Print Story I'd get crucified if I said this in public...
Kuro5hin
By gzt (Wed Oct 03, 2012 at 11:40:05 PM EST) gzt, energy, rmoney, debate, lab (all tags)
...but I think Rmoney sounded pretty good in the debate.


Apparently Nate Silver is coming here sometime to talk.

I liked how they at least thought to talk a little bit about energy. But, seriously, what are the odds that Lehrer will ask them about climate or, more generally, the environment? Low - there might be one question about the environment in the series eventually.

So I watch Fringe because it's somewhat amusing sci-fi stuff, anyway, but last week they referred to people who stole things (and bodies) out of "Amber", a substance used to stop up holes in space-time, essentially, as "Amber Gypsies". It was grating to me because it's somewhat racist to use the word in that way. Would they say "Amber Jews" or "Amber Indians"?

Still drinking tea.

Had a test yesterday in the R class. I did okay, but I ran out of time because I had to spend a bit of time figuring out why one of my things wasn't working, but I saw I was low on time, so instead of finishing the problem I was working on (the second to last one), I made sure to get at least a skeleton of the solution to the last problem in. Fortunately, nobody finished, so I think it'll all be okay.

Had a moment of fright today about whether the washer would fit in the basement. It would, so, whatevs.

My lab sections are scoring higher (non-significant) on labs than other sections. I think I might be helping them along a little bit more than the others, but I don't think I'm doing so in a way that's inappropriate. My sections also scored higher on the exam (non-significant)(they were 2 of the top 3), so, you know, maybe they're smarter, too.

So last month we used 265kwh of electricity and 320 cubic feet of water. Such barbaric units. The latter figure isn't that great. The former is okay. They'll both get worse now that we have a washer.

< Moments in those bursts. | Here we go loop de li >
I'd get crucified if I said this in public... | 29 comments (29 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Romney won by ucblockhead (4.00 / 1) #1 Wed Oct 03, 2012 at 11:56:55 PM EST
It just remains to be seen if it helps him much.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
A wild theory appears... by codemonkey uk (2.00 / 0) #9 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 10:56:17 AM EST
I was thinking about this on the way in ... most people who watched the debates already have fixed opinions, right? So a "loss" in a debate isn't going to change a lot of minds.

You could argue that the biggest risk to a 2nd term for Obama is youth voter turn out.

I get the impression that a lot of liberal/democrat supporters consider him a shoe in.

Perhaps the poor show at the debate as a master stroke genius move to put scare the bjebus out of his base, make them nervous, and ensure they campaign and turn out to vote.

Or maybe he was just tired.


--- Thad ---
Almost as Smart As you.

[ Parent ]
that seems far fetched to me by lm (2.00 / 0) #15 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 05:26:38 PM EST
Obama's performance was not all that exceptionally different than his performances in the 2008 primaries. I think he is mostly just out of practice at something that he was never very good at to start with.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
first time i've ever thought romney had a chance by the mariner (2.00 / 0) #2 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 12:22:19 AM EST
i doubt trying to sound like reagan is as smart as romney's advisers think it is, but they're the pros.

the fact that his strategy seems to have been to say he's got all new plans and/or that everyone just failed to understand his plan may be what saves obama from what looked like a pretty bad debate performance. i don't think you can come into a debate and surprise everyone with the notion that your plans are totally different from what everyone's been saying about them and survive the attack ads the turnaround spawns, but we'll see. 

reagan by gzt (2.00 / 0) #16 Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 11:17:48 AM EST
I think becoming Reagan is their best bet. It worked for Barry O.

[ Parent ]
Obama by yankeehack (2.00 / 0) #3 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 01:53:28 AM EST
needed an energy drink or two or some meth. He was not on his game. All I want to know is why.

I liked how Romney said he wasn't going to give tax cuts to the rich. That should go over well with his base....along with the other stuff he went back on.

I would go see Nate Silver if I could, he's a smart guy.
"...she dares to indulge in the secret sport. You can't be a MILF with the F, at least in part because the M is predicated upon it."-CBB

at our viewing party by garlic (2.00 / 0) #5 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 09:43:14 AM EST
we kept going over Romney's plan -- he's not going to cut taxes, he's only going to lower tax rates. Can't you see that's not the same at all?


[ Parent ]
It's an interesting and new spin by lm (2.00 / 0) #6 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 09:55:27 AM EST
These past two years the GOP has largely looked at ending various credits as tax hikes. Now they aren't. Only raising marginal rates is a tax hike. It's a brave new world.

