2012 U.S. Presidential Election

[kurai]

that's no way to speak about the vice president

[Plantae]

I can think of several reasons why Romney (and the GOP in general) lost. They alienated minorities and women, and assumed - wrongfully - that Democrats who voted for Mr. Obama the last time were so disappointed with him that they'd stay home this time.

Obama's ground game was definitely superior in the end. This is why I'm calling Hillary Clinton v. Marco Rubio in 2016.

May I note the Democrat's Running Mate is a utter retard with Joe Biden?

Really Roy? The r-word? I never imagined you'd be happy camper after this election, but that's no excuse for bigotry.

[Dark Sage]

that's no way to speak about the vice president

Just ignore him, Kurai. He's just bitter because Biden gets to keep the job that Ryan wanted.

[kurai]

Really Roy? The r-word? I never imagined you'd be happy camper after this election, but that's no excuse for bigotry.

well,

Yeah difference is that when the White Community feels slighted, they usually do not engage in mass rioting and racial vengeance. On the other hand you have... Rodney King

[mr_pikachu]

I wasn't online yesterday because I was doing live election coverage all night long for a class blog that I run. Looking back, I can see the tone of my writing start to change around 10:00 p.m., as I grew more weary and the outcome grew more inevitable.

Looks like half the country is eagerly anticipating gas prices in the $4-5/gallon range, unemployment climbing past 10%, and several trillion more dollars added to the national debt over the next four years. The other half of the country is considering moving to Belize.

Unless, of course, Obama replicates what Clinton did in his second term and actually moves toward bipartisanship in order to get things done. Given Obama's track record, though, I'm not expecting much.

It's absolutely astonishing that anyone could get reelected after
1) holding the unemployment rate above 8% for the majority of his presidency,
2) adding several trillion to the already sky-high national debt,
3) doubling gas prices,
4) literally watching a U.S. ambassador die live on closed-circuit television while refusing troops' pleas to let them go and save lives, and
5) explicitly insulting voters in the key states of Ohio and Pennsylvania -- both of which he won -- by saying that they just inexplicably "cling to guns or religion," then putting them at the same level of illogic as blind xenophobia.

I guess that just shows how ill-advised the Romney campaign was. As soon as he won the first debate, Romney backed off the attack and passed up an array of opportunities to attack Obama. He clearly thought he could just let the clock run out and hold a tiny victory, totally forgetting that anything can happen in the final week of the campaign. This is an election that he should have won, and it's a campaign cycle in which the Republicans should have at least tightened the margin in the Senate. Instead, well, you know what happened.

Looking at the polls, Obama turned the corner in the last week, largely due to the Sandy catastrophe. I'd say there was a shift of roughly 1.5% in the polls during that timeframe. If you gave that margin back to Romney, then looking at how many nail-biter states there were, the Republican would be our next president. But that's just not how politics works. His staff failed to realize that you can't just rest on your laurels if you hope to unseat an incumbent.

Ugh. If I'm able to earn any sizable chunk of money in the near future, I'm planning to invest at least a portion of it overseas. The U.S. economy is no longer trustworthy enough for me to trust everything to domestic markets.

On a side note, CNN still hasn't called Florida. Are they really still that scared after 2000? I mean, even I decided to call it for Obama at 2:00 a.m., just a couple of minutes after his acceptance speech ended.

[kurai]

florida is within 0.5% so it falls into automatic recount

i don't think the secretary of state has decided what to do since it doesn't really matter

[mr_pikachu]

Really? RCP has it as 49.9%-49.3% with 100% of precincts reporting. Even if there are some early, absentee, or provisional ballots yet to be counted, I'd expect those to increase his margin, not shrink it.

Maybe I'm missing something. I am fighting a migraine, after all... I had a terrible night of sleep after the election.

[Roy Karrde]

that's no way to speak about the vice president

Really Roy? The r-word? I never imagined you'd be happy camper after this election, but that's no excuse for bigotry.

