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.

(Washington Post)   Logic of many newspaper endorsements for Romney: Republicans in Congress refuse to work with Obama, so we need to elect someone they'll work with   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 84
    More: Stupid, Mitt Romney, President Obama, Mitch McConnell, Boehner, congresses, Republican, human beings, logic  
•       •       •

1329 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Oct 2012 at 3:47 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-30 04:43:33 PM

jasimo: 1) Oppose everything the President wants to do (especially jobs bills), even if it was your idea first

2) Primary out anyone who cooperates with the President/Democrats

3) Blame the President for being partisan and unable to pass jobs bills and other legislation

4) Suggest/admit that you're going to keep opposing even the most reasonable legislation and the only way you'll act in good faith is if your guy is elected President

5) Profit


When Obama begins his second term, expect him to whip out the Executive Order pen numerous times to bypass Congress on important legislation that the GOP continually roadblocks.
 
2012-10-30 04:47:19 PM
Or we could try a Democratic congress instead.

Nah, we really need to work on getting rape redefined and Wall St. unregulated. Plus I think everyone under 55 could do without Medicare. And has unemployment insurance really helped anyone but lazy people?
 
2012-10-30 04:47:23 PM

markie_farkie:

When Obama begins his second term, expect him to whip out the Executive Order pen numerous times to bypass Congress on important legislation that the GOP continually roadblocks.


He's shown remarkable constraint in not fully abusing all of the incredible powers the Republicans gave to the executive branch.
 
2012-10-30 04:48:39 PM
Sadly things like this make me understand why parents give in and buy their kids crappy toys or junk food. Its tempting to put the GOP into office no matter how awful it would be just to get some relief from this stupid crap for a couple of years.
 
2012-10-30 04:53:29 PM

Bloody William: tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama was supposed to be the most post-partisan President eva.
Instead he starts his term with "I won" and it goes downhill from there.

Wow. You're actually admitting that the main problem you have with Obama is that he won the election.


This is why we can't have nice things, some people are incapable of actual reading.
 
2012-10-30 04:59:31 PM
He said he could do the job, he promised he could do the job and by almost accounts he failed, even using Obama's own standard of measurement he failed.
We have to let him go and move on, he'll find something more suited to his skill set.
 
2012-10-30 05:00:51 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama was supposed to be the most post-partisan President eva.
Instead he starts his term with "I won" and it goes downhill from there.


I know your a troll, but listen:

Obama didn't start his term rubbing it in. It was a pretty awesome moment--a ton of people were happy about it. McCain's concession speech was--admirable. Humble and exactly what it should have been.

In the first few years he mostly spent time feeling out healthcare reform. He settled on the Republican model suggested both in the 1990s by the neoconservatives and then by Mittens as a model in Massachusetts.

He then kept taxes low. At least as low as they have been. If you didn't complain under Bush, you frankly have zero reason to be complaining right now. Sadly--this goes with deficit spending. You didn't care when it was half this high. "Deficits are good." right? If you didn't complain when Bush did it, you really cannot honestly blame this president solely for the Deficit.

He isn't a socialist or a muslim either. Just for clarity. You seem pretty out of touch.

Obamacare largely directs government money to healthcare and spending. It isn't a perfect bill to the left or the right. But the amount you've spent making it look like medical care is now the delivery scene from Rosemary's Baby shows me you probably don't know enough about it or are being willfully ignorant of the good things within it.

If Obama is elected to a second term, Republicans may want to begin working with him. It may not be an ideal presidency--but the republican obstructionism of this era will very likely be a chapter in High School History textbooks.
 
2012-10-30 05:02:23 PM

vpb: tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama was supposed to be the most post-partisan President eva.
Instead he starts his term with "I won" and it goes downhill from there.

Yes, expecting Republicans to understand Democracy was obviously a mistake. Still, it's better to get noting done than to let the GOP ruin the country.


Hold on so Republicans don't understand democracy. After 2 years of a Democrat President, Senate, and House the people elected more Republican's into the house to give them control. Shouldn't the Democrats have taken that to mean that the people want a 'righter' policy in place. Both sides play the exact same games in Washington and say that the other side won't talk.

Mitt Romneys Tax Return: Even though live in a blue state, I also cast my vote for Obama.

As fun as it would be to watch the butthurt if Obama loses the popular vote but wins the EC, I think the President will have an easier second term if he wins unequivocally.


I'm in the same boat. I'd will be amusing to here the same lines the left said about Bush (not) winning said by the right.
 
