|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:26 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| Today, many academics infuse the concept of "power" into the idea of racism. Such that, racism is the having of the power to damage others with racist thoughts and actions. Racist thoughts minus the power is something less than racism. |
A very convenient way of excusing anti-white racism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:43 pm Post subject: Debate changes everything for Romney; but for how long? |
|
|
After lackluster Presidential debate performance, Obama slips. He now polls even with Romney in Pew poll (.pdf)
I point your attention to the voter engagement. In July, only 34% of Romney supporters were enthusiastic. Today, 67% of Romney supporters support the candidate strongly. This pulls Romney even with Obama in terms of supporter enthusiasm.
After the debate, Romney's favorability rating finally hits 50%.
In addition, Romney has pulled even with women voters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
No_hite_pls
Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Location: Don't hate me because I'm right
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It's so exciting, who's going to win, the red team or the blue team? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:09 pm Post subject: Re: Debate changes everything for Romney; but for how long? |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
After lackluster Presidential debate performance, Obama slips. He now polls even with Romney in Pew poll (.pdf)
I point your attention to the voter engagement. In July, only 34% of Romney supporters were enthusiastic. Today, 67% of Romney supporters support the candidate strongly. This pulls Romney even with Obama in terms of supporter enthusiasm.
After the debate, Romney's favorability rating finally hits 50%.
In addition, Romney has pulled even with women voters. |
And he achieved it all with a debate performance totally lacking in substance and at least moderately lacking in honesty. This kind of thing is precisely why I can't buy into Titus' whole, "It's all because of the elite!" schtick. Americans actively incentivize elite corruption. To the extent that anyone in this world ever deserves anything, the nation deserves what it gets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:18 pm Post subject: Re: Debate changes everything for Romney; but for how long? |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
After lackluster Presidential debate performance, Obama slips. He now polls even with Romney in Pew poll (.pdf)
I point your attention to the voter engagement. In July, only 34% of Romney supporters were enthusiastic. Today, 67% of Romney supporters support the candidate strongly. This pulls Romney even with Obama in terms of supporter enthusiasm.
After the debate, Romney's favorability rating finally hits 50%.
In addition, Romney has pulled even with women voters. |
And he achieved it all with a debate performance totally lacking in substance and at least moderately lacking in honesty. This kind of thing is precisely why I can't buy into Titus' whole, "It's all because of the elite!" schtick. Americans actively incentivize elite corruption. To the extent that anyone in this world ever deserves anything, the nation deserves what it gets. |
I don't think Romney's performance was totally lacking in substance. I think his endorsement of Simpson-Bowles was smart, and an obvious contrast with Obama (although expect Biden to eviscerate Ryan for voting against the commission). I think Romney advanced the most palatable right-wing proposals and went moderate in a lot of ways. Romney's worst moments were his demagougery on entitlements, particularly when he attacked Obama for cutting Medicare.
Moreover, if Romney appeared decent but flawed, Obama appeared terrible and off-balance. Obama could not defend his record, and only mounted a meek defense of Obamacare. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:29 pm Post subject: Re: Debate changes everything for Romney; but for how long? |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Moreover, if Romney appeared decent but flawed, Obama appeared terrible and off-balance. Obama could not defend his record, and only mounted a meek defense of Obamacare. |
I think this is the bottom line. Obama can't defend his record, because it's basically indefensible. He lied about literally everything he said he would do when he was campaigning the first time. You can see it written on his face any time he's called on it.
Basically the main difference between Obama and Romney is that the latter hasn't had the opportunity to break all his promises as president yet. It's pretty obvious to the more discerning of us that he's lying, but for most people he still gets the benefit of the (tenuous) doubt. With Obama, there is no doubt. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:43 pm Post subject: Re: Debate changes everything for Romney; but for how long? |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| Moreover, if Romney appeared decent but flawed, Obama appeared terrible and off-balance. Obama could not defend his record, and only mounted a meek defense of Obamacare. |
I think this is the bottom line. Obama can't defend his record, because it's basically indefensible. He lied about literally everything he said he would do when he was campaigning the first time. You can see it written on his face any time he's called on it.