Care to explain how calling some one retarded is any more bigoted than calling some one crazy? Both are a critique on a candidate's mental capabilities.

Also I am curious where was this new found respect for the President and Vice President when Bush and Cheney were in office? And were called far worse.

Just ignore him, Kurai. He's just bitter because Biden gets to keep the job that Ryan wanted.

I believe I have debated with you many times on my views of the mental capabilities or lack there of, of Joe Biden.

well,

Care to point out where in my post I advocated for mass rioting or racial vengeance?

[classy_cat18]

Care to explain how calling some one retarded is any more bigoted than calling some one crazy? Both are a critique on a candidate's mental capabilities.

Joe Biden wasn't the one who made a last-minute desperate comment that voting for Obama would mean an end to religious freedom.

Also I am curious where was this new found respect for the President and Vice President when Bush and Cheney were in office?

...I'm going to spend the rest of today trying not to laugh at that.

[Roy Karrde]

Joe Biden wasn't the one who made a last-minute desperate comment that voting for Obama would mean an end to religious freedom.

No he just came out and said that voting for Romney would put Black people back in chains.

[Dark Sage]

Roy, I thought that the only way you would accept defeat would be when Romney actually lost.

Seems I was wrong. Even THAT won't do the trick.

[Roy Karrde]

Roy, I thought that the only way you would accept defeat would be when Romney actually lost.

Seems I was wrong. Even THAT won't do the trick.

I believe I said last night that Romney lost, what did you expect for me to stop debating?

[Heald]

Called it over a year ago. Called it six months ago. Called it last night.

And thanks to a bet I placed I've got a little something extra in my pocket to buy a winter warmer with.

Anyway, Shitstorm 2012 is finally over. Let the rustling of jimmies commence. Once everyone's jimmies have been sufficiently rustled I'll lock the thread at long last, then I'll delete all of Roy's and DS' posts so it looks like this forum is capable of civilised debate.

[classy_cat18]

Might as well delete the whole damn thing. Can't believe I got pulled into this stupid shitstorm. My IQ must be dropping.

[Dark Sage]

I agree with Cat. Delete it and erase all evidence that it ever happened.

The only reason I responded to Roy's posts was because I hated seeing Mr. Obama smeared.

[classy_cat18]

To be fair, your criticism of Romney wasn't any prettier. I actually respected the guy, at least a whole lot more than Bush. Ryan, on the other hand, got on my nerves.

[Magmar]

Care to explain how calling some one retarded is any more bigoted than calling some one crazy? Both are a critique on a candidate's mental capabilities.

This is true. In general, saying something or someone is "crazy", "loopy", "nuts", "an idiot", "stupid" or even "insane" all have the exact same connotation as saying that something is "retarded". I try to refrain from using this language (and I'm pretty good about not using 'retarded') but it is difficult for me to eliminate these other words from my vernacular. I think awareness is a factor here; generally, people speak very openly about the use of "retarded" to describe someone or something, and it's pretty clear that "retarded" has connotation to someone who lives with mental disability. Words like "crazy" on the other hand are generally used to imply that someone is failing to listen to reason. Either way you look at these words, they are (except for 'retarded') passively discriminatory.

Once again, all of these terms (barring 'retarded') have become so ingrained in our vernacular that one generally wouldn't use them to describe a person who has mental retardation because that in itself is deemed offensive, but rather one who has a mental deficiency/chemical disequilibrium which is offensive for other reasons. So yes, they are different, but the original meaning of terms like stupid, idiot, and moron has been lost to the vernacular. They are usually only encountered in a historical context of psychology. On that note, saying something is "lame" today has changed in meaning to that something is unexciting or not fulfilling, not differently abled physically. Still interesting to think about--when does the meaning change? I doubt we'll ever call a boring episode of Judge Judy "differently abled", but someone may call it "pretty lame".

[kurai]

Really? RCP has it as 49.9%-49.3% with 100% of precincts reporting. Even if there are some early, absentee, or provisional ballots yet to be counted, I'd expect those to increase his margin, not shrink it.