2012-10-30 05:09:38 PM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: So I can understand the low-information voter seeing Mitt Romney in the past couple of weeks and saying to themselves "He seems like a compassionate conservative who could get this country on track." It's incredibly dumb, but I understand it. What I don't understand is why his base is still turning out and enthusiastic, considering he's reversed every position he took to squeak through the primaries. Conservatives are taking their least ugly cousin to the prom, and cheering that she's going to leave with another guy.



Then you haven't been paying attention. Their mantra since 2009 has been "Anybody but Obama", and Mitt Romney is the walking definition of 'anybody.'

It doesn't matter how much Mitt contradicts himself. It doesn't matter if he slaughters every sacred cow conservatives hold dear in the next seven days. He's not Obama, and that's all that matters. Once he gets elected they'll just dictate his agenda anyway (see Grover Norquist's comments at CPAC).
 
2012-10-30 05:14:37 PM

Lt_Ryan: vpb: tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama was supposed to be the most post-partisan President eva.
Instead he starts his term with "I won" and it goes downhill from there.

Yes, expecting Republicans to understand Democracy was obviously a mistake. Still, it's better to get noting done than to let the GOP ruin the country.

Hold on so Republicans don't understand democracy. After 2 years of a Democrat President, Senate, and House the people elected more Republican's into the house to give them control. Shouldn't the Democrats have taken that to mean that the people want a 'righter' policy in place. Both sides play the exact same games in Washington and say that the other side won't talk.

Mitt Romneys Tax Return: Even though live in a blue state, I also cast my vote for Obama.

As fun as it would be to watch the butthurt if Obama loses the popular vote but wins the EC, I think the President will have an easier second term if he wins unequivocally.

I'm in the same boat. I'd will be amusing to here the same lines the left said about Bush (not) winning said by the right.


The understand democracy. They don't seem to get compromise. Or politicking. Not even a little. Especially since Obama was elected--and sadly that narrative was put forth mostly by sources on the right: He's a Muslim, He wasn't born here, he's a socialist. And it's worked. In some polls still, STILL half of registered republicans believe Obama isn't an American citizen. It was largely those types of things that spurred the Tea Party, and those types of accusations that directed people to all of a sudden care about deficits, even though they hadn't for eight years. And while Obama hasn't been a truly exceptional president, the right has used a massive, massive amount of lying and deception in their news and social outlets to justify the fact that Obama isn't "One of us."

So frankly, the state of the country needs work--and I blame the current right more than I blame the current left. The no negotiation, the flat refusal to negotiate is not how adults handle arguments. And it should never be the way out policy makers do.
 
2012-10-30 05:15:41 PM
REWARD BAD BEHAVIOR
GOP 2012!
 
2012-10-30 05:21:37 PM

markie_farkie: jasimo: 1) Oppose everything the President wants to do (especially jobs bills), even if it was your idea first

2) Primary out anyone who cooperates with the President/Democrats

3) Blame the President for being partisan and unable to pass jobs bills and other legislation

4) Suggest/admit that you're going to keep opposing even the most reasonable legislation and the only way you'll act in good faith is if your guy is elected President

5) Profit

When Obama begins his second term, expect him to whip out the Executive Order pen numerous times to bypass Congress on important legislation that the GOP continually roadblocks.


I'm getting the sense from his office that he's done messing around with the GOP tea baggers
 
2012-10-30 05:22:20 PM
Romney/Ryan: BECAUSE NEGOTIATING WITH TERRORISTS WORKS!!!
 
2012-10-30 05:36:14 PM
A Rmoney presidency would be remote controlled by the Koch Brothers, Sheldon Adelson, Paul Ryan, and Steve King. In that order.
 
2012-10-30 06:17:01 PM
For those wondering about 'I won.'

Because Obama was, arguably, childish and a bit arrogant during his first couple of days in office and attempted to shut down what he regarded as a pointless debate about whether or not the 47% deserved rebates by reminding Republicans that he won the election, the Republicans are perfectly justified in punishing the entire country for that insult for years by fighting Obama every step of the way, often changing their own positions whenever Obama gave a hint of agreeing with them.

Thus, since Obama mentioned that he won, we can't let him win again or he might say he won again and force the Republicans to continue with their much deserved response to such a vile insult.
 
2012-10-30 06:18:56 PM

Schubert'sCell: To anyone that makes this argument:

Just because the Republicans will work with Romney doesn't mean that you will benefit from (or approve of) the policies that result from that cooperation.

Equivalently: I want my toddlers to play well together. If they put their heads together and destroy a toy, am I supposed to be pleased that they cooperated?



