Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Pre-Convention Election Round-UpFollow

#77 Aug 13 2012 at 1:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Prepare to get Tweet-spammed 195 times, motherfucker Smiley: mad

Sometimes I get someone who decides to follow me for a day which always confuses me. Then they stop following me, but that part makes a lot more sense.

Also, I hope no one is relying on this thread for riveting election coverage right now.

Edited, Aug 13th 2012 2:29pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#78 Aug 13 2012 at 1:37 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,896 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Also, I hope no one is relying on this thread for riveting election coverage right now.
Be still, my beating heart.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#79 Aug 13 2012 at 1:42 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
lolgaxe wrote:
Be still, my beating heart.

I agree Smiley: mad
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#80 Aug 13 2012 at 1:42 PM Rating: Excellent
****
6,471 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Prepare to get Tweet-spammed 195 times, motherfucker Smiley: mad

Sometimes I get someone who decides to follow me for a day which always confuses me. Then they stop following me, but that part makes a lot more sense.

Also, I hope no one is relying on this thread for riveting election coverage right now.

Edited, Aug 13th 2012 2:29pm by Jophiel


If their avatar is a mildly attractive-looking girl, then they're almost assuredly a bot. If not, then there's still a 75-90% chance that they're a bot anyway. The dead giveaways are the ratio of tweets/following/followers, links to **** sites in the profile, or tweets that sound like bumper-sticker advice or jokes that come at regular intervals.

I guess the crawlers that they use sometimes search for keywords in your tweets. I'll get follows from bots devoted to particular video games when I mention them by name. But I've also been followed by a bot for a haiku site when I used the word "haiku", and a trademark website for using "trademark", etc. etc.

At one point I had a harem of about 12 **** bots. I was actually kinda bummed when they all left after a couple weeks. Smiley: lol
#81 Aug 13 2012 at 2:11 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
No, they're usually people following politics. I think sometimes someone just trawls through John Avlon's followers list or something.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#82 Aug 13 2012 at 2:21 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,826 posts
Now I'm following Joph and Locke on Twitter. You both need to amuse me!
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


World of Warcraft
Aggramar Alliance
Allizsah: 92 Human Paladin
#83 Aug 13 2012 at 2:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Twitter wrote:
If you believe Bigdaddyjug is engaging in abusive behavior on Twitter, you may report Bigdaddyjug for spam

Don't EVEN make me...
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#84 Aug 13 2012 at 2:36 PM Rating: Good
***
2,826 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Twitter wrote:
If you believe Bigdaddyjug is engaging in abusive behavior on Twitter, you may report Bigdaddyjug for spam

Don't EVEN make me...


Pfft, I've been signed up for Twitter for over a year and have 23 tweets. Like they'd believe that!!!

Edited, Aug 13th 2012 3:36pm by Bigdaddyjug
____________________________
Sir Xsarus wrote:
That's pretty much the best ninja edit ever.


World of Warcraft
Aggramar Alliance
Allizsah: 92 Human Paladin
#85 Aug 13 2012 at 3:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
I have a Twitter account that I use just for entering crap online. It's full of useless follows and followers. I sometimes think about making another account that I might actually use. Then I can follow you guys, since I really just don't get enough of you here.
#86 Aug 13 2012 at 3:23 PM Rating: Good
****
6,471 posts
Nadenu wrote:
I have a Twitter account that I use just for entering crap online. It's full of useless follows and followers. I sometimes think about making another account that I might actually use. Then I can follow you guys, since I really just don't get enough of you here.


I'm sure Joph's account is just a GMG retweeting bot, anyway.


Omnibus!!
#87 Aug 13 2012 at 3:25 PM Rating: Excellent
If there is one thing that has been really missing in my life it's more Asylum poster content.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#88 Aug 13 2012 at 3:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
@varrussword?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#89 Aug 13 2012 at 4:42 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Yeah. Late to the party. Whatever.

Jophiel wrote:
It's pretty much a given that the Ryan pick represents a feeling that Romney wasn't holding his base. Traditionally, you pick a VP who fills some of the holes in your resume. Ryan is a complete hand-over to the conservative base who had been demanding in recent weeks that he get the slot.


I think that the sense was that by picking Ryan, they make it a contest of ideas rather than popularity. IMO, it's not a bad choice. Actually, I think it's a very good choice.

Quote:
The flip side of this is that whatever pretend-moderate stances Romney might have taken are tossed out the window. He has aligned himself with an unpopular budget that dismantles Medicare and refuses to raise revenues to combat the nation's debt/deficit problems. Obama had been hoping to run against Ryan and now he has his chance.