Maybe I'm missing something. I am fighting a migraine, after all... I had a terrible night of sleep after the election.

but the actual report right now is here: http://enight.elections.myflorida.com/FederalOffices/

0.5% of 8314953 is 41575
the difference right now is 47477 (or 0.57%)

which is 0.5 truncated overall

even though the law says "one-half of a percent or less", it does not specify significant digits

this can be solved immediately by romney sending a letter asking them to not bother with a recount ("A recount need not be ordered with respect to the returns for any office, however, if the candidate or candidates defeated or eliminated from contention for such office by one-half of a percent or less of the votes cast for such office request in writing that a recount not be made.")

Care to point out where in my post I advocated for mass rioting or racial vengeance?

that is not the problem with that post

[Roy Karrde]

that is not the problem with that post

I see no connection from one post to the next. Nor have you properly explained one.

[Magmar]

Ugh. If I'm able to earn any sizable chunk of money in the near future, I'm planning to invest at least a portion of it overseas.

Isn't that why there's like no money in the US right now

[kurai]

the posting of bigotry by roy karrde is the connection

riots are the "usual" response by the non-white community to "feel[ing] slighted"?

a compelling argument!

[Dark Sage]

Isn't that why there's like no money in the US right now

It's also a big reason why so many people didn't like Romney. He did the exact same thing.

[Roy Karrde]

the posting of bigotry by roy karrde is the connection

riots are the "usual" response by the non-white community to "feel[ing] slighted"?

a compelling argument!

Yes and it was in response to Plantae talking about "Plenty of White Folks" in response to the riot threats made by black twitterers.

However such "bigotry" or generalization that we are both using, has nothing to do with calling some one a retard. You are merely engaging in a poor apples and oranges connection.

[kurai]

disparaging categorization of mental disability as a negative term of insult

disparaging categorization of racial group as defined by negative characteristics

apples and oranges

[Roy Karrde]

disparaging categorization of mental disability as a negative term of insult

disparaging categorization of racial group as defined by negative characteristics

apples and oranges

So you have given up on it being "Bigotry" and merely noting I was negative or disparaging in both.... Yeah. What's next "They were both posts at Pokemasters.net"?

[kurai]

and so, we circle back to a trend of disparaging categorizations betraying an inner core of intolerant bigotry

[ChobiChibi]

Not exactly what I meant. I'm not talking about 4 years time, I'm talking right now. Here are the two outcomes I'm foreseeing:
1) Obama wins, Romney loses. Roy sulks, continuing to slate Obama, regardless of the fact people obviously like his leadership. Dark Sage gloats, with an "I told you so" like attitude. This thread still goes on for another couple of months.

I rest my case.

[Blademaster]

Before I start this off I want everyone to know that it is a lock that Romney will win. The election is over. Period

my well-thought-out posts

I rest my case.

Crazy thread in a nutshell.

HI GUYS!

[Dark Sage]

Is this thread still here? Okay, I'm going to state my $0.02 one last time...

Romney was born rich, went to prep school as a kid, and had everything in his life handed to him. To make things worse, he is a member of a religion with a dark history of intolerance and outright racism. He actually signed a contract saying he would oppose the rights of the gay community that every other GOP candidate but one also signed.

Mitt Romney would not have solved the problems facing this country. On the contrary, he is the embodiment of them.

There, I said it. I feel better.

[Telume]

What hurt Romney? Hispanic vote, according to alot of news outlets.

This, I can agree with. I am no exception, I voted for Obama.

[Telume]

Source 1:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8M7JO720121107

Source 2:

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/pol...linching-ohio/

Source 3:

http://www.slate.com/articles/busine..._crushing.html

[mr_pikachu]

*sighs*

I took a four-hour nap to relieve a migraine, and I woke up to see exactly what I was most hoping not to see.

If Romney wins, and Roy does sink to that level, I'm just going to ignore him, and hope that Heald has the sense to finally lock this accursed thread.

I agree with Cat. Delete it and erase all evidence that it ever happened.

