US Elections 2012 Part I: The Primaries/Caucus

[Urzu 7]

It is sad, I see the TV ad where the Romney campaign slams Obama for endorsing another TV ad which is misleading on its attacks on Mitt Romney. They say in the Romney endorsed TV ad "How can you trust in a president when he doesn't tell the truth" and I can see the Obama haters nodding in agreement and being like "That's right!". All the while, we have Mitt Romney lying about things that actually matter, one of which being something that could be a felony, and then he lies on other things, like his tax returns for one example. What right does the Romney campaign have to paint Obama as a liar? That's right; none.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

It is sad, I see the TV ad where the Romney campaign slams Obama for endorsing another TV ad which is misleading on its attacks on Mitt Romney. They say in the Romney endorsed TV ad "How can you trust in a president when he doesn't tell the truth" and I can see the Obama haters nodding in agreement and being like "That's right!". All the while, we have Mitt Romney lying about things that actually matter, one of which being something that could be a felony, and then he lies on other things, like his tax returns for one example. What right does the Romney campaign have to paint Obama as a liar? That's right; none.

It's not Romney's fault that his voters demand him to lie. He will tell the truth when his voters care about it.

Politics isn't about being evil; it is about working with what you got. And being a politician means giving your voting base exactly what they demand. What do you expect him to do? Educate his voters? That would push them to Democrat's side.
If truth cause you to lose, and lies cause you to win, you lie.

It's like how the Texas GOP platform publicly states that they are against higher level thinking. If it doesn't hurt you in any way to lie, cheat, and do horrible things to win, then why stop?

Romney will stop lying when his approval rating drops after each lie. And not before.

Truth sets you free. But not everyone want to be free.

[Urzu 7]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

It's not Romney's fault that his voters demand him to lie. He will tell the truth when his voters care about it.

Politics isn't about being evil; it is about working with what you got. And being a politician means giving your voting base exactly what they demand. What do you expect him to do? Educate his voters? That would push them to Democrat's side.
If truth cause you to lose, and lies cause you to win, you lie.

It's like how the Texas GOP platform publicly states that they are against higher level thinking. If it doesn't hurt you in any way to lie, cheat, and do horrible things to win, then why stop?

Romney will stop lying when his approval rating drops after each lie. And not before.

Truth sets you free. But not everyone want to be free.

Hm...thanks, now I'm sad and I weep for America.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

Hm...thanks, now I'm sad and I weep for America.

I started giving up in 2000... now I just acidly remark on the seemingly irreversible spiral into doom.

[Urzu 7]

Originally Posted by Vexx

I started giving up in 2000... now I just acidly remark on the seemingly irreversible spiral into doom.

I know the democrats are also at fault for this, but it irritates me to see some people blame them for how bad things are and then think the GOP somehow isn't more at fault than them. Really, they are much more at fault. They've been assailing the well being of America since 2001.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

I know the democrats are also at fault for this, but it irritates me to see some people blame them for how bad things are and then think the GOP somehow isn't more at fault than them. Really, they are much more at fault. They've been assailing the well being of America since 2001.

We should also ask ourself which part of the problem came from the politician ( of any party), there's others groups and individuals than are also making thing as bas as they are.

[Vexx]

Raise your eyes up from the "two party system" and follow the money... sometimes you'll discover that the money source is buying both sides of the aisle. Thanks again to "Citizens United" and related rulings which are giving us the United Corporations of America.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Raise your eyes up from the "two party system" and follow the money... sometimes you'll discover that the money source is buying both sides of the aisle.

To ''never put all our eggs in the same basket''or ''you never know what craxy idea the plebe might get at the day of the election ''...

[Kyuu]

Romney's paper trail with Bain Capital is REALLY biting him in the ass.

Apparently, Bain Capital made investments to a company named "Stericycle", which dealt with "aborted fetuses".
http://www.nationalreview.com/campai...oad-stericycle

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Kyuu

Romney's paper trail with Bain Capital is REALLY biting him in the ass.

Apparently, Bain Capital made investments to a company named "Stericycle", which dealt with "aborted fetuses".
http://www.nationalreview.com/campai...oad-stericycle

Finally the Democrats are getting it. If they want to win elections they need to out Karl Rove.

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by Kyuu

Romney's paper trail with Bain Capital is REALLY biting him in the ass.

Apparently, Bain Capital made investments to a company named "Stericycle", which dealt with "aborted fetuses".
http://www.nationalreview.com/campai...oad-stericycle

I have mixed feelings about Romney's whole tenure with Bain thing. I didn't care when the Obama camp brought it up, because I accepted that Romney had nothing to do with Bain's operations after he left in 1999. It seemed weird that the ownership transfer took three years, but I get it: he wasn't involved with their operations. It gets weird that he refuses to just explain the situation beyond "Obama is telling lies," and that makes me suspicious.

But this thing with Stericycle is really foolish.

