User Tag List

First 1234513 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 135

  1. #21
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    Given the way Romney's position have changed over time, Romney suffered from being ill-defined. Selected a very conservative representative for VP (apparently the most extreme VP pick from congress in the last 100 years) appeals to his base, but forfeits much chance of tacking to the center.

    So, Ryan as VP does help define what a Romney ticket represents. Whether that helps or hurts remains to be seen.
    The US is getting more polarised, there isnt any centre any longer and what used to constitute the centre was actually the broad right with militant characteristics in comparison to most of the rest of the world, at least fiscally.

  2. #22
    Vaguely Precise Seymour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    The US is getting more polarised, there isnt any centre any longer and what used to constitute the centre was actually the broad right with militant characteristics in comparison to most of the rest of the world, at least fiscally.
    It is striking that Obama is fairly in line with Ronald Reagan on the political spectrum (at least when comparing policies)... which shows how much the center has drifted right in the US.

  3. #23
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    It is striking that Obama is fairly in line with Ronald Reagan on the political spectrum (at least when comparing policies)... which shows how much the center has drifted right in the US.
    Yeah but the right wing dont see it that way which I think is really concerning, I really dont know when they are going to have their Orwell moment or persona to assist with reality checks on their mission/vision.

    I've read a lot of what some of Thatcher's key gurus were thinking, for instance Hayek, and to be honest most of them are inline with a modern day social democrat, although it is not something which their supporters acknowledge. Sometimes I think this is because their supporters are actually less reasonable and not able to contextualise when these people came up with their ideas and just how much of an outsider or how marginal they believed their ideas were and would remain.

    Hayek in his writing about the intellectuals and socialism goes on about utopianism and how it would be impossible to achieve moderate goals or reforms so long as an enticing and utopian fantasy was unavailable for the "masses", now I read that and sort of think "this means you" or "this means me" but I think a lot of present day libertarians or capitalists read that with conceited pride and think "this means them" as in others who its presumed are ignorant. The entire essay reflects a belief in being marginalised and remaining that way, there's nothing really along the lines that people shouldnt believe their own propaganda or keep in mind the distinction between the utopia/fantasy and what's reasonable to expect in an imperfect order which wont ever approximate the perfect.

    Then there's his other essay about the fatal conceit, it could be applied to present day capitalists in the way that it once was to central planners, the you dont have all the answers and lets not concentrate all the decision making power in one place has been lost in a big way on neo-capitalists, or they dont want to think about the implications of their policies beyond "liberals will hate this".

    I think part of the problem really is that not a few of these elements thought they'd be marginal, I really do, Hayek at a dinner or conference or something once bemoaned the lack of good socialist theorists (a lot of his work, if you read it and analyse it even a bit is in response to a lot of forgotten socialist theorists such as GDH Cole or that woman who wrote the books Freedom and Planning, I cant remember her name) Von Mise was meant to have then said that Hayek was a socialist for saying such a thing.

    I've seen some truly awful quizes online which are titled along the lines of "so you think you're pretty libertarian?" which strike at the very heart of once neutral political ground, asking for instance if you could tolerate child sexual abuse or maltreatment if the alternative was taxation to support even basic state or state subsidised services to try and prevent it or respond to it once it is discovered. To that's shockingly extreme but its all couched in moderate terms and language, at once very closely linked to distorted living memory or history in which present day standards and expectations did not exist.

  4. #24
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    It is striking that Obama is fairly in line with Ronald Reagan on the political spectrum (at least when comparing policies)... which shows how much the center has drifted right in the US.
    I don't know if that's really a fair assessment.

    Reagan: "government is the problem".

    Obama: "more government, more government, more government."

  5. #25
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Really? Unexpected I mean? I dont see a great deal of difference between capitalist 1 and capitalist 2 here.
    Paul Ryan is a lightning rod for the left; its unclear whether the center will embrace him (either for his policies or his personality) or reject him. Portman or Pawlenty would have been the 'safe' option, neither helping nor hurting the campaign to any large extent. Up to now, Romney has almost always played it safe. He is currently stuck in a rut that favors Obama (although not to the extent indicated by certain recent polls that are weighted heavily in favor of Democrats), so he probably figured that now was the time to take a chance.

    I think one angle that many are missing is that Ryan will give the ticket an aura of fighting for something, rather than simply fighting against Obama-such things tend to be important for swing voters in particular. It remains to be seen whether a majority of swing voters prefer a change of course with an openness to experimentation (a la FDR, albeit to a lesser extent and in the opposite ideological direction) or prefer to 'stay the course' with an under-performing President with a likable personality (a la GWB 2004).

    Also, many analysts think that this election will ultimately be determined by whomever can motivate their base the most; both candidates now seem to be buying into this strategy.

  6. #26
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Paul Ryan is a lightning rod for the left; its unclear whether the center will embrace him (either for his policies or his personality) or reject him. Portman or Pawlenty would have been the 'safe' option, neither helping nor hurting the campaign to any large extent. Up to now, Romney has almost always played it safe. He is currently stuck in a rut that favors Obama (although not to the extent indicated by certain recent polls that are weighted heavily in favor of Democrats), so he probably figured that now was the time to take a chance.