Basically the main difference between Obama and Romney is that the latter hasn't had the opportunity to break all his promises as president yet. It's pretty obvious to the more discerning of us that he's lying, but for most people he still gets the benefit of the (tenuous) doubt. With Obama, there is no doubt. |
Yes, I'm with you about 80% here visitorq, except I do think Obamacare is defensible, unlike much of the rest of Obama's domestic policy record.
Meanwhile, Andrew Sullivan shows us how to overreact to a Pew Poll.
| Quote: |
Obama's performance gave Romney a 12 point swing! I repeat: a 12 point swing.
Romney's favorables are above Obama's now. Yes, you read that right. Romney's favorables are higher than Obama's right now. That gender gap that was Obama's firewall? Over in one night:
| Quote: |
| Currently, women are evenly divided (47% Obama, 47% Romney). Last month, Obama led Romney by 18 points (56% to 38%) among women likely voters. |
Seriously: has that kind of swing ever happened this late in a campaign? Has any candidate lost 18 points among women voters in one night ever? And we are told that when Obama left the stage that night, he was feeling good. That's terrifying. On every single issue, Obama has instantly plummeted into near-oblivion. |
OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:01 pm Post subject: Re: Debate changes everything for Romney; but for how long? |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| I think his endorsement of Simpson-Bowles was smart ... |
I suppose you could call it smart strategy insofar as it gulls informed moderates, but that's not the same as smart policy, because it is not his policy. Surely smart policy is what should be rewarded by the electorate.
| Kuros wrote: |
| I think Romney advanced the most palatable right-wing proposals and went moderate in a lot of ways. |
Right, he blatantly contradicted his previous rhetoric in a totally disingenuous and dishonest fashion, and the country applauds him for it. Americans have acknowledged in this debate that they would rather hear a charismatically-told lie than a blunt truth -- they are literally clamoring to be deceived -- and you're evidently supporting that choice by defending it.
| Kuros wrote: |
| Moreover, if Romney appeared decent but flawed, Obama appeared terrible and off-balance. Obama could not defend his record, and only mounted a meek defense of Obamacare. |
Sure, Obama was by all accounts terrible. That justifies a potential reduction in popular support for Obama, not an increased positive view of Romney. Being caught out in non-trivial falsehoods ought to be a disqualifying offense (and I'm willing to see Obama get burned on that as well: my ire is regarding the surge in Romney support, not any potential diminishment in Obama support). Our countrymen evidently can't handle even that incredibly simple test of character. America reflects Americans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
actionjackson
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Any place I'm at
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Sure, Obama was by all accounts terrible. That justifies a potential reduction in popular support for Obama, not an increased positive view of Romney. Being caught out in non-trivial falsehoods ought to be a disqualifying offense (and I'm willing to see Obama get burned on that as well: my ire is regarding the surge in Romney support, not any potential diminishment in Obama support). Our countrymen evidently can't handle even that incredibly simple test of character. America reflects Americans. |
This type of thing always reminds of this quote by George Carlin, "Now, there's one thing you might have noticed I don't complain about: politicians. Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says they suck. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don't fall out of the sky. They don't pass through a membrane from another reality. They come from American parents and American families, American homes, American schools, American churches, American businesses and American universities, and they are elected by American citizens. This is the best we can do folks. This is what we have to offer. It's what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. Term limits ain't going to do any good; you're just going to end up with a brand new bunch of selfish, ignorant Americans. So, maybe, maybe, maybe, it's not the politicians who suck. Maybe something else sucks around here... like, the public. Yeah, the public sucks. There's a nice campaign slogan for somebody: 'The Public Sucks. F*ck Hope.'" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:05 pm Post subject: Re: Debate changes everything for Romney; but for how long? |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Right, he blatantly contradicted his previous rhetoric in a totally disingenuous and dishonest fashion, and the country applauds him for it. Americans have acknowledged in this [presidency] that they would rather hear a charismatically-told lie than a blunt truth -- they are literally clamoring to be deceived -- and [Democrats are] evidently supporting that choice by defending it. |
There, just had to fix that for you.
