Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
I'm annoyed by the ad but it's nothing more than fighting fire with, well, a flickering match really. The moral imperative to keep the Republicans from controlling our government in 2013 outweighs almost any (legal) means used to get there. It's what they do, after all.
As Jon Stewart likes to point out, Fox News is quick to leap on Democrats for the exact same tactics they use themselves, every single day.
edited 3rd May '12 7:12:21 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I don't know what ads you guys are talking about, but this one that's circling tumblr right now is pretty interesting. It's basically straight up just saying that the Republicans and Big Oil are lying.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8IkC4gM6QX4
I hate lies...
By the way, Paul and Romney aren't the only Republicans still running. Fred Karger (Gay Conservative) and Andy Martin (Birther) are running, but doing so poorly the news doesn't cover them.
I feel kinda bad for them... well, I feel bad for Karger, not Martin. The idiot tried to sue the state of Hawaii for Obama's "real" birth certificate.
edited 3rd May '12 11:10:51 PM by Skatepunk
I liked that ad. Kind of a straight and to the point advertisement without all the rallying charismatic bullshit people like to make attempts at in campaign ads for either side.
And I know it's true, because the company I work for(which makes electric and hybrid vehicles) does work with fisker automotive. I also know about the solar plant, because it was in the local paper, since I live near San Luis Obispo.
I wholeheartedly support an entire campaign that is built on going "er, no, that's factually incorrect"
"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter
this. Though on some issues, Romney's going to fall back onto using various misniformation groups such as the Heartland institute, or conservative think tanks like the Heritage foundation, known for making reports which are either brilliant or would fail an introductory college statistics course (such as claiming that poor people aren't truly poor because they have appliances such as refrigerators or microwaves or a computer).
It's also interesting that they're pretty much putting an ad out there that relies largely on word of mouth and Internet proliferation. I wasn't paying near as much attention to politics the last time, but isn't this basically what Obama did last time? Appeal to the youth vote largely through the internet?
@Ace: It actually makes sense to me. Obama's got a leg up on Romney, since it appears that Obama has better command of social media and social networking, while Romney is very much still doing more traditional advertising. There's an article out there showing the differences between how Romney spent his money and how Obama spent it.
Also, Obama has to rely more on word of mouth and fundraisers than Romney because Obama has pledged not to make use of Super PA Cs.
Very big Daydream Believer. "That's not knowledge, that's a crapshoot!" -Al Murray "Welcome to QI" -Stephen FryYes, Obama went back on his pledge not to use SuperPAC funds.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Huh, ok. I take back the part about the superpacs, then.
Very big Daydream Believer. "That's not knowledge, that's a crapshoot!" -Al Murray "Welcome to QI" -Stephen FryI'm certain Obama never pledged not to take money from super PA Cs. You might be thinking about how he pledged to take public funds in the 2008 campaign. If he had done so, it would have restricted his ability to take money from small donors, and he got way more money from them than he would have from public funding, so he backed out of that promise. American campaign finance law is both very complicated and very bad at keeping money out of politics. Obama would have had to have been an idiot to pledge not to take money from super PA Cs (in my humble opinion. It would have been very noble, but not very practical). He did publicly disagree with the Supreme Court decision that allowed corporations to donate unlimited amounts of money anonymously to super PA Cs, so this might make him a little hypocritical to take money from them, but he didn't actually break a promise in this case.
Sorry, misread. He's vowed not to accept PAC money (Super PA Cs not included necessarily), accept donations from lobbyists, or allow any registered lobbyists to “bundle” contributions for his campaign.
Whether he's gone back on that is a different matter.
Very big Daydream Believer. "That's not knowledge, that's a crapshoot!" -Al Murray "Welcome to QI" -Stephen FryPersonally, I think Obama should use his superPAC to fight the deficit (not sure if that's legal) rather than advertising. That would influence the election in a completely different way!
Also, I have noticed that the internet was almost completely devoid of Romney ads unless you deliberately go looking for them, while Obama puts his ads in web commercials, for all the youth to see.
Also, slightly off-topic but important: do you think voting should be mandatory in the United States? Australia has a 95% voter turnout because of mandatory voting. But is it a good idea or not?
Not mandatory. It should be legal to kick people in the crotch when they complain about the government and then admit "yeah, I didn't bother voting because it doesn't do anything."
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.

He probably didn't personally write the ad or anything, but yeah, it's not the kind of campaign I'd like to see.
ALAS, to win is important I suppose.