Is this thread still here?

There are plenty more of these in the last 162 pages. I don't care to waste my time tracking them down.

EDIT: Okay. After some further reflection, I've decided to withhold my full response to your most recent comments, DS. I've been restraining myself for months, and I still don't want to get this thread off track if I can avoid it. So let me just say that if you really hate this thread so much that you feel the need to say how much it sucks in every other post you make here, you shouldn't be posting in the thread at all. Maybe you think that you look like the sole voice of reason when you keep saying "why is the thread still open?" But when you continue posting here several times a day, you just make yourself look like a hypocrite. Others have complained about this thread, too -- mostly about the almost-flame wars between you and Roy, actually -- but they haven't turned around and posted in the thread five times the next day.

If you genuinely thought that this thread should be locked so that no one could post in it, you'd stop being an active participant in it yourself. So either keep debating in the thread (thereby acknowledging its usefulness) and stop whining about having a place to voice your opinions, or act like it isn't here and leave it alone, as others who truly don't like the thread have done. You can't have it both ways. Pick one.

but the actual report right now is here: http://enight.elections.myflorida.com/FederalOffices/

0.5% of 8314953 is 41575
the difference right now is 47477 (or 0.57%)

which is 0.5 truncated overall

even though the law says "one-half of a percent or less", it does not specify significant digits

Hmm, I wasn't aware of that standard on significant digits. Interesting. Thanks for the clarification, kurai!

Isn't that why there's like no money in the US right now

Actually, the reason why there's no money in the U.S. right now is because the government is taxing the daylights out of the people who have worked for decades to make a living. This not only punishes hard work, but it also keeps them from hiring others and allowing them to climb the economic ladder in the same way. Then, the government's taken that money and spent it on brilliant ideas like automatic weapons for Mexican gangs who subsequently use them to massacre people just across the border.

But after all those taxes, the government has decided that they still don't have enough to do everything that they'd like, and they see that the economy's not recovering (since people still can't get jobs), so they've been printing more money at a higher rate in an attempt to generate more funds that they can spend. However, all this has done is drive up the inflation rate, making the U.S. dollars that people still have worth less and less by the day.

That's where all our money's going, and it's why smart investors here are concerned about trusting everything to the increasingly weak American dollar. Our funds aren't merely vanishing because investors are acting like Romney, who must be evil. There's a reason behind that behavior, and it lies with the government that has inhibited natural economic growth and developed this poor fiscal climate.

[RedStarWarrior]

@Gavin: WA and CO are looking at applying rules to usage as they have for alcohol.

[Asilynne]

I wasn't online yesterday because I was doing live election coverage all night long for a class blog that I run. Looking back, I can see the tone of my writing start to change around 10:00 p.m., as I grew more weary and the outcome grew more inevitable.

Looks like half the country is eagerly anticipating gas prices in the $4-5/gallon range, unemployment climbing past 10%, and several trillion more dollars added to the national debt over the next four years. The other half of the country is considering moving to Belize.

Unless, of course, Obama replicates what Clinton did in his second term and actually moves toward bipartisanship in order to get things done. Given Obama's track record, though, I'm not expecting much.

It's absolutely astonishing that anyone could get reelected after
1) holding the unemployment rate above 8% for the majority of his presidency,
2) adding several trillion to the already sky-high national debt,
3) doubling gas prices,
4) literally watching a U.S. ambassador die live on closed-circuit television while refusing troops' pleas to let them go and save lives, and
5) explicitly insulting voters in the key states of Ohio and Pennsylvania -- both of which he won -- by saying that they just inexplicably "cling to guns or religion," then putting them at the same level of illogic as blind xenophobia.

I guess that just shows how ill-advised the Romney campaign was. As soon as he won the first debate, Romney backed off the attack and passed up an array of opportunities to attack Obama. He clearly thought he could just let the clock run out and hold a tiny victory, totally forgetting that anything can happen in the final week of the campaign. This is an election that he should have won, and it's a campaign cycle in which the Republicans should have at least tightened the margin in the Senate. Instead, well, you know what happened.