Or something like that.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
is that it, by garlic (2.00 / 0) #8 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 10:03:45 AM EST
or is it more simply "your changes are tax hikes, and mine are tax cuts, by definition"?


[ Parent ]
From memory, by wumpus (4.00 / 1) #17 Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 12:22:25 PM EST
the last US presidential candidate that tried to win the thinking public was Adlai Stevenson. I can't imagine an undecided voter bothering to tune in to a debate, so the major goal was simply to have the media claim you won the debate. Switching any decided voter by shaking the etch-a-sketch extra hard would be a bonus, but I suspect that few switchable voters were watching.

My guess is that that the Obama campaign is going to be hammering the flip-flop issue, and the Romney campaign will be going full speed on the "trust me, everything will be better with me" message. Politicians have been sold like soap since Procter & Gamble figured out how to sell massive amounts of soap, but I figure there is a good chance we will simply shut down the fact checkers after this election.

Wumpus

Note that this is why I could care less about comparing voters' interest against politician's official positions. Voting what you believe their position will be after they take the oath of office should matter much more than the noises coming out of their mouth's and their spokesmans' mouths.

[ Parent ]
Oh for fucks sake people by Gedvondur (4.00 / 2) #4 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 09:32:59 AM EST
Romney won because he showed more energy?  Really?

Rich asshole STILL didn't do more than hint at what he might do, has no plan for foreign policy and his replacement for Obamacare is......that's right, we don't know! 


Don't be SUCH a bunch of fucking sheep.  Republicans WILL FUCK YOU.  As a party and individually.  They care about the rich and corporations.  That's it.  

"So I will be hitting the snatch hard, I think, tonight." - gzt
I agree by garlic (4.00 / 2) #7 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 10:02:37 AM EST
but in presenting himself to the public, Romney did better. He presented more smoke and mirrors (I believe) but he did that better than Obama presenting what he's done.


[ Parent ]
Heh by Gedvondur (2.00 / 0) #10 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 11:05:44 AM EST
He did better than his normal robot-stiff fumble fuckery, yes.

I shouldn't even comment on these things, I'm WAY to angry and afraid of Republicans to be rational about it.

I've set up my twitter client to remove almost every political post, because I'll turn into a raving lunatic (well more anyway) if I read too much on this shit.  


To me it's very fucking easy:  Obama isn't everything to everybody, but FUCK ME RUNNING is he better than any alternative ANYONE has presented.  Therefore, vote Obama.


"So I will be hitting the snatch hard, I think, tonight." - gzt
[ Parent ]
Listen, I agree, the guy who wants to kill by yankeehack (4.00 / 1) #11 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 11:10:26 AM EST
Big Bird nominally won because he was a jerk and more aggressive. Which is a shitty way to win.

However, that debate was Obama's to lose though and he just didn't show up. So many missed opportunities. So many of them. 
"...she dares to indulge in the secret sport. You can't be a MILF with the F, at least in part because the M is predicated upon it."-CBB

[ Parent ]
Winning debates by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #13 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 01:34:27 PM EST
You can be completely right and lose a debate to someone who is completely wrong.

In my opinion, Romney won.  I sure as hell aren't voting for the bastard.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
There's an expression by yicky yacky (2.00 / 0) #18 Fri Oct 05, 2012 at 01:48:43 PM EST

that's sometimes used in boxing: "$So_and_so won the event".

It doesn't necessarily mean they won the fight -- quite the opposite, in fact, 99% of the time it almost certainly means they didn't win the fight -- but it means the event will be generally be remembered for something to do with them rather than the other guy.

There's nothing specific about it: It could be a robbery; it could be a close contest that everyone previously assumed would be a walkover; it could be a stupid gimmick involving a costume or an over-the-top entrance; it could even be do to with ludicrous pre-fight antics (e.g. Lewis-Tyson -- nobody really remembers the bout, but they remember the press conference).

Whenever I get annoyed about analysts obsessing over "the wrong damn thing"®, I try and remember that it's the political equivalent of winning 'the event' and has dick-all to do with the name that eventually goes in the winner column.

A classic example was the Tories getting a lot of coverage, and polling very well, with their Euro-sceptical stance in 2005. Until someone realized that Euro-scepticism was at best 6th on the concerns of everday voters, and Labour were battering them in all the other criteria.


----
Vacuity abhors a vacuum.
[ Parent ]
Those bastard republicans by dmg (2.00 / 0) #19 Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 09:31:32 AM EST
Republicans WILL FUCK YOU.  As a party and individually.  They care about the rich and corporations.

As compared to democrats who will fuck you as a party and individually, and who also care about the rich and corporations.

Is Guantanamo closed yet?
--
dmg - HuSi's most dimwitted overprivileged user.

[ Parent ]
man, reminds me of some parties at college by gzt (2.00 / 0) #20 Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 11:23:32 AM EST
those friggin' econ majors.

[ Parent ]
Feel Free by Gedvondur (2.00 / 0) #21 Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 06:19:35 PM EST
To ask the Republican House why Gitmo is still around.  They created it and they are the ones that still feed it.

If you want to run the old dodge that both parties are equally bad, feel free to live in whatever fantasy based world you want.

The Republicans are insane.  Beyond reasonable. The democrats may be pussy asshats but they haven't gone cuckoo for coco-nuts.  At least democrats can do fucking basic math.  Cut taxes to increase income.  Yup, get right on that.



"So I will be hitting the snatch hard, I think, tonight." - gzt
[ Parent ]
usually i'm sympathetic... by gzt (4.00 / 1) #22 Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 08:59:20 PM EST
...to the other party, trying to be a bit charitable.

but then i moved here and this is the incumbent: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_King

jiminy christmas.

[ Parent ]
Both parties may or may not be equally bad by dmg (2.00 / 0) #23 Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 09:06:38 AM EST
But the system itself is broken and no amount of voting foe either of those parties is going to fix it.

Re Guantanamo, I thought Obama promised to close it down?
--
dmg - HuSi's most dimwitted overprivileged user.

[ Parent ]
He did by Gedvondur (2.00 / 0) #24 Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 04:09:12 PM EST
And then it became abundantly clear that the Republicans were not going to play ball about their favorite prison camp.

"So I will be hitting the snatch hard, I think, tonight." - gzt
[ Parent ]
I don't get it. by dmg (4.00 / 1) #25 Sun Oct 07, 2012 at 09:27:56 PM EST
Does voting democrat make a difference or not?
--
dmg - HuSi's most dimwitted overprivileged user.
[ Parent ]
sure does by Gedvondur (2.00 / 0) #26 Mon Oct 08, 2012 at 09:51:27 AM EST
But if you want to be single issue about, go nuts.

I'd love to have a functioning opposition party.  But the Republicans simply not it anymore.  They are held hostage by a radically Randian and radically socially conservative minority of their party who honestly believes that they are a national majority that just "hasn't woken up yet".

The Republican "Big Tent" is gone, tolerance is gone, restraint is gone.  Compromise is gone.  They can't govern in that state of mind.  It would be GWB all over again, unnecessary wars, unlimited defense spending, and the shit end of the stick for everybody but the rich.

But whatever.  I've bitten enough.



"So I will be hitting the snatch hard, I think, tonight." - gzt
[ Parent ]
What Republicans? by Merekat (2.00 / 0) #27 Mon Oct 08, 2012 at 10:54:29 AM EST
I don't see a party an actual Republican could vote for running.

[ Parent ]
Easy by Gedvondur (2.00 / 0) #28 Mon Oct 08, 2012 at 12:55:28 PM EST
Obama, despite all the hype is a center right politician.  The republicans have dragged everyone to the right.

"So I will be hitting the snatch hard, I think, tonight." - gzt
[ Parent ]
Romney did very, very well. by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #12 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 01:09:18 PM EST
But here's the elephant in the room for me: Romney says his plan won't contain a tax cut if it increases the deficit. Assume for the moment that's true.

Now imagine the House Republicans pass a tax cut which increases the deficit. Will Romney sign it?

My bet is he will.

So Romney's plan is irrelevant; only Cantor's plan matters.

What's Cantor's plan?

If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

yup by lm (2.00 / 0) #14 Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 05:24:33 PM EST
One of the reasons I couldn't be bothered to watch last night's debate is that I figured both candidates would put out platforms based on the premise that the president passes legislation. Long story short, the legislature matters more than the presidency this time around. Well, it would if it weren't likely that at least one new SCOTUS justice will be appointed next term.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
to be caught in a intern like scandal? by dev trash (2.00 / 0) #29 Tue Oct 09, 2012 at 09:15:24 PM EST


--
I DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR BALLS! ->clock
[ Parent ]
I'd get crucified if I said this in public... | 29 comments (29 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback