Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Piell posted:

Yeah Palin is 100% not running, she might have to do actual work then and she's done with doing that, she just wants to get on TV saying dumb poo poo.
Wonkette has been following her subscription internet TV stream, and she's starting to become too lazy to even bother updating that. You'd think this week in particular she'd be eager to make an appearance and gloat about the kicking those libruls just took, but nope - just a paragraph on her facebook page and some entries from her word-a-day calendar (seriously).

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Unzip and Attack posted:

Watching Romney flail to stay relevant has been even more rewarding than his actual loss. Is there any precedent for a losing politician to hang around and snipe rather than actually do anything other than Palin? Did she create a new political cliche?
Usually you just head off to obscurity (sitting on corporate boards, teaching at a school of government, that sort of thing) or go back to your day job. Mondale and Dukakis did the former, Dole and Kerry and McCain did the latter.

What Romney is doing is really odd and kind of unprecedented. He wants to stake his claim as a Power and be a Mover and Shaker in the republican party establishment, despite the fact that his sole claims to relevance are that he ran a so-so presidential campaign that lost to a black guy named Hussein, and was the one-term governor of a solidly blue state that passed a bunch of very liberal legislation on his watch. Why would anyone bother to take his phone calls? I guess it's the way that he has a rolodex full of guys with checkbooks that he might put at their disposal.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

evilweasel posted:

I think that he'll have a vague cloud of incompetence that will follow him as the result of 2012 no matter what he does. I have a lot of sympathy for the argument it may be entirely undeserved - I still maintain Kerry was a decent candidate and did well in a hard situation to no avail - but it's there. The last memory most of America has of him is post-2012 when everyone (friend and foe) tripped over themselves to discuss how incompetent his campaign was. Right or wrong, that's the image and I don't see how you make a serious run when that's everyone's gut feel about you.
Yeah, once you LOSE a presidential election you are supposed to go away because you are a LOSER. Nixon's 1960/1968 doubleshot went down as one of the greatest comebacks in history because things like that are so rare. Romney already faced the voters once, and got decisively rejected. What possible logic (other than a total lack of other viable candidates) justifies giving him another bite at the apple?

Kerry's campaign wasn't perfect (few are) but he did OK. He came within one rigged state - Ohio - from defeating a sitting president during wartime. That's pretty impressive.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Alter Ego posted:

pulled up stakes and went to New Hampshire--only to eat poo poo once again in another Senate election.
Ate poo poo in an election year where the Republicans either captured or came within a whisker of capturing every single contestable Senate election - except his. He's a dud.

All these non-starters making noises about running in 2016 makes me think we're entering a new age where has-beens circle around a Presidential run just to draw attention to themselves and boost their profile and maybe catch on with a deep-pocketed sugar daddy or get a Fox media gig or maybe bump their speaker's fees. 2012 saw a lot of base-enthusiast True Conservative "book tour candidates" looking to boost their Q-levels and propel themselves up the right wing media ladder by a rung or two, 2016 may see faded Establishment types doing the same thing.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Mooseontheloose posted:

I mean isn't the whole Texas Miracle basically based off the fact that oil was so expensive?
That, and American oil production started booming (because of fracking) and guess where all the refineries for that are, and guess where all the companies that make and operate oil-drilling equipment are?

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
VP gets to ascend to the Presidency if something happens to the President (dies, assassinated, resigns), which happened quite a bit in the mid-20th century (Truman, LBJ, Ford all did it in a 30-year period). Medical science and improved security (recent lapses notwithstanding) mean fewer spot promotions to the big chair - it's been 40 years since the last one - but it still gives the veep a non-zero chance of becoming President without much effort.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Nessus posted:

Speaking of which, what do you guys think about this campaign I've heard rumors of to have blue states with Republican legislatures go to an EV-split situation? This seems like it could upend the map significantly, although if it just COINCIDENTALLY happens to be in three large Democratic-leaning swing states, at some point I think they're going to have a hard time explaining that in a way other than "gently caress you, we rule now, the First Tea Party Division occupies Washington."
Unlikely - states that do that suddenly stop being swing states (a close state with 15 EVs is worth fighting for because 15 EVs is so much more than 0; if it splits proportionately, then it goes 8/7 or 7/8 depending on who wins, and who needs that?). The politicians of the state lose a lot of influence and ability to bank favors from Presidential campaigns if they split their EVs.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
A tech bubble burst would disrupt (heh) the Northern California economy, but nowhere near enough to put CA in play. This bubble isn't nearly as pervasive or out-of-control as the 1990s one. There's been nothing like TimeWarner buying AOL for $160bn (that's $220bn in today's money).

