Topic: U.S Presidential Primary Thread #2 (Read 14095 times)

  • Avatar of Ryan
  • thx ds k?
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Oct 22, 2003
  • Posts: 4460
Debate starts at 8 EST on ABC
  • Avatar of Ryan
  • thx ds k?
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Oct 22, 2003
  • Posts: 4460
hooooly shit this debate is awful.

summary: obama why don't you wear flag pins? obama why are you an elitist? obama do you love our flag?

hooray for an hour of HOW PATRIOTIC ARE YOU? questions
  • Avatar of Xeno|Soft
  • Chicken Hunter
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Jun 18, 2002
  • Posts: 564
Gahh, is there anyway I can catch this online?
  • Avatar of Pasty
  • Here are some of their hands
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Jun 6, 2004
  • Posts: 942
http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/What_Is_Rove_Up_To.pdf

fffffffffffff
  • Avatar of Ryan
  • thx ds k?
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Oct 22, 2003
  • Posts: 4460
  • Firbolg Warrior
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Dec 9, 2002
  • Posts: 1201
Apparently Ron Paul hasn't heard the news that he's been eliminated from the nomination process.  I got a letter in the mail from his campaign today, and then heard an ad for him on the radio about 15 minutes ago.  Just further proof that he's fucking insane.

Anyways less than 12 hours and I'm off to the polls.  I've even convinced both my parents to vote for Obama (they haven't voted since Carter), so tomorrow should be a pretty interesting day.

Gaming World Mini City: Population, Industry, Transportation, Security Current rank 3950.
Click a different link each day.
  • Avatar of Ryan
  • thx ds k?
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Oct 22, 2003
  • Posts: 4460
Pennsylvania primary is today!

latest polls have Clinton and Obama 5-10 points apart, with Clinton ahead. she's probably going to win, however a single digit victory will probably be spun by the Obama folks as a victory.
  • Avatar of Ryan
  • thx ds k?
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Oct 22, 2003
  • Posts: 4460
Results should start to come in soon.

obamas numbers will be severely deflated until right near the end because typically larger cities come in last.

edit:

Fox news and msnbc call it for Clinton

3% precincts reporting.

Clinton 55
Obama 45
Last Edit: April 23, 2008, 12:56:08 am by Ryan
  • Avatar of Neophyte
  • Master of Darkness
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Apr 20, 2003
  • Posts: 1296
I don't know why they're calling it yet. It's pretty close, IMO.

CNN projections:

Clinton: 53%
Obama: 47%

14% reporting.

I guess she's going to win, but the delegate gain for her is going to be very small. I can see things getting even tighter as the night goes on.
  • Avatar of The Truth
  • SB is unaware that Dimmu sucks
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: May 15, 2003
  • Posts: 1204
I don't know why they're calling it yet. It's pretty close, IMO.

CNN projections:

Clinton: 53%
Obama: 47%

14% reporting.

I guess she's going to win, but the delegate gain for her is going to be very small. I can see things getting even tighter as the night goes on.

exit polls

exit polls

exit polls

exit polls

exit polls
--- Back when we were young and loved the internet....
  • Insane teacher
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Oct 8, 2002
  • Posts: 10515
she's still going to win by that margin.

kind of sad obama still couldn't win with like six weeks and lots of spendng!
brian chemicals
  • Avatar of `~congresman Ron paul~~
  • Legio Morbidius
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Jan 18, 2006
  • Posts: 2653
Apparently Ron Paul hasn't heard the news that he's been eliminated from the nomination process.  I got a letter in the mail from his campaign today, and then heard an ad for him on the radio about 15 minutes ago.  Just further proof that he's fucking insane.

Anyways less than 12 hours and I'm off to the polls.  I've even convinced both my parents to vote for Obama (they haven't voted since Carter), so tomorrow should be a pretty interesting day.



Paul people are still convinced they can pull a coup with delegates at the convention (since apparently Paul people are the most likely to have nothing better to do than be delegates?).

That’s right, you have the young gaming with the old(er), white people gaming with black people, men and women, Asian countries gaming with the EU, North Americans gaming with South Americans. Much like world sporting events like the Wolrd Cup, or the Olympics will bring together different nations in friendly competition, (note the recent Asian Cup; Iraq vs. Saudi Arabia, no violence there) we come together. The differences being, we are not divided by our nationalities and we do it 24-7, and on a personal level.

We are a community without borders and without colours, the spirit and diversity of the gaming community is one that should be looked up to, a spirit and diversity other groups should strive toward.
  • Avatar of The Truth
  • SB is unaware that Dimmu sucks
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: May 15, 2003
  • Posts: 1204
she's still going to win by that margin.

kind of sad obama still couldn't win with like six weeks and lots of spendng!

