Randomville

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
GigaBook.com
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7]   Go Down

Author Topic: Do Republicans Hate Everyone?  (Read 11531 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

daytime drinking

  • City Elder
  • Posts: 1,705
Re: Do Republicans Hate Everyone?
« Reply #90 on: October 02, 2012, 01:51:29 PM »


Are you invoking the 47% thing?  I gotta call foul on that.  I think it's pretty clear that what he meant was that he knew he couldn't get the vote from that 47% and he couldn't focus his efforts on trying to, which may be douchey but it's practical.  Using someone's words out of context in a way that they didn't mean them is wrong, even when it's the bad guy.

 "There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it -- that that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. ... These are people who pay no income tax. ... [M]y job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

If he hadn't said the parts in bold, I think maybe he could claim he was misquoted.  But he went out of his way to insult that 47%.  The other problem is that a huge chunk of that 47% who pays no taxes actually votes Republican.   The 47% of people who are mega-liberals and believe in government entitlements etc. and will never vote for Romney are NOT the same 47% who don't pay taxes.



it's pretty blunt, but it was said in private.  it's not like he told those 47% to go fuck themselves to their face.  obama has another side to him i imagine as any public figure has to.  i met mayor mallory at a bar here in northside cincinnati and he just gave me typical safe standard reply regarding the streetcars.  he wasn't candid, and flat out refused to answer my possible alternatives. 
Logged
poach eggs, not elephants

Zafer Kaya

  • City Elder
  • Posts: 3,592
Re: Do Republicans Hate Everyone?
« Reply #91 on: October 02, 2012, 02:01:08 PM »

Yeah, the fact that it was leaked means it is being taken out of context.  It's sort of dirty in that sense.

But unfortunately that doesn't help Romney. If he says that those remarks were made spontaneously and in private, then he's implicitly admitting that yes he does feel this way but he simply doesn't say so in public.

If he says that he was simply trying to mad pander to a bunch of rich GOP fuckwits, which is in fact what he was doing, then he angers all the rich GOP fuckwits and he really needs money, and it just strengthens the public perception of him as a flip-flopping, no conviction-having dude who can't be trusted.

There are some things that are so stupid you just shouldn't ever say in any situation even if you're just doing it to try to be cool.  That was one of them.  So... kind of unfair he's getting screwed because of it, but also kind of not. 

daytime drinking

  • City Elder
  • Posts: 1,705
Re: Do Republicans Hate Everyone?
« Reply #92 on: October 02, 2012, 02:10:01 PM »

Yeah, the fact that it was leaked means it is being taken out of context.  It's sort of dirty in that sense.

But unfortunately that doesn't help Romney. If he says that those remarks were made spontaneously and in private, then he's implicitly admitting that yes he does feel this way but he simply doesn't say so in public.

If he says that he was simply trying to mad pander to a bunch of rich GOP fuckwits, which is in fact what he was doing, then he angers all the rich GOP fuckwits and he really needs money, and it just strengthens the public perception of him as a flip-flopping, no conviction-having dude who can't be trusted.

There are some things that are so stupid you just shouldn't ever say in any situation even if you're just doing it to try to be cool.  That was one of them.  So... kind of unfair he's getting screwed because of it, but also kind of not. 

oh i agree.  it seems to me that at that fundraiser, those were going to be the folks who'd be voting for him anyway, so i don't know why he just didn't talk about the bengals or something.  but i imagine he'd lose points in cleveland, a democratic stronghold in this swing state.  i live in ohio.  he could have at least talked about how awesome the movie battleship was. 
Logged
poach eggs, not elephants

Kwyjibo

  • Bringing Grumpy Back
  • City Elder
  • Posts: 10,589
Re: Do Republicans Hate Everyone?
« Reply #93 on: October 02, 2012, 02:13:47 PM »

The 47% thing is part of it, sure, but Romney has shown us plenty of times that he really doesn't seem to have any grasp on how a large portion of this country actually lives.  I understand he was likely pandering to that room of people, after all that's what he does, but those statements seemed very candid and truthful to what Romney believes.  He doesn't even have his demographics right.  There are (or were) plenty of Romney supporters among that 47% because there are a number of reasons why you may not have to pay income taxes, including being retired.  Most of them still had taxes to pay and some actually paid a higher effective rate than Mitt did.  The fact that he either doesn't understand this or he's willing to talk about them as the scum of society to a room full of donors demonstrates that he really doesn't care about them now or during his presidency if he becomes president.

