Brontoforumus Archive

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:


This board has been fossilized.
You are reading an archive of Brontoforumus, a.k.a. The Worst Forums Ever, from 2008 to early 2014.  Registration and posting (for most members) has been disabled here to discourage spambots from taking over.  Old members can still log in to view boards, PMs, etc.

The new message board is at http://brontoforum.us.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10

Author Topic: 2010  (Read 11895 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Royal☭

  • Supreme Court Judge President
  • Tested
  • Karma: 88
  • Posts: 6301
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #140 on: November 03, 2010, 07:19:08 AM »

So instead you're saying it's a moral victory that a guy who put a lot of money into a race won?

My quibble is with your word moral.

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: 2010
« Reply #141 on: November 03, 2010, 07:33:19 AM »

Well, no real surprises, plenty of disappointments.

Mitchell's out, which is a pity but not a surprise (though just how much he got spanked is).  It's really through no fault of his own except being a Democrat (kinda like what happened to Chafee in '06 -- nice to hear he's bounced back, anyway).

I saw some talking heads on the local PBS station say that what Mitchell should've done was emphasize his 40 years of service -- he couldn't run by emphasizing his party or his votes in the past 2 years, and he shouldn't have gone negative; his best option was playing up his personal reputation.  He probably still would have lost, but I think that would have been his best shot.

Hoping he's not done with politics.  Ugh -- what if the '14 governor race is Pearce/Mitchell?

The :facepalm: of the evening came when a local journalism student -- who I am sure is being razzed about this by her classmates as we speak -- said to Goddard, "So you're down right now -- what do you think you can do to turn it around?"  This was, of course, an hour after the polls closed.

Apparently the medical marijuana prop is still too close to call.  Given that that was pretty much the only thing I had any hope on going in, well, that's something, at least.

So those are my thoughts on the local stuff.  Not really much to say on the federal level that hasn't been said.
Logged

Pacobird

  • Just fell off the AOL cart
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65482
  • Posts: 1741
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #142 on: November 03, 2010, 07:44:20 AM »

Same story in Michigan; Snyder destroyed Bernero in the governor's race, to the shock of absolutely nobody.  Bernero probably would have lost regardless of the national trends, as Granholm is extremely unpopular and the Dems basically wrote Michigan off this time around, but the degree to which the DNC abandoned Bernero is truly breathtaking.  Snyder, the Republican, outspent him 8-to-1; a co-worker of mine says she went to the local campaign office and they didn't even have lawn signs to give her.
Logged

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #143 on: November 03, 2010, 08:07:10 AM »

Can somebody summarise the Harry Reid thing for the dirty Canadian in two or three sentences? I tried to follow that subthread, but never really got more than he was running against another Tea Party whackjob?
Logged

Pacobird

  • Just fell off the AOL cart
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65482
  • Posts: 1741
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #144 on: November 03, 2010, 08:22:48 AM »

oh, by the way, I want to take this moment to remind everybody that everyone gets slaughtered in their midterm. relax.

people are not stupid for turning on the president they elected; they are stupid for having believed the president they elected could transcend realpolitik and rule by fiat, accomplishing everything the people who elected him wanted (other 49% of the country be damned) whether the president himself actually said he'd deliver or not. i said this back when everybody was moaning about slightly-diluted HCR and i stand by it.  while i am confident that one day we will all get the openly fascist government we secretly want, that day is not today; tea partiers are tea partiers not because they are dumb but because they are scared shitless and we decided we were going to laugh at them rather than trying to allay those fears, so frankly good for them for handing us our asses.

before you say it, yes, even Bush was on track to get pummeled in 2002 before 9/11. 
Logged

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #145 on: November 03, 2010, 08:25:26 AM »

Would you cut that out? That's three times one day I agree with every word in your post, even the crack about fascist government. This is making me look bad. Or something.
Logged

Shinra

  • Big Juicy Winners
  • Tested
  • Karma: 34
  • Posts: 3269
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #146 on: November 03, 2010, 08:51:56 AM »

i'm with mongrel :(
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: 2010
« Reply #147 on: November 03, 2010, 09:08:04 AM »

Can somebody summarise the Harry Reid thing for the dirty Canadian in two or three sentences? I tried to follow that subthread, but never really got more than he was running against another Tea Party whackjob?

