Re: the recent U.S. party conventions ...
Displaying poll results.19752 total votes.
Most Votes
- What's the highest dollar price will Bitcoin reach in 2024? Posted on February 28th, 2024 | 8339 votes
- Will ByteDance be forced to divest TikTok Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 2396 votes
Most Comments
- What's the highest dollar price will Bitcoin reach in 2024? Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 68 comments
- Will ByteDance be forced to divest TikTok Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 9 comments
Possible? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is there any way to mod a poll as flamebait? This one is going to take off.
I'm part of the 96% (Score:5, Insightful)
What do I care? (Score:5, Insightful)
And in this case, the media chose Romney a long time ago. Seeing Romney and Paul as the only choices on my primary ballot was comical (in a not so funny way). Now I know how all the liberals felt during Bush vs. Kerry. This November, I'm going from the poll straight to the bar to drink away my sorrow.
No. Just no. (Score:5, Insightful)
More of stuff that matters to geeks... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, and every geek I know cares about the funding of science, adherence to facts and logic, and simple budgetary arithmetic. The whole "Gee, who knows what's true or not?!? They're just fighting about things I'm too lazy and shallow to learn about, and isn't Snooki on TV?!?" thing is just about the opposite mentality of geekdom.
Libertarian? (Score:5, Insightful)
I didn't bother following any of the recent conventions, because my mind was already made up. Obama's treating the Bill of Rights as a list of things to demolish, and Romney would be even worse.
The Libertarian convention was months ago, and they picked Gary Johnson as their candidate. He comes across as a slightly more awkward, slightly more reasonable Ron Paul - although I disagree with many of his positions (going back to the gold standard, for instance), the things we disagree on he recognizes are mostly Libertarian ideals and that he will focus on the more immediate problems (he wants a balanced budget IMMEDIATELY).
It's a rather sad state of affairs when a self-described "small government socialist" finds the party that closest matches his ideals is the Libertarian Party, but that's America for you.
Re:any impact is probably the least-scripted bit. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Nothing but what was in my Twitter feed. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm voting for Mickey Mouse this year...
For what? To extend copyright another hundred years?
Your post has mod points as funny, but it should have been modded insightful.
Re:any impact is probably the least-scripted bit. (Score:4, Insightful)
... and believe cutting taxes will generate more revenue (voodoo economics.)...
It isn't a matter of voodoo economics, its a disagreement about what part of the Laffer Curve [wikipedia.org] we're on (and the shape thereof).
It is fact that there is a point beyond which raising taxes will decrease revenues longterm. The Republicans think we're above this point, the Democrats think we're below this point. And then it becomes highly political, almost nobody knowing what they're talking about.
And knowing nothing about what they are talking about is what politicians and talkshow hosts have perfected to a lucrative art.
I really enjoyed studying economics and the thing about Reagan's tax cuts which blew me away, was the belief it would result in more money circulating, faster, thus increasing revenue. Overlooked was the prospect of inflation, which defeats the whole purpose of trying to increase the rate of spending. Further it tends to create 'bubbles', which if not monitored closely, result in 2008 banking collapse scenarios.
If there is one thing to take away from taxation it is that changing tax rates on the uber rich does not result in changes in unimployment or the wages of the middle class. The rich in the US have it good, as tax rates for their brackets are far higher in most other developed countries.
Re:Missing option? Or just lumped into the first? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't watch them to hear what they say... Watch them to see how they think.
The things that they say are the things that they think will resonate. They reveal what politicians think of you. The things they don't say are either the things they think are politically dangerous, or inane. More often it's the latter.
Re:PARTY! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Missing option? Or just lumped into the first? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, one way or the other, it's irrelevant since I'm Canadian.
All I can do is watch the trainwreck, and see how badly it ends up fucking up the rest of the world.
Re:It isn't because of people like you. (Score:4, Insightful)
The only people that shouldn't complain are those who vote to continually reelect the politicians they bitch about. So, my beef is with them, not the people they elect. Doing nothing is still an improvement over voting for a republican or democrat. That is the ultimate wasted vote. It's a sell out to the highest bidder.
Re:I'm part of the 96% (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Possible? (Score:4, Insightful)
The context you're missing is that the US political system is a train wreck where even the decision to move Obama's speech to an indoor venue to avoid looming thunder storms is turned into a political cudgel by partisan hacks on the other side.