One of the problems of the tech bubble is that it doesn't actually employ very many people for all the valuation it generates (when Facebook bought Whatsapp for $21bn, Whatsapp had something like 80 employees) but at least when the bubble bursts it won't throw huge numbers of people out of work.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
There are a lot of "app" companies with zillion-dollar valuations and no viable business model. It's an overheated sector and it'll fall down sooner or later, but it's a pale shadow of the size and insanity of the 1990s bubble.

Uber is currently rated as more valuable than the entire taxi and livery sector of the economy and they're still able to raise piles of money. This can't go on indefinitely.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Hodgepodge posted:

I suppose it could actually be good for the economy if billionaires stop trying to play the startup lottery and actually invest money into the real economy.
A lot of 'real' companies in Silicon Valley (like Intel, Cisco, Oracle, etc.) resent the current App bubble companies because their outsized valuations make it very hard for older, established companies to hire top engineering talent (too hard to compete with no-rule frathouses that might generate an eight figure equity payout for you if they take off) and would probably welcome the collapse of that bubble.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Joementum posted:

There's some evidence that Palin actually helped McCain's final vote tally by turning out more of the base in 2008, but I did leave off a couple of qualifiers from that statement. The Vice Presidential pick doesn't matter if the pick is someone generally perceived as qualified for the office. Palin fails that test, obviously, and Eagleton might be another example, though McGovern was doomed anyway. The other qualifier that I left out is that the VP pick doesn't matter in the post-McGovern primary reform era. Prior to that, the pick was used to bargain at the convention for delegate support. Nixon allowed Thurmond to hand him a list of acceptable names, which is how we got Agnew.
IIRC Quayle was a such a risible joke that it did cost Bush a point or a point-and-a-half in the final tally. But for the most part VP picks have little effect - a really bad one can cost you slightly, and if a good pick buoys the ticket, that's probably a sign that the top of the ticket is weak and is probably going to lose (I think Bentsen in 1988 was good for Dukakis, but the fact that a VP pick was enough to bump his polls was a sign of how deep a hole his campaign was in).

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
I'm more struck by the continuing belief that they lost in 08 and 12 because conservative voters stayed home. Remember, "demographics" is a made-up socialist fake science, like climatology.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

radical meme posted:

This is what amazes me also. Plus, many of those imagined potential voters from eight years ago will be dead by 2016. Everything about Cruz indicates a commitment to doubling down on the conservative.
The belief that millions of True Conservatives decide to stay at home in 08/12 instead of voting against Kenyan Marxist Moslem Traitor Tyrant Barack HUSSEIN Obama because Mitt Romney and John McCain just weren't quite conservative enough is infinitely hilarious. "Hmmm, on one hand, a man raised from birth to hate and destroy America for his Black Communist masters, but on the other hand, this Romney fellow once said he didn't feel like killing all illegal immigrants with his hands." *throw up hands* "It's like they aren't even pretending to offer us a choice any more"

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
Right now it's mostly name recognition muscle-twitch. At the same point in previous election cycles you had Joe Lieberman and Rudy Giuliani as leading their races.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:

Please tell me how this guy is going to get the nomination because :allears: Unless it will be because it's the best the GOP can do.
It's the best the GOP can do.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

FMguru posted:

I've always loved Charles Pierce's observation about the utility of the Iowa straw poll - that the ability to convince old people to board buses to take them to somewhere in rural Iowa qualifies you to be the marketing director for an Indian casino, not the leader of the free world.
Charlie comes through for me today

Charles Pierce posted:

That doesn't mean that everybody won't show up for the corn dogs and the concerts and the spectacle of deciding which campaign is best at putting old white people on buses and moving them from one place to another. (Which, to me, is a qualification for managing an Indian casino, not for being handed the nuclear codes.)
:allears:

FMguru fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Jan 9, 2015

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

ufarn posted:

Uhm, so does all this mean the SOTU responses will be more or less absolutely batshit insane?
I think that means there will be 14 "unofficial" responses to the next two SOTUs.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

baw posted:

I really doubt they'll go through with this, but...


...I imagine it would backfire horribly if they did.
Oh man.

