If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   And lo, when scant one week before the election remained, did the pundits their hedging begin   (nytimes.com) divider line 132
    More: Obvious, pundits, slog, entitlement reform, general elections, President Obama  
•       •       •

10484 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Oct 2012 at 11:51 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



132 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-30 08:52:39 AM  
On foreign policy matters, for example, Bush has attracted the policy wonk version of the 1927 Yankees. You look at the people who will fill key slots in his administration, from Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice down through less-prominent advisors such as Bob Zoellick and Paul Wolfowitz. They are the best out there. Link
 
2012-10-30 08:55:30 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: On foreign policy matters, for example, Bush has attracted the policy wonk version of the 1927 Yankees. You look at the people who will fill key slots in his administration, from Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice down through less-prominent advisors such as Bob Zoellick and Paul Wolfowitz. They are the best out there. Link


Ouch. Tim Russert salutes you from the great beyond.
 
2012-10-30 09:18:03 AM  
I can't believe Brooks wrote that.

Romney is not the correct choice. He has run a cynical campaign replete with a level of dishonesty that has outdone the worst of the Republican base. To expect Romney to be anything but a complete disaster for American families is to ignore his record at Bain, his out-spoken hatred for half of us - because we are less wealthy than himself - and his mendacity.

A president Romney will agree with his advisers to invade Iran, which apparently he can not find on a map, to increase military spending. He can not confront the worst elements of the Republican party. Those contemptible people chose the guy. His VP is one of them.

I too can imagine what Romney's election would mean. Based on Romney's promises made during his campaign we can expect several immediate consequences. An immediate response to the Romney/Ryan budget plan by the credit ranking agencies would be to downgrade US credit several notches. An immediate response to his overt threats to Iran would be that nation's pre-emptive invasion and occupation of Iraq. An immediate response by China would be to nationalize subsidiaries within their country and hold them hostage until Romney obeys their trade demands.

Brooks thinks Americans can happily forget Romney's promises made during his cynical "say anything to get elected campaign" but his statements will have global consequences. Look outside the US. That's where you will find the real opportunists. They have a proven record for action and they will be forced into action by a Romney election.
 
2012-10-30 09:24:31 AM  

Delay: I can't believe Brooks wrote that.


You can't believe the conservative opinion writers for the New York Times wrote what is basically the weakest "Vote for this guy because" argument in the history of the paper?
 
2012-10-30 09:37:04 AM  
Shut up David Brooks.
 
2012-10-30 09:40:27 AM  

WTF Indeed: Delay: I can't believe Brooks wrote that.

You can't believe the conservative opinion writers for the New York Times wrote what is basically the weakest "Vote for this guy because" argument in the history of the paper?


Not exactly. I read Brooks frequently and he is usually coherent. I can't believe he wrote that column because his own colleague, Paul Krugman, wrote a column about a month ago anticipating this Republican argument and showing its foolishness. After thinking about it I believe Krugman was too optimistic.
 
2012-10-30 09:40:38 AM  
So the only way to get the House to work for the country instead of against it would be to elect Romney. I thought we didn't approve of negotiating with terrorists.
 
2012-10-30 09:57:04 AM  
Dammit.
 
2012-10-30 10:03:01 AM  
First George Will finally drank the Kool Aid, now David Brooks. Are there any sane conservatives left?

A Romney Presidency would be one of real reform and bipartisan compromise??????
 
2012-10-30 10:27:45 AM  

Delay: A president Romney will agree with his advisers to invade Iran, which apparently he can not find on a map, to increase military spending. He can not confront the worst elements of the Republican party


I'm always surprised at how little people care about foreign affairs. This is a candidate who flat out stated that Israel will dictate our policies in the mideast, doesn't intend to follow Obama's exit timetable in Afghanistan and will most likely invade Iran whether they have the bomb or not.

A Romney Presidency means more dead American soldiers than an Obama Presidency and that's not hyperbole, that's just simple facts based on what he said directly. But people who plan to vote for him are doing so based on bullshiat social issues and because the republicans now suddenly give a shiat about the debt. The fact that such a vast number of people can be so Goddamned stupid just, well it may not be eloquent but it sucks. 

At the very least take your farking Made in China magnetic ribbons off your cars because you don't give a fark about American soldiers.
 
2012-10-30 10:48:09 AM  

NuttierThanEver: sane conservatives


I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with this terminology.
 
2012-10-30 10:53:54 AM  

NuttierThanEver: First George Will finally drank the Kool Aid, now David Brooks. Are there any sane conservatives left?

A Romney Presidency would be one of real reform and bipartisan compromise??????


If you "reform" and "bipartisan compromise" you mean "corporate bennies" and "eliminating competitive forces" I think that would describe a Romney Administration with a complicit Congress pretty well...
 
2012-10-30 11:13:42 AM  
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: November 1, 2010

The new Republicans may distrust government, but this will be a Republican class with enormous legislative experience. Tea Party hype notwithstanding, most leading G.O.P. candidates either served in state legislatures or previously in Washington. The No Compromise stalwarts like Senator Jim DeMint have a big megaphone but few actual followers within the Senate.

Over all, if it is won, a Republican House majority will be like a second marriage. Less ecstasy, more realism. Link

Link
 
2012-10-30 11:15:33 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: By DAVID BROOKS
Published: November 1, 2010

The new Republicans may distrust government, but this will be a Republican class with enormous legislative experience. Tea Party hype notwithstanding, most leading G.O.P. candidates either served in state legislatures or previously in Washington. The No Compromise stalwarts like Senator Jim DeMint have a big megaphone but few actual followers within the Senate.

Over all, if it is won, a Republican House majority will be like a second marriage. Less ecstasy, more realism. Link

Link


So, he's the same as the rest of them.
 
2012-10-30 11:44:04 AM  
Well, Bill Clinton did say that a Romney presidency would be worse than Hurricane Sandy.  So, basically, the Democratic talking point appears to be that Romney will flood your cities, slaughter your resdients (59+ in the Caribbean and 15+ in the states), will cut your power, and leave you damp and cold inside.
 
2012-10-30 11:54:06 AM  
Editorial writers - Dying profession or not dead enough profession? I can't seriously think of a professional editorialist worth a damn, left right or center. None of them have any special knowledge about anything, they just regurgitate talking points from whatever their favorite think-tank is
 
2012-10-30 11:54:16 AM  
Slow and steady progress with an increasing national debt vs. Christian conservatism and Ayn Rand tax policies

Status quo please.
 
2012-10-30 11:55:37 AM  
Brooks stepped over the line a few times in the name of sanity, but when it comes down to the wire, if he doesn't toe the line here, he'll be one of the names thrown out there as apostates and heretics when the GOP falls on its face in about 6 days.
 
2012-10-30 11:55:51 AM  
Looks like Obama is going to be spending even more time golfing. And don't worry, Michelle can continue to live like someone that just won the lottery. Plenty of left-tards will shell out money to see them happy.
 
2012-10-30 11:56:59 AM  
Rats, sinking ship.
 
2012-10-30 11:57:09 AM  
In Nate Silver We Trust.
 
2012-10-30 11:57:20 AM  
Win or lose, Obama should be in pretty good shape....just the other day Hugo Chávez offered him a job in his cabinet as his Propaganda Czar. I think former president Obama will be alright.
 
2012-10-30 11:57:36 AM  
I read that entire article to say:

Elect Mitt Romney because his nature of doing anything to be President means he will violate his campaign promises and work as a partisan by making the obstinate Congress Republicans work with him because they don't want to make a Republican President look bad.

Seriously?! What. The. Fark.
 
2012-10-30 11:58:02 AM  
I think a return to the policies that crashed the economy will obviously be the best outcome. Vote for Romney to get the government you deserve.
 
2012-10-30 11:58:19 AM  

manfriend: Looks like Obama is going to be spending even more time golfing. And don't worry, Michelle can continue to live like someone that just won the lottery. Plenty of left-tards will shell out money to see them happy.


More liquid from GOP tears than 10 Sandy's combined.
 
2012-10-30 11:59:43 AM  

bwilson27: manfriend: Looks like Obama is going to be spending even more time golfing. And don't worry, Michelle can continue to live like someone that just won the lottery. Plenty of left-tards will shell out money to see them happy.

More liquid from GOP tears than 10 Sandy's combined.


My doctor is telling me I need to cut back on the tears. I'm developing a condition.
 
2012-10-30 12:00:14 PM  

manfriend: Looks like Obama is going to be spending even more time golfing. And don't worry, Michelle can continue to live like someone that just won the lottery. Plenty of left-tards will shell out money to see them happy.


beta_plus: In Nate Silver We Trust.


karnal: Win or lose, Obama should be in pretty good shape....just the other day Hugo Chávez offered him a job in his cabinet as his Propaganda Czar. I think former president Obama will be alright.


