Evilbore's Presidential Election Thread --Its the Final COUNTDOWN Ba da ba baaaa

[Human Snorenado]

First nominee VP to face a trial. What a farce.

Though I wonder happens now (if she is found to break the law); I presume charges will brought against her and a court date arranged 

I love the stupidity of that woman who called Obama an Arab when she meant Muslim.

No trial was suggested in the report

Yeah, really they can't charge her on criminal counts.  However, she could be censured by the state legislature or (more likely) Walt Monegan can bring a civil case against her for wrongful termination or something.

[Fresh Prince]

A trial would be awesome though.  A civil case? That's no fun.

[Bocsius]

So I took the "political compass" survey again tonight. It's the one that evaluates your political leanings on a 2D plane, with the Y axis being the social side and the X axis being the economic side. I was surprised when I first did this one a few years ago that I wasn't as conservative as I thought I was, and then tonight when taking it I wondered how many people would have seen a definitive shift leftward in light of the current economic climate. Sure enough, the results showed an even more pronouced liberal leaning that before. What the crap. :/

http://www.politicalcompass.org/test

My results:

-3.88 on economic left/right
+0.51 on social libertarian/authoritarian

I think the ranges go from -10 to +10 on both metrics.

[Bocsius]

Election "mix up" in New York: Osama on the ballot

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081011/ap_on_el_pr/osama_ballot;_ylt=AgfUH3SYqDdpOIMUZXkDvKqs0NUE

Surely a "typographical error (wink wink)" and an "honest mistake (nudge nudge)."

[Phoenix Dark]

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/10/10/black.republicans.loftv.cnn

Rick Sanchez: asshole
"HAVE YOU NO PRIDE?"

the young dude: fucktard

edit: "if democrats are for the poor, why are people still poor?" 

[duckman2000]

So I took the "political compass" survey again tonight. It's the one that evaluates your political leanings on a 2D plane, with the Y axis being the social side and the X axis being the economic side. I was surprised when I first did this one a few years ago that I wasn't as conservative as I thought I was, and then tonight when taking it I wondered how many people would have seen a definitive shift leftward in light of the current economic climate. Sure enough, the results showed an even more pronouced liberal leaning that before. What the crap. :/

http://www.politicalcompass.org/test

My results:

-3.88 on economic left/right
+0.51 on social libertarian/authoritarian

I think the ranges go from -10 to +10 on both metrics.

European Socialist, go back to China

[Bocsius]

What can I say, the past 8 years have given me an intense distrust of big business and politics. 7 months of laughable health insurance as a contract worker followed by a 3 month waiting period for coverage at my new employer have given me an appreciation for more universally available (and equitable) health benefits.

[Fresh Prince]

edit: "if democrats are for the poor, why are people still poor?" 

8 years of Bush solved the economic divide.

[Human Snorenado]

The last time I took the political compass test, I scored -9.88, -8.15.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

I was about -7, -7

[Phoenix Dark]

[youtube=425,350]xT9nYjqTL10[/youtube]
  @ the hip hop beat in the background

Added:  May 27, 2008

Apparently Fox is playing Farrakkhan calling Obama "the messiah." Interestingly Farrakhan even says he wants to be careful in what he says so he doesn't hurt Obama's chances

[Fresh Prince]

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=77539

More on it but the whole he is the Messiah meme has already passed.

[Phoenix Dark]

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=77539

More on it but the whole he is the Messiah meme has already passed.

You can watch it for yourself on a newly posted YouTube video.

[Brehvolution]

To be fair, most of McCain's base is still on 56k. SO when the shit finally plays, it is the gospel since no other truth would make you wait that long.

[duckman2000]

Economic Left/Right: -9.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.67

But I'm European, so hey

[Brehvolution]

Bill Maher is killing!!!!You'll thank me tomorrow.

[MrAngryFace]

Economic Left/Right: -6.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49

is that good?

[duckman2000]

Hippie

[Fresh Prince]

Economic Left/Right: 0
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2

Centrist

[Van Cruncheon]

Economic Left/Right: -6.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49

is that good?

yes, it means you believe in bigger government involvement in money and less government involvement in people's lives

[Brehvolution]

Sweet!! So when you go to pay for that $80 shirt, the govt. rejects the purchase because it is outside your means. then you get embareesd and leave as the line behind you heckles you, you dirty poor.

[MrAngryFace]

They should have had one button on the test that says "I just wanna play videogames and sleep", cause that sums me up most days lol

[y2kev]

Economic Left/Right: 0.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.21

[Brehvolution]

THis Bill Maher has got me thinking. Not what he says in the show, but what that cigarillo to the far right of the table believes and acts like. republican 'trickle down economics' is only good if you are a republican. Because if you're not, then you shall receive no effect of the trickle down.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

Trickle Down Economics is a fucking joke and has been since its conception.

The whole ideology is backed basically one giving money to the rich at the expense of the poor, which has failed so many times throughout history.  Not only that but it basically assumes that rich people are inherently smarter but if they are gambling with billions of dollars of assets, that isn't smart, it is reckless.  I also hate the fact that everything these days is considered most efficient in stock form.  Trading energy in a stock like manner?  You got Enron.  Trading debt like stocks?  You got 2 Great 2 Depressing.

TDE only worked in the first place because the government borrowed a shitload of money to flood the market with extra funds.  Its like me using my credit cards: I might have more wealth but if I have to pay it back, then that isn't really wealth at all.

I really hope Reaganomics is dead and buried soon.

[Human Snorenado]

Whatever arises in place of the Republican Party as we know it today will not advocate Trickle Down Economics any longer.  You can see them TRYING to pretend like they're not for it now- McCain saying he wants tax relief for everyone, not just the uber rich.  But of course he's lying.

I would kind of like for there to be a second viable party, since absolute power corrupts absolutely, blah blah blah and all that rot.  But right now the Republican party is such a shitty, looked down upon brand name that only the far, far right nutbars are going to be left after this election to pick up the pieces.  And they'll think that they lost so badly this year because they didn't go FAR ENOUGH to the right.  The Republicans are in such a pickle because they like to ostensibly play to the "look down your nose at snooty, uppity educated folk" card.  Well guess what?  When you do that, people getting educations say "well shit, they're not for me then I guess."  So you end up with a party of Sarah Palins.  And that will only appeal to other Sarah Palins, who thankfully are becoming a smaller percentage of the population.  So that's a losing strategy over the long haul, as is the "fuck over the non-white skinned people" kick that Republicans have been on for a while.

I know that people say that a third party or more system wouldn't work in our bicameral legislature having, checks n' balances system.  But I kind of think that if you had to have a majority coalition cobbled together to get things passed, it would encourage active and actual bipartisanship for the sake of the country and progress as opposed to the toxic insanity that we have today.  We could have a far left party (that's me), the boring centrists (that's APF), the conservatives (toxic adam and sd) and then the loony religious nutbars. Obviously the libertopians would be right out.  Now, the loony religious nutbars would probably win in some states, but since by nature they won't want to compromise on anything none of their agenda would get advanced and eventually their constituents would have to ask themselves- "hey, we don't get money for bridges and shit so much.  maybe we should try electing someone that isn't insane."  Or at least it would be hoped.

Anyway, just a thought.

[Flannel Boy]

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -2.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.28

I still think many of the question included in The Political Compass are bogus, poorly worded, or irrelevant.

Example: Astrology accurately explains many things.

Data from the 2006 General Social Survey indicates that this question is irrelevant, as it weakly correlates with political identification.

Percent who believe astrology is very or sort of scientific
Extremely liberal 43.3
Liberal 32.2
Slightly liberal 31.4
Moderate 25.9
Slightly conservative 25.9
Conservative 26.1
Extremely conservative 25.0

Example 2: Some people are naturally unlucky.