I think that this may be a case of being careful of what you wish for, because you might just get it. I suspect that the tipping point for the decision of Ryan as VP was related to what we were talking about last week with polling. I watched some panel yesterday talking about it, and I guess that the NYT did a piece basically saying that this was what the Dems wanted because then they could make the election about ideas instead of Obama's record. But I think that the Romney camp realized (or feared) that the Left has sufficient influence with the media to run a successful distraction campaign right up to the election, effectively allowing them to avoid having to defend Obama's record anyway. Simply by bringing up a different negative attack on Romney and the GOP each week, they could potentially have pulled that off.


Basically, they don't want to have the public looking at Obama's economic performance and asking if someone else could do better. But with Ryan, they have a target to attack (his budget plans), that appears all tasty and fun. But I suspect it'll backfire. Because if they engage on that front, that gives the Romney campaign the toe in the door they need to make it about economics at least, and not who treats dogs worse, or who's filed how many years of returns, or whether someone's policies/actions resulted in someone dying. Get the Dems to engage on something related to economics, and it gives the Romney campaign the opportunity to contrast their plan with the absence of a plan on the Left. They can point to 3 years of no budgets from the Democrats. They can point to the lack of leadership from Obama.

I think the Dems will not be able to help themselves but to attack Ryan on his budget plans and along the way Romney on Bain. And I think that will ultimately help the GOP.

Quote:
I don't know if Romney had a "better" option available. He was losing the election and a forgettable VP pick wasn't going to make him lose any less. But Romney is pretty boring and forgettable himself and this race may well turn into Obama vs Ryan just as last election was dominated by Obama vs Palin with McCain slipping towards the back. Ryan isn't Palin in that he can probably conduct himself better, is smarter and hopefully can name what newspapers he reads but Romney (intentionally or not) has just sidelined himself in relevance this campaign.


I think that the Left is making the mistake of thinking this is more about the people than the policies. Polling numbers today aside (which are more about popularity), the last couple years have shown a voting public increasingly disappointed with more empty rhetoric and increasingly demanding actual plans and results. I think that the Ryan pick puts the Romney campaign firmly into the "we've go the ideas and solutions", and makes this an easy comparison between the guys who have those ideas and solutions and the guys who just hope they can distract Americans from their problems with clever rhetoric. It signals that Romney isn't going to just run on surface level politics, but will attempt to show that his team has skill and capability while the other side just looks pretty.


Oh. And Ryan will absolutely decimate Biden in any sort of debate. In an environment where the public demands straight talk, Ryan walks away with the win here.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#90 Aug 13 2012 at 4:47 PM Rating: Decent
******
21,720 posts
gbaji wrote:
And Ryan will absolutely decimate Biden in any sort of debate.


Biden's a tool. This is the only part of your post that made any sense whatsoever. All that other crap is just more Smiley: tinfoilhat
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#91 Aug 13 2012 at 5:10 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
/shrug

I think that the Ryan pick puts the Dems in the position of having to attack the Ryan budgets. Which at least puts something related to economics in front of the public, as opposed to endless media stories about dogs in containers and the virtues of dressage. It's a smart pick in that it allows the GOP to at least somewhat force the debate to be about economic policy. Of course, they still have to win that debate, but at least it gives them some control over their own destiny. If they succeed in convincing people that the sorts of economic policies reflected in Romey's actions at Bain and Ryans budget proposals are what American needs, they will win. If they don't, they will lose. It's a good risk IMO.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#92 Aug 13 2012 at 5:14 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Quote:
In an environment where the public demands straight talk

It's as though you've never watched a debate in your life Smiley: laugh

Biden is much more folksy and affable which counts for a lot in those things. The only reason people didn't say Palin bombed in the debate was because of folksy connection with the audience. Not that I think Biden can't defend on policy but I expect neither side will "destroy" anyone.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#93 Aug 13 2012 at 5:15 PM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
I don't think people are going to be all that impressed by a plan that requires 5 trillion dollars to appear out of thin air and raises taxes on low income households.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#94 Aug 13 2012 at 5:48 PM Rating: Good
****
6,471 posts
gbaji wrote:
Actually, I think it's a very good choice.


Color me surprised. Smiley: rolleyes
#95 Aug 13 2012 at 5:48 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Quote:
In an environment where the public demands straight talk

It's as though you've never watched a debate in your life Smiley: laugh

Biden is much more folksy and affable which counts for a lot in those things.


I suspect that'll be worth a lot less this time around than at any time during our adult lifetimes Joph. You get that this is really the first presidential election cycle in 32 years in which the US has actually been in a down economy for an entire presidential term, right? You and I (and pretty much everyone on this forum) have lived our entire adult lives in which the assumption of a robust growing US economy was the norm, so election politics became around who had the most clever lines, or the most appealing personality, etc.

I suspect that the voters will want a bit more substance this time around. Because for most of them (just as for most of us), this is the first time they've felt that the actual economic health of the nation is at stake. You'll need more than clever sounding slogans, doubly so when you're the guys trying to run for a second term after the first term went so poorly.