Bill's philandering made Hillary into an incredibly sympathetic figure worldwide, especially among women. Her husband cheats on her, embarrasses her on the global stage, she's the wronged woman, and then she keeps a stiff upper lip about it and keeps her cool and sails through it head held high and forgives the big lug and keeps her family together.

Please baby Jesus, please have the Republicans trot Monica Lewisnky out over and over again for the next two years. Americans will surely rally to the sight of the scatterbrained teenage would-be housewrecker over the woman whose marriage she tried to destroy.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
:rip: peenworm

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Jackson Taus posted:

That's gonna be like an all-time list, right?
Needs more Zombie Harold Stassen.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Sir Tonk posted:

Goddammit I really hope Fiorina doesn't run. She's completely insufferable and would be even worse with Clinton running as well.
She's clearly running for the VP slot under the argument that hey you can't just send up a ticket of two well-fed white dudes against the first woman candidate for President, you gotta have some gender diversity on the ticket, just think of the optics.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
Mitt Romney's people throw some shade at Jeb Bush.

quote:

His time as governor was quite a while ago.
Bush left office as governor of Florida in 2007, and hasn't held an elected position since then, unlike Mitt Romney...who left office as governor of Massachusetts in 2007 and hasn't held an elected position since then.

quote:

A substantial number of Republicans have never heard him deliver a speech. Mitt is a proven commodity
See, Mitt has already run for and lost a presidentional election. He's a proven...loser?!?

Nice to see the Romney messaging team has lost none of its demonstrated deftness.

The GOP race is like all of three days old and I'm already loving it.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
Late-breaking statement from the man himself*:

quote:

Gosh, my friends, it sure seems like only yesterday when we were on our way to a crushing victory over the, ah, dark forces of Barack Obama, under whose leadership America’s once-bright future has, um, dimmed, leaving us staring into a bla–

Uh, well, you understand where I’m coming from. “Ann” and I to this day often sit down with our five boys — Tagg, Fritz, Spork, Clog, and (annoyed grunt) — and ask ourselves what happened. They’re growing boys, as you know, and they’ll often scarf down one of “Ann’s” special treats, like unflavored pudding or mayonnaise on white bread. Clog likes his bread toasted, but “Ann” says the shards of toast “feel like machetes” when she tries to swallow it, so it’s plain white bread for us.

I can assure you that our internal campaign figures and computer numbers and whatnot guaranteed a “Mitt” Romney victory — my top advisers assured me of such every time their direct deposit payments hit their checking accounts, and I’m sure they were right on the money. But I suppose some things will have to remain a mystery, like, for example, the exact percentage of our income that “Ann” and I have paid in taxes over the past several years. Only God and Saul, our Israelite accountant, will ever know for sure.

At any rate, while “Ann” and I have made no final decisions about what would be my first real attempt at winning election to the presidency (my first race was merely dabbling, and you’ll recall that my last attempt at the office was undertaken largely against my will, so these should not be counted), I can assure you that we will not be swayed by the opinions of Jennifer Robins at the Washington Post. I plan spend the next few months asking ordinary Americans what I can do to help make their lives better. I’ll go from corporate boardroom to corporate boardroom, from country club to $50,000 a plate gala dinner, to hear from regular folks.

“Regular folks.” Ha! They’re adorable! Many of them, I would imagine, don’t even have elevators for their cars! I guess you’re taking the stairs, Mr. Aston Martin! Oh, gosh, I’m almost giddy today!

These are people who realize that, under a “Mitt” Romney presidency, there would be no ISIS, and Vladimir Putin would know his place. People would be more physically appealing, cancer would surrender to our doctors, and everyone would win the Powerball. That’s the kind of leadership you’ll see from President “Mitt” Romney, and it would be unfair to the American people to deprive them of my own gifts simply because Robert Jefferson at the Washington Post has some problem with me attempting what, again, would really be my first run for the presidency, or political office of any kind, really.

Rest assured that once I have interacted with other human beings in regards to my future plans, I will inform you of same in a timely fashion. Thank you my friends, and God Bless the United States of America!

Mitt “Mitt” Romney
* may not actually be the man himself

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
Something like 80% of a President's approval rating can be explained from the rise and fall of gasoline prices.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

evilweasel posted:

He may disagree about how bad the skeletons are or not realize they're there, or just figure that anything that damaging would have leaked already.
Also, consider that the source for "this guy has more skeletons than a Level 65 Epic Necromancer" is a campaign that was confident of victory that they refused to prepare a concession speech going into election night.