 

Example 3: Making peace with the establishment is an important aspect of maturity.
Too vague. What does making peace mean?

Example 4: When you are troubled, it's better not to think about it, but to keep busy with more cheerful things.
Isn't this type of question  appropriate for a personality test?

[Boogie]

Political compass:



Economic Left/Right: -3.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.77


I think I've been creeping gradually leftward over the past 5 years, taking this test.

That said, I agree with malek's assessment of many of the questions.

[Flannel Boy]

My result from two years ago:

http://www.ga-forum.com/showpost.php?p=4509422&postcount=64

Economic Left/Right: -0.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.64

Not a major shift.

[TakingBackSunday]

Economic Left/Right: -4.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.77

[cool breeze]

Economic Left/Right: -2.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.90

I'm confused about my score.  I'm thinking that I should suddenly start feeling strongly about something, but I can muster enough enough will to do so.

They should have had one button on the test that says "I just wanna play videogames and sleep", cause that sums me up most days lol

I would strongly agree.

[Boogie]

My result from two years ago:

http://www.ga-forum.com/showpost.php?p=4509422&postcount=64

Economic Left/Right: -0.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.64

Not a major shift.

From that thread:



Okay, maybe I'm wrong.  It actually looks like I'm pretty stable, even drifting right, economically.

[recursivelyenumerable]

I get a -4.12 ec, -6.56 soc.  agreed that some of the questions are bogus tho

[duckman2000]

Example 3: Making peace with the establishment is an important aspect of maturity.
Too vague. What does making peace mean?

I read it as: accept your given place in a society and the rules of the system that you have submitted to, as opposed to continued attempts at changing society, or your part in it, to fit your rules or your ideas of how things should be.

[Bocsius]

I agree with the need for more viable political parties, although I disagree that the religious among us will be a lost people adrift in the political sea. I tend to think the "religious right" are much like everyone else in that there are a wide variety of beliefs and opinions about public policy, social and fiscal, it's just that the Republican party currently is the only one to offer a voice to the pro-life leanings of most Christians, and that's a pretty big issue. If you were to take Roe v. Wade out of the equation, I think you'd find the "religious right" would be quite diverse. Unfortunately, with the two party system we have, the social side is all entangled with the fiscal side, and you're left with an entire block of voters tied to a party they might not agree with for the most part, might not have even thought about it to that great of a degree, but can only vote one way because the one thing they know without a doubt they agree with just happens to be the most important issue.

I mean, it's not just something that applies to the religious right, and it's something we all know and it's evidenced by that political compass. You can find yourself in any one of those larger squares, and even within those squares find yourself disagreeing with the extremes within them. It's just that the current political landscape with two parties pretty much limits your options as far as expressing your own opinion, instead it's basically an all-or-nothing proposition.

[laesperanzapaz]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/news/general/princess-di-palins-cousin/2008/10/10/1223145577054.html

http://bloggerinterrupted.com/2008/10/video-mccain-palin-mob-part-2-womans-child-says-of-barack-you-need-gloves-to-touch-him

^ yes, "smh" is the actual website

[brawndolicious]

That Ohio video makes me think after Barack gets elected, a lot of conservatives will split into a secessionist party.  A bunch of people are not ever going to salute a president that has skin pigment.  I mean these are the hyper-crazy jack-off-to-the-American-flag every night type of people but I expect them to take over some states.  Palin might try to lead it.  The funniest thing is that those states would be landlocked.

[HyperZoneWasAwesome]

Is there an remote possibility that Palin will be dropped? That would be hilarious.

I mean first it was Edwards that thought he would never get caught cheating and now it's Palin who had the idiocy to accept the VP nomination when she knew this was coming out.

yes, it was stupid of her stupidity all around.  But lets not forget, this investigation started LAST SPRING(its been all over the Alaska media for ages now).  Months and months before the convention.  McCain knew about this, he knew it was coming out sooner rather then later (remember, his lawyer was the only other one kept in the loop), and he went ahead and picked her anyway.

