Is A Vote for Mitt Romney Purely an Emotional/Ideological one?

[MiddleClassCentrist]

http://www.thecomedynetwork.ca/Shows/TheDailyShow

I like the Daily Show because it's making fun of stupid things politicians/fox news does it often has more truth hidden in it than regular broadcasting. Now, I haven't seen good math/statistical analysis from the right to show that their general path (because they don't seem to quantify their policies) is the correct direction.

Do they not like math anymore?

I mean, simple math proves global warming by counting the number of hot days in a year and number of days over a certain threshold. You can track that abortion is a good public policy because of the lowering crime rate associated with the year it becomes legal.

Are they abandoning analysis and relying on emotion, ideology and marketing tricks? I suppose that's fair, isn't that how Obama won? Hope and Change (that will never happen).

Edited September 8, 2012 by MiddleClassCentrist

[Shady]

Are they abandoning analysis and relying on emotion

That's how Obama was elected in the first place.

[Bonam]

It's the story of American politics, and likely politics in many nations around the world. Individual people can be very intelligent, but a mass of people is dumber than rocks. You have to appeal to them in the most primitive and primal ways to get ahead. No "analysis", just fear, hope, carrot, stick.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

It's the story of American politics, and likely politics in many nations around the world. Individual people can be very intelligent, but a mass of people is dumber than rocks. You have to appeal to them in the most primitive and primal ways to get ahead. No "analysis", just fear, hope, carrot, stick.

But, shouldn't they put a few stats/data analysis out there to convince the people who look for such information? Even if it was just 5% that actually look for it, that's enough difference between defeat and victory.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

That's how Obama was elected in the first place.

Absolutely.

Obama got the emotional hope vote.

Is it just good strategy to ignore facts/analysis?

As an outsider looking in, the U.S. needs a combination of spending cuts and tax increases... neither party wants to really admit that the only sensible thing is to do both.

[punked]

That's how Obama was elected in the first place.

Yah it wasn't that Republican policies ran the countries economy off the edge of a cliff and that by the time the new guy got on the job American was losing a million jobs a month at all Shady. It was about emotion sure. More of the same was what America needed Shady. Some day maybe you will visit the real world instead of living in crazytown.

[Shady]

Yah it wasn't that Republican policies ran the countries economy off the edge of a cliff and that by the time the new guy got on the job American was losing a million jobs a month at all Shady. It was about emotion sure. More of the same was what America needed Shady. Some day maybe you will visit the real world instead of living in crazytown.

You're right, it wasn't Republican policies. It was Democrat policies that ran the economy off the edge of a cliff. Lowering mortgage standards in order to qualify borrowers for mortgages that wouldn't otherwise qualify, all under the good intentions of helping the poor almost destroyed the housing market.

[punked]

You're right, it wasn't Republican policies. It was Democrat policies that ran the economy off the edge of a cliff. Lowering mortgage standards in order to qualify borrowers for mortgages that wouldn't otherwise qualify, all under the good intentions of helping the poor almost destroyed the housing market.

Don't worry Shady banks had no issue of doing that on their own. Probably why they were lending to way more of those types of people then the government ever required. Then they got to insure those mortgages themselves because of regulations you yourself had said were outdated and wrong. Your side was holding the Ball. You had the Congress, Senate and Presidency from 2001-2007 remember the years leading up to the whole collapse. They could have done anything they wanted right?

[cybercoma]

You're right, it wasn't Republican policies. It was Democrat policies that ran the economy off the edge of a cliff. Lowering mortgage standards in order to qualify borrowers for mortgages that wouldn't otherwise qualify, all under the good intentions of helping the poor almost destroyed the housing market.

You can keep ignoring it all you want, but you know damn well banks sold crap mortgages because deregulation allowed them to make money off selling the risks and lying about their ratings. If it were the Democrats deregulating the banking industry, then you would be swinging for their nuts instead of the Republicans. After all, you love absolute freedom in the markets. So quit pretending like it was the Democrats that were responsible for the mortgage fiasco.

[punked]

You can keep ignoring it all you want, but you know damn well banks sold crap mortgages because deregulation allowed them to make money off selling the risks and lying about their ratings. If it were the Democrats deregulating the banking industry, then you would be swinging for their nuts instead of the Republicans. After all, you love absolute freedom in the markets. So quit pretending like it was the Democrats that were responsible for the mortgage fiasco.

He lives in a fantasy world. He literally blamed Obama for the housing bubble because as a lawyer he helped in a lawsuit that forced the banks to stop giving out mortgages based on race.

[cybercoma]

He lives in a fantasy world. He literally blamed Obama for the housing bubble because as a lawyer he helped in a lawsuit that forced the banks to stop giving out mortgages based on race.

Yet the 8 years leading up to the bubble were lead by Bush.

Oh... and the government shouldn't control the economy, but when something happens in the economy it's the government's fault for not controlling it.... unless it's a Republican.

What a clown.

Edited September 8, 2012 by cybercoma

[JerrySeinfeld]

Yah it wasn't that Republican policies ran the countries economy off the edge of a cliff and that by the time the new guy got on the job American was losing a million jobs a month at all Shady. It was about emotion sure. More of the same was what America needed Shady. Some day maybe you will visit the real world instead of living in crazytown.

Because electing a guy to office who's first real job is being President makes perfect sense.