Jesus Tapdancing Christ, this thread went to shiat in a heartbeat.
 
2012-10-30 12:00:39 PM  

Infernalist: bwilson27: manfriend: Looks like Obama is going to be spending even more time golfing. And don't worry, Michelle can continue to live like someone that just won the lottery. Plenty of left-tards will shell out money to see them happy.

More liquid from GOP tears than 10 Sandy's combined.

My doctor is telling me I need to cut back on the tears. I'm developing a condition.


They are rather high in sodium.
 
2012-10-30 12:01:01 PM  
If Obama wins, we'll probably get small-bore stasis; if Romney wins, we're more likely to get bipartisan reform.

Seriously... and by bipartisan reform he means the Dems have to do everything the Republicans want.
/Fark that guy

mauricebroaddus.com
 
2012-10-30 12:01:37 PM  

tnpir: manfriend: Looks like Obama is going to be spending even more time golfing. And don't worry, Michelle can continue to live like someone that just won the lottery. Plenty of left-tards will shell out money to see them happy.

beta_plus: In Nate Silver We Trust.

karnal: Win or lose, Obama should be in pretty good shape....just the other day Hugo Chávez offered him a job in his cabinet as his Propaganda Czar. I think former president Obama will be alright.

Jesus Tapdancing Christ, this thread went to shiat in a heartbeat.


Well the paychecks end in a week, you know. This whole 'paid internet shill' thing is only seasonal work.
 
2012-10-30 12:01:59 PM  
This is indeed the only argument for electing a repub: vote for us and we'll stop stabbing you in the back. Of course, while you're facing in that direction...
 
2012-10-30 12:02:04 PM  
So to sum up the article, he is saying, "Obama won't get anything done because the Republican House puts party over country so vote Romney."
 
2012-10-30 12:02:06 PM  
He would easily find 10 Republican senators willing to go along with a version of a Grand Bargain.


I mean, sure, if you just ignore all of recent history that makes sense. Of course, since the GOP will have failed in their most important priority (making Obama a 1-termer) then maybe there's some wiggle room.

But I doubt it.

David Brooks is peddling the fallacy that the GOP is, essentially, a rational organization.
 
2012-10-30 12:02:41 PM  
Stupid person says stupid thing. More at 11.
 
2012-10-30 12:02:50 PM  
The bottom line is this: If Obama wins, we'll probably get small-bore stasis; if Romney wins, we're more likely to get bipartisan reform. Romney is more of a flexible flip-flopper than Obama. He has more influence over the most intransigent element in the Washington equation House Republicans. He's more likely to get big stuff done.

Republicans are willing to let the country implode rather than work with Democrats, so vote Republican?
 
2012-10-30 12:02:51 PM  

RichieLaw: I read that entire article to say:

Elect Mitt Romney because his nature of doing anything to be President means he will violate his campaign promises and work as a partisan by making the obstinate Congress Republicans work with him because they don't want to make a Republican President look bad.

Seriously?! What. The. Fark.


Don't forget the point about how the Republicans in Congress would continue to do everything in their power to ensure that Obama looks like a bad President, even if it comes at the expense of the American people. It plainly states that Republicans are truly party before country, so vote Republican.

So I echo your sentiment: WTF?
 
2012-10-30 12:03:12 PM  
"Romney is more of a flexible flip-flopper than Obama. He has more influence over the most intransigent element in the Washington equation House Republicans. He's more likely to get big stuff done. "

So, being a flip-flopper is an asset now?
 
2012-10-30 12:03:24 PM  

I_C_Weener: Well, Bill Clinton did say that a Romney presidency would be worse than Hurricane Sandy.  So, basically, the Democratic talking point appears to be that Romney will flood your cities, slaughter your resdients (59+ in the Caribbean and 15+ in the states), will cut your power, and leave you damp and cold inside.


Well, we'd lose far more than 74 in a war with Iran pretty easily, and the costs of that war would be more than the costs of cleanup from the hurricane, so yeah.
 
2012-10-30 12:03:51 PM  

manfriend: Looks like Obama is going to be spending even more time golfing. And don't worry, Michelle can continue to live like someone that just won the lottery. Plenty of left-tards will shell out money to see them happy.


I see you have both massive butthurt and a large amount of sand in your vagina.