Not the smartest move there John. 

[radioheadrule83]

McCain's campaign has generally endulged in some negative bullshit, but McCain himself deserves a little respect for trying to get through to people like this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/us_elections_2008/7665238.stm

[Boogie]

McCain's campaign has generally endulged in some negative bullshit, but McCain himself deserves a little respect for trying to get through to people like this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/us_elections_2008/7665238.stm

I give him no respect for that, because he's the one who allowed the flames of hatred to be stoked in the first place.

[MrAngryFace]

I think McCain is a man lost in his own campaign. Shame on him for playing along this long, but at this point I feel kinda sorry for him.

[border]

If McCain were winning, do you really think he'd object?  All this hatchet-man bullshit was A-OK when he was ahead in the polls.

I think he now realizes he's finished, and that it'd be better for his career/legacy to go out classy than go out flinging shit at his opponent.

[MrAngryFace]

I dunno, in almost all video clips ive seen of these verbally violent rallies you see mccain visibly wince and sometimes even pull back to the crowd saying things like TERROIST and whatnot. Its Palin that 'doesnt blink'/

[AdmiralViscen]

He's happy enough to let it go on when he can claim he couldn't hear it. He just doesn't want to be standing 2 feet away from someone when they're saying it.

[border]

I just went to the John McCain website and there is a section where you can sign up to make phone calls for support.  It gives you the numbers of people and a script to read.  Is this common in politics?  Just allowing anonymous people to call up on your behalf?

I have to wonder whether McCain can trust his cretinous supporters to do the job right.....exactly how long before one of them starts going off on a Muslim/terrorist rant?

[duckman2000]

I think McCain is a man lost in his own campaign. Shame on him for playing along this long, but at this point I feel kinda sorry for him.

That's exactly how I perceived the recent clips. As much as I think that he's the absolutely worst person possible to run for President right now (although this sort of confirms that belief), I don't think he's controlling this. If it's a personal lack of organization or if it's him being steamrolled by a power of his own design (such as The Palin Werks), I think you're basically right; he's lost, and he doesn't know how to control it. Which, incidentally, happens to be a cardinal sin for anyone running for this particular position.

[MrAngryFace]

I think he was on-board for the attack focus, thats politics and its typical in the late game, but the hate speak is undoubtedly a byproduct of Palin and now McCain has to pay the price.

[Phoenix Dark]

Whatever arises in place of the Republican Party as we know it today will not advocate Trickle Down Economics any longer.  You can see them TRYING to pretend like they're not for it now- McCain saying he wants tax relief for everyone, not just the uber rich.  But of course he's lying.

I would kind of like for there to be a second viable party, since absolute power corrupts absolutely, blah blah blah and all that rot.  But right now the Republican party is such a shitty, looked down upon brand name that only the far, far right nutbars are going to be left after this election to pick up the pieces.  And they'll think that they lost so badly this year because they didn't go FAR ENOUGH to the right.  The Republicans are in such a pickle because they like to ostensibly play to the "look down your nose at snooty, uppity educated folk" card.  Well guess what?  When you do that, people getting educations say "well shit, they're not for me then I guess."  So you end up with a party of Sarah Palins.  And that will only appeal to other Sarah Palins, who thankfully are becoming a smaller percentage of the population.  So that's a losing strategy over the long haul, as is the "fuck over the non-white skinned people" kick that Republicans have been on for a while.

I know that people say that a third party or more system wouldn't work in our bicameral legislature having, checks n' balances system.  But I kind of think that if you had to have a majority coalition cobbled together to get things passed, it would encourage active and actual bipartisanship for the sake of the country and progress as opposed to the toxic insanity that we have today.  We could have a far left party (that's me), the boring centrists (that's APF), the conservatives (toxic adam and sd) and then the loony religious nutbars. Obviously the libertopians would be right out.  Now, the loony religious nutbars would probably win in some states, but since by nature they won't want to compromise on anything none of their agenda would get advanced and eventually their constituents would have to ask themselves- "hey, we don't get money for bridges and shit so much.  maybe we should try electing someone that isn't insane."  Or at least it would be hoped.