His private sector career was all about paying people off so he could acquire their companies, leveraging mountains of debt to do it, siphoning off all it's worth, putting the companies into bankruptcy, and putting people out of jobs.  How am I supposed to have any confidence that he can run this country after all the stuff he's said?  He's a Wall Street guy and he'll always be a Wall Street guy.

I agree with you completely, I just hate the 47% thing because it's fruit of the forbidden tree.  He didn't really say it that way, or you can't entirely prove he meant it that way, so it's a bad piece of data to hold on to, is all I mean.  I agree he likely feels that way, and his actions speak to that.  And that he's a douche.
Logged
Baby, check this out, I've got something to say.  Man, it's so loud in here.

Zafer Kaya

  • City Elder
  • Posts: 3,592
Re: Do Republicans Hate Everyone?
« Reply #94 on: October 02, 2012, 09:54:27 PM »

I'm with daytime drinking.  He's not being quoted out of context.  He said and intended to say, that 47% of America are leeches with no personal responsibility.

What he didn't intend was for it to get out.  But it's not like someone bugged his room.  Or even like he privately confided in someone.  He said it during a speech at a fundraiser, which is a political event and so if it gets out it's fair play.  The actual video footage might not be legal, but anyone at that event could have gone to the press and said "Yeah, Romney said blahblahblah..."

Where he got sort of screwed is he had the expectation that seeing as how these were supposed to be big supporters, no one would leak it.  That's his own stupidity.  Like daytime drinking said, all he had to do was giving a standard stump speech.  He could have said that poor people get too many benefits, or that rich people pay too many taxes.  What he said was something that was way more controversial and made way less sense, even to most conservatives. 

He looks like an asshole/incompetent because he was being an asshole/incompetent.  It's just that no one was supposed to find out about it.  Which is not really all that defensible.  He can get mad at whoever leaked the video to Mother Jones I guess, but I don't think he can get mad at the public for misconstruing him. 

I actually don't think Romney is a bad guy personally.  I don't think he's a bad guy for wanting to cut social spending or reduce taxes, either.  I'm sure that Obama also feels strongly about certain things that he keeps to himself. 

BUT that's part of the job.  None of us could win the Presidency, and probably none of us want to do it because we like to speak our minds, and not have to cater to loony right-wingers,  compromise on policy issues, make speeches we don't believe in all the time, and fake friendships with lobbyists.  We wouldn't last a month.  But if you want to be the President, you have to do those things.  This is not the last semi-private speech to rich influencers Romney will make if elected. 

I hate the whole political "gotcha" game, but in this case the way he's handled the fallout has just been so awful I have to strongly question both the direction and his ability to lead the country even if I don't think he's this rich, evil bastard.

daytime drinking

  • City Elder
  • Posts: 1,705
Re: Do Republicans Hate Everyone?
« Reply #95 on: October 04, 2012, 01:03:11 PM »

well that's one thing we can agree on.  the sole reason why ron paul isn't electable.  but he hates black people, doesn't he?  both parties are a joke because what's best for america has been co-opted.  but even in a shitty two party system, we're still doing pretty ok. considering a majority of america would fail a citizenship test and get their political advise from campaign commercials and yard signs.  or, or a televised debate.  televised debates are genius, but i don't think they should hold water as to whom our next president is.  but they absolutely do.  so because you're a better orator, have a better debate coach, suggests you have the potential to be a better president?  i completely understand why we have them and the fact that they are necessary because at least politics can be entertaining.  imagine if gary johnson could have a pulpit?  different train of thought, "radical" ideas that appeal to the left and right, but who the fuck is gary johnson? 
Logged
poach eggs, not elephants

Kwyjibo

  • Bringing Grumpy Back
  • City Elder
  • Posts: 10,589
Re: Do Republicans Hate Everyone?
« Reply #96 on: October 04, 2012, 01:24:45 PM »

I guess when you get right down to it what makes me mad about all of that business with the 47% is that you didn't need to see that video to know that he feels that way.  It's patently obvious in everything he does and says that he is completely out of touch about that segment of the population and doesn't give a shit if he wins them over or not.