30 points to 10 points in one of the most racist states in the country is p good
--- Back when we were young and loved the internet....
  • Insane teacher
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Oct 8, 2002
  • Posts: 10515
i did not know it was so racist.

regardless, its still worrying. granted he just came off the Wright/bitter comments but still at this point we're not talking a clear winner necessarily and if it goes brokered he's going to have to find some way to ingratiate himself to working class whites.
brian chemicals
  • Comrade!
  • Group: Member
  • Joined: Dec 19, 2005
  • Posts: 68
The problem here is that real conservatism CANNOT exist. They want to shrink the Federal Government. There's absolutely no real reason to do this; they don't want to shrink the Fed because of some real world problem it's causing. They want to shrink it because in their ideology, that's going to be the right thing to do.

There's no reason to do this?  Take for example what is happening to our food prices now - they are skyrocketing.  The government has imposed ethanol mandates and subsidies.  As a result, many of our farms are no longer being used to produce food, but corn to be converted to ethanol, and therefore food prices are on the increase as it becomes less available on the market.  The poor will feel the pinch of this the worst, of course, and charities and organizations who buy foodstuffs on limited resources to feed the world's hungry are also suffering - so much for Big Government helping those less fortunate.  Not to mention all of the waste, fraud, and corruption from all of the pork-barrel spending and earmarks.  Your argument is based on a false premise and false stereotype.

What happens when you slash those services? People demand them back. Believe it or not, people do expect the government to serve more than a defense purpose, and they will ask for their libraries and their social security, and the modern conservative is in a dilemma. The result is that he still has to pay for services while slashing taxes. They cannot shrink government, but they are also wholely unwilling to improve it since they don't like the idea of government at all, so you get not only a bigger government, but a more ineffective one.

Lower taxes and lower revenues are not necessarily correlating issues, so that is another false argument and a false premise - indeed the opposite has been demonstrated to be true if an uptick in economic activity proceeds it (as this creates more taxpayers).  The FICA tax has never been slashed (SS).  Libraries are primarily a function of local governments.

Alan Wolfe goes into detail on this in one of the best pieces of political polemic I've read in a while:  If government is necessary, bad government, at least for conservatives, is inevitable, and conservatives have been exceptionally good at showing just how bad it can be. Hence the truth revealed by the Bush years: Bad government--indeed, bloated, inefficient, corrupt, and unfair government--is the only kind of conservative government there is. Conservatives cannot govern well for the same reason that vegetarians cannot prepare a world-class boeuf bourguignon: If you believe that what you are called upon to do is wrong, you are not likely to do it very well.

Wolfe's article is absurd.  Big Government is not conservative.  President Bush has spent like a drunken sailor, and expanded government mandates and programs across the board.  He even created a new entitlement - certainly not a conservative action in the least.  And it's creating problems?  Rather than acknowledge that government is the problem, you simply state that it isn't really Big Government because the expansion happened under the watch of someone with "R" beside his name - which does not make any sense - sort of like saying Clinton took a liberal action when he signed Welfare Reform into law because he had a "D" beside his name.
 
They also have incredibly stunted understandings of economics, raised in vacuums and full of jargon that has no application to the real world. For instance, the private accounts plan that Jeff is outlining. President Bush first suggested the plan, claiming Social Security was in some crisis (one that does not exist) and that under the current system, today's generation will suffer under the old system.

Social Security has dwindling amounts of workers for each retiree under the system.  The ratio has had a dramatic downward spiral over the years.  Moreover, the SS funds from that tax were dumped into the general fund long ago, so the surpluses were already spent, so using those to offset the future deficits is not a valid argument.  The pyramidal structure of the SS system is moving toward becoming inverted.  It's not a crisis as of yet but that is certainly an issue - it'd be nice if steps could be taken to fix it before there is a crisis.  In 1950, for example, there were 16 workers to each 1 retiree.  Now, that ratio is 3 to 1 and is continuing to drop.  Social Security is a pay as you go system - there is no "investment" in it.  To state there is no problem with the base of the system changing like this is to stick one's head in the sand.  Your treasuries argument is false as that is government being in debt to itself, not investment. 

If you've got a better grasp of economics I certainly don't see it - the advocation of the government taking over sectors of the economy certainly has no evidence or history of being beneficial.  China's increasing economic prosperity was not caused by moving further to the left but to the right - implementing more free market and less command economy into its system.  By your the premise of the arguments you are presenting, North Korea should have the most prosperous and thriving economy in the world as its government controls literally everything.

You'll notice how there is no evidence of private accounts doing better. That's because, well, there really IS none. There are theories, all untested, and highly controversial to boot. The reason Jeff wants private accounts is because HE thinks it's a better idea. Somehow Jeff, king of the stock market, believes neutering social security and going to private accounts, despite being laughable at best and inhumane more likely, is a good idea because it's part of his ideology. And he likes his ideology because he thinks it's full of good ideas.

The underlying issue, regardless of the debate over which one provides a higher rate of return, is having ownership over your own money that you earned.  A private account is your own money - not someone else's - that you can pass on to loved ones if the money is not spent.  You repeatedly seem to have an anethema toward the idea of taking personal responsibility for one's self and actually owning what one has earned vs. government as a big nanny being involved in everything one does.  Regarding "no evidence" that alternatives to Social Security are better, I would suggest you look up "Galveston County" and "Social Security."  Here's a good place to get started - http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2005-03-15-benefits-reform-galveston_x.htm  Regardless of your opinion of this program, your claim that opting out of Social Security is entirely "untested" and merely "theory" is clearly proven false by this.