Anyway, just a thought.

I don't think we'll see a viable third party anytime soon. You're right that it's going to take the republicans a long time to recover from an 08 loss. Remember in 04 when democrats were so obsessed with "electibility" that they lost focus? If McCain loses the majority of the party will ostracize John McCain; it would be nice if he uses the opportunity to get back to his old self and go down in history as the first black president's biggest republican supporter at times, and his most honorable opponent at other times - like a true maverick.

Just look at the GOP's potential lineup: Palin, Huckabee, Jindal, Romney, Newt. Three of the five are religious nuts (four if you include Romney). The religious right will look at an 08 loss as further proof that the party needs another god-fearing candidate to remind America of its values. Huckabee will be well positioned considering he won Iowa last year, but I think Palin could really storm caucuses. The thing about Huckabee though is that he's clever as shit, and no doubt will try to imitate Obama's primary success with similar all-including rhetoric and hardcore grass roots organization. But perhaps the Wildcard no one is talking about is John Thune. Conservative as shit, creationism believin' blible thumper who already pulled off one electoral upset and may be given the opportunity to do it again.

The conservatives like Romney and Newt are going to focus on what's they're best at, which is giving money to rich folk. If Romney wasn't mormon he'd probably be in McCain's position right now. Newt will probably do well in the primaries but ultimately he'll be auditioning to be someone's elder VP.

I'm not giving Jindal much of a chance. He'll be the token colored guy in the debates and will probably be rather popular in some places, but with the way the primaries are set up he has no chance with republicans in South Carolina, Iowa, etc. They'll like him but choose Huck or Palin over him 10 times out of 10.

And assuming this process ends with the GOP choosing another out of touch distinguished mentally-challenged fellow who gets smoked by Obama, they'll be forced to reconsider their strategy. I really think the best thing the GOP could do is move towards the libertarian right. Ron Paul started the "revolution" (lol) and we all know the trailblazer is always more extreme than the person who actually wins.

[Van Cruncheon]

yeah, the "palin effect" will become synonymous with "galvinizing mouth-breathing fundamentalist sociopaths"

[Howard Alan Treesong]

I dunno if we're going to see a viable third party, but I would like to see the Republicans kick out the fundies and reclaim their heritage as a viable party - fiscally conservative, small government. (not that I'd vote for them, as I love socialism, but it would be nice to have a realistic counterpoint instead of utter psychosis). I'd imagine we'll see some fundie third party splinter off in the south in 2012 or 2016 for the religious crazies.

the past week has seen some fairly public defections from Republicans pissed off at the party's descent into anti-intellectual Nuremberg rallies. when McCain loses I expect an all-out civil war, and perhaps I'm being naive but I expect the religious psychos to be on the losing side.

[Mandark]

Third parties don't happen because the two big parties are giant, self-perpetuating institutions and the plurality-takes-all voting system always winnows things down to two choices.

Models for the Republican party over the next decade: the 1930's GOP under FDR, the 1970's-80's Democrats, and the Tories under Blair in the UK.  They'll still have a base that's a big chunk of the party, and representatives from safe seats will remain hardliners, but overall they'll be on the defensive.

But Senators, governors, and presidential candidates will have to respect the way the winds have blown, and downplay their differences with the ruling party.  I think Dubya's "compassionate conservatism" was a step in this direction, and 9/11 was just a disruption of the underlying trends.

The GOP isn't going to split.  I think the differences within the party have always been exaggerated by outsiders (like myself) who find their social and economic platforms to be contradictory.  It's just going to slowly wither, and it'll be fun to watch.

[Howard Alan Treesong]

Third parties don't happen because the two big parties are giant, self-perpetuating institutions and the plurality-takes-all voting system always winnows things down to two choices.