Quote:
The only reason people didn't say Palin bombed in the debate was because of folksy connection with the audience.


Uh huh. Which is why Romney's choice shows a marked change from past approaches to presidential elections. He's betting that the voters care about real proposals, real ideas, and real solutions. He's making a sharp contrast between his ticket and Obama's, and making economic policy the front and center difference. Again, I happen to think this was absolutely the right thing to do. He could have done this with several possible VP picks, but Ryan probably serves that purpose better than any.

Quote:
Not that I think Biden can't defend on policy but I expect neither side will "destroy" anyone.



Uh... Ok. You keep on thinking that.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#96 Aug 13 2012 at 5:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Thanks, I will? I guess?

I spent last election watching you get every grand prediction wrong. Maybe this time will be different but I'm not exactly inspired to engage you in the same rhetoric until something new actually happens.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#97 Aug 13 2012 at 6:01 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
I don't think people are going to be all that impressed by a plan that requires 5 trillion dollars to appear out of thin air and raises taxes on low income households.


First off. It doesn't. It assumes that by committing to not raising taxes (on anyone), that job creators will feel safer investing in longer term job creation. This will lower the unemployment rate and increase the GDP growth rate. That, in turn, will increase tax revenues without raising a single rate. Over time, it will help to eliminate the deficit. It also assumes cuts in spending to make up the difference. It's a longer term plan. The critics assume that no new jobs will be created and that no economic growth will occur, and engage in zero sum economics to assume that in order to close the deficit, the GOP would then have to raise taxes. Then they speculate that those tax increases will be levied on the middle and working classes. It's all pretty speculative.


Secondly, what are we comparing it against? In the absence of a plan from the Dems, we *will* still go in debt at an increasing rate in the future. The same 5 trillion (more) shortfall will occur. The counter from the left is like insisting that bandaging a wound is pointless because it might not stop the bleeding, with the alternative simply being to not bandage it at all. Ryan's plans at least attempt to do something about the deficit and debt. What exactly is the Dem's plan? Nothing. Just sit around wailing and gnashing our teeth while we fall further in debt. Yeah. Great plan!


The reality is that the GOP has proposed dozens of budgets in the House over the last 2 years. The Dems in the Senate are so scared of making any decision at all that they wont even bring them for a vote or even propose their own budgets at all. Talk about cowardice. And Obama has been completely absent from leading his party in any way in this. And this is *not* just about partisan politics. The Dems failed to pass a budget in 2010, when they still controlled both houses of Congress. They've dug themselves such a deep hole that they can't think of a solution and are afraid to even suggest one. They know that their own members will not go along with the kinds of tax increases that would be necessary to pay our way out of debt, but they can't bring themselves to admit that the GOP was right all along, so they just sit there dong nothing.


I'll ask again: Where is the Dem plan? Not a speech. Not a sound bite. Where is the actual, on paper proposal scored by the CBO, showing what they would do? So isn't the choice really between leadership and no leadership? This is why Ryan was a good choice. He puts that discrepancy between the party's (and the candidates for president) front and center. GOP has a plan. Dems have no plan. And every single time the Dems attack Ryan's plan, they're reminding the public of this fact.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#98 Aug 13 2012 at 7:45 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,000 posts
Every time I hear a Republican say "job creator" I laugh. Rich people do not create jobs. Demand creates jobs. Giving these rich people more money (i.e. less taxes) will NOT create sufficient consumer demand to turn around the economy.

____________________________
Come on Bill, let's go home
[ffxisig]63311[/ffxisig]
#99 Aug 13 2012 at 9:13 PM Rating: Good
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Actually, I think it's a very good choice.


Color me surprised. Smiley: rolleyes

The GOP could pick Big Bird to run for *anything* and he'd think it was a good choice.
#100 Aug 13 2012 at 9:48 PM Rating: Decent
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts

Almost nobody ever gets "destroyed" in any presidential debate.

____________________________
Na Zdrowie
#101 Aug 14 2012 at 1:11 AM Rating: Excellent
Gbaji wrote:
Which is why Romney's choice shows a marked change from past approaches to presidential elections. He's betting that the voters care about real proposals, real ideas, and real solutions. He's making a sharp contrast between his ticket and Obama's, and making economic policy the front and center difference. Again, I happen to think this was absolutely the right thing to do. He could have done this with several possible VP picks, but Ryan probably serves that purpose better than any.


I think Ryan has made real proposals & has real ideas, but besides renaming a post office & passing another bill that did something with taxes on arrows, what has Ryan solved in 10+ years in congress? Making economic policy front & center is a pretty bad idea when your VP's plan will reduce your taxes to less than 1%...

Ryan's good looking, can speak well, & shores up the base a bit. What else does he actually bring to the table?
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 36 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (36)