Enjoy your 4 more years!
 
2012-10-30 12:05:09 PM  

Delay: He can not confront the worst elements of the Republican party.


Not only is he unprepared to confront them, he will need their support and in turn will have to cater to them to achieve any of his goals.
 
2012-10-30 12:05:43 PM  

tnpir: manfriend: Looks like Obama is going to be spending even more time golfing. And don't worry, Michelle can continue to live like someone that just won the lottery. Plenty of left-tards will shell out money to see them happy.

beta_plus: In Nate Silver We Trust.

karnal: Win or lose, Obama should be in pretty good shape....just the other day Hugo Chávez offered him a job in his cabinet as his Propaganda Czar. I think former president Obama will be alright.

Jesus Tapdancing Christ, this thread went to shiat in a heartbeat.


Conservatives are in full meltdown right now. the polls aren't looking good, and that has them running scared, again. If Obama wins again, I think they will just go ape factor 10, not understanding how they could possibly have lost.
 
2012-10-30 12:06:00 PM  

ghare: I_C_Weener: Well, Bill Clinton did say that a Romney presidency would be worse than Hurricane Sandy.  So, basically, the Democratic talking point appears to be that Romney will flood your cities, slaughter your resdients (59+ in the Caribbean and 15+ in the states), will cut your power, and leave you damp and cold inside.

Well, we'd lose far more than 74 in a war with Iran pretty easily, and the costs of that war would be more than the costs of cleanup from the hurricane, so yeah.


Oh, I absolutely agree that a GOP administration will result in the loss of American lives.

We only have to look back on the last 8 years of GWB to determine that.
 
2012-10-30 12:06:51 PM  
The bottom line is this: If Obama wins, we'll probably get small-bore stasis; if Romney wins, we're more likely to get bipartisan reform.*

*Remember, when Republicans talk about "bipartisan reform," they mean "give me everything I want or else."
 
2012-10-30 12:06:52 PM  
"Vote for Romney because he's a flipflopper".

I can't believe I just read that.
 
2012-10-30 12:07:02 PM  
So, lemme see if I've got this right...

The GOP filibustered everything the President tried to do, so that they could get their way.
The Democrats used Republican ideas to get the few slivers of that group they could shave off to get SOMETHING done.
The GOP now screams that nothing got done, and it's the fault of the democrats.
They also say that we should elect more of them, so that they'll have even more power to 'not' do things, but they won't 'not' do that if we elect Their man for the big seat....


Do I have this right? I mean, before I laugh in their faces?
 
2012-10-30 12:08:00 PM  

I_C_Weener: Well, Bill Clinton did say


IClinton's uses topical context. Pretty typical for him.

Here's a few you can use yourself.

"Boy, those Detroit Tigers stunk out the World Series, *pause* but that's nothing like the failure that we will see if Romney gets elected."

or

"There's a new study that shows that if you watch horror shows you will lose weight, *pause* but, I think we should just skip a few hamburgers rather than suffer the horror of a Romney presidency."
 
2012-10-30 12:08:19 PM  
So the lesson here is.....Holding the nation hostage works.

thanks for playing
 
2012-10-30 12:09:49 PM  
So his argument is that the House Republicans are such a group of intransigent babies that only Romney would have a chance of getting anything significant through Congress. So vote Republican.

I've got a better idea. Vote Obama, and work on reducing the tea party contingent in the House this year and in 2014. Then, not only would the president be able to "get things done," but they would actually be things that are good for the country.

Failing that, I'll take four more years of gridlock (and the full implementation of the ACA) over handing the GOP the keys again and allowing them to drive the country back over a cliff again.
 
2012-10-30 12:10:08 PM  
FTFA:

"Romney is more of a flexible flip-flopper than Obama. He has more influence over the most intransigent element in the Washington equation House Republicans. He's more likely to get big stuff done. "

So flip-flopping is a character trait you want in a leader now.
 
2012-10-30 12:10:39 PM  

I_C_Weener: Romney will flood your cities, slaughter your resdients (59+ in the Caribbean and 15+ in the states), will cut your power, and leave you damp and cold inside.


cuts to infrastructure and the work force that services it... ✓
known chickenhawk that has already been lying about Iran... ✓
deregulation that leads to more Enrons... ✓
tax cuts for the rich at the expense of the poor and middle class... ✓

looks like Bill is 4 for 4 there...
 
Displayed 50 of 132 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report