FROM 2012 INTO 2013 POLITICS THREAD

LongTimeListener · Nov 5, 2012

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

MileHigh said:

Silver: "A few more polls to add. But Obama at 91% to win Electoral College based on today's data so far.There's been a pretty clear shift toward Obama in national polls. Based on most recent data, he may lead by 2-3% in popular vote.Obama gained an average of 1.5 points between 12 national polls published today. Big sample sizes. That's a pretty big deal."
Click to expand...

I guess YF goes back to mocking and dismissing Silver. For a couple days it was his oracle.

Armchair_QB · Nov 5, 2012

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

Dear WWL:

Why the fuck are you doing a halftime segment with Berman and both presidential candidates? He sucks at covering football, why do you think he won't suck at covering politics?

Sincerely,

America

LongTimeListener · Nov 5, 2012

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

They did that with Obama and McCain. I guess it's a thing now. (Although I think the last time was when Obama got behind an eight-team playoff in college football.)

Inky_Wretch · Nov 5, 2012

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

Armchair_QB said:

Dear WWL:

Why the fuck are you doing a halftime segment with Berman and both presidential candidates? He sucks at covering football, why do you think he won't suck at covering politics?

Sincerely,

America
Click to expand...

I can't think of a single reason I would watch Berman interview them. Hell, I don't think I'd watch Berman interview Jesus Christ himself.

YankeeFan · Nov 5, 2012

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

dooley_womack1 said:

He now has Florida a light blue.
Click to expand...

And, he's got Virginia deep blue.

RickStain · Nov 5, 2012

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

Yeah, this is going to be boring, more likely than not. Virginia or Florida will turn blue, and the media will have to spend a few hours pretending like it's not over until the West Coast polls close.

LongTimeListener · Nov 5, 2012

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

If that happens, I'm definitely watching whatever shows Dick Morris and George Will are on.

Which I suppose is their point in the crazy predictions of 325/321 for Romney.

Alma · Nov 5, 2012

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

If Romney loses - which I have long said he would even before his nomination, which I long said he would get - it might be time for Republicans to examine:

1. How in the world Mitt could lose with an economy this far in the tank

OR

2. Whether this battle over the "true conservatism" makes it possible to reasonably win.

Tarheel316 · Nov 5, 2012

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

RickStain said:

Yeah, this is going to be boring, more likely than not. Virginia or Florida will turn blue, and the media will have to spend a few hours pretending like it's not over until the West Coast polls close.
Click to expand...

Wow. Where did that seismic shift come from?

LongTimeListener · Nov 5, 2012

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

Alma said:

If Romney loses - which I have long said he would even before his nomination, which I long said he would get - it might be time for Republicans to examine:

1. How in the world Mitt could lose with an economy this far in the tank

OR

2. Whether this battle over the "true conservatism" makes it possible to reasonably win.
Click to expand...

And

3. Whether they want to allow the recovery that is being predicted (regardless of candidate) or whether they want to gum up the gears for the next four years so the Democrats don't have anything to run on.

YankeeFan · Nov 5, 2012

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

LongTimeListener said:

MileHigh said:

Silver: "A few more polls to add. But Obama at 91% to win Electoral College based on today's data so far.There's been a pretty clear shift toward Obama in national polls. Based on most recent data, he may lead by 2-3% in popular vote.Obama gained an average of 1.5 points between 12 national polls published today. Big sample sizes. That's a pretty big deal."
Click to expand...

I guess YF goes back to mocking and dismissing Silver. For a couple days it was his oracle.
Click to expand...

He's certainly put himself further out on the limb.

He's got the difference in the popular vote at almost 3 full percentage points now, and a bunch of states in Obama's column, so he's got some room for error.

But, boy, if it turns out he's wrong...

Baron Scicluna · Nov 5, 2012

Re: THE 2012 POLITICS THREAD

GeorgeFHayek said:

Baron Scicluna said:

YankeeFan said:

dooley_womack1 said:

If it's part of the contract or law that a new worker has to join a union to work somewhere, I'm with that.
Click to expand...

Why?

Honestly, wouldn't you be pissed if you were forced to join a union (or any organization), and fork over money to them, only to see them use it to support a candidate or cause you opposed?
Click to expand...

I'll use the same reasoning that the pro-biz people on here have used before. If they don't like it, they're free to leave the union and find a different job.

I may not like it how a business uses my labor to make money to support another candidate, or I may not like who the paper endorses. But, as I've been told several times on here before, I'm free to leave at any time.

Heck, I've even been told on here that, since I'm a journalist, that if a company doesn't want me to sign a petition or put a bumper sticker on my car, that they have the right to do so, and I'm free to leave at any time. Even though their endorsements may bring the same complaints of reporting bias from their readers.
Click to expand...

I think you're missing an important point here: Why should you be forced, as a condition of your employment, to contribute financially to politicians and/or causes you don't personally support? If you're OK with that, fine, but let's be clear what we're talking about here. And if you are OK with that, then I would assume you'd be OK with your employer holding back a bit of your paycheck to make that whole contributing thing a bit easier.
Click to expand...

Because I'm not directly supporting the candidate. My money would be supporting the union which is supporting the candidate. I may not like it, but if I want to remain employed, I have to give my money to the union.

Just like my labor isn't supporting a candidate even though the paper may endorse that candidate. If I'm told to layout an editorial page with a pro-Romney editorial, that doesn't mean that I'm contributing to Romney's endorsement. I may not like it, but if I want to remain employed, I have to lay-out the pro-Romney editorial.

In other words, if I should have a choice in where my union dues go or not go, then I should have a choice in what work assignments I do, and refuse any that I don't agree with. I'm sure most on here would agree that, at best, it wouldn't be practical, and at worst, it'd be fireable.

Log in or Sign up

FROM 2012 INTO 2013 POLITICS THREAD

LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

YankeeFan Well-Known Member

RickStain Well-Known Member

LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

Alma Well-Known Member

Tarheel316 Well-Known Member

LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

YankeeFan Well-Known Member

Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

FROM 2012 INTO 2013 POLITICS THREAD

LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

YankeeFan Well-Known Member

RickStain Well-Known Member

LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

Alma Well-Known Member

Tarheel316 Well-Known Member

LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

YankeeFan Well-Known Member

Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches