EPTPresident Obama Re-Elected - Page 1156
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Hey guys! We'll be closing this thread shortly, but we will make an American politics megathread where we can continue the discussions in here. The new thread can be found here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=383301 | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
MstrJinbo
United States1251 Posts
On November 03 2012 02:45 paralleluniverse wrote: I'm pretty sure xDaunt doesn't believe Nate Silver... because Nate Silver says Obama is winning, which can't possibly be true. Polling is coming up with a lot of contradictory conclusions. State polls favor Obama decisively where national polls show a tighter race. The concensus is one set of polls is wrong but it's looking like we have to wait till tuesday night/Wednesday morning to tell which one. As can be expected partisan observers favor the set of polls favorable to their guy. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On November 02 2012 23:39 Sermokala wrote: I'm really more surprised more people havn't gone down. Spring went down in flames not too long back. That being said I think Obama is going to win now. The jeep controversy in ohio is going to cost him the state and with the hurricane covering up bengazigate for him he doesn't have a real scandel to hold him back anymore. Unless more then one of these swing states flips to romney (wisconsion minnesota penn colorado) then its going to be a race again. I'm not even 100% sure that romney is going to hold the florida nor cal and virgina states anymore. I'm going to actualy vote for romney in Minnesota beacuse it might get close instead of twilight sparkle like I was hopeing to. a lot of black people I've talked to about the election arn't happy with obama for not doing anything for racial balance in socio-economic situations. Who knows really. I'm more pissed that the gay rights campaign is falling on its face again and is going to fail to fight a gay marriage ban in my state. And now bachmann is going to get another term. How fucking incompetent are democrats in Minnesota that they let her keep her office year after year after year. Bro, if Minnesota votes yes on the marriage amendment, it won't be because the Vote No campaign didn't do an exceptional job. I've never seen such a spirited and powerful public issue campaign. If Graves loses, it'll be because the Twin Cities suburbs are insane, not because he's not a fantastic candidate. I can't fathom how you're looking at the DFL as a failure; we have a DFL gov, two senators, one of whom will destroy her challenger on Nov6th, and the DFL holds a stranglehold on the cities. Nolan has been polled ahead of Craavak in the iron range, (although the Star Trub endorsed Cravaak, very interesting) and both Vote No campaigns have turned landslide defeats into extremely narrow fights. It's not probable, but it is possible that MN votes No twice along with the expected Obama-Klobuchar vote. Also, supporting vote no, opposed to Bachman, but voting for Romney? Count me confused. | ||
|
HellRoxYa
Sweden1614 Posts
On November 03 2012 01:41 BluePanther wrote: First of all, America isn't going to "go to shit" if Romney gets elected. Stop being dumb. He can't change Roe v. Wade if he wanted to. The voucher plan is not stupid and runs like many other programs in our federal system. The military money is a drop in the bucket. Fox news is a conservative propaganda machine. Everyone knows this. It's not some super duper secret weapon of the right. And Obama's ads are just as bad when it comes to lying. No, you're right, you missed the chance to really fuck shit up with Ron Paul. Ron Paul 2016! (Romney's still a horrible, horrible choice compared to Obama) | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
bureaucracy is a problem for both public and private organizations. bad investments happen both publicly and privately, we call that 'entrepreneur error'. a fancy way of saying you fucked up. the argument against govt is that there is no incentive to make sure the money gets used right, and there is no competition to drive the bad govt out of business. but, this argument is a coarse one, relying on generalities and failing to specify any particular government or its culture. it does not mean motivated individuals cannot make a difference in government work itself and do things right. the whole premise of a technocracy is that technical experts are less influenced by interest capture and can better represent the interests of the public, and a more fair representation as well. | ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On November 03 2012 01:41 BluePanther wrote: First of all, America isn't going to "go to shit" if Romney gets elected. Stop being dumb. He can't change Roe v. Wade if he wanted to. The voucher plan is not stupid and runs like many other programs in our federal system. The military money is a drop in the bucket. Fox news is a conservative propaganda machine. Everyone knows this. It's not some super duper secret weapon of the right. And Obama's ads are just as bad when it comes to lying. But I thought it isn't a voucher plan? No? And how exactly is voucherizing Medicare suppose to be good for people? It's just shifting the cost of healthcare from the government to people. And if you can't afford it beyond what the voucher covers (which doesn't