A resume thinner than a college sophomore

Never ran a thing in his life

Never had to make a payroll

A grand total of 143 days of senate experience

Attended a racist church for 20 years

Yep. That math adds up

[bleeding heart]

Because electing a guy to office who's first real job is being President makes perfect sense.

A resume thinner than a college sophomore

Never ran a thing in his life

Never had to make a payroll

A grand total of 143 days of senate experience

Attended a racist church for 20 years

Yep. That math adds up

If such math matters, you would of course recognize that, finally, Obama does, explicitly, have experience as President...unlike Romney...who has zero!

[JerrySeinfeld]

If such math matters, you would of course recognize that, finally, Obama does, explicitly, have experience as President...unlike Romney...who has zero!

Yes and we all know how well that turned out

[bleeding heart]

Yes and we all know how well that turned out

So your point to which I responded was utterly and completely useless?

A rare concession.

[JerrySeinfeld]

So your point to which I responded was utterly and completely useless?

A rare concession.

The emperor has no clothes.

[bleeding heart]

The emperor has no clothes.

Virtually every ant you see is female.

New Brunswick is the only officially bilingual region in North America.

The lower-end Hyundai sedans tend to have rust problems.

Edited September 9, 2012 by bleeding heart

[GostHacked]

You're right, it wasn't Republican policies. It was Democrat policies that ran the economy off the edge of a cliff. Lowering mortgage standards in order to qualify borrowers for mortgages that wouldn't otherwise qualify, all under the good intentions of helping the poor almost destroyed the housing market.

And your other man Bush failed to correct that. He had 8 years.

Edited September 9, 2012 by GostHacked

[Bitsy]

You're right, it wasn't Republican policies. It was Democrat policies that ran the economy off the edge of a cliff. Lowering mortgage standards in order to qualify borrowers for mortgages that wouldn't otherwise qualify, all under the good intentions of helping the poor almost destroyed the housing market.

Shady, Shady, Shady, what alternate universe do you live in?

From his earliest days in office, Bush paired his belief that Americans do best when they own their own homes with his conviction that markets do best when left alone. Bush pushed hard to expand home ownership, especially among minority groups, an initiative that dovetailed with both his ambition to expand Republican appeal and the business interests of some of his biggest donors. But his housing policies and hands-off approach to regulation encouraged lax lending standards.

snip

.... Advocating home ownership is hardly novel; Bill Clinton's administration did it, too. For Bush, it was part of his vision of an "ownership society," in which Americans would rely less on the government for health care, retirement and shelter. It was also good politics, a way to court black and Hispanic voters.

So Bush had to, in his words, "use the mighty muscle of the federal government" to meet his goal. He proposed affordable housing tax incentives. He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meet ambitious new goals for low-income lending.

Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Bush persuaded Congress to spend as much as $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

snip

The president also leaned on mortgage brokers and lenders to devise their own innovations. "Corporate America," he said, "has a responsibility to work to make America a compassionate place."

And corporate America, eyeing a lucrative market, delivered in ways Bush might not have expected, with a proliferation of too-good-to-be-true teaser rates and interest-only loans that were sold to investors in a loosely regulated environment. But Bush populated the financial system's alphabet soup of oversight agencies with people who, like him, wanted fewer rules, not more.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html?pagewanted=all

[JerrySeinfeld]

Shady, Shady, Shady, what alternate universe do you live in?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html?pagewanted=all

Shady is correct. It's false to say that Bush policies alone led to the housing bubble, although they did contribute to it.

[dre]

Shady is correct. It's false to say that Bush policies alone led to the housing bubble, although they did contribute to it.

The housing bubble was entirely bipartisan and really has a lot more to do with the economic system itself than anything else.

The biggest two factors were trade policy, and monetary policy and really blame can get spread out equally to all administrations over the last 30 years.

Funner for hacks to just blame their favoriate boogey man though.

[JerrySeinfeld]

The housing bubble was entirely bipartisan and really has a lot more to do with the economic system itself than anything else.

The biggest two factors were trade policy, and monetary policy and really blame can get spread out equally to all administrations over the last 30 years.

Funner for hacks to just blame their favoriate boogey man though.

I totally agree. But since we're being honest, there is only one party assigning the blame unilaterally, no?

Their electoral lives depend upon it.

Edited September 14, 2012 by JerrySeinfeld

[Bitsy]

The housing bubble was entirely bipartisan and really has a lot more to do with the economic system itself than anything else.

But that is not what Shady said, and what exactly is the "economic system" that you blame? Republican or Demoractic systems?

You're right, it wasn't Republican policies. It was Democrat policies that ran the economy off the edge of a cliff. Lowering mortgage standards in order to qualify borrowers for mortgages that wouldn't otherwise qualify, all under the good intentions of helping the poor almost destroyed the housing market.

Edited September 14, 2012 by Bitsy

[JerrySeinfeld]

But that is not what Shady said, and what exactly is the "economic system" that you blame?

Losers who used debt to pretend they were rich by speculating on real estate. They all got what they had coming to them. I love preying on losers like this. Buy their house for 1/4 the value.

Edited September 14, 2012 by JerrySeinfeld

[Bitsy]

Losers who used debt to pretend they were rich by speculating on real estate. They all got what they had coming to them. I love preying on losers like this. Buy their house for 1/4 the value.

Wow, that sounds like what Mitt Romney did at Bain Capital.