The Romney people haven't exactly established themselves as world-beaters when it comes to savvy political analysis.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Concerned Citizen posted:

Yeah. Edwards campaign was already over, but supposedly (according to Game Change and probably bullshit) his top staff knew about the affair and promised to sabotage the campaign if he actually came close to winning the nomination. I highly doubt that, though.
"We'll keep cashing our paychecks and sending out pleading fundraising memos, but if our guy looks like he might win we'll sabotage his campaign en masse."

Christ, what horrible people (if true).

FMguru fucked around with this message at 06:27 on Jan 22, 2015

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Necc0 posted:

I'm not giving him a pass but this always came across as a general cultural tone-deafness to anything outside of his own bubble, not just on race issues. He was just as aggressively awkward around farmers or dock workers or anyone that wasn't massively wealthy.
Watching the Republican candidate for president attend a NASCAR race and inadvertently insult most of the people he tried to mingle with was quite something. He made John Kerry look like Bruce Springsteen.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

BiggerBoat posted:

I agree with all that but what would you say about the net effect of Lieberman on Gore's ticket or Cheney on Bush's? The former turned a lot of people off to Gore and I think, conversely, Cheney arguably added some right wing credibility to GWB.
As much as lefties hated in, the Lieberman pick was widely popular. Gore never got such good media coverage as when he picked Lieberman, and his poll numbers peaked after the pick.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Duckbag posted:

The thing is, announcing a VP --any VP -- almost always entails a significant boost in media coverage and a corresponding bump in poll numbers. What's more, Lieberman was announced in August to coincide with the Democratic Convention. Conventions inspire a lot of positive media coverage and are known for giving huge (but generally temporary) boosts to their nominee's poll numbers. Unless you have a way of factoring out these major confounding variables, there's really no way to know how much the Lieberman pick affected things. You could probably use a rough aggregate analysis of presidential campaigns to find a "generic" VP bump and a "generic" convention bump and compare those numbers with what we saw in 2000, but so many other factors change between election years that I'm not sure even those results would be meaningful. Someone get Nate Silver on this.
All true. But the notion that he was some sort of disaster pick just isn't supported by the evidence. There have been VP picks that had no discernible effect (Paul Ryan didn't move the needle at all) and VP picks that have actively damaged their tickets from the moment they were selected (Quayle). Lieberman was pretty popular - heck, in late 2002-early 2003 he was led the polls for 2004 Dem nomination. I suppose you could say that the Nader 2000 movement was fed by people who were upset by the Lieberman choice, but I don't remember too many 2K Naderites complaining about Holy Joe - they were mostly about Gush/Bore, vote for a real change, the two parties are interchangeable corporate hand-puppets, and the like.

Also also, just because a VP pick moves the needle in one direction when they are announced doesn't mean that the pick won't backfire (Palin was a good example - she gave McCain a big boost when she was announced, but by the end of the campaign she was a clear liability). And finally, if a VP pick provides a big boost to the candidate, it's probably a sign that what you have is a weak candidate and are in big trouble (Dukakis' pick of Lloyd Bentsen was very enthusiastically received, which in retrospect was a warning sign of how shallow the main candidate's support and appeal was).

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
Palin's word salad is terrible (and getting worse) but until recently it was no different in content than most other Republican politicians opining about the issues of today. What she said wasn't any more ridiculous than listening to Mike Huckabee talk about the deficit or Rick Santorum discuss events in the Middle East. Her problem was that her flavor of nonsense didn't sound like the usual platitudes that come out of conservative pols - it had this rough, unpolished, homespun quality to it that it made it stand out (which has also served Palin well - she doesn't sound like the rest of the crowd, and her particular phraseology strikes a chord with a certain subset of the base in a way that smoother Beltway talkers like Gingrich and Rubio do not). She sounds more ridiculous that the rest of her colleagues, but if you parse their words, they're all equally nonsensical. Palin just never measured the particular cadences of Beltway nonsense. She speaks Backwoods nonsense - same garbage but with a different accent.