Try hardwork, pal!

Well, you're going to get farther trying to do that than sitting around not even trying, waiting for someone else to do it for you.
The Chairman's Quest (RM2k3) 100% Complete - http://www.gamingw.net/forums/index.php?topic=47923
Topic thread contains download links.
  • Avatar of Ryan
  • thx ds k?
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Oct 22, 2003
  • Posts: 4460
There's no reason to do this?  Take for example what is happening to our food prices now - they are skyrocketing.  The government has imposed ethanol mandates and subsidies.  As a result, many of our farms are no longer being used to produce food, but corn to be converted to ethanol, and therefore food prices are on the increase as it becomes less available on the market.  The poor will feel the pinch of this the worst, of course, and charities and organizations who buy foodstuffs on limited resources to feed the world's hungry are also suffering - so much for Big Government helping those less fortunate.  Not to mention all of the waste, fraud, and corruption from all of the pork-barrel spending and earmarks.  Your argument is based on a false premise and false stereotype.

the skyrocketing price of food has nothing to do with ethanol mandates.

it has to do with the price of gas and the increasing demand from southeast asia.

the rest of your post is basically about bootstrapping soooooooooo yeah.
  • Insane teacher
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Oct 8, 2002
  • Posts: 10515
man i wish i could muster up the effort but you didn't even read the post :(

like this

Quote
Wolfe's article is absurd.  Big Government is not conservative.  President Bush has spent like a drunken sailor, and expanded government mandates and programs across the board.  He even created a new entitlement - certainly not a conservative action in the least.  And it's creating problems?  Rather than acknowledge that government is the problem, you simply state that it isn't really Big Government because the expansion happened under the watch of someone with "R" beside his name - which does not make any sense - sort of like saying Clinton took a liberal action when he signed Welfare Reform into law because he had a "D" beside his name.

the article goes into detail about this but you didn't read it at all.

or this

Quote
Lower taxes and lower revenues are not necessarily correlating issues, so that is another false argument and a false premise - indeed the opposite has been demonstrated to be true if an uptick in economic activity proceeds it (as this creates more taxpayers).  The FICA tax has never been slashed (SS).  Libraries are primarily a function of local governments.

sweet the laffer curve is still known to be patently untrue by every economist ever so as much as you want to say IT STILL WORKS, it doesn't and you're wrong.

and then there's just a bunch of stupid BOOTSTRAP and false arguments (I cited almost everything I posted about and you linked to a USATODAY article written with a man named "Cooky" who was a local judge (truly an economic mind)) so nope not gonna read this shit.

or stuff like this jesus

Quote
the advocation of the government taking over sectors of the economy certainly has no evidence or history of being beneficial.

you know that regardless of other flaws socialist and communist countries never did badly and at times do and did much better than freemarket contemporaries and stating CHINA as your example of freemarket ideology being highly successful is a bit completely insane.

too bad that you will read this and then link a bunch of stuff and smirk like you've actually written something not completely asinine because you found someone from the Cato Institute who agrees with you.
Last Edit: April 26, 2008, 06:27:43 pm by Magical Negro
brian chemicals
  • Avatar of Ryan
  • thx ds k?
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Oct 22, 2003
  • Posts: 4460
ffs even ronald reagans budget director said the laffer curve isn't to be taken literally. (maybe because it's bullshit??)
  • Insane teacher
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: Oct 8, 2002
  • Posts: 10515
oh for fuck's sake the USA today article is written by the man who made the fucking plan up.

that's like quoting president Bush and saying SEE IRAQ IS A SUCCESS THE MAN WHO INVADED SAID SO.
brian chemicals
  • Avatar of The Truth
  • SB is unaware that Dimmu sucks
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Premium Member
  • Joined: May 15, 2003
  • Posts: 1204

The underlying issue, regardless of the debate over which one provides a higher rate of return, is having ownership over your own money that you earned.  A private account is your own money - not someone else's - that you can pass on to loved ones if the money is not spent.  You repeatedly seem to have an anethema toward the idea of taking personal responsibility for one's self and actually owning what one has earned vs. government as a big nanny being involved in everything one does.  Regarding "no evidence" that alternatives to Social Security are better, I would suggest you look up "Galveston County" and "Social Security."  Here's a good place to get started - http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2005-03-15-benefits-reform-galveston_x.htm  Regardless of your opinion of this program, your claim that opting out of Social Security is entirely "untested" and merely "theory" is clearly proven false by this.

Try hardwork, pal!

Well, you're going to get farther trying to do that than sitting around not even trying, waiting for someone else to do it for you.

what the fuck is this, get your objectivist shit out of here man. You're clearly ignoring the large segment of the population that cannot TAKE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY (which is an idiotic way to describe it anyway) because of socio-economic hegemony, disablity, mental illness, etc.
--- Back when we were young and loved the internet....
Locked