I've decided the difference between liberals and conservatives in this country is critical thinking.

One side sees good and bad, while the other side see shades of grey. Both love their country and its people, it just comes down to planning and intelligence versus action and faith. Interestingly, it's the mixture of the two that makes America so interesting.

The problem with this is if there is gridlock like we're currently seeing happen. Because when there is total gridlock only a political revolution can cause the seizure to relax.
 
2012-10-30 06:26:11 PM
And soon as Romney gets into office the Democrats will return the favor of the last few years. Think they won't? You must be new to politics.
 
2012-10-30 06:39:31 PM


The problem with this is if there is gridlock like we're currently seeing happen. Because when there is total gridlock only a political revolution can cause the seizure to relax.


Revolutions are unpredictable. As many turn out poorly as well. When "the enemy" theoretically represents half the population, instead of a foreign master or a small subpopulation, the outcomes is predictably bad. So I disagree strongly.

I think the fundamental breakdown that we've seen is the "marketization" of campaigns: candidates are willing to say anything that might net a voter. Sometimes it's direct lies (I'm looking at you, Mitt), sometimes it's fear-mongering, sometimes it's missing context, sometimes its blaming "the other guy" for what ails a demographic. In almost no cases does it involve actual policy. If the candidates can't talk policy in realistic terms, why are the voters going to?

A few years ago, the "citation needed" meme got really popular. I think the meme we missed this cycle was "Be specific!". On both sides. I think Obama did a better job than Romney did (hard not to), but there's still a lot he could have said. Until we (voters, media, donors and all) hold candidates' feet to the fire, it really won't get any better.
 
2012-10-30 06:53:44 PM

Freudian_slipknot: I guess he just hopes no one will remember that when he was governor even the Republicans voted against him

"But DiMasi, the Democratic speaker, pointed to dwindling Republican support: ''You didn't even have to debate ..... Even the Republicans voted against him.''

Of 283 budget veto overrides in 2006, Romney failed to attract a single Republican vote on 81 roll calls in the Senate and 60 in the House, records show."

Oh, who am I kidding. Of course they don't remember.


See? He was bipartisan!
 
2012-10-30 07:01:59 PM
Can US economy handle Romney presidency?
 
2012-10-30 07:27:57 PM
Well, this farkin' little spoiled brat won't stop throwing himself on the floor screaming in the grocery store every time his parents refuse to give him a lollipop.

Instead, we should get rid of his parents and get new adopted parents that will give him said lollipop.
 
2012-10-30 07:28:39 PM

FlameDuck: Can US economy handle Romney presidency?


Let's not try and find out, OK?
 
2012-10-30 07:29:16 PM

markie_farkie: Everyone's missing the point here.

Newspapers are a dying breed. The GOP are a dying breed. They need each other. It's self-preservation as they impotently watch their on-fire sinking houseboat go over a waterfall.


This is it, in a nutshell. Newspapers are at the point they need to affirm their readership's views, in order to keep them. Those are older, conservative folks. That there isn't much rational thought behind these endorsements, and especially in a long term vein, is beside the point.

Yes, I'm sure endorsing the precedent of one party holding the nation's economy hostage for political gain is a great idea.
 
2012-10-30 07:34:51 PM

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Yes, I'm sure endorsing the precedent of one party holding the nation's economy hostage for political gain is a great idea.


Sarcasm doesn't work well on Fark.
 
2012-10-30 07:45:02 PM
What bothers me most about this is that if the Republicans win in spite of their history making obstructionism, the Democrats will not learn the lesson that "voters don't give a shi*t about obstructionism," and return the favor to Romney. They'll roll over on their backs just like they did for Bush.
 
2012-10-30 07:54:52 PM

bugontherug: What bothers me most about this is that if the Republicans win in spite of their history making obstructionism, the Democrats will not learn the lesson that "voters don't give a shi*t about obstructionism," and return the favor to Romney. They'll roll over on their backs just like they did for Bush.


The trend of filibuster use to force supermajorities to get anything done actually started during the later Bush years. It's not _entirely_ a partisan thing, the fact that the Dems were able to use it (more hesitantly, because they weren't sure if voters would call 'em out at first) and not lose seats over it is sort of why it snowballed into how the GOP uses it in the first place.

This was sorta where we were bound to end up regardless of which party was on top, basically. It's happened before. The last couple times people have gotten sick of it, reforms were implemented that lasted a couple decades, then the rule changes to allow loopholes and bullshiat started building up again.
 
2012-10-30 08:19:38 PM

Tyee: He said he could do the job, he promised he could do the job and by almost accounts he failed, even using Obama's own standard of measurement he failed.
We have to let him go and move on, he'll find something more suited to his skill set.


This raises another question.

Why do you think Romney is the better alternative? When has a man's success in business ever translated into politics?
 
2012-10-30 08:51:34 PM
Yeah, and I dont get along with my boss, so they should fire him and hire someone that I do get along with.

/gop logic
 
2012-10-30 09:21:23 PM

Jim_Callahan: bugontherug: What bothers me most about this is that if the Republicans win in spite of their history making obstructionism, the Democrats will not learn the lesson that "voters don't give a shi*t about obstructionism," and return the favor to Romney. They'll roll over on their backs just like they did for Bush.

The trend of filibuster use to force supermajorities to get anything done actually started during the later Bush years. It's not _entirely_ a partisan thing, the fact that the Dems were able to use it (more hesitantly, because they weren't sure if voters would call 'em out at first) and not lose seats over it is sort of why it snowballed into how the GOP uses it in the first place.

This was sorta where we were bound to end up regardless of which party was on top, basically. It's happened before. The last couple times people have gotten sick of it, reforms were implemented that lasted a couple decades, then the rule changes to allow loopholes and bullshiat started building up again.


Just to set the record straight...
While both parties have been guilty of overuse of the filibuster, the Republicans were the ones that have ramped things up each time they were the minority party. 

dl.dropbox.com
 
2012-10-30 11:24:16 PM

I Browse: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: So I can understand the low-information voter seeing Mitt Romney in the past couple of weeks and saying to themselves "He seems like a compassionate conservative who could get this country on track." It's incredibly dumb, but I understand it. What I don't understand is why his base is still turning out and enthusiastic, considering he's reversed every position he took to squeak through the primaries. Conservatives are taking their least ugly cousin to the prom, and cheering that she's going to leave with another guy.


Then you haven't been paying attention. Their mantra since 2009 has been "Anybody but Obama", and Mitt Romney is the walking definition of 'anybody.'

It doesn't matter how much Mitt contradicts himself. It doesn't matter if he slaughters every sacred cow conservatives hold dear in the next seven days. He's not Obama, and that's all that matters. Once he gets elected they'll just dictate his agenda anyway (see Grover Norquist's comments at CPAC).


Is it just me, or is Romney the John Kerry of the Republicans? The parallels are almost eerie. The current incumbent is vulnerable, and deeply unpopular with the opposition. Despite flirting with more extreme candidates in the primary, the party eventually settles on a consensus candidate no on is particularly excited about. Despite this, the party faithful eventually come around, because, 'well anyone is better that the current asshole in charge'. And when all is said and done, it all comes down to Ohio.
 
2012-10-30 11:52:36 PM
Since I doubt the Republicans are going to put forth any laws worthe encating, I have a plan. The Democrats in the Senate, who probably will be a minority if Romeny gets elected, Filibsuter everything. For the next 2 years shut down the federal govenrments ability to pass laws. Then have all of the papers pushing for dems to have control again so something can get done.
 
2012-10-31 01:19:04 AM

LeftOfLiberal: Since I doubt the Republicans are going to put forth any laws worthe encating, I have a plan. The Democrats in the Senate, who probably will be a minority if Romeny gets elected, Filibsuter everything. For the next 2 years shut down the federal govenrments ability to pass laws. Then have all of the papers pushing for dems to have control again so something can get done.


img1.fark.net

/IOKIYAR
 
2012-10-31 01:37:12 AM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: LeftOfLiberal: Since I doubt the Republicans are going to put forth any laws worthe encating, I have a plan. The Democrats in the Senate, who probably will be a minority if Romeny gets elected, Filibsuter everything. For the next 2 years shut down the federal govenrments ability to pass laws. Then have all of the papers pushing for dems to have control again so something can get done.

[img1.fark.net image 54x11]

/I ONLY OKIYAR

 
2012-10-31 10:50:49 PM
The real problem we have here is too many people whine and b*tch about what goes on in Washington without knowing what goes on in Washington. You hear them make grunting noises that sound like "I hate the gridlock... I just want something to get done!" without any thought as to what that "something" might be. If given the choice between the "somethings" that the republicans want (and have promised to teabaggers, birfers, racists, the 1%, and corporations all over the planet) and the "nothing" that these idiots swear up and down is happening, I'll take the "nothing" every time.

It's like handing a schizophrenic maniac a loaded gun, and being locked in a room with him while he's off his meds... which is the better choice, that he does "something", or that he does "nothing"?
 
Displayed 34 of 84 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report