Models for the Republican party over the next decade: the 1930's GOP under FDR, the 1970's-80's Democrats, and the Tories under Blair in the UK.  They'll still have a base that's a big chunk of the party, and representatives from safe seats will remain hardliners, but overall they'll be on the defensive.

But Senators, governors, and presidential candidates will have to respect the way the winds have blown, and downplay their differences with the ruling party.  I think Dubya's "compassionate conservatism" was a step in this direction, and 9/11 was just a disruption of the underlying trends.

The GOP isn't going to split.  I think the differences within the party have always been exaggerated by outsiders (like myself) who find their social and economic platforms to be contradictory.  It's just going to slowly wither, and it'll be fun to watch.

just to clarify, when I say "fundie third party" I am talking about a 1-2 cycle gadfly a la Perot's "Reform" party, not a viable alternative. the Dem/Rep split is here to stay in US politics, of course!

[Mandark]

Oooh, that would be fun.

Imagine Huckabee going third party and splitting the vote to the point where Obama gets re-elected in a Nixon/Reagan-style rout.  Mmmmmmmm.

And lemme echo the rest of the thread in saying that the McCain/Palin/unruly mob dynamic is a microcosm of the last few decades of the Republican party.

You can't stoke anti-immigrant, anti-foreigner, anti-black, and anti-intellectual sentiments to win elections and expect that people will instantly drop those biases as soon as they leave the voting booth.  There are consequences.

The GOP has spent years making its choggle pants.  Now it has to wear them.

[Human Snorenado]

Speaking of wearing choggle pants...

Before McCain’s arrival, a minister delivering an invocation said, “There are plenty of people around the world who are praying to their god, be they Hindu, Buddah, or Allah, that (McCain’s) opponent wins. I pray that you step forward and honor your own name.”  Ends with “in Jesus’ name.”

Hallelujah!

[Howard Alan Treesong]

actually, the better comparison to my 2012/2016 prediction would be the Dixiecrat party - a regional, fundamentalist political party that basically takes the South out of play for a few cycles. I can't imagine that they wouldn't reconcile their views eventually, but after Palin somehow fails to miraculously ascend to the White House, I can imagine tempers flaring enough on both sides to see some crazy party swapping

[Beardo]

WTF is choggle pants. Do I even want to know? 

[Mandark]

WTF is choggle pants. Do I even want to know? 

http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showpost.php?p=193668&postcount=1

[Phoenix Dark]

Mark Halperin's top 5 most important people in politics today (who aren't running for president)

1. Steve Schmidt

2. Obama adviser Steve Hildebrand

3. Obama adviser Paul Tewes

4. George W. Bush

5. The person overseeing McCain’s direct mail copy.

http://thepage.time.com/

I hate how you have to click on stories 2-3 times just to get to them. Is that to inflate his site hit numbers or something? jeez

Steve Schmidt might be the dumbest person in politics right now

[The Fake Shemp]

Is it me or do politicians' campaign staffers seem melodramatic?  This is just my opinion after reading and watching a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff.  Everything is the event.  They're the adult version of kids that used to yell, "Fight fight fight!" in grade school and spread gossip.

[Mandark]

Halperin has been running a non-stop campaign to make Larry King's old columns look in-depth and detailed.

Either way, how do you list the most important people in politics without including anyone involved in the bailout?  Paulson, Bernanke, Frank, Dodd?

It's like he's spoofing political media types whose insularity becomes silliness.



Willco:  I've always had the impression of campaign staffers and political aides as being very ambitious, high-stress people who are hypersensitive to the point of paranoia about the politicians they work for and their own role in the campaign.

Plus everyone who works in politics (including reporters) naturally amplify every day's event or soundbite until it's a huge deal, when 95% of it will be forgotten by the day after the election.  It's hard for them to step back, take a breath, and get perspective.

An appropriate take on politics within the Beltway would look less like the West Wing and more like Bowfinger.