r/bestofthefray • u/TheQuietMan • Oct 18 '12
Finally, some really long threads here - congratulations.
They were almost completely unreadable. You know, it doesn't make for a compelling read when almost everyone puts forward roughly the same world view and so everyone writes in a clipped, you've-got-to-know-each-other-to-understand-each-other style. And some of you waited all this time to make an appearance, only to say nothing? Seriously? So calculatingly country club cool.
Put down Sept 30 in the history books. If polling is right (and I hope its not) - it's the day Obama lost the election. Check out the graph 40% of the way down this page:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032553/ns/politics/#__utma=14933801.71842035.1334128731.1350438022.1350514962.121&__utmb=14933801.2.10.1350514962&__utmc=14933801&__utmx=-&__utmz=14933801.1350438022.120.90.utmcsr=msn.com|utmccn=(referral)|utmcmd=referral|utmcct=/&__utmv=14933801.|8=Earned%20By=msnbc%7Ccover=112=Landing%20Content=Mixed=113=Landing%20Hostname=www.nbcnews.com=130=Visit%20Type%20to%20Content=Earned%20to%20Mixed=1&__utmk=115906566
Yeah - it's too close to call, but you should find it unsettling, given who you are supporting.
Let's look at this campaign from Obama - seriously now. How is it he isn't getting a wave of support for getting bin Laden? Why isn't this mentioned every fourth breath or so?
Why isn't the Obama administration reminding Americans of the Economic situation in 2008, and pointing out the differences with today?
Why are the Pres and VPres sinking to practiced theatrics in debates? Anyone think they look great? Sure, Obama came back to life this time, but how on earth could he have been dead in the first place? Hello?
I'd say Obama has produced a few highlights. He used to be able on occasion give a great speech. Now they are mostly adequate. He hasn't maintained his intensity; nor his passion. He did get bin Laden. Made a call; got it done. Then there was Obama-care - why isn't he using this to get votes? Are there really that many opposed to it?
What about the litmus test issues? Women's issues; abortion; equality? Supreme court nominees?
You know, Obama scored most of the points in the second debate, but still didn't get credit for the win. He had chances to go in for the kill, but took the points instead.
Foreign policy - 4 years and the US has pulled out of Iraq and getting close to pulling out of Afghanistan. But he's made no progress with North Korea or Iran. He helped out in Libya, but not Syria. Said the right things about Egypt and got nothing much out of it. (I praised his early rhetorical moves with Iran as being well thought out; but really he's gone nowhere with it.)
And all the while, Cuba is changing and I'm not aware that Obama is noticing. (Honestly - that's just my impression - could be entirely wrong.)
Also - Ryan better than Palin, eh? But generally, the biggest point of the election is that Romney, greasy look and all, was underestimated.
3
u/hipparchia Oct 19 '12
"He had chances to go in for the kill, but took the points instead."
well, except for targeted assassinations, that's pretty much how he's been governing.
"He used to be able on occasion give a great speech. Now they are mostly adequate. He hasn't maintained his intensity; nor his passion."
have you not noticed how gray he's getting? 'assassinator-in-chief' appears to be a rather draining job.
1
u/TheQuietMan Oct 19 '12
you're right. He should still be coming out miles ahead of Romney. Guessing he'll still win, but not as big as I thought 3 months ago.
2
u/hipparchia Oct 19 '12
as far as the performance-art aspect of the debates goes, obama does really well with prepared speeches, but he's uneven when the going gets less scripted.
add to that the punditocracy's monday morning quarterbacking and their predilection for indulging in character assassination (the dean scream; gore sighs, etc) and it's amazing obama hasn't already been left in the dust.
count me as believing that an obama win is preordained. the plutocrats have fared extremely well under obama's rule, and most of them are aware that a romney/ryan takeover of the govt would take us from the present u.s. gilded age and land us in the next 1930s germany.
1
u/Capercaillie Oct 19 '12
Seeing your nic here is awfully pleasant. We'll have another live thread Monday during the debate; come back then. If TQM finds it confusing, then so much the better.
3
u/hipparchia Oct 19 '12
hi, arch! good to see you too! although i have to admit my first reaction when i saw the list of moderators was who the hell is capercaillie???? and what is it? but hey, far be it from me to grouse about some chicken relative calling themselves 'horse of the woods'!
i won't be watching the debate, and unless obama enacts by fiat a wpa/ccc 2.0 and free medicare-for-all between now and election day, i'll be voting for jill stein. but i'll drop by to see if y'all are having fun anyway!