    I think one angle that many are missing is that Ryan will give the ticket an aura of fighting for something, rather than simply fighting against Obama-such things tend to be important for swing voters in particular. It remains to be seen whether a majority of swing voters prefer a change of course with an openness to experimentation (a la FDR, albeit to a lesser extent and in the opposite ideological direction) or prefer to 'stay the course' with an under-performing President with a likable personality (a la GWB 2004).

    Also, many analysts think that this election will ultimately be determined by whomever can motivate their base the most; both candidates now seem to be buying into this strategy.
    Well it didnt surprise me in the least, in fact the selection of a "moderate", ie realist, would have surprised me, until the tea party has its october revolution moment this is going to be the pattern of events in the US, even if it does I suspect that most of that faction will be like Pol Pot and claim the "revolution didnt go far enough" until their dying day.

  7. #27
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Paul Ryan is a lightning rod for the left; its unclear whether the center will embrace him (either for his policies or his personality) or reject him. Portman or Pawlenty would have been the 'safe' option, neither helping nor hurting the campaign to any large extent. Up to now, Romney has almost always played it safe. He is currently stuck in a rut that favors Obama (although not to the extent indicated by certain recent polls that are weighted heavily in favor of Democrats), so he probably figured that now was the time to take a chance.

    I think one angle that many are missing is that Ryan will give the ticket an aura of fighting for something, rather than simply fighting against Obama-such things tend to be important for swing voters in particular. It remains to be seen whether a majority of swing voters prefer a change of course with an openness to experimentation (a la FDR, albeit to a lesser extent and in the opposite ideological direction) or prefer to 'stay the course' with an under-performing President with a likable personality (a la GWB 2004).

    Also, many analysts think that this election will ultimately be determined by whomever can motivate their base the most; both candidates now seem to be buying into this strategy.
    Very well put.

    I agree with all but the last part.

    I think these things are almost always decided by the middle.

  8. #28
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    I think these things are almost always decided by the middle.
    I agree, but many pollsters seem to think that virtually everyone has already made up their mind, even those who claim to be undecided, and that the numbers are very close.

  9. #29
    Vaguely Precise Seymour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,565

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    I don't know if that's really a fair assessment.

    Reagan: "government is the problem".

    Obama: "more government, more government, more government."
    Their rhetoric is definitely different, but their policies, less so (in some respects). And, you left out the qualification on the Reagan quote "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem." The crisis then is not the crisis now.

    Still, clearly Obama is not a supply-sider, and is more optimistic about the role of government (as opposed to Reagan's "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" joke). Still, he does often appoint conservatives and implement center-ish policies (because fundamentally, he is a pragmatist). I don't believe that Obama is as conservative as Reagan, but he's a centrist in practice. That fact is sometimes lost is all the cries of "socialist!" (Which really makes me role my eyes when applied to Obamacare.)

  10. #30
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    I agree, but many pollsters seem to think that virtually everyone has already made up their mind, even those who claim to be undecided, and that the numbers are very close.
    Hmm...

    I feel like a lot of people I know, more than in any other election, could go either way...

    People I know who have always voted Democrat are very much considering jumping off the Obama boat...

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    Their rhetoric is definitely different, but their policies, less so (in some respects).
    Oy vey...

    I'll read it, but, to be honest, I think that "Young Turks" guy is an idiot.

    Edit: read part of it. It's just cherry-picking facts and spinning them in a certain light. I really don't think it's a particularly cogent, objective, or full analysis. It's an analysis based in spinning everything according to a perspective he already had in mind. Which is what this hack does 100% of the time, and why he is just about the worst "journalist" in the country (although, there are a disturbingly large and growing number of them who basically seem to be doing the exact same thing [on both sides of the aisle]).

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    And, you left out the qualification on the Reagan quote "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem." The crisis then is not the crisis now.
    The problem was economic malaise...

    And he was arguing that too much government was the problem...

    Sound familiar? Hint: it's Paul Ryan's argument, not Barack Obama's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    Still, clearly Obama is not a supply-sider, and is more optimistic about the role of government (as opposed to Reagan's "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" joke).
    I had to decide which of these two quotes to use...

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    Still, he does often appoint conservatives and implement center-ish policies (because fundamentally, he is a pragmatist). I don't believe that Obama is as conservative as Reagan, but he's a centrist in practice. That fact is sometimes lost is all the cries of "socialist!"
    I agree that he is largely a pragmatist, but he does actually have strong socialist tendencies and sympathies.

    I think it's just as untrue to deny that as to deny the fact that he's also rather a pragmatist.

    You don't have the NY Times asking you if you're a socialist after you've been inaugurated for no reason whatsoever...

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    (Which really makes me role my eyes when applied to Obamacare.)
    Why is that?

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 294
    Last Post: 10-07-2017, 08:07 PM
  2. is it possible to be a peaceful muslim?
    By Il Morto Qui Parla in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 04-23-2010, 09:11 PM
  3. Would you choose to be born?
    By proteanmix in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 10-09-2007, 05:34 AM
  4. Is it Illogical to be Dominantly Je?
    By Blackwater in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-06-2007, 09:21 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO