Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Even More Awesome Presidential Election Thread
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


(2)
Message 166 of 308 (673408)
09-19-2012 2:21 AM
Reply to: Message 148 by New Cat's Eye
09-18-2012 2:35 PM


Re: Moochers
Hi CS,
The 47% figure that Romney was mangling is about households, not individuals. Since there is typically more than one person in a household, if 47% of households are going to block vote Democrat, the state will turn blue, guaranteed. If Romney seriously believes this drivel, he ought to give up now, because it would not be possible for him to win.
Anyway, that's not the point. the point is that Romney is apparently so retarded as to genuinely believe that anyone and everyone in that 47% is an Obama voter. That is an insult, not so much to Democrats, but to all those poor dumb-ass working class republicans in the 47%.
There was never a good reason for poor families to vote Republican. Fortunately Romney has been kind enough to spell that out in public.
Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-18-2012 2:35 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-19-2012 2:40 AM Granny Magda has seen this message but not replied
 Message 173 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-19-2012 10:52 AM Granny Magda has replied
 Message 181 by ringo, posted 09-19-2012 12:13 PM Granny Magda has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 167 of 308 (673409)
09-19-2012 2:40 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by Granny Magda
09-19-2012 2:21 AM


Re: Moochers
The 47% figure that Romney was mangling is about households, not individuals. Since there is typically more than one person in a household, if 47% of households are going to block vote Democrat, the state will turn blue, guaranteed.
But there is typically more than one person per household in the other 53% of households.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Granny Magda, posted 09-19-2012 2:21 AM Granny Magda has seen this message but not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1025 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 168 of 308 (673410)
09-19-2012 3:40 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by Kairyu
09-18-2012 3:07 PM


As a European I have trouble understanding how somebody who has made this amount of blunders is still a viable candidate for a presidental race.
And it has been mentioned before here, but I also wonder why the trias politica has firmly in place in the US, but it has such a small role in judging the accomplishments of presidents. And like in the UK, the 2 party system creates serious mud-throwing, and stagnation because they both block and reverse whatever the other party wants to accomplish if they get the chance.
I'm just a outsider, but I like to ask: are you all content with this political system?
I don't think we have any call to sit all smug in Europe. Whilst there are certainly absurdities in the US political system, we've got our fair share here, too. As crashfrog pointed out, the PVV got 15% of the vote in the Netherlands two years ago, and they're still the third largest party now. We're talking a party that put up a website allowing people to register complaints about eastern Europeans playing music too loud or being drunk in the streets.
List Pim Fortuyn did even better, with some voters expressing the opinion that it would be cool to vote for a dead man.
I don't think we're in a position to mock.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Kairyu, posted 09-18-2012 3:07 PM Kairyu has not replied

  
Kairyu
Member (Idle past 205 days)
Posts: 162
From: netherlands
Joined: 06-23-2010


Message 169 of 308 (673412)
09-19-2012 4:27 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by crashfrog
09-18-2012 6:38 PM


Funny that you mention it. Geert blew up his role in the coaltion back in April. The result? New elections. He never ''ran'' it either, he merely tolerated a minority coalition consisting of a right-wing party and the christian-democrats. He also only had 24 seats out of 150 in parlement.
I shall skip past the finer workings of our elections, but the end result is that the previously mentioned right wing party got 41 seats, and the ''labour'' left wing one got 38, given them
Majority. Wilders got knocked down to 15 seats.
. Because we got many splinter parties, they are now trying to form a new coalition together. It has got it's drawbacks, but the power lies here with the parties, and we have many of them. I do believe our politics to be more dynamic then the USA though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by crashfrog, posted 09-18-2012 6:38 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


(1)
Message 170 of 308 (673415)
09-19-2012 7:54 AM


Slight disconnect ?
The thing that I find most interesting about Romney's comments (and to be fair, about the attitude underlying Republican thinking, which we were all aware of anyway) is the extent to which Republicans can promote this agenda, and yet still champion and espouse Crhistianity.
Just a few biblical (NT) quotations I found:
"Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God."
"Then the king will say to those at his right hand, "Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.""
"Jesus, looking at him, loved him and said, "You lack one thing; go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me." When he heard this, he was shocked and went away grieving, for he had many possessions."
(There's more, but those will do).
Do passages like these get cut out of bibles given to GOP members ?