Looking at the polls, Obama turned the corner in the last week, largely due to the Sandy catastrophe. I'd say there was a shift of roughly 1.5% in the polls during that timeframe. If you gave that margin back to Romney, then looking at how many nail-biter states there were, the Republican would be our next president. But that's just not how politics works. His staff failed to realize that you can't just rest on your laurels if you hope to unseat an incumbent.

Ugh. If I'm able to earn any sizable chunk of money in the near future, I'm planning to invest at least a portion of it overseas. The U.S. economy is no longer trustworthy enough for me to trust everything to domestic markets.

On a side note, CNN still hasn't called Florida. Are they really still that scared after 2000? I mean, even I decided to call it for Obama at 2:00 a.m., just a couple of minutes after his acceptance speech ended.

As with your views on social media that were published in the book of yours we got at the wedding (I read it :3) you managed to sum up my opinions and said it better than I ever could, bravo sir Thank you for posting this!

[Plantae]

Before I launch into an argument about this, I'd just like to note that mr_pikachu, Asilynne, I respect both of you, even if I disagree. I don't mean to offend you. If anything, you seem to be the only voices of compassionate conservatism in this thread. And I appreciate that. And oh, congrats on the wedding, Asi!

Actually, the reason why there's no money in the U.S. right now is because the government is taxing the daylights out of the people who have worked for decades to make a living. This not only punishes hard work, but it also keeps them from hiring others and allowing them to climb the economic ladder in the same way.

Emphasis mine. If you're referring here to so-called "job creators," this argument has no merit. Even if you're referring to the poor or the middle class, this argument still doesn't work. All groups of people receive benefits for what they pass in taxes; some groups more so than others. Some don't pay taxes at all, but there's a reason for that. If they did, they'd never have the chance to climb the "economic ladder," as you suggest.

Trickle-down economics is fallacious. It has been tried throughout history, disguised as both horse-and-sparrow theory in the 1890's and Reaganomics later on. No credible evidence suggests that tax cuts to the wealthy create jobs; because no matter how much taxes are cut, the rich are more eager to amass their money in tax havens, which ultimately damage the economy, than to invest the money in the way you suggest. The idea that we should feed the wealth of the rich, in vain hope that they might give some of it to the poor and the middle class, is completely senseless, and needlessly indirect. Why wouldn't it be wiser to cut the taxes of the poor and middle class directly?

Even Ross Perot called trickle-down economics "political voodoo." The few of the nation's privileged who actually understand their duty as citizens are eager to give more, to be taxed more, because they understand that this theory is completely bogus. Because they've lived it. Because once you have that much money, it's almost impossible to avoid indulging yourself, and to avoid doing whatever you want.

1) holding the unemployment rate above 8% for the majority of his presidency,
2) adding several trillion to the already sky-high national debt,
3) doubling gas prices,
4) literally watching a U.S. ambassador die live on closed-circuit television while refusing troops' pleas to let them go and save lives, and
5) explicitly insulting voters in the key states of Ohio and Pennsylvania -- both of which he won -- by saying that they just inexplicably "cling to guns or religion," then putting them at the same level of illogic as blind xenophobia.

1. He didn't "hold" the rate above 8%. It wasn't an intention. Don't suggest that it was.
2. Fair enough. But if you can explain how Romney would have done better, with tax cuts and defense spending that could not have been paid for, do tell.
3. The president has almost no control over this.
4. This is a complete misrepresentation. Good luck finding a credible source that supports this claim.
5. Many more extreme Christians regard homosexuals with blind hatred, based on an ancient text that also suggests that slavery is acceptable and that stoning is the proper punishment for various minor sins. As someone who was raised Catholic, I think the Bible has some good ideas; but many people seem to cherry-pick the "fire and brimstone" that supports their own, prejudiced views.