keep up with inflation), then you're screwed. It's a well-known fact, proved by every other advanced country that government doing healthcare significantly reduces costs and with better results. And somehow doing the opposite, using a voucher scheme, to shift costs to private citizens is meant to make things better? The idea that privatizing healthcare will fix everything by the magic of the free market is a fantasy. Economic theory says that in order for a free market to be efficient, a number of assumptions must hold, for example transactions must be voluntary, market participants must have perfect information, all costs are internalized, etc. None of these assumptions hold for the healthcare market. For example, if you almost die in a serious car crash, you don't have a voluntary choice to go to hospital, you go or you die. There are information asymmetries, for example, as a patient, you don't have perfect information about what treatments you should get, or insurance companies know less about your health than you do, so adverse selection prevents them taking people with preexisting conditions, unless the government steps in. Costs are not internalized, if you're in that car crash and can't afford to pay the hospital, than the taxpayers ultimately pick up the bill. So, yes, vouchercare moves healthcare closer to the free market, which is a stupid thing to do, based not only on theory but also the evidence from the rest of the world. And Obama's ads are nowhere near as bad when it comes to lying. | ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On November 03 2012 01:50 BluePanther wrote: Yes, they are just going to throw money down a black hole and wave goodbye to it while we plunge further into massive deficits..... *rollseyes* Stop being so naive. Nobody thinks that's a smart move. It's bad leadership and political suicide. Regardless of what you think of Romney's thoughts on the first one, we all know he's not going to do something that's political suicide. PS, the fed shouldn't be spending money on education. Basically, you should vote for Romney because he's crazy campaign is a lie, and when he's in office he'll be more sensible. Trust me. In The Economist's endorsement of Obama it says: Mr Romney’s more sensible supporters explain his fiscal policies away as necessary rubbish, concocted to persuade the fanatics who vote in the Republican primaries: the great flipflopper, they maintain, does not mean a word of it. Source: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21565623-america-could-do-better-barack-obama-sadly-mitt-romney-does-not-fit-bill-which-one This is your argument. | ||
|
ZackAttack
United States884 Posts
On November 03 2012 03:20 paralleluniverse wrote: But I thought it isn't a voucher plan? No? And how exactly is voucherizing Medicare suppose to be good for people? It's just shifting the cost of healthcare from the government to people. And if you can't afford it beyond what the voucher covers (which doesn't keep up with inflation), then you're screwed. It's a well-known fact, proved by every other advanced country that government doing healthcare significantly reduces costs and with better results. And somehow doing the opposite, using a voucher scheme, to shift costs to private citizens is meant to make things better? The idea that privatizing healthcare will fix everything by the magic of the free market is a fantasy. Economic theory says that in order for a market to be efficient, a number of assumptions must hold, for example transactions must be voluntary, market participants must have perfect information, all costs are internalized, etc. None of these assumptions hold for the healthcare market. For example, if you almost die in a serious car crash, you don't have a voluntary choice to go to hospital, you go or you die. There are information asymmetries, for example, as a patient, you don't have perfect information about what treatments you should get, or insurance companies know less about your health than you do, so adverse selection prevents them taking people with preexisting conditions, unless the government steps in. Costs are not internalized, if you're in that car crash and can't afford to pay the hospital, than the taxpayers ultimately pick up the bill. So, yes, vouchercare moves healthcare closer to the free market, which is a stupid thing to do, based not only on theory but also the evidence from the rest of the world. And Obama's ads are nowhere near as bad when it comes to lying. What a fantastic post. I hope everyone is taking notes on how to have an informed opinion. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7235 Posts
