homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools
Thread closed  Thread closed


Post new thread  
Thread closed  Thread closed
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: The political junkie POTUS prediction thread (Page 87)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  84  85  86  87  88  89  90  ...  109  110  111 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: The political junkie POTUS prediction thread
saysay

Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645

 - Posted      Profile for saysay   Email saysay   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
Ayers was a radical back in the 1960s; today he's a respected member of the Chicago education establishment.

Respected by whom? Bin Laden? He's an unrepentant terrorist pure and simple.

McCain's followers may shout slogans at rallies, but Obama's followers are the true thugs.

Doesn't living with that level of paranoia get exhausting?

--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."

Posts: 2943 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984

 - Posted      Profile for Doublethink.   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
No McCain supporter has yet answered my question as to why they think the USA is being targetted by terrorists.

--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell

Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28

 - Posted      Profile for Nicolemr   Author's homepage   Email Nicolemr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
No. Let's not head to Dead Horses. I just don't have the time. Too many New Yorkers to convert to McCain and not enough time to do it!
[Killing me] [Killing me]

And on the subject of can McCain turn it around at this point:

Is a McCain Comeback Even Possible? Let's Check the History Books

So yeah, it's possible but not very likely.

--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!

Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

 - Posted      Profile for Josephine   Author's homepage   Email Josephine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
Ayers was a radical back in the 1960s; today he's a respected member of the Chicago education establishment.

Respected by whom? Bin Laden? He's an unrepentant terrorist pure and simple.

According to this article on factcheck.org, Ayers was "named a Chicago citizen of the year in 1997 for his efforts in the field of education." It's possible that I'm suffering from a severe case of inability to read for meaning, but I think naming him citizen of the year for his efforts in the field of education makes him a respected member of the Chicago education establishment.

You might try expanding your reading a bit, and looking at sources other than Fox News and the National Review. I think you're smarter than they are.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Nicole, that's what I said yesterday, actually. But hey, my post was long and detailed and not in the NY Times. [Smile]

To reiterate, in the age of polling, only Ronald Reagan has come from behind in October to win in November. And he ran a far better campaign than McCain is running, and he didn't have to deal with early voting on the massive scale we have today.

McCain isn't going to win. He hasn't got the ground game that Bush had in 2004, he can't seem to find and stick with a message that resonates with the electorate, and his campaign doesn't know what to do. They keep trying to find something that will turn this thing around, but nothing has worked, and it makes McCain look bad because he keeps switching what he's saying. Most recently word came out that McCain was going to introduce a major new economic proposal this week, probably at the debate, and now it appears that that isn't going to happen. Last week the campaign was all anger, all the time, and this week he has a new stump speech. Today he is campaigning in Virginia and North Carolina, places where he shouldn't have to be spending time and money.

The last debate, this Wednesday, is McCain absolute last chance to turn things around, but really all Obama has to do is not screw up. When Bill Kristol's suggestions are that McCain fire his campaign, pull all his ads, and be cheerful to the media, you can stick a fork in this thing -- it's done.

Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28

 - Posted      Profile for Nicolemr   Author's homepage   Email Nicolemr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Ruth, sorry, I' I've just been away over the weekend for Parents Weekend at my daughters college, and skimming quickly to catch up.

--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!

Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Oh, no worries. After all, it afforded me yet another opportunity to run my mouth about how Obama is going to win. [Yipee]
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513

 - Posted      Profile for Alogon   Email Alogon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Obama is currently down a bit from the peak of a few days ago -- and it's not outside the realm of possibility that he will lose, but barring a major unforeseen development, it's rather unlikely. The issue of the economy isn't going to go away in the next few weeks,

Last time I checked, the Dow Industrial Average had rebounded 500 points today (Monday) over Friday's close, echoing similar rises in exchanges overseas. Have we ever seen this in a single day? No one but an idiot would say that the trouble is over, but people will heave a great sigh of relief.

This rise is attributed to confidence that government interventions for banking will work. With this a fait accompli, McCain has actually been blaming Obama for voting for another one of those big government spending giveaways for which he is so notorious. Never mind that only days prior, McCain was the one who suspended his campaign in order to return to Washington and get the government to Do Something about the crisis. It's the most transparent spin I've ever heard. Do the elephants think they're the only animals that can remember something for a fortnight?

I hope that Obama points this explanation out. If McCain wants to distance himself from this decision, fine, but then he can take no credit for the market upturn.

--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.

Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28

 - Posted      Profile for Nicolemr   Author's homepage   Email Nicolemr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
An interesting take on who's really "pro-life".

Is this policy really pro-life?

--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!

Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Figbash

The Doubtful Guest
# 9048

 - Posted      Profile for Figbash   Author's homepage   Email Figbash   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I found this on the Economist web site and thought it was fascinating. Basically they have decided to see what would happen if you extrapolated the electoral college to the whole world, and then have allowed Economist readers to vote.

Basically, Obama wins in all countries bar Georgia and Macedonia. And remember that the Economist is not noted for being an organ of the radical left.

Posts: 1209 | From: Gashlycrumb | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513

 - Posted      Profile for Alogon   Email Alogon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemrw:
An interesting take on who's really "pro-life".

Is this policy really pro-life?

It's also rather strange for a pro-lifer to be content with one of the highest infant mortality rates in the developed world. Ours is worse than Cuba's. Did you read that correctly? Yes: the U.S. infant mortality rate is worse than Cuba's.
I guess one wants the government to guarantee that every child get born, but after that they're on their own.

It's easy, of course, to cry crocodile tears saying of course nobody wants an infant to die. But these are the folx who've been in power for the past eight years.

--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.

Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
McCain's followers may shout slogans at rallies, but Obama's followers are the true thugs.

National Review? Couldn't you find a more objective source, like Karl Rove's blog?

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
moron
Shipmate
# 206

 - Posted      Profile for moron   Email moron   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
National Review? Couldn't you find a more objective source, like Karl Rove's blog?

Pardon me for intruding but I have a hunch NYer is also searching for objective sources: could you recommend some?

TIA.

Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mjg:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
National Review? Couldn't you find a more objective source, like Karl Rove's blog?

Pardon me for intruding but I have a hunch NYer is also searching for objective sources: could you recommend some?

Unless you are getting metaphysical on us, the basic concept of (relative) objectivity is not that hard to grasp. A publication that is dedicated to editorial opinion is not an objective source, and does not pretend to be. Any major news outlet, outside of its editorial pages, strives to be.

Of course, people are not 100% successful at such things. But, in normal discourse, any such publication would be seen as objective until proven otherwise. Being objective does not make you right, of course. But the dismissal of the notion of commitment to reporting that has taken hold in some circles only reinforces the tendency to dismiss any reporting that does not jibe with the views one already holds. That tendency necessarily replaces truth with ideology, and is devastating to democracy IMO.

--Tom Clune

[ 13. October 2008, 22:23: Message edited by: tclune ]

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

 - Posted      Profile for Josephine   Author's homepage   Email Josephine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I already suggested www.factcheck.org -- you're not suggesting they're a biased source, are you?

There's also the Politifact.com, home of the truth-o-meter, a project of Congressional Quarterly and St. Petersburg Times. You could check Project VoteSmart, which has an excellent reputation as a non-partisan, objective source of unbiased information for voters. On The Issues is also a balanced site.

Fivethirtyeight.com is, I think, the best source out there for polling information -- the people running the site have a bias, but that shows up only in their blog entries, not in the way they handle the numbers.

ETA: This was addressed to mjg.

[ 13. October 2008, 22:33: Message edited by: Josephine ]

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
moron
Shipmate
# 206

 