And as much as there may be validity to the suggestion that allowing civilians to keep their guns may prevent certain crimes, it should be noted that the only reason many violent crimes occur is because of the proliferation of guns that occurred in the first place. People who believe unequivocally in unrestricted gun rights are trying to fight fire with fire. There's a reason that nations with very restrictive gun rights also have extremely low rates of violent crime.

This isn't the wild west anymore. People need to realize that you can't clean up the streets with a gun. We need to address the social disparities that have led to crime in the first place. But I agree that these are discussions we need to have without the application of partisan rhetoric.

disparaging categorization of mental disability as a negative term of insult

disparaging categorization of racial group as defined by negative characteristics

So you have given up on it being "Bigotry" and merely noting I was negative or disparaging in both.... Yeah. What's next "They were both posts at Pokemasters.net"?

You really just don't get it, do you? This is exactly why you're a bigot. Because you apply generally negative, disparaging characteristics to groups of people who have done nothing to deserve such prejudice. Because no one deserves such prejudice. And the sad thing is, you'll probably never learn.

I've been glad to try and debate you on the principles of logic. And I think you've made a number of reasonable, even insightful points. But why would anyone ever think your political arguments have merit, when it's clear that the policies you suggest are not guided by conventional morality? Instead, you base your designs for society on relative principles unbound by notions of right and wrong, which even you don't hold internally consistent. Anyone that thinks there is nothing wrong with indiscriminately applying the word "retard" or suggesting that African-Americans are prone to "racial violence" makes me sick. Please, take your ideals, and go back to whatever backward century you came from.

I know this argument is ad hominem. But it was necessary. And hopefully, it will encourage someone to close this thread.

[Roy Karrde]

4. This is a complete misrepresentation. Good luck finding a credible source that supports this claim.

"The United States had an unmanned Predator drone over its consulate in Benghazi during the attack that slaughtered four Americans — which should have led to a quicker military response, it was revealed yesterday.

“They stood, and they watched, and our people died,” former CIA commander Gary Berntsen told CBS News.

The network reported that the drone and other reconnaissance aircraft observed the final hours of the hours-long siege on Sept. 11 — obtaining information that should have spurred swift action.

But as Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three colleagues were killed by terrorists armed with AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenade launchers, Defense Department officials were too slow to send in the troops, Berntsen said.

The Pentagon said it moved a team of special operators from Central Europe to Sigonella, Italy — about an hour flight from Libya — but gave no other details.

Fighter jets and Specter AC-130 gunships — which could have been used to help disperse the bloodthirsty mob — were also stationed at three nearby bases, sources told the network."

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/interna...OK23rPf7Z5BHWO

[Plantae]

"The United States had an unmanned Predator drone over its consulate in Benghazi during the attack that slaughtered four Americans — which should have led to a quicker military response, it was revealed yesterday...

I'm not talking about the claim that the government stood by. I'm talking about the claim that they did it without motive, and that the reason Americans died in Libya was because Barack Obama somehow wanted them to. That argument is unconscionable and not based on any evidence.

[Roy Karrde]

I'm not talking about the claim that the government stood by. I'm talking about the claim that they did it without motive, and that the reason Americans died in Libya was because Barack Obama somehow wanted them to. That argument is unconscionable and not based on any evidence.

Obama had final authority to order troops in or aircraft in, which they were clearly ready. He did not. The evidence seems to point that Obama believed or wanted to believe the Libyans could take care of the situation. As we know now, road blocks had been set up and were making it hard for Libyan security to reach the consulate. Road blocks mind you, that Jets would have had no trouble with.

[Plantae]

Obama had final authority to order troops in or aircraft in, which they were clearly ready. He did not. The evidence seems to point that Obama believed or wanted to believe the Libyans could take care of the situation. As we know now, road blocks had been set up and were making it hard for Libyan security to reach the consulate. Road blocks mind you, that Jets would have had no trouble with.

This would have been a violation of Libyan airspace.

[Roy Karrde]

This would have been a violation of Libyan airspace.

It would have, but then one has to ask which is more important, violating Libyan Airspace, or saving American lives.