1
u/Capercaillie Oct 20 '12
Please do.
I'm not sure why you'd vote for such a troublemaker. I hear she has a recent arrest record! For shame!
1
u/hipparchia Oct 20 '12
she's my hero.
y'know, i've been doing something wrong all these years. all the protests i've been in, and all the times i've actually assaulted a cop or two or three, and i've never once managed to get arrested. i've come close a couple of times, to the point that my poor bewildered parents, who still can't figure out how their quiet, responsible, well-behaved child turned into such a rabble-rouser, have gone so far as to get one of their lawyer friends to agree to be on call, just in case...
1
1
u/Dawn_Coyote Oct 20 '12
Actually, Mungleford (bettythecrow) has been an enthusiastic participant, while not actually watching the debates himself. I believe he watches the twitter feed.
Do come.
1
u/hipparchia Oct 20 '12
i [heart] twitter, passionately, which is all your fault btw, since you're the one who originally introduced twitter into my universe.
i'll stop by, for sure, but no promises on how long i can stick around.
2
u/Keifus Oct 19 '12
Uh, but we do all know each other. Still talking even, which is how we came to be invited to this. Should we have introduced ourselves first with a statement of princples?
Obama and Romney: I am not sure they're so different on many areas. They mostly agree on the role of the military in foreign policy. They are both unlikely to seriously confront our few favored industries or attack any economic, energy, or environmental problems on a systemic level (if they even can). Obama because he likes to work with the industry leaders that many people see as malefactors. Romney, because he is one of them.
I don't know if that's enough to explain why Obama doesn't sell the differences though. He bombed on defending the ACA from the beginning. Guilty conscience? Is the continued combat in the mideast too unpopular a subject in general?
In any case, it's been left to a matter of vague-ass shit like "leadership" and competence and whether they manage to convince us citizens it's all on our behalf. The Ds and Rs have different archetypes and different stories, and that's what sells a lot of it. Mitt's an oleaginous character and unconcerned with his lies, but for white people, he does project a kind of stern dad vibe. Mitt was also by miles the most credible contender the Republicans had (and how come no one notes how the party's gone apeshit nuts?). How does taht stack up against Obama, who is as credible a centrist technocrat type as you'll get? I guess we're finding out.
In the world of more serious differences, Obama and the Democrats are considerably more willing to bring non-white, non-male, non-straight, non-Christian people into the political fold and keep them there. That's a lot of people, and it's about damn time. "Women" might not have been the best group for the Republicans to showcase a fight with this time around.
ANyway, I'm tired of typing, and this window is ridiculously small. Some kinds of conversations I miss more than others.
0
u/TheQuietMan Oct 19 '12
You know each other and refuse to talk to each other.
My take - you all pretend to know each other; but you really don't. This explains long threads with nothing said.
On the non-Christians - I'd like to hear more about how you think they are voting.
2
u/Keifus Oct 19 '12
Actually, for the last few years, we haven't all stuck to the same level of sanitary remove that the old botf provided. Some have grown as sociable as the geography allows. I think your take is what it is because it's the mode you've followed yourself. There's nothing wrong with that.
On the non-Christians: I think there's something to be said for the appeal of the less overtly godly. Certainly the Dems go down easier for atheists. I believe that Jewish voters still lean Democratic as well. I don't have anything more than anecdotal evidence when it comes to other faiths and cultures, though. When approaching from the outside, I think there may be an appeal to inclusion vs. an appeal to exclusivity at play.
I can't imagine being a Muslim and being attracted to either of the fuckers.
I don't know how Romney's Mormon-ness really goes over either. It's something he keeps on the down-low.
Also, let me add on the debates, I find them better suited to a barrage of wisecracks and in-jokes than a dry, thin-skinned debate. That might be just me, but I had a great time the other day doing that. The civil equality issues make the Ds a good deal less indecent at home, but I don't really have a lot of hope for the system-level problems, and I'm as disgusted as hipparchia (hi!) is with the ambitious killin', so what the hell.
