The American Politics thread

[silentstriker]

Mind, if you change your mind in light of examining the evidence closely, this should not be a bad thing.

Certainly better than professing infinite knowledge and never being wrong.

Sure. On every single issue, and then that change just happens to align with whichever election you happen to be contesting? I don't think so.

[Samuel_Vimes]

Sure. On every single issue, and then that change just happens to align with whichever election you happen to be contesting? I don't think so.

True. Different kinds of evidence I suppose...the polls rather than the facts.

[Fusion]

Mind, if you change your mind in light of examining the evidence closely, this should not be a bad thing.

Certainly better than professing infinite knowledge and never being wrong.

Absolutely. However, the question is whether you think Romney changed his mind due to learning something or for political expediency. I would humbly suggest it’s the later.

[Redbacks]

what the spin doctors are saying:

How Republicans are being taught to talk about Occupy Wall Street | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

The public . . . still prefers capitalism to socialism

Where as Wall street much prefer socialism to capitalism.

pretty lol and indicative of the thinking of PR companies. Spin doctors will say anything and corrupt the principles of leaders.

[Flem274*]

corrupt the principles of leaders.

har har

[silentstriker]

Indecision 2012 - Mittstorm - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 12/01/11 - Video Clip | Comedy Central

[silentstriker]

Hoping that Gingrich (or someone else besides Romney, except Huntsman) wins the nomination. Best chance for four more Obama years.

I think, with the way the political situation is now, he would lose to Romney (and to Huntsman, but no way Huntsman will ever get the nomination). Gingrich and most of the others would be destroyed though.

[Redbacks]

har har

I present as evidence: K Rudd.

[Redbacks]

Hoping that Gingrich (or someone else besides Romney, except Huntsman) wins the nomination. Best chance for four more Obama years.

I think, with the way the political situation is now, he would lose to Romney (and to Huntsman, but no way Huntsman will ever get the nomination). Gingrich and most of the others would be destroyed though.

Don't most people feel uneasy about the mormon factor with Romney. They are pretty nuts afterall.

[silentstriker]

Don't most people feel uneasy about the mormon factor with Romney. They are pretty nuts afterall.

Personally, I don't think they are much different to to most other conservative denominations. Some extremely conservative protestants or catholics may not regard Mormons as Christians (due to them saying Joseph Smith was a prophet, and having another book in addition to the Bible), but that's not a mainstream position and I don't think most people outside of the extreme conservatives would have a problem (eg, the independents and the democrats).

After all, he was elected governor to a very liberal state and he was a mormon back then too (though with very different political views). I don't suspect it's going to be an issue, especially as those same extremely conservative people would prefer a Mormon president over someone who they still probably suspect is a 'secret muslim.' So overall, it won't hurt him at all if he makes it out to the general election.

[Top_Cat]

The Bomb Buried In Obamacare Explodes Today-Hallelujah! - Forbes

[Redbacks]

After all, he was elected governor to a very liberal state and he was a mormon back then too (though with very different political views). I don't suspect it's going to be an issue.

He's flip-flopped on Abortion, health care and what else? Probably the best thing he could do is get his platform set 100% and then sell that with a focus on the economy. We've seen in the EU that social democratic governments have been turfed, e.g. Spain, by record margins as people now look to what deregualtion can do to cut unemployment in the short term.

As silly as Newt's views on swapping 'mexicans janitors for children' sounds, in a recent interview he did have more method to his madness. He was running on anecdotal evidence of most of the business tycoons in the US today who kicked around as paper boys or flipping burgers when they were in their teens. It would be more interesting if he had an economic study which could show the link between lifelong unemployment and hours worked as a teen. Liberal (english sense) philosophy is built on individual responsibility so I can see this as a decent position given it gives people a taste of managing money, time and teamwork etc.

Border protection also seems to be a big issue, with accusations being thrown around between republicans over the ammnesty vs hard line approach. Survey data in Aus showed that this kind of rhetoric hold traction ~ in proportion to unemployment rates, similarly with 'being tough on welfare' right now that kind of policy is a dog as people realise it's tough to get a job.

[silentstriker]

He's flip-flopped on Abortion, health care and what else? Probably the best thing he could do is get his platform set 100% and then sell that with a focus on the economy. We've seen in the EU that social democratic governments have been turfed, e.g. Spain, by record margins as people now look to what deregualtion can do to cut unemployment in the short term.

Abortion, health care, gay rights, stimulus, whether he likes Reagan (lol), immigration, global warming, no-new taxes pledge, assault weapons, TARP, Auto bailouts.

That I know of.


You can look at his tenure as the governor of massachusets and I'm sure you'll find a lot more - he needed to say he supported a bunch of those things in order to get elected in Massachusets, just like he needs to say he supports a bunch of opposite things to get elected in the Republican primary. If he does get to the general election (and unfortunately, I think he will, and I think he's got a good shot of beating Obama too), I bet you'll see a few more flip flops again back to his original position so he can win over the independents.

As silly as Newt's views on swapping 'mexicans janitors for children' sounds, in a recent interview he did have more method to his madness. He was running on anecdotal evidence of most of the business tycoons in the US today who kicked around as paper boys or flipping burgers when they were in their teens. It would be more interesting if he had an economic study which could show the link between lifelong unemployment and hours worked as a teen. Liberal (english sense) philosophy is built on individual responsibility so I can see this as a decent position given it gives people a taste of managing money, time and teamwork etc.

Border protection also seems to be a big issue, with accusations being thrown around between republicans over the ammnesty vs hard line approach. Survey data in Aus showed that this kind of rhetoric hold traction ~ in proportion to unemployment rates, similarly with 'being tough on welfare' right now that kind of policy is a dog as people realise it's tough to get a job.

TBF, I'm not arguing that his immigration policy is wrong, or even that giving jobs to inner city youth can be a 'good thing' in many ways (disagree with a lot of his OTHER policies). I'm just saying that based on who he is, he will not be elected as the President (even if he was centrist - which he is not, he wouldn't be elected over Obama - it's more than policies when it comes to Presidential elections - and it's not fair but a lot of people use the absolutely asinine 'who would I rather have a beer with?' test...eg Bush v Gore and Bush v Kerry)'. So therefore, as someone who wants to see Obama win, I am rooting for him to come out of the Republican primary over Romney (though I think Newt's numbers will crash like Trumps, Bachmanns and Cains before him - Romneys the only one that's been steady).

[Sanz]

Newt is a moron and elitist, I will never vote for the guy even if he came up with the best of the policies, not that he has one. The only two republicans that I would consider voting would be Romney (Despite all his flip flops) and Huntsman. Huntsman is someone I would vote for even over Obama.

[Ikki]

Neither McCain or Obama or anyone else that I know is on even the same universe as Mitt when it comes to issues. I mean just look at the bills he himself signed as governor and how many of those he is against now.

Because he needs to be against them to come out of the primary.

Gringrich is just as bad, if not worse.

Huntsman has gained some noticable traction recently. He'd be better than the other candidates not named Paul; but in many areas he seems to be more progressive than conservative. The two party system is truly a sham.