I listened to a speaker here at work today talk about what he felt should be the real focus of the election, and while I didn't agree with his point there, or the means he used to get there, I did agree with his assessment that the real problem with our political system is that candidates only play to their constituents to get elected, beyond that they act like a Parliament and pander to their party lines.  These guys are only going to vote the way their constituents want them to vote, and make the compromises we want them to make if we beat them over the head, and your average U.S. citizen can't be bothered.  Maybe that's pessimistic, but it seems to be the case, so while I think it matters who has the majority, because they get a slight edge, I don't see anything at all really getting done.
Logged
Baby, check this out, I've got something to say.  Man, it's so loud in here.

Zafer Kaya

  • City Elder
  • Posts: 3,592
Re: Do Republicans Hate Everyone?
« Reply #97 on: October 04, 2012, 02:51:03 PM »

well that's one thing we can agree on.  the sole reason why ron paul isn't electable. 

The reason why Ron Paul isn't electable is because no one thinks his libertarian platform is a very good idea.  And also in small part because he sent out a bunch of vile newsletters with his name on it.  Why is it unfair for me to hold him responsible for his private actions?  That's what the freemarket is about, isn't it?  I mean, if I think Ron Paul is a dick it's my right not to vote for him.

That's the problem with libertarianism as an actual political party.  You are trying to get your ideas passed by gaining control of the government, while at the same time believing that enforcing beliefs via government is immoral.  We have free elections in this country.  It doesn't violate any libertarian principles.  You can complain about the choices being made as part of the electoral process, but not the electoral process itself.  Paul isn't getting jobbed.  He just lost in the "marketplace of ideas."  Go work harder and win people over WITHOUT needing the government to do it.  What would John Galt do?  Probably not sit around whining about how he always gets the short end of the stick and everyone is out to get him.

But along those lines, I think Gary Johnson is better than Ron Paul because I think Ron Paul punts too much.  There's substantive due process which Ron Paul is all about.  But there's also procedural due process which Ron Paul refuses to deal with.  He makes that vanish with his line on substantive due process.  In essence, if the government doesn't do anything, then everyone is treated fairly.  It's that simple to him.

Ron Paul runs into huge problems whenever he is asked about civil rights.  Ask him about something like that and he'll say the government has no business delving into race relations or people's sex lives or whatever.  Okay, but what happens if straight people who currently have the majority and most of the power in the US right now decide to start killing with gays?  We just let it happen? 

I think Gary Johnson is more willing to address the idea that while government should be massively downsized and only worry about a few things, those few things are HUGELY important and the government should be active about it.  Ron Paul is just like hey, no government no problem.  He has difficulty articulating anything the government should do, and in fact he seems to view government as the sole cause of all of our problems when any idiot can see that things like racism, rape, killing, and general dickishness are problems with human nature and not a result of government.

daytime drinking

  • City Elder
  • Posts: 1,705
Re: Do Republicans Hate Everyone?
« Reply #98 on: October 05, 2012, 11:18:17 AM »

imo, ron paul knows he's never had a shot at the presidency.  he's merely using this as a platform to launch his ideas.  it's working. having a libertarian in office wouldn't be the same as gaining control of the government, it would be having the main voice of the government.  besides, no one man has the most say in the government.  the president's basically a figurehead but receives almost all of the blame. 

the gop definitely jobbed paul at the convention.   the man might or might not be a racist, i don't know him.  what i think is that he vilifies a system that doesn't treat everyone like a human being.  though on policy, i actually agree more with gary johnson than i do ron paul.  why do you always have to invoke hyperbole?  and so ron paul is an anarchist now?
Logged
poach eggs, not elephants

Zafer Kaya

  • City Elder
  • Posts: 3,592
Re: Do Republicans Hate Everyone?
« Reply #99 on: October 05, 2012, 09:20:15 PM »

No, I'm not saying Ron Paul is an anarchist.  What I'm saying is he comes across as a nutty curmudgeon who hates everything.  I respect his principled "Dr. No" stance on things, but he's a poor spokesperson for libertarian issues.