Pretty much.  Like, crazy, let's abolish the EPA and the Board of Education and take the fluoride out of our water to protect our precious bodily fluids crazy.  And it was a close race.  As Stewart put it, "Boy, Nevada must either really hate the EPA...or Harry Reid."

people are not stupid for turning on the president they elected; they are stupid for having believed the president they elected could transcend realpolitik and rule by fiat, accomplishing everything the people who elected him wanted (other 49% of the country be damned) whether the president himself actually said he'd deliver or not. i said this back when everybody was moaning about slightly-diluted HCR and i stand by it.  while i am confident that one day we will all get the openly fascist government we secretly want, that day is not today;

Might respond to this if you rephrase in a way that's not a series of the most obnoxious strawmen you can possibly string together.

tea partiers are tea partiers not because they are dumb but because they are scared shitless and we decided we were going to laugh at them rather than trying to allay those fears, so frankly good for them for handing us our asses.

So who the hell is this vague "we" you're referring to?

If "we" literally means US, right here, I really doubt any elections swung on anything I had to say on this messageboard.  That's the only "we" I'm seeing here.

If "we" refers to MSNBC and liberal bloggers, yeah, okay, they do what they do and it's not always productive, but they're also already preaching to the choir.

If "we" means Democratic politicians, then you're full of shit when you say all they did was make fun of the Tea Partiers, though I'll grant they didn't do much to assuage anybody's fears.  The Onion pretty much nailed it: Democrats: 'If We're Gonna Lose, Let's Go Down Running Away From Every Legislative Accomplishment We've Made'.  The close Democratic races basically swung on two different types of campaign, the "Look how scary the other guy is" and the "I'm not like the other Democrats."  Feingold, maybe, notwithstanding.

Your overall point that midterm elections always go down this way is fair enough.  But, whatever happens nationally, shit's about to get a whole lot worse in Arizona.
Logged

Shinra

  • Big Juicy Winners
  • Tested
  • Karma: 34
  • Posts: 3269
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #148 on: November 03, 2010, 09:34:22 AM »

Oklahoma is more of the same, except we went from a crazy far right Democrat to a crazy far right Republican as our governor, we voted no to a spending state question that would have let us not be 49th in state per student spending anymore, and we voted yes to opt out of health care reform, which we're going to spend literally hundreds of millions of dollars in court fighting only to lose to the federal government since health care reform's federal mandate trumps state law. (and has been held up in the supreme court already!) So not only are we just as crazy as ever, we're also telling students that they can't have money because we're too busy setting it on fire to spite the black man in the white house.

Logged

Ted Belmont

  • Tested
  • Karma: 50
  • Posts: 3447
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #149 on: November 03, 2010, 09:47:08 AM »

Ah, the joys of an uneducated electorate.
Logged

TA

  • Tested
  • Karma: 29
  • Posts: 3219
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #150 on: November 03, 2010, 10:58:59 AM »

tea partiers are tea partiers not because they are dumb but because they are scared shitless and we decided we were going to laugh at them rather than trying to allay those fears, so frankly good for them for handing us our asses.

When the fear in question is that the evil socialist nigger is going to kill grandma, how exactly do you propose to allay that fear?  It's not something rational or sane that can be talked down with reason.

Might respond to this if you rephrase in a way that's not a series of the most obnoxious strawmen you can possibly string together.

How is that a strawman?  I've seen the argument put forth repeatedly, all over, that because there's a Democratic president and a Democratic majority in the senate, 100% of Democratic policies should be pushed through easily.  That it's Obama's fault, and proof of some sort of homophobia, that he didn't wave a magic wand and get DADT repealed on January 21st, or that the health care bill wasn't single payer, or any number of dreamworld ideals with no awareness to the political process.
Logged
Do you understand how terrifying the words “vibrating strap on” are for an asexual? That’s like saying “the holocaust” to a Jew.

