections, Republicans can't field the moderates they need in the senate.

The funny thing is that the primaries for the presidential candidate face a very similar issue.

What do you guys think? Do you think the Republicans will double down? Or maybe you feel like they will try to dismantle the Tea Party? Perhaps we might see a split in the party?

[monir]

Originally Posted by Frenchie

What do you guys think? Do you think the Republicans will double down? Or maybe you feel like they will try to dismantle the Tea Party? Perhaps we might see a split in the party?

The last question is a very interesting one. One of the reason the Tea Party had so much sway in 2010 election with the Republican Party was based on the fear that if the party don't incorporate some of those ideas, the Tea Party will simply form a third party which would cost the Republican Party dearly. I'm afraid GOP has already made their bed, and they will have to sleep on it for a while before the party finds a way out. One of the critical thinker for GOP (yes, they do exist ) goes by the name of Steve Schmidt who said GOP will may have to get used to the idea that the next few presidential election will belong to the Democrats. He thinks the solution is a long term one at how GOP can once again start appealing to wider base of voters. He says that GOP should slowly cut ties with some of these members (Tea Party or otherwise) who are unwilling to change the message. He is bold enough to suggest that perhaps in the next Congressional election, the GOP shouldn't spend any money on behalf of those people up for reelection bid even at the risk of losing those seats to Democrats.

I think we'll know very soon where GOP is heading toward before January 1st, 2013. After that, we've got couple of more years to sort things out and see first hand how the party will shape itself. Let's just say the urgency for GOP to reform itself is very, very real. And if they stubbornly holds ground to some of those out-of-touch messages/views, winning presidential bids will be the least of their long list of worries.

[Irenicus]

The thing is that there is no clear Republican leader to make that choice. Unless a successful coup happens in one of the backrooms, we'll see competing factions for a while. But I don't think they will split apart, not now. It's not a heavy enough defeat, not a rout.

Ryan hasn't lost credit from his failed VP run. The Tea Party cadre still retain its House presence thanks to the successful gerrymandering in 2010. John Boehner is still a dick -- er, I mean, Speaker of the House. McCain made his move by raising BS and trying to block the nomination of UN Ambassador Susan Rice to Hillary Clinton's position (the GOP really, really wants to manufacture a "Benghazi-Gate" controversy, to borrow their own term, which I consider an Orwellian offense against language). There's Jeb Bush, and then there's Christie. Rove went back to lick his wounds, but is he truly sidelined?

The only truly dead faction is the Romney faction, which, well, didn't really exist in the first place. He was supported by the GOP elite mainstream, but he was not their leader, and though he courted them by going as far right as he can, he was never one of the Tea Partiers, only that they accepted his candidacy because they hated Obama so, so much.

Moreover, they're quite still unified on the platform of opposing President Obama, if out of habit. The "fiscal cliff" (austerity bomb, whatever) is now in play and there are talks of the necessity of a deal, but I'm honestly not sure the GOP as a whole, and especially the 2010 generation, is psychologically capable of compromise. They have always proved the contrary.

In the end we also have to remember that Obama's popular victory, while decisive enough by American standards, and certainly decisive in electoral numbers, is still thin. Many in the Republican Party truly believe that the failure is in the so-called "ground game" and not in the ideology, and if these people win the coming power struggle, that is the road they'll continue to take.

I myself think differently, of course, I think many of us voted this election because of ideology, social, economic, and political, because we -- the young, the poor, the minorities, the LGBT people and their supporters -- were truly rattled by what appeared a stark, historic choice that will either see us disenfranchised from what it means to be American, or claim it as our own legacy. We felt the reactionary threat, the monied threat, the Super PAC money, the Christianist rhetoric, we felt it all so strongly. So despite the widespread prediction of apathy from the supporters of a President under siege in bad economic times whose promises of Change did not quite pan out, voter turnout far exceeded predictions of self-confident Republican strategists. Yet despite heralds of a new era, I hardly think this victory is decisive enough. This isn't 1932 and the beginning of the New Deal. History will need time -- and more victories -- to take root, change minds, convince the Republican Party that they either change or become the past. Not yet.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

This all boils down to who ends up with the GOP leadership. And we are not talking about someone "electable", we are talking about someone who can actually give orders.

Romney was running for president, but he never gave orders to the GOP.

The fight for the leadership would be a simultaneous fight for the future direction of the party. That much we are sure of.

It is technically too soon for the GOP to choose the next POTUS candidate. But they really can't wait two years to get a new leader. Someone has to make decisions and take the responsibility. It really doesn't matter what kind of party you are running, leadership is always required.

[ganbaru]

Rep. Allen West concedes House race to Patrick Murphy
http://www.postonpolitics.com/2012/1...atrick-murphy/
Ah, Florida. At least they didn't elect this idiot :
Top 5 Most Outrageous Allen West Comments of All-Time
http://www.policymic.com/articles/68...ts-of-all-time

[GundamFan0083]

Well, Patrick Leahy has shown his true colors.

Senate bill rewrite lets feds read your e-mail without warrants
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57...news&tag=title

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by GundamFan0083

Well, Patrick Leahy has shown his true colors.

Senate bill rewrite lets feds read your e-mail without warrants
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57...news&tag=title

I am so relieved that my main email is not in a server inside the USA, since now that law enforcement there has free access to emails the next logical step is data mining them. 1984 is late, but 2014 is just around the corner.

[Vexx]

Its a bill, not the law, bills are simply proposals. In other words its all written in chalk at the moment. But yeah, Leahy apparently tried to flip the intent of the bill (he's always been a bit of a twit). Now the various ACLU/EPIC/EFF types will have to keep a spotlight on it to either kill it or get it re-flipped to the original intent.

[GDB]

GOP Starting to Rebel Against No-Tax-Hikes Pledge

My god, could it be that some sanity is beginning to return to the republicans?

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by GDB

GOP Starting to Rebel Against No-Tax-Hikes Pledge

My god, could it be that some sanity is beginning to return to the republicans?

No ... just fear of not being re-elected. The smoke and mirrors are fading and there's an extreme likelihood of the GOP being hung by their petards on the budget crisis.

Simple fact, the 1%/.01% is paying far lower tax rates than they did for the entire 20th Century. In fact, they did their best during some of the higher taxation periods (if for no other reason there was a large middle class to sell to). So for them to complain they can't make it under the lowest tax rates in history or compete globally against others who pay far more in taxes in other countries --- "histrionics" is a nice word and "totally incompetent it seems" might also come to mind.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Vexx

No ... just fear of not being re-elected.

In this case, reason wouldn't matter. Sanity is sanity, even if they regain it because someone is chasing them with a giant mallet.

[Ithekro]

Originally Posted by GDB

In this case, reason wouldn't matter. Sanity is sanity, even if they regain it because someone is chasing them with a giant mallet.

What, Gallagher is running again?