the most important election of your lifetime: 2012 american general election thread

http://www.baywindows.com/romney-ill-be-better-than-ted-for-gay-rights-53688

Have you guys talked about this article? This guy's position seems to have evolved.

Yeah, gawker or buzzfeed or whomever was talking about this and, as I pointed out yesterday, at least Obama, for whatever reasons, evolved in the right direction.

Romney has a lot of work ahead. I don't see how he lines up with, much less defeats, Obama in November. Anything's possible, but Romney doesn't strike me as a come-from-behind maverick. Then again, that's my personal opinion. I'll leave it to the states to decide.

http://dennisperrin.blogspot.com/2012/05/got-to-let-it-show.html

snap crackle or pop?

So Romney was a dick in high school

lol Dennis Perrin never gets old.

he does, but much more naturally than the obsession w/ Romney trivia vs war crimes does.

as naturally as your obsession with posting in the wrong threads

I know I introduced you to Greenwald only a couple years ago but still

I don't think you did.

Nothing wrong with this thread, ain't nothin goin on but an election, whether you're a marriage-obsessed idiot gay or President Machiavelli himself.

I posted some Bambait in the other thread.

Romney's base will like that story of him grabbing his high school classmate and forcibly cutting his hair

they could (but won't) point out that no one cares about Bam's bullying.

http://jahanzebjz.tumblr.com/post/2753963879/victims-of-us-drone-attacks-in-pakistan-drone

the release of the romney bullying story was deliberately timed to follow obama's gay marriage announcement, y/n? i mean, it had to be, right?

the obsession w/ Romney trivia vs war crimes

probably should be Romney trvia (+ likely war crimes) vs war crimes tbh

fine, they're the same, except for nasty schoolboy pranks + dog roofing.

yes, because those are the only differences

i mean, i get that you don't like things Obama has done, and I know that it really really irks you that perceive a lot of 'liberals' as being full-throated in their support and love for the man, so you have to compensate by overstating your case, but we're all pretty reasonable here. you don't have to do that with us. it's okay. you can tone it down.

trivial pursuit hate crimes edition

ok, just let me know when the overstatement comes in.

I admit the dead bombed kids may not have been gay.

It's really weird how we let this Obama character murder all these children. Very unpresidential.

If the dead bombed kids had been gay they were probably gonna be beheaded anyway.

Morbs, I'm not sure anybody is arguing for the atrocious acts of Obama and the military here, but you basically saying that there is only one issue (WAR CRIMES) and since Romney and Obama are the both the same it doesn't matter is really, really, stupid. I mean, America is a shitty, shitty country, no matter who is running it. That's got a lot to do with the people, of course, but whatever. But somehow saying that the guy who doesn't even believe in civil unions or planned parenthood or infrastructure investment or non-voucher medicare is "the exact same" as Obama is ridiculous. As shitty as Obama is, he's not Romney, who would not only NOT address any of your issues with the current policies, he would make a lot more much worse.

So yes, you are overcompensating by treating us all like we don't know. But maybe you really are impressed with Dennis Perrin's tedious, condescending, and rather obvious writing. If so, welcome to the fucking rest of us.

If the dead bombed kids had been gay they were probably gonna be beheaded anyway.

in afghanistan?

http://publicintelligence.net/afghanistan-human-terrain-team-pashtun-homosexuality-report/

i was being really flippant with that remark tbf

http://i.imgur.com/tReka.png

it's okay. you can tone it down.

i really don't think he can.

you basically saying that there is only one issue

I have more, and never seriously meant they were THE SAME. They do both fall under the minimum level of humanity required to get my vote, is all.

welcome to America dude.

greatest country on earth iirc

Looks like Obama's nice but pointless declaration has now become an issue in this election: http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/05/10/481772/romney-adviser-gillespie-constitutional-marriage-ba/

We've had the lesser of two evils system since 1776! (xp)

Actually for a while there were the articles of confederation so nobody got to be president

haha

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qel2_d-kNX4

she is awesome. also, i think carney's 'o look i am pulling back the curtain on your media trickery' schtick here only really connects with the dumber and more gullible corners of the voting public.

"i'm trying to go meta-meta on you" - oh please

he may be a jackass, but there's nothing more awful about american broadcast news (and election-cycle political coverage in particular) than its completely tunnel-visioned focus on only a small handful of "major stories" each day, many of them completely asinine and in fact invented by the brain-dead news cycle's desperate hunger for the next big thing. i understand her frustration, she's just trying to do her job, and he's arrogantly fucking with the program. but that interview plays mostly like the hostility of the news cycle as an entity to any suggestion that there might be something wrong with its monomania, hostility to the idea that there might be other questions to ask, other stories to tell.

If news persons are always wondering "is there a better question I could be asking?" they would never ask any questions. When the cameras are rolling you have to ask one question at a time. Usually these questions are what people are thinking about currently.

how would anyone in the MSM know what ppl are thinking about?

A story hits the news*, people think about it.

* yeah, yeah. Should it not have been reported?

i kind of think that "i understand the question, but rather than answer it directly, i'd instead like to talk about the way certain stories and questions are privileged over others by the media and how that limits the discourse" is a perfectly acceptable response to an interview question.

He seemed to be acting as if this was a "gothcha" surprise attack when she indicated that that was what he had been invited on the show to discuss. And she wasn't going to let him pretend for all the viewers that this was another MSM blindside attack.

i kind of think that "i understand the question, but rather than answer it directly, i'd instead like to talk about the way certain stories and questions are privileged over others by the media and how that limits the discourse" is a perfectly acceptable response to an interview question.

― 10. “Pour Some Sugar On Me” – Tom Cruise (contenderizer), Sunday, May 13, 2012 1:41 AM (51 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

haha no it isn't

it's perfectly annoying and insufferable tho

Maybe if it was a contributor questioning the point of the story (as was done on other programs on MSNBC that day, or at least Alex Wagner), as opposed to some Romney supporter unsure about how to respond to the negative press by shouting about how he's going to PUT THE MEDIA ON TRIAL!

wrt to this particular point, i don't care what side of the political fence he's on, or whether or not he imagines he's pulling some tiresome "gotcha". i didn't see anything so terribly impertinent in his response, myself, but he clearly intended to challenge the interviewer. i figure it was her call, and i don't object to her decision to snub him. he asked for it.

that said, i wish more interviewees, when asked about dumb shit like this - even if they've previously agreed to be asked about it - would take the "you know, let's talk about something else" route.

He seemed to be acting as if this was a "gothcha" surprise attack when she indicated that that was what he had been invited on the show to discuss. And she wasn't going to let him pretend for all the viewers that this was another MSM blindside attack.

― nickn, Sunday, May 13, 2012 2:46 AM (7 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

OTM

http://www.mittromney.com/issues/gun-rights

As president, Mitt will work to expand and enhance access and opportunities for Americans to hunt, shoot, and protect their families, homes and property

it's funny, but it's also true

in fact, one could say it's kind of lol but mostly sad

would totally vote for candidate who would work to expand my opportunities to hunt and shoot my family

Mitt Romney now holds a three point national lead over President Obama according to the newest NYT/CBS News poll. The poll found that 46 percent of registered voters say they would choose Romney while just 43 percent say they would back Obama. This represents a small drop in support for Obama compared to last month when the same poll found the race perfectly tied at 46 percent each.

http://elections.firedoglake.com/2012/05/15/romney-holds-small-national-lead-in-nytcbs-poll/