I missed it. I did see Karl Rove accuse Fox's projection team as being idiots who were calling the race way too early though. Deliciously awkward.

Very unprecedented.

@Kas/Khan

Speaking as something of a disinterested observer. One of the biggest issues with the Romney campaign was that it was nothing if not inconsistent. Pick a spot at random on the political map, and chances are that Mitt Romney took that position at one point or another. If not in the past six months at least in the past six years. If that weren't bad enough he had a way of being particularly vague, and making blanket proclamations. To say his comments were up for interpretation is a pretty fair criticism.

I took note of this, because to be blunt it fucking pissed me off. Presidential elections aren't just about winning the office. They are about promoting a national discourse. You don't have to win a election to get something accomplished. Sometimes the most powerful legacy of running for the office isn't actually winning the office. Sometimes its the idea put forward in the heat of the campaign. Would we have Obama Care today if Bill Clinton hadn't made it a centerpiece of his presidential campaign. George W Bush made Tort reform a centerpiece of his campaigns, and it is a idea getting traction now. Hell we may see Gores magical lock boxes in a not so distant future.

The real tragedy for the supporters of Romney in this campaign isn't going to be that he lost. The real tragedy is that he isn't going to bequeath a legacy to the nation. That might have been a future victory that might have given these supporters some solace years down the line. Mitt was right he did leave everything on the field. The awful truth of it though is that it was all empty rhetoric. He had the limelight, and he squandered the opportunity that afforded him to move the conversation forward.

Brace yourselves now, because I am going to say something that is probably going to shock this shit out of you. Ron Paul is going to have a far stronger legacy then Mitt Romney in the national discussion. No he didn't stand a chance in hell, and yes most of his ideas are bat shit crazy, but there are a few that have some merit.

Anyway in that regard we all lost this presidential campaign. Firstly we had a challenger who didn't bring anything new to the debate, and secondly that let the incumbent do much of the same.

Haha... I wish I could have got fox news to see all the saltiness. I was forced to watch ABC were they were jumping for joy as soon as it became clear President Obama won. It was quite funny how openly biased they were well still pretending to be fair and balanced. Karl rove was clearly delusional especially in how he thought almost every swing state would go Romney.

I am just relieved the election is over after being pelted over and over with political adds on tv, the radio, getting call, and horrible internet add even on vgc.

OMG. If anyone one wants to see the ultimate rub it in your face from Rachel Maddow, here it is:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#49736294

She is brutal.

chocoloco said: OMG. If anyone one wants to see the ultimate rub it in your face from Rachel Maddow, here it is: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#49736294 She is brutal.

ugh, this is why I can't watch msnbc or Fox news.  The in your face partisan take on news just irritates the crap out of me.  I would rather they report the news and let me have my own opinions.  Thats why if I am going to watch a channel, it is generally CNN.

Also, on a side note.  I don't know if you have been watching the Show Go On on NBC, But Rachel Maddow does look a lot like mathew perry...

gergroy said: chocoloco said: OMG. If anyone one wants to see the ultimate rub it in your face from Rachel Maddow, here it is: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#49736294 She is brutal. ugh, this is why I can't watch msnbc or Fox news.  The in your face partisan take on news just irritates the crap out of me.  I would rather they report the news and let me have my own opinions.  Thats why if I am going to watch a channel, it is generally CNN. Also, on a side note.  I don't know if you have been watching the Show Go On on NBC, But Rachel Maddow does look a lot like mathew perry...

I do not watch MSNBC. Watched CNN my whole life. Assuming you watch it all it just gets worse and worse. In this case, I do agree with her in this case because she only states facts.

Your mistake here... which i'm surpised considering it's you... is relying too much on party affiliation.

Actually Kennedy was AWFUL for the stock market and econonomy... and according to his own administration actually hurt US GDP because he went after the steal market in a way that's hard to not describe as illegal.   He was basically holding the stock market back.

As can be seen by his assassnation.   Prices didn't drop.  They didn't even slow down... they actually accellerated because Johnson was seen as a "Pro buisness" guy.

Which he turned out to be... Johnson would be considered  conservative economically today.   Sure he put in a lot of social welfare programs... but he cut taxes by 20%.... and it led to an increase in revenue.

Outside that... it's more just about Obama.  I've been watching financial news stuff for months... even the people supporting Obama more or less agree that Obama is seen as specifically bad for the economy based on the radical shift in his economic policies.

They see his tax increase as a huge problem,  don't think he'll tackle corporate tax issues like Romney promised to,  don't think he'll tackle the fiscal cliff because he was the one who blew up the "Grand Bargain" (Most people blame republicans... but if you read the Woodward book, like a lot of buisness leaders have, you see it was mostly Obama's fault.) and they don't think he will tackle the deficit in any meaningful way.  They seem him as obstructionist when it comes to cheap energy, and that he'll go out of his way to block Natural Gas rather then help it.  (Also oil, but this is more important because Nat gas stays in north america, meaning much cheaper energy prices for US buisnesses.

On the plus side though, they think he'll keep the free money flowing by keeping Bernake and healthcare and insurance companies don't have to worry about losing future profits due to Obamacare being removed.

Better late than never.
Gratz to the democrats and Hurray...

Or to put it more precisely i suppose. If I had to guess based on watching the economy AND Obama is that Obama came in with the same Keynesian influenced monetarism that every president since Reagan practiced. (including Reagan.)


This can be seen by him outright vetoing the plan between Bush officials and Senate to force banks to write down a percentage of their bad mortgages if they took government bailouts and various other things, just trying to do everything to bail out the losers and make sure nothing gets in the way of that, or makes them face any real consequences.

The stock market rebounded (at least relative to everybody else) and wealth creation capture by the wealthy reached levels that hadn't been seen since World War 2.

http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~saez/saez-UStopincomes-2010.pdf


In the middle of this, the Tea party showed up... angry poor people mad that rich people got bailouts and advantages while they got nothing and the deficit rose.

I think Obama mostly ignored them because they were mostly republican and people were quick to call them racists. (With no real documented proof but we were still in the "Obama high" years.)

Then in 2011 OWS showed up... angry upper middle class people mad the rich got bailouts and advantages. Now these were mostly democrats... his voting base. Hell the part of it that likely got him elected...

at this point I think he started looking at things seriously and noticed that most people were doing pretty awful still despite what the Keynesian focus on the big picture formula/number was saying. It started to dawn on him that boosting up aggregate demand isn't the end all be all, and what is boosting the demand is important.


Unfortunately, instead of looking at what was wrong with his stimulus plan structurally, and how to make things easier for everybody to grow like wall street. He instead has focused and blamed the people succeeding... in the very system he created that allowed them to succeed to much while not doing anything for anybody else... creating a new plan to basically slow them down, so everyone is more equal.... rather then looking at actual ways to speed up everybody else.

Additionally he's casting a big net, not just at those who succeeded but everybody in that group, even those still struggling.

chocoloco said: gergroy said: chocoloco said: OMG. If anyone one wants to see the ultimate rub it in your face from Rachel Maddow, here it is: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#49736294 She is brutal. ugh, this is why I can't watch msnbc or Fox news.  The in your face partisan take on news just irritates the crap out of me.  I would rather they report the news and let me have my own opinions.  Thats why if I am going to watch a channel, it is generally CNN. Also, on a side note.  I don't know if you have been watching the Show Go On on NBC, But Rachel Maddow does look a lot like mathew perry... I do not watch MSNBC. Watched CNN my whole life. Assuming you watch it all it just gets worse and worse. In this case, I do agree with her in this case because she only states facts.

No, she doesnt just state facts, she has some misleading information and some straight up untrue statements as well.