![[image loading]](http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/11/gille.png) | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On November 03 2012 03:17 oneofthem wrote: for all the shit i give libertarians they are at least sincere about fixing government. but they conflate bad government with government in general. eliminating fraud and rent seeking in all the government related industries can go a long way towards making government work better. republicans on the other hand is a party of crony powers. they are realist about government. it should work only for the powerful and rich. bureaucracy is a problem for both public and private organizations. bad investments happen both publicly and privately, we call that 'entrepreneur error'. a fancy way of saying you fucked up. the argument against govt is that there is no incentive to make sure the money gets used right, and there is no competition to drive the bad govt out of business. but, this argument is a coarse one, relying on generalities and failing to specify any particular government or its culture. it does not mean motivated individuals cannot make a difference in government work itself and do things right. the whole premise of a technocracy is that technical experts are less influenced by interest capture and can better represent the interests of the public, and a more fair representation as well. Dems and Reps are both parties of cronyism, though in my own experience Dems have been worse. A key difference between private and public investment gone awry is that the private market does a better job of pricing in the risk of failure. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
i'm not saying you gotta USSR the whole thing. that'd be silly. but public services are better run by the government for either efficiency or fairness reasons | ||
Souma
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On November 03 2012 03:33 JonnyBNoHo wrote: Dems and Reps are both parties of cronyism, though in my own experience Dems have been worse. A key difference between private and public investment gone awry is that the private market does a better job of pricing in the risk of failure. You look at our defense spending and you think Dems have been worse? lol. | ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On November 03 2012 03:33 JonnyBNoHo wrote: A key difference between private and public investment gone awry is that the private market does a better job of pricing in the risk of failure. Yes, I agree. But that's the reason why private sector doesn't put enough money into research, public goods, new technology, etc. Obviously there needs to be a good balance. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On November 03 2012 03:42 Souma wrote: You look at our defense spending and you think Dems have been worse? lol. Didn't realize there was a line item for 'cronyism' can you link me that number? Or are you talking about something different now? | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On November 03 2012 03:43 paralleluniverse wrote: Yes, I agree. But that's the reason why private sector doesn't put enough money into research, public goods, new technology, etc. Obviously there needs to be a good balance. Sure, I think that's what we need to do more of. More university level R&D, less buddy loans to businesses. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Darknat
United States122 Posts
Forcing a partisan healthcare law that steps into territory that no government at all should step into. Returning the US to the mentality that lead to September 11, 2001. He's an ideologue and ideologues make terrible presidents(as shown by Obama's disastrous presidency). It's his way or the highway which just creates a gridlock in Washington that will only go away once he's removed from office. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21689 Posts
On November 03 2012 03:53 Darknat wrote: Reasons Obama should lose on Election Day: Forcing a partisan healthcare law that steps into territory that no government at all should step into. Returning the US to the mentality that lead to September 11, 2001. He's an ideologue and ideologues make terrible presidents(as shown by Obama's disastrous presidency). It's his way or the highway which just creates a gridlock in Washington that will only go away once he's removed from office. heathcare that every single other western nation has The mentality of bomb first never ask questions is what got you into 9-11 yeah damn him for having a vision Republicans have shut down his attempts at compromise at every turn. highest number of filibusters ever. | ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On November 03 2012 03:27 Sadist wrote: lol @ one of Chrysler's VP calling the republicans out for their bullshit. http://www.freep.com/article/20121101/BUSINESS0103/121101042/Chrysler-exec-tweets-Donald-Trump-full-over-Jeep-accusation?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE VP of Chrysler also had this to say: Jeep has no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China. It’s simply reviewing the opportunities to return Jeep output to China for the world’s largest auto market. U.S. Jeep assembly lines will continue to stay in operation. A careful and unbiased reading of the Bloomberg take would have saved unnecessary fantasies and extravagant comments. Source: http://blog.chryslerllc.com/blog.do?id=1932&p=entry Ouch. But the question is, does bullshit work even if it is disproved. Somehow I doubt that he will cause much damage, as most people have already decided, and those who haven't tend to be low information. | ||
|
Souma
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On November 03 2012 03:48 JonnyBNoHo wrote: Didn't realize there was a line item for 'cronyism' can you link me that number? Or are you talking about something different now? You're saying that cronyism on the part of the Democrats is worse than that of the Republicans, I'm just saying take a look around. Dems have been getting increasingly worse these past few years (or just more visible), but they are not yet on the level of the Republicans. | ||
| ||