Like take his stance on pot, or sodomy, or what have you.  Ask him-- Do you have a fundamental right to do these things?  No, because it's not in the constitution.  And he's got kind of that old dude thing going where it seems like he can't quite hide his personal distate for them.  So if you don't have a right to smoke pot, then can the government stop you from smoking it.  Well again, his answer would be "No" because while the constitution doesn't give you the right to smoke pot/not get sexually harassed/get married it also doesn't empower the government to stop you.  Okay so what if the government stops you?  Can we get the law overturned?  Well no, because that is giving too much power to the courts and he doesn't like that either.  So where does that leave us?

His libertarianism comes into conflict with his Constitutionalism, and then he has to toss in this whole fiscal angle into the mix, plus his odd fascination with the gold standard.  I do not know what Ron Paul would do about legalizing drugs other than be disgusted that he even has to deal with the issue.  It doesn't make Paul a hypocrite just because he has beliefs that can end up conflicting with each other.  It just seems like he feels like he can beat a logical conundrum via application of theoretical principles and sheer conviction.  And obviously that doesn't make the problem go away.

Gary Johnson is more of a modern-type guy and naturally more socially liberal than Paul so I feel more comfortable with him from that aspect.  But I also think he does a better job of sticking to and discussing the core principles rather than finding 10,000 reasons to dislike everything.  It makes his message more positive, he comes across as more amenable, and I think he's easier to understand.  But it's not like he's watered-down, his actual policies and ideal world isn't much different than Paul's.

You ask Johnson what he thinks about pot and he's like "I have toked up myself, and I think people should be able to smoke because I think people are responsible enough to do it without hurting anyone else."  Gay marriage?  Yes, we need that.   Not fair not to have it, we have to do something about it.  That's the core message... you should be left alone to do what you want so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

So Gary Johnson to me comes across as a libertarian.  Ron Paul comes across as a grouch.  I have no idea how Johnson would actually govern when it gets messy or if he has huge skeletons in his closet or what.  I'm just saying to me he's got the better message.

As for Paul getting screwed at the convention, I don't know what to think.  Yeah, it was kind of dirty what they did, but then I'm a softie and I like justice and fair play and things to be done about it.  From the GOP standpoint, why would they let him speak?  He didn't endorse Romney, he's not a trustworthy GOP team player as he bags on Republicans quite frequently, and he's got a huge image problem with all of that racist stuff hanging over his head.  The convention is a time to get people excited about saying "yes," so naturally Dr. No is a bit of a downer.  They're trying to win an election, and Ron Paul isn't going to help them.

And where in the Constitution or the principles of libertarianism does it say you have the right to speak at some private group's convention?  I mean, if the recourse for people who are sexually harassed at their jobs is to quit, then certainly Ron Paul has no complaint here.  And you said it-- he's not a Republican, he knows he can't win, he's just trying to get his views out there.  He's using the party for his own purposes.  So in a private actor, rational, dog-eat-dog world it's natural that the other party is going to go "Wait a minute, I'm not getting anything out of this arrangement.  Why should I give this guy a pulpit to espouse views that don't necessarily help me out?"  And then you have to suck it up and deal, just like everyone else.

If he had refused to go, pulled his delegates and said in a non-cranky manner "Hey that's fine because they don't like me, and to be honest I don't like them that much either.  So let them have their convention, and I'll go and speak to my own people"  I would have given him some props, but as it is I guess I'm unsympathetic.

I also don't think Ron Paul's message is working, or maybe his message is working but what I think of as a libertarian message isn't.  No one cares about the Libertarian party.  I have the sneaky suspicion that at least a third of Paul supporters are more loyal to him than the actual libertarian principles, and another third are really tea baggers.  My feeling is that libertarians have gotten nowhere in twenty years, or if anything had their views twisted and co-opted by the far right which is a step back.  And Ron Paul's been the face of the movement so I think they should have dumped him years ago.  It's alright to like him because he votes your way and is a fanatic about it and all, but don't let him speak for you.

At this point I think even Reason magazine is sorta like "We gotta get rid of this guy," and I think Reason has gone from what was once an interesting read even if I didn't agree with all of it to a huge Fox News-like piece of crap. 
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7]   Go Up