Her last couple of appearances show a considerable degeneration in her speaking. I don't know if it's drugs, incipient mental illness, or her just not giving enough of a gently caress to bother even trying to string together related thoughts (I'm betting on the latter), but her recent total incoherence has been genuinely alarming. Nice pick, John McCain.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

shadow puppet of a posted:

That raises the question, what did Biden do with Cheney's direct-report kill teams he had scattered around the globe?
Put them to work trying to acquire hard-to-get aftermarket accessories for his sweet vette

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

joeburz posted:

Is that pic taken on an airplane banking hard left?
a ship that is in the process of capsizing

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
Huh. Mark Haleprin over at Bloomberg stacked up a bunch of evidence that he's probably running ( http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/features/2015-01-30/why-mitt-romney-thinks-he-can-win-and-jeb-bush-can-t- , with some commentary here: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_01/mitt_edges_up_to_the_starting053943.php ). OTOH, one of Romney's key campaign figures (the guy who ran his Iowa operation) just signed on with Jeb ( http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_01/smalltime_businessman_snags_ke053944.php )

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
California is a failed state in their minds because it does everything the exact opposite of what conservatives like to do: high taxes, raises taxes, big liberal cities, huge latino population, tolerance of gay people, some strong regulations (especially air pollution) and labor protections, not very Evangelical, freewheeling culture, and so on. By their ideology California should be this flaming bankrupt shithole that people are fleeing in droves, the American equivalent of the late-period Soviet Union. And yet, California is thriving right now. Huge budget surpluses, giant diverse economy, new billionaires and new Fortune 500 companies being created every day. Say, did you hear one of our homespun little hippie companies (run by a genuine out-n-proud homosexual gaylord) just booked the largest quarterly profit in the history of capitalism? I drive by the Tesla factory on the way to and from work every day. The wait list to buy one of their $80,000 electric sedans is almost a year long. They can't make them fast enough, and the plant now employs as many people as when it was making light trucks for Ford/Mazda, and they're looking to expand. Note that this isn't being done in Wisconsin or Mississippi or Kansas - it's happening in California, which is literally impossible according to wingnut theology.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Bizarro Watt posted:

Also guns. To many conservatives, California's gun laws (silly as some of them are, admittedly) are evidence that it is a state completely adverse to individual freedoms. Because to middle class white conservatives, that's the only freedom that matters.
Oh, yeah, forgot about GUNS GUNS GUNS.

quote:

They just bring up the pension stuff in that case.
Here's a complete list of states that aren't in danger of being bitten on the rear end by underfunded pension obligations:

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Pegged Lamb posted:

I think he meant Canon in D
I think it's Wagner's "Wedding March" aka "Here Comes The Bride"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgh9XTkQTDI

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Rygar201 posted:

I'm always surprised by how spry W was there
He was a dumbass but he kept himself in very good shape. When he had some minor surgery at one point, they were a little worried because his resting heart rate was so low on account of his fitness. Low heart rate + anesthesia = potential trouble.

Jazerus posted:

He never actually bounced back, he is just campaigning as though he did and he is facing ever-spiraling federal investigations.
Christie's appeal to the GOP establishment was as the one guy who could appeal to voters and win states outside of the tea party/old confederacy base. Well, several other candidates have emerged for the role of "credible non-snakehandler" (Bush most notably, but there are also a couple of Republican governors of flyover states that would do), and they don't have multiple federal investigations hanging over them. Seems like the money people are looking at Christie and saying "thanks, but no thanks".

Christie's actions over the last year or so (the bridge closure, the bridge closure denials and coverups, his big-spending personal ways, his handling of Atlantic City and other state projects, that ebola nurse quarantine, etc.) have shown him to be not at all ready for prime time, and I think the funders have come to understand that.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

GalacticAcid posted:

Besides the big names (Bill, Barack) I'd anticipate a Warren speech, probably a smiling Southerner like Mark Warner, possibly Cory Booker, and someone like Ann Kirkpatrick who won a Red State election without running away from Obama.
Don't forget the Castros.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually
Republicans are always and forever the Hot New Thing, and their warmed-over Reaganism is always in the form of Bold Fresh New Ideas.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

Nessus posted:

I remember that MTV personality whose whole thing was "I have a Republican elephant tattoo and find Dan Quayle hot." What happened to her?
That was Kennedy, who was on MTV in the early 1990s.

She currently hosts a show (with other hip young conservatives) on the Fox Business Channel, where it regularly gets a 0.0 rating.

She was on the cover of the NYT Magazine just a couple of months ago, talking about the Hot New Political Movement that's All The Rage with the Youth Of Today- Libertarianism!

  • Locked thread