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by nwr, posted 09-19-2012 8:57 AM vimesey has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 171 of 308 (673418)
09-19-2012 8:57 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by vimesey
09-19-2012 7:54 AM


Re: Slight disconnect ?
Do passages like these get cut out of bibles given to GOP members ?
There actually is a Conservative Bible Project.

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by vimesey, posted 09-19-2012 7:54 AM vimesey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by vimesey, posted 09-19-2012 9:01 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1398
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011


Message 172 of 308 (673419)
09-19-2012 9:01 AM
Reply to: Message 171 by nwr
09-19-2012 8:57 AM


Re: Slight disconnect ?
I had no idea !
And so dies another blade of hope, on the increasingly patchy lawn of my soul ...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by nwr, posted 09-19-2012 8:57 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 173 of 308 (673424)
09-19-2012 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by Granny Magda
09-19-2012 2:21 AM


Re: Moochers
The 47% figure that Romney was mangling is about households, not individuals. Since there is typically more than one person in a household, if 47% of households are going to block vote Democrat, the state will turn blue, guaranteed.
Are you assuming that households that vote Democrat have more people in them than those that vote Republican?
If Romney seriously believes this drivel, he ought to give up now, because it would not be possible for him to win.
What are the odds of a politician seriously believing their drivel?
Anyway, that's not the point.
I was just questioning because your joke seemed to be a non-sequitor. Take Texas. We can all agree that's a red state, right? Your map has 39% of filers with no liability. According to wiki: In 2008, 55.48% (4,467,748) voted Republican and 43.72% (3,521,164) voted Democrat in the presidential election. So it doesn't necessarily follow that all those filers couldn't have voted Democrat while the state is red. I don't doubt that not all of them did, it just doesn't follow in the hurr-durr sense that you were joking about.
the point is that Romney is apparently so retarded as to genuinely believe that anyone and everyone in that 47% is an Obama voter.
Well, yeah. It is retarded. I think that the bigger mistake is assuming all of those 47% are the moochers. I think he was talking mostly just about the moochers, and had his figure wrong about how many of them there really are.
That is an insult, not so much to Democrats, but to all those poor dumb-ass working class republicans in the 47%.
There's old retired people that fall into that group too and many of them will vote against Obama regardless of who is running against him.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Granny Magda, posted 09-19-2012 2:21 AM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by Granny Magda, posted 09-19-2012 11:34 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 174 of 308 (673425)
09-19-2012 10:53 AM


Fortunately there is a bright ray of hope.
Fortunate for the US, recent advances in robotics offer hope for the Real Americans. It seems that the 47% is simply not necessary. All those repetitive task jobs like trash pickup and grocery check out and factory line assembly work and janitorial services and burger flipping and house cleaning and pool maintenance can be done by new human friendly robots at the equivalent of $4.00 an hour. Best of all, they will not even need Social Security, Health Care, Vacations or Retirement Plans so all of those unnecessary expenses can just fade away.
Of course there will always be a demand for artists and performers, athletes and entertainers, a good butler or maid as well as top line health care, golf pros, pool boys, gigolos and prostitutes but only enough to provide for the needs of the elite.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Straggler, posted 09-19-2012 11:48 AM jar has replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 175 of 308 (673429)
09-19-2012 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by New Cat's Eye
09-19-2012 10:52 AM


Re: Moochers
Are you assuming that households that vote Democrat have more people in them than those that vote Republican?
Yeah, I kinda suspect that to be the case. Couldn't prove it though if I'm honest. Poorer households tend to be larger...
What are the odds of a politician seriously believing their drivel?
If it's deliberate bullshit, I'm not sure that makes it any better. Is this really the best bullshit he could come up with? It's transparently stupid, it insults some of his base supporters and it makes Romney look out of touch with the real world.
The way he talks about it though, it's as though 47% will support Obama and the other 53% is, at least in part, still to play for. Well if that's the case he's totally screwed. A block vote of that size would swing it. It doesn't strike me as the best thing to say at a fundraiser.
I was just questioning because your joke seemed to be a non-sequitor. Take Texas. We can all agree that's a red state, right? Your map has 39% of filers with no liability. According to wiki: In 2008, 55.48% (4,467,748) voted Republican and 43.72% (3,521,164) voted Democrat in the presidential election. So it doesn't necessarily follow that all those filers couldn't have voted Democrat while the state is red. I don't doubt that not all of them did, it just doesn't follow in the hurr-durr sense that you were joking about.
Key words there; "I don't doubt that not all of them did". Of course you don't doubt it, because those of us not living on Planet Mitt know full well that the 47% percent will include both Republicans and Democrats... and Libertarians and Greens, and other small party voters... and a hell of a lot who just don't vote. That's a big part of what makes this so stupid; people don't vote in uniform blocks like that. This whole line of rhetoric stinks of a naive view of how the world works or at least panders to one.
What I mostly found so funny was that Romney should insult low-income republicans like that. He should have known that he was smearing some of his own. He's conflating this 47% with Obama voters, when a child ought to be able to predict that in fact, many of them are going to be Republican or just not Obama supporters. The image fairly heavily implies that there are indeed a hell of a lot of people that in the 47% who vote Republican. I mostly just think that it's amusing to watch as Romney pisses in the faces of his own supporters. Nice campaigning there fella!
Mutate and survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-19-2012 10:52 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by jar, posted 09-19-2012 11:49 AM Granny Magda has not replied
 Message 179 by NoNukes, posted 09-19-2012 12:05 PM Granny Magda has not replied
 Message 182 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-19-2012 12:23 PM Granny Magda has not replied
 Message 184 by Aware Wolf, posted 09-19-2012 1:07 PM Granny Magda has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 176 of 308 (673430)
09-19-2012 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 174 by jar
09-19-2012 10:53 AM


Re: Fortunately there is a bright ray of hope.
Maybe the Occupy Movement needs to take note here and change it's slogan.
We are the 47%.....
Then again - maybe not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by jar, posted 09-19-2012 10:53 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by jar, posted 09-19-2012 11:56 AM Straggler has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(3)
Message 177 of 308 (673431)
09-19-2012 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 175 by Granny Magda
09-19-2012 11:34 AM


Re: Moochers
What I mostly found so funny was that Romney should insult low-income republicans like that.
Doesn't that assume that low-income Republicans would see it as an insult?
Remember, many think in terms of US and THEM and they know he is not talking about US but THEM.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by Granny Magda, posted 09-19-2012 11:34 AM Granny Magda has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by NoNukes, posted 09-19-2012 12:10 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 178 of 308 (673433)
09-19-2012 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 176 by Straggler
09-19-2012 11:48 AM


Re: Fortunately there is a bright ray of hope.
Maybe to "We were the 47%"?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by Straggler, posted 09-19-2012 11:48 AM Straggler has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 179 of 308 (673435)
09-19-2012 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by Granny Magda
09-19-2012 11:34 AM


Re: Moochers
What I mostly found so funny was that Romney should insult low-income republicans like that.
Why is it so surprising that Romney insulted them? Not a single one of those people was supposed to be in the room. The target audience was composed almost entirely of a bunch of people who believe every word of what Mitt said.
Most likely, you don't hang with the crowd Mitt hangs with. If you make a 10,000 bet with a buddy, your buddy likely knows you are just blowing smoke. You buy your own groceries, and you don't have to ponder about an answer when someone asks you how many houses you own.
You simply weren't supposed to hear the remarks.
On the other hand, Romney's attempts to "clarify" what he meant really are funny. If I had more respect for Mitt, I might even be offended.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.
Choose silence of all virtues, for by it you hear other men's imperfections, and conceal your own. George Bernard Shaw

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by Granny Magda, posted 09-19-2012 11:34 AM Granny Magda has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 180 of 308 (673436)
09-19-2012 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by jar
09-19-2012 11:49 AM


Re: Moochers
Remember, many think in terms of US and THEM and they know he is not talking about US but THEM.
As well he should. His remarks regarding laziness and not taking personal responsibility apply to the minority of people in the 47%, and also apply to some people inside of the 1%. It would be pretty easy to dismiss his remarks as Not Me, but THEM no matter who you are.
In fact, Romney might argue that if it does not apply to you, then you should not be insulted.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.
Choose silence of all virtues, for by it you hear other men's imperfections, and conceal your own. George Bernard Shaw

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by jar, posted 09-19-2012 11:49 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024