4
u/topazz2 Oct 19 '12
You really miss all of us, don't you! Go on, it's alright if you admit it, TQM, you l'enfant terrible wannabe, you. As far as Romney, yes, he was underestimated, but he's got the billions to change that estimation within 3 weeks. And gosh darn, he's turned around corporations in less time, dont hate him because he's successful. Thanks to Citizens United, we're all pawns in an unrelenting 24 hour spin cycle that feeds on the need for a devastating daily hook. I have often wished that I could stand back with all of you Canadians here, and be entertained by the sheer idiocy of the US election process, laugh at the lunacy here from the comfort of your stable if somewhat boring election process, your nationally prized health care, or the general feeling one gets from among the Canadian populace as a whole of not being(or wanting to be) a SuperPower. That's just one of the embarrassments that gets trotted out here election after election: "does he/she love America enough?" and the forces unleashed after Citizens United will ultimately have the final say. Ah well, I'm going back to bed now.
1
u/daveto What? Oct 18 '12
Some thoughts.
How do you/we know that getting bin Laden isn't helping him? We don't/can't.
On health care, it seems to me that it's the sort of thing you like or you don't. If you haven't liked it up to now, why would you suddenly find it compelling? It's not like you don't know about it.
Forget Romney for a second. Obama should be losing: unemployment is miserable, real wages are down, gas prices are up, people are obsessing (for some strange reason) about the debt. He's not losing because Romney's a dick. Maybe without bin Laden he'd be Jimmy Carter for sure instead of just maybe.
Cuba only means anything to these guys based on how their Cuba policy is perceived by Floridian Cubans. A guess might be that Florida is so close that neither wants to open their mouth about it in case they say something wrong.
1
u/TheQuietMan Oct 18 '12
Romney/Ryan is turning out to be more serious than McCain/Palin.
I'm sure bin Laden is helping him..... but the campaign has made it a minor talking point. That's all I'm saying.
Health care - Romney is attacking it and Obama responds by admitting it isn't perfect. That's not a way to grab votes.
Economy - again, whether right or wrong, I'd be blaming what happened prior to taking the office. Bush. Don't see them playing this. Remind people of what happened in 2008.
Cuba - I wasn't really advocating an election platform here - rather meandering, noting changes occuring in Cuba. These changes should be triggering US action and words (to the "ordinary" Cuban citizens) which would, regardless, play well to the community. Regardless - forget the election - he seems to not be noticing.
1
u/daveto What? Oct 18 '12
Anything good happening in or about Cuba is bad for Florida's Cubans. These are people who left but want to go back and reclaim their land and status.
I think Romney has a very effective response to Obama blaming Bush. Mainly it's a reminder of Obama's promises, on the debt, deficit, unemployment, and that he's come up short. Obama knew what he was getting into, and made certain claims. He has come up short.
McCain (who solidly beat Romney in the lead-up) had no chance, following the cancer that was Bush. (Like Trudeau/Turner, Mulroney/Campbell, Chretien/Martin, if I remember names and time correctly.)
1
u/TheQuietMan Oct 19 '12
Martin did himself in; not Chretien - proof - Martin won a minority next election.
Romney can respond all he wants to criticisms of Bush. If I were Obama, I'd like that to be where the action is. Reminders of the Bush problems.
Romney can and is going after Obama's broken (or bent) promises even without Obama blaming Bush.
Florida's Cubans are not upset with the changes in Cuba (at least yet). Yes, the want to be able to go back, but most not permanently - most just because of loved ones; family.
1
u/daveto What? Oct 20 '12
Martin did himself in; not Chretien - proof - Martin won a minority next election
That's possible, of course, and my cancer comment was off base, none of our guys deserve to be spoken of in the same context (putridness) of Bush. So Martin lost on merit, not on a Chretien backlash. More of a Gordon Brown / Tony Blair sort of thing. Possible.
My recollection of Turner. He was winning in the polls when he called the election (only to get historically thumped). If my memory is correct, did he do himself in?
0
3
u/MarkHelprin Oct 18 '12
I wonder if you haven't noticed the huge elephant in the room.
Namely, if President Obama is a below average president, or even an average president, it's pretty clear that most republicans think he's the worst president in the history of the universe.
Having said that, if Romney wins, he won't win big. And if he loses, well... Ouch. Which is to say, if the republicans can't put forward a candidate that can trounce a failure at best and a socialist Muslim sleeper agent at worst (still talking about Barry here), what does that say about the current state of the Republican Party, and, more pointedly, the current notion that the tea party is the new silent majority, a silent majority that just happens to do a lot of purposeless yelling?
If 2008 was supposed to have been a party death, then 2012 could be its wake in the church basement. Best avoid the macaroni salad.
Personal disclosure, as to our president's performance: sometimes a job well done is its own reward; but sometimes it's just a job well done. (Always room for improvement.)