Re:I'm part of the 96% (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Possible? (Score:5, Insightful)
Thank you, jmorris42, for that wonderful example of exactly what I was talking about.
Re:Romney would not be worse (Score:5, Insightful)
As you say, we need a balanced budget NOW. Something like that is way more likely to happen if Republicans take control than Demcorats.
You think so? It seems to me that if the Republicans gain control of the government, one of either two things will happen:
(a) they will follow through on their promises and drastically cut government spending to balance the budget, while at the same time drastically cutting taxes for the rich. The resulting layoffs and chaos will result in their being thrown out of office again two years later, with the deficit larger than ever due to the decrease in tax revenue and the double-dip recession they caused.
or
(b) The Republicans are smart enough to realize that they need to avoid (a), and therefore they will cut taxes on the rich (as promised) but only make some minor spending cuts, leaving the deficit bigger than ever (but at least without a double-dip recession).
If I had to bet, I'd go with (b), but you never know. I think a better outcome would be obtained if Obama is re-elected, and uses the mandate (such as it is) of re-election to force the Republicans into a compromise plan that involves both spending cuts and increased taxes. That worked well in the '80s and '90s, I don't see why it wouldn't work again.
Re:I'm part of the 96% (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Possible? (Score:4, Insightful)
Really, 4 years from now, the country will be about the same, no matter which one gets elected.
can't stand the republicans, only watched the dems (Score:5, Insightful)
After their long, drawn out primary full of corporate appeasers, I'm through listening to the Republican talking points. They never change their stances, it's always:
Republican Talking Points:
-Reduce taxes.
-Make unions, abortion, gay marriage (of any form), and anything else that might empower or reinforce the personal liberties of the citizenry illegal.
-Proclaim the Dems guilty of whatever the Repubs are responsible for creating/doing/passing. (The great depression we're currently swimming around/out of? That was Clinton's fault before it was Obama's fault.)
You must remember that it was a Republican, Joe Wilson, who interrupted a President during a Presidential Address to a joint session of the Congress on the State of the Union for the FIRST TIME IN US HISTORY. His "you lie" is a very appalling epitome of the numerous misconducts committed by the Republicans in the last 4 years. His example can not be forgotten. The entire Republican party is damned by the likes of Wilson and other elected Republican officials who are guilty of gross disrespect of the US Presidency.
So, I'm done listening to the Republicans and didn't bother to watch their convention. I have listened to them enough, already, to fully comprehend their positions and policies on anything and everything I'm interested in knowing.
But I did watch the Democratic convention. Unfortunately, they didn't go through a 2 year long primary so the media haven't spent 2 years discussing each and every Democratic platform policy. But I can tell you this:
President Obama has:
-Passed healthcare reform through the house, senate, *and* the judiciary. This reform mandates personal healthcare coverage. It also mandates insurance companies insure every part of a person's health, there are no pre-existing conditions anymore. There are other changes, but those are the two that the Republicans have pointed out most often.
-Killed Osama Bin Laden.
-Ended the war in Iraq and reduced the US presence in Afghanistan.
--Overseen ever increasing use of military "drones" to combat terrorists.
-Passed at least 2 major Keynesian-style stimulus bills.
-Shutdown the Yucca Mountain Project. (I don't agree with his doing this. But it was a 2008 campaign promise, and I respect his living up to his word so markedly.)
-Created at least one economic regulatory commission.
-Handled the worst oil spill in the history of the US (Deep Sea Horizon).
-Reinforced the rebels in Libya in their overthrow of a dictator via direct and international cooperation.
-All the other things I've forgotten.
Re:Possible? (Score:5, Insightful)
"you don't really need to watch the conventions to know if you're going to check the (D) or the (R)."
I'm sure that I'm NOT voting for 'D' or 'R'. Will probably vote 'L' with a bit of reluctance. Not a huge fan of Gary Johnson, but it's a way to be reasonably sure that my vote is counted and reported.
Re:Possible? (Score:2, Insightful)
I know it's cool to be above politics and to claim they are all the same, but that's just lazy thinking and/or pretentiousness. The differences between the parties are in many areas nowhere near as different as I would like, but there are differences and they are consequential.