Brentai

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXYVlPgX_o
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65281
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #151 on: November 03, 2010, 11:06:24 AM »

On Harry Reid and Nevada:

Outside of Las Vegas, most of Nevada is indistinguishable from Arizona.  Inside of Las Vegas, Harry Reid is known as the man who did absolutely fuckall to stop Yucca Mountain from being approved.

Yucca Mountain is a proposed nuclear waste dump on top of Las Vegas's water supply.

So yes, it's safe to say that Nevada cannot fucking stand Harry Reid.  His win is not a victory for the Democrats, it is an outstanding failure for the Tea Party Republicans.  It seems they can beat us even at the thing we're best at, pulling failure straight from the jaws of victory.

Which makes Democrats terrible even at losing?

FAIL PARADOX
Logged

Pacobird

  • Just fell off the AOL cart
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65482
  • Posts: 1741
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #152 on: November 03, 2010, 11:34:43 AM »

Quote
When the fear in question is that the evil socialist nigger is going to kill grandma, how exactly do you propose to allay that fear?  It's not something rational or sane that can be talked down with reason.

A fair point.  Back to basics.  Forgive me if this is flowery.

The world is in a perpetual state of change.  This shapes all of our lives in the most fundamental of ways, be it embracing a bold new future or huddling beneath a falling sky.

It is often said the Democratic party has no message.  This is probably true, because the political dialogue in America has implicitly conceded the extremely dangerous fiction that change is something you can control, 100% of the time.  The party that should be about a reactive pliability to change, a message of profound courage based on a willingness to seize opportunities as they present themselves and hope in the belief that when we wake up tomorrow the world will still be here, has allowed itself to be played into a rhetorical game it can't win.

If change can be controlled, the conservatives are probably right.  Think about it: if we can control the world around us, if we can remake the people in the image of the state (and not the other way around), why wouldn't we want to set up a Thousand-Year Reich?  Who wouldn't want to know their children and children's children would enjoy the same power, stability, and prosperity they knew? 

The problem is, if the conservatives were right, we'd all be speaking Latin.  Rome ruled for a thousand years, but fell in a decade.  It grew stagnant and unwilling to acknowledge the wild, implacable forces of change that undermined its power; it was content to blame internal liars and thieves for its degradation, satisfied in the belief that the forces upsetting its Golden Years were enemies to be faced and conquered.

"We have nothing to fear but fear itself."  It is a fucking mantra, precisely because it doesn't downplay fear.  Fear is a natural emotion; democracy is, after all, a recent experiment, and history shows the natural human response when the walls come tumbling down is "somebody tell me what to do".  But Democrats believe we can be better than that.  We can build new walls, that hold up better.  They won't be perfect, but they don't have to be; they just have to stay up long enough until the change subsides.

So, the message to the tea party is: it's okay.  I understand.  I know this is fucking scary.  I'm scared, too, but we have to respond to these developments, not resist them.

I guess.

My mind is elsewhere right now; sorry.
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: 2010
« Reply #153 on: November 03, 2010, 12:07:00 PM »

How is that a strawman?  I've seen the argument put forth repeatedly, all over, that because there's a Democratic president and a Democratic majority in the senate, 100% of Democratic policies should be pushed through easily.  That it's Obama's fault, and proof of some sort of homophobia, that he didn't wave a magic wand and get DADT repealed on January 21st, or that the health care bill wasn't single payer, or any number of dreamworld ideals with no awareness to the political process.

I guess I missed that conversation.  Was it in the Canada thread?  I admit I sometimes just skim that one.

Inside of Las Vegas, Harry Reid is known as the man who did absolutely fuckall to stop Yucca Mountain from being approved.

Yucca Mountain is a proposed nuclear waste dump on top of Las Vegas's water supply.

So yes, it's safe to say that Nevada cannot fucking stand Harry Reid.  His win is not a victory for the Democrats, it is an outstanding failure for the Tea Party Republicans.  It seems they can beat us even at the thing we're best at, pulling failure straight from the jaws of victory.

Yeah, but while Reid may not have done anything to stop it, Angle actually vociferously SUPPORTED it.

Which makes a pretty great metaphor for Reid in general, the two parties in general, and this election in general.
Logged

François

  • Huh.
  • Tested
  • Karma: 83
  • Posts: 3313
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #154 on: November 03, 2010, 12:18:59 PM »

I'm scared, too, but we have to respond to these developments, not resist them.

Okay, so, curiosity. Let's say you are utterly convinced the homo negro gestapo is coming for granny, and that despite your fears, you are nevertheless open to heeding the wise advice of those who recommend response over resistance. What does that entail?
Logged

Pacobird

  • Just fell off the AOL cart
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65482
  • Posts: 1741
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #155 on: November 03, 2010, 12:59:56 PM »

I'm scared, too, but we have to respond to these developments, not resist them.

Okay, so, curiosity. Let's say you are utterly convinced the homo negro gestapo is coming for granny, and that despite your fears, you are nevertheless open to heeding the wise advice of those who recommend response over resistance. What does that entail?

Emotional arguments don't have to outline specific action.  That Democrats try to outline specific action every time somebody hands them a microphone is my whole point~
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: 2010
« Reply #156 on: November 03, 2010, 01:10:22 PM »

And a good point it is.  Especially when you only take two sentences to state it instead of 6 impenetrable paragraphs.

As Franken (a guy who's pretty good at pithy turns of phrase) put it, the problem is "Their bumper sticker . . . it’s one word: ‘No.’ . . . Our bumper sticker has — it’s just way too many words. And it says, ‘Continued on next bumper ­sticker.’" (NYT)

Simple emotional appeals work a whole lot better than wonky policy explanations.  Obama nailed it in '04 and '08 but seems to have lost the plot.

Republicans are much better at simple emotional appeals, and in most cases have a natural advantage because on most issues they're the ones with the concrete, intuitive appeal and the Democrats are the ones with the complex, nuanced one.

Healthcare is an exception, and the Dems fucked up on the message bigtime.  They've got the simple emotional appeal -- "people are dying while insurers get rich" -- while the Republicans have the abstract one ("SOCIALISM!").  But the Dems blew it, because they're basically idiots.

Know I've said all this before; it just bears repeating.  Constantly.
Logged

Pacobird

  • Just fell off the AOL cart
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65482
  • Posts: 1741
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #157 on: November 03, 2010, 01:37:12 PM »

See, but that's the thing.  The Democrats have worked themselves into a position where they HAVE to rely on complex policy explanations rather than emotional appeals by conceding the idea that you can always control change.

Here's a simple soundbite for you:

Some people say we need to get back to the Constitution.  I agree.  If the Constitution stands for anything, though, it is "We the People".  The state should reflect the people, not the other way around.  When people change, the state must change with them; this is what makes a democracy a democracy.


If you ask me what I mean by that, I've won.  I have succeeded in communicating my emotional argument in a way that resonates with you, personally.  Now I can talk about specifics of policy if you want to hear them and I may or may not convince you, but you'll know my intentions.  Suddenly, I am not a communist fascist whatever but a guy with a cat and a mortgage, and fear-based politics don't work if you can't strip your audience of the idea that the people with whom you disagree are human beings.
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: 2010
« Reply #158 on: November 03, 2010, 01:55:07 PM »

If you ask me what I mean by that, I've won.  I have succeeded in communicating my emotional argument in a way that resonates with you, personally.

Not necessarily.  Sometimes when people ask what you mean it's because they realize you've spouted a bunch of meaningless bullshit.
Logged

Pacobird

  • Just fell off the AOL cart
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65482
  • Posts: 1741
    • View Profile
Re: 2010
« Reply #159 on: November 03, 2010, 02:16:26 PM »

That we didn't even bother doing that is a big reason why tea partiers called us elitist.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10