| 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 | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On June 28 2012 08:03 Deathmanbob wrote: i trust rasmussen polling as much as you trust polling from HP they are both just way to biased to be considered legit If I recall correctly, Rasmussen has been the most accurate for the past couple presidential elections. | ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
On June 28 2012 07:02 DoubleReed wrote: Totally disagree with Limbaugh. Romney can't alienate Hispanics if he wants to win the swing states. Of course it may be hopeless by now. It's a risk, but it would galvanize his base if he double-downed ... or conversely, he can show some balls, switch positions and support the Dream Act outright. I think Romney is actually a moderate, and he should just come out as one instead of trying to play both sides. He might risk alienating the more extreme segments of his base, and it would expose him as a flake. But he would gain more active support of prominent, popular Republicans like Jeb Bush, McCain, Rubio etc, while giving moderate independents and Hispanics in swing states a viable candidate to consider. And I think he can still maintain support from White voters by pounding Obama on the economy. Bear in mind, I'm still an Obama fan and I hope Romney does none of these things  . | ||
|
Deathmanbob
United States2356 Posts
On June 28 2012 08:04 xDaunt wrote: If I recall correctly, Rasmussen has been the most accurate for the past couple presidential elections. if my memory serves rasmussen was calling it for mcain all the way up until it was CLEAR obama would win, then they had obama up only slightly when he won in a landslide | ||
|
Signet
United States1718 Posts
On June 28 2012 06:50 Saryph wrote: Here in swing state virginia my gas is already below $3 and still dropping. It's nice, hope it continues. Thanks election year! I doubt the election year has much to do with it. The price of a barrel of oil on world markets has fallen below $80 (from well above $100 earlier this year) due to fears of another worldwide economic downturn. I haven't heard much in recent months about the possibility of a war with Iran, so that's probably helping lower oil prices as well. | ||
|
Signet
United States1718 Posts
On June 28 2012 08:27 Deathmanbob wrote: if my memory serves rasmussen was calling it for mcain all the way up until it was CLEAR obama would win, then they had obama up only slightly when he won in a landslide According to this: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/ Rasmussen performed poorly in 2000, strongly in 2004 and 2006, average in 2008, and poorly in 2010. | ||
|
forgottendreams
United States1771 Posts
| ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On June 28 2012 06:34 xDaunt wrote: Because I'd rather the EPA not pass bullshit CO2 regulations that unnecessarily hamper the American economy. Yes, because accelerating global warming is a great long-term plan for the American economy. | ||
|
forgottendreams
United States1771 Posts
On June 28 2012 15:39 forgottendreams wrote: Predictions of consistently lowered gas prices for awhile, projected economic upswing into fall... all Obama needs left to cement the presidency is a gift from Anthony Kennedy of a complete strike down of Obamacare (as opposed to tempered and less controversial striking of only the mandate) to rejuvenate democratic emotional voters and it will ensure him as one of the luckiest timed presidents in history aside from FDR. Well don't I look dumb, my predictions have completely failed me with this case. The decision itself appears on its surface to be a give and take between enhancement of New Federalism (by blowing back Commerce Clause, Proper Clause and limiting Medicare) and enhancement of taxation powers. Not sure though this will provide a huge bump to Obama in the long term towards November. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
| ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On June 28 2012 15:48 kwizach wrote: Yes, because accelerating global warming is a great long-term plan for the American economy. You don't really think these right-wingers believe in global warming, do you? | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On June 29 2012 02:14 paralleluniverse wrote: You don't really think these right-wingers believe in global warming, do you? But big oil says its not real, and surely they would have no reason to lie about something so serious! | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
On June 29 2012 04:57 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So has anyone checked Mitt Romney website to see if it still says he will nominate Judges in the mold of Justice Roberts? Still there http://www.mittromney.com/issues/courts-constitution | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
The more that I think about the Obamacare ruling, the more that it looks like it might become a pyrrhic victory for democrats. With regards to the ruling itself and the precedent that it sets, the most important thing to keep in mind is that it does not expand federal power one iota. In fact, it significantly limits federal power pursuant to the commerce clause, necessary and proper clause, and 10th Amendment. Contrary to what I've heard from some conservative commentators, the decision does not expand federal tax power. If you read the dissent, there isn't even a suggestion that the federal government does not have the power to pass the type of tax that the individual mandate is. The argument is strictly over whether the law should be considered a tax. Even so, the majority conditioned the constitutionality of the mandate upon the amount of the tax -- noting that there has to be a real option for individuals with regards to whether to take an action or pay a tax penalty for not taking that action. In summary, despite the fact that Obamacare was upheld, the Court erected significant barriers to new, potentially intrusive legislation and laid the foundation for expansion of these protective principals in future Court decisions. These are all very important long term considerations that conservatives should be happy about. As for the short term, I get the sense that this decision has all but guaranteed that 2012 will be a repeat of 2010. Regardless of its constitutionality, Obamacare remains very unpopular. More importantly, it is the fuel upon which the Tea Party feeds. To whatever extent the Tea Party has gone dormant since 2010, that's over. Just look at how much money Romney is raising today. Moreover, now that we know that Obamacare is a massive tax hike, Obama is going to have a hard time explaining why this law was sold under false pretenses to the American public. I doubt that this will improve the inherent optics problems with Obamacare that make the law so unpopular. All in all, I think that this is going to bite democrats in the ass big time. As an update, some other conservative writers have come to similar conclusions: From George Will: Conservatives won a substantial victory Thursday. The physics of American politics — actions provoking reactions — continues to move the crucial debate, about the nature of the American regime, toward conservatism. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. has served this cause. The health-care legislation’s expansion of the federal government’s purview has improved our civic health by rekindling interest in what this expansion threatens — the Framers’ design for limited government. Conservatives distraught about the survival of the individual mandate are missing the considerable consolation prize they won when the Supreme Court rejected a constitutional rationale for the mandate — Congress’s rationale — that was pregnant with rampant statism. Source. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On June 29 2012 06:46 xDaunt wrote: All in all, I think that this is going to bite democrats in the ass big time. After your predictions regarding the ACA, this is great news to me! | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On June 29 2012 06:54 Mohdoo wrote: After your predictions regarding the ACA, this is great news to me! Actually, my predictions regarding the ACA were pretty damned good with regards to the commerce clause. Specifically, I was one of the few people who has been saying that the law would not be upheld under the commerce clause since the beginning. I did not comment on the tax power issue because I took the law at its face when it purported to have no new taxes. | ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
On June 29 2012 06:46 xDaunt wrote: I'm reposting this here because this thread is more appropriate and the Obamacare thread is a mess: The more that I think about the Obamacare ruling, the more that it looks like it might become a pyrrhic victory for democrats. With regards to the ruling itself and the precedent that it sets, the most important thing to keep in mind is that it does not expand federal power one iota. In fact, it significantly limits federal power pursuant to the commerce clause, necessary and proper clause, and 10th Amendment. Contrary to what I've heard from some conservative commentators, the decision does not expand federal tax power. If you read the dissent, there isn't even a suggestion that the federal government does not have the power to pass the type of tax that the individual mandate is. The argument is strictly over whether the law should be considered a tax. Even so, the majority conditioned the constitutionality of the mandate upon the amount of the tax -- noting that there has to be a real option for individuals with regards to whether to take an action or pay a tax penalty for not taking that action. In summary, despite the fact that Obamacare was upheld, the Court erected significant barriers to new, potentially intrusive legislation and laid the foundation for expansion of these protective principals in future Court decisions. These are all very important long term considerations that conservatives should be happy about. As for the short term, I get the sense that this decision has all but guaranteed that 2012 will be a repeat of 2010. Regardless of its constitutionality, Obamacare remains very unpopular. More importantly, it is the fuel upon which the Tea Party feeds. To whatever extent the Tea Party has gone dormant since 2010, that's over. Just look at how much money Romney is raising today. Moreover, now that we know that Obamacare is a massive tax hike, Obama is going to have a hard time explaining why this law was sold under false pretenses to the American public. I doubt that this will improve the inherent optics problems with Obamacare that make the law so unpopular. All in all, I think that this is going to bite democrats in the ass big time. As an update, some other conservative writers have come to similar conclusions: From George Will: Source. I'm been reading some conflicting opinions. At first I thought this ruling was actually a gift to Republicans. But there are some 'experts'/pundits that are speculating that Romney will hammer Obama for a week or two about Obamacare but his campaign's focus and stump speeches will largely remain unchanged -- he will go back to the narrative that the economy is in the shitter and it's all Obama's fault. The reasoning is that by making Obamacare an issue, it opens him to the following counter attacks: 1) It's easy to critique the cost of Obamacare, but also gives Obama an opportunity to promote it's legitimate benefits. This would ... 2) force Romney to outline an alternative plan or policy, which he doesn't have. The primary grievance Republicans have is that it's a mandate punishable by a tax/penalty which ... 3) Romney has fiercely defended at one pont or another in the past, including during the Republican primary. Romney's has argued convincingly that as long as health care providers are forced to provide emergency care, an individual mandate is actually a truly conservative idea, because it forces everyone to contribute something. I'll try to find the references later, at work right now. :\ | ||
|
DoubleReed
United States4130 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On June 29 2012 07:16 DoubleReed wrote: Yea, it's nice to see xDaunt dealing with the ruling so well. It's definitely true that his hindsight is ridiculously accurate. ...and you used to be such a good poster that I enjoyed responding to. | ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
On June 29 2012 07:18 xDaunt wrote: ...and you used to be such a good poster that I enjoyed responding to. Oh, don't be crusty just because Obama dunked ALL OVA YO FACE!!!!! BOOYAH! Seriously, DoubleReed is an OG in this thread. He reserves the right to smack talk. | ||
| ||
The PiG Daily
Best Games of HSC
SKillous vs SerralLIVE!
ShoWTimE vs Arrogfire
TBD vs Elazer
Reynor vs Jumy
PiGStarcraft499
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 PiGStarcraft499 StarCraft: Brood WarWinterStarcraft348 ViBE210 NeuroSwarm  199RuFF_SC2  154SteadfastSC 148UpATreeSC 65JuggernautJason28 Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
RSL Revival
Serral vs Bunny
ByuN vs GgMaChine
CranKy Ducklings
Afreeca Starleague
Snow vs Jaedong
YSC vs hero
SC Evo League
ByuN vs Classic
Cure vs Solar
IPSL
Dragon vs Ret
Patches Events
RSL Revival
Solar vs Rogue
Maru vs NightMare
Sparkling Tuna Cup
IPSL
Bonyth vs Hawk
GSL
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