I mean... Guantanamo Bay? Patriot Act? His Nobel Peace Prize and endless drone strikes? Record-setting budget deficits being "irresponsible and unpatriotic"? Relaxed Federal drug enforcement? Executive overreach?
| VisitorQ wrote: |
| Basically the main difference between Obama and Romney is that the latter hasn't had the opportunity to break all his promises as president yet. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:17 pm Post subject: Re: Debate changes everything for Romney; but for how long? |
|
|
| comm wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Right, he blatantly contradicted his previous rhetoric in a totally disingenuous and dishonest fashion, and the country applauds him for it. Americans have acknowledged in this [presidency] that they would rather hear a charismatically-told lie than a blunt truth -- they are literally clamoring to be deceived -- and [Democrats are] evidently supporting that choice by defending it. |
There, just had to fix that for you.
I mean... Guantanamo Bay? Patriot Act? His Nobel Peace Prize and endless drone strikes? Record-setting budget deficits being "irresponsible and unpatriotic"? Relaxed Federal drug enforcement? Executive overreach? |
I can't really disagree. One could even expand it even further to the entirety of American politics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:50 am Post subject: Re: Debate changes everything for Romney; but for how long? |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| I can't really disagree. One could even expand it even further to the entirety of American politics. |
Which is why I've basically stopped caring. I'll still support the campaigns of the few people who seem trustworthy from both sides of the aisle... But real change will only come with the next existential threat that the U.S. has to deal with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 8:54 am Post subject: Re: Debate changes everything for Romney; but for how long? |
|
|
| comm wrote: |
| But real change will only come with the next existential threat that the U.S. has to deal with. |
Which is why I agree with about 90% of the George Carlin quote. The one bit I don't agree with is the hope bit. Sure, our politics are a mess but somehow we eventually find a way through. Sometimes it takes a crisis (like the Great Depression, WW II), sometimes it takes leaders who knows how to get stuff done (LBJ, maybe Reagan and Clinton)*.
And a lot of us bash the general public and criticize its intelligence, but eventually it "sees the light". I just think it takes a lot longer for most people due to a) their own lives being full of other crap b) a general disinterest in politics/policy unless it directly affects them and/or is in their face.
*I'm not saying that all (or most) of what those 3 presidents did was GOOD, but they did manage to get legislation passed and were MUCH more effective than our current Pres. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:27 am Post subject: Re: Debate changes everything for Romney; but for how long? |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Sometimes it takes a crisis (like the Great Depression, WW II), sometimes it takes leaders who knows how to get stuff done (LBJ, maybe Reagan and Clinton)*. |
The people who run our country plan long in advance. First they create crises (like the Great Depression, WWII, the Cold War, 9-11 etc.), then they react to it with their decisive "leadership", and finally use the opportunity to bring about the most favorable solution for themselves. This is the simple way in which they maintain and expand their control. The rest of us just coast along with the tsunami, excited to feel a part of something bigger than ourselves, and are generally oblivious to how we are being manipulated.
The Hegelian dialectic is a pretty simple tool once you grasp it, and you see it at work constantly (round-table groups like the CFR even publish journals about it, so it's hardly a secret). Unfortunately it is well beyond the grasp of the average public (most of whom watch like 5 hours of TV per day and know about history only what they were fed in public school).
An example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vbf5RO6TfxA |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 3:02 pm Post subject: Re: Debate changes everything for Romney; but for how long? |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| I think Romney advanced the most palatable right-wing proposals and went moderate in a lot of ways. |
Right, he blatantly contradicted his previous rhetoric in a totally disingenuous and dishonest fashion, and the country applauds him for it. Americans have acknowledged in this debate that they would rather hear a charismatically-told lie than a blunt truth -- they are literally clamoring to be deceived -- and you're evidently supporting that choice by defending it. |
His previous rhetoric was obnoxious, so of course the country applauds him for getting beyond it.
Your complaints remind me of Republican complaints in 2008; namely that Barack Obama was so eloquent it was unfair. It wasn't unfair, because McCain was peddling crap. Same thing this year, except both Obama and Romney are peddling crap. Yes, the one who demonstrates better posture and confidence will be rewarded among two candidates who peddle crap.
Meanwhile, I know full well why Obama couldn't counter Romney's lies: because he's arrogant, distant, and was generally unprepared for the debate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