Then again, I suppose I'm not the target audience. I understand that it's an attempt to weaken Romney's support with the extremely religious; the types of people who assume that anything to do with abortion, by any association, is terrible and must not be supported. It'll probably be pretty effective in that regard.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Ledgem

Then again, I suppose I'm not the target audience. I understand that it's an attempt to weaken Romney's support with the extremely religious; the types of people who assume that anything to do with abortion, by any association, is terrible and must not be supported. It'll probably be pretty effective in that regard.

Probably not; the extremely religious and the ''save the foetus'' peoples pretty much always vote republican. It would need a miracle to make them vote democrate, or just to not vote.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Probably not; the extremely religious and the ''save the foetus'' peoples pretty much always vote republican. It would need a miracle to make them vote democrate, or just to not vote.

The "social conservatives", to use a polite term usually just stay home if they feel like they've got no one to vote for. And most national elections are decided on the margins of "who stays home" or "who can be diverted from voting".

[ChainLegacy]

Originally Posted by Vexx

I started giving up in 2000... now I just acidly remark on the seemingly irreversible spiral into doom.

Picture being 10 years old in the year 2000... never even had a better choice to look back on fondly...

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by ChainLegacy

Picture being 10 years old in the year 2000... never even had a better choice to look back on fondly...

When a fascist regime is finally born (where there will be no citizens, only serfs and rulers) you will look back fondly to the years before empire.

[monsta666]

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

When a fascist regime is finally born (where there will be no citizens, only serfs and rulers) you will look back fondly to the years before empire.

Whilst I think socio-economic depression/collapse is a distinct possibility I do not really subscribe to the notion that if economic collapse were to happen then the rulers would control the people like slaves/serfs. The rulers may run the show in this current system but they are also dependant on it as well. This is because a lot of their skill and education comes from gaming the system, once the underlying system is gone then many of this elite will lack the skills and the means to run the show as the rules of society would drastically change, often in unpredictable ways. Yes that time could well result in people who are ruthless and cunning taking advantage of the situation but I would suggest those people would largely be different to the current elite we see today.

In any case consider this, if the American economy were to collapse it is pretty safe to say the global economy would also fall. Some would say China or the far East would then run the show but the problem I have with this theory is that unlike the US in the past those economies are not self-contained, they are export led economies. If the economies of the west were to implode then who would buy all those items? It won't be the average Chinese worker because they don't earn nearly enough to buy all those goods. As a result of this fact, a lot of Chinese factories would close and there would be a whole lot of unemployed people. Now considering that country doesn't have a democracy then that could well end in a explosive situation...

So if the US implodes and the same happens to the export countries all those multinational corporations go under and seeing as a lot of these corporations are owned by the elite then their source of wealth goes... Plus if everything is going downhill there is bound to be social upheaval with the masses revolting. We need to remember the person who has lost everything is the most dangerous type of person. At this moment of time people are still complicit even if they think the game is somewhat rigged because they want to keep their jobs/social status or pension. There is a fear factor preventing people from speaking out. If all those things go away they will want to blame someone and the natural reaction would be to point at the guy who is still driving around in a Ferrari.

If you want historic examples just look at the French revolution. The French elite wanted to undermine the power of the French government and it did so by effectively making it go broke (they did this by forcing lower taxes and great military expenditures/misadventures). As the government got poorer the influence of the elite grew but all this looting came at the expense of the average French person and when things finally got really bad we all know what happened next... Now, I am not saying this scenario will definitely not happen in the US and I understand what I am saying is bit out there but if it did happen, suppose it were to occur, then I think the elite would not be in a good place. Maybe if they left the country and lived elsewhere it would be different. But I think if the US really did go down then it would be a global problem so there would be no place to hide and they would take a big hit.

[ganbaru]

Ed Gillespie: Mitt Romney 'Retired Retroactively' From Bain Capital
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1674281.html
Is that me or the ''explanation'' from Romney's camp are more and more weird ?

[cors8]

I'm wondering who the hell in the Romney campaign comes up with these things.

It should be a simple answer instead some convoluted story that makes you seem even more suspicious.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Ed Gillespie: Mitt Romney 'Retired Retroactively' From Bain Capital
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1674281.html
Is that me or the ''explanation'' from Romney's camp are more and more weird ?

Not at all. Retroactive retirement is just something people who bend rules to suit them do everyday. The idea is that you can do anything you like as long as you make up for them later. Like, you can steal a few billion dollars from your customer's accounts as long as you return them later without them noticing. So in this case, Romney needed to retire earlier than he actually did. So they signed papers backdating his retirement and effective changed the past through legal magic.

It's LEGAL, or at least no one has banned it yet.

However, just because it is legal doesn't change the fact that he was CEO at some stage. And that you can't erase it from time. Most people don't care what you say on your paper, they care about what you actually do. And Romney was working as CEO and sole owner from the viewpoint of normal people.

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by cors8

I'm wondering who the hell in the Romney campaign comes up with these things.

It should be a simple answer instead some convoluted story that makes you seem even more suspicious.

Agreed. This one really seemed like a total non-issue when it was brought up, but Romney's weird explanations and skirting around the issue make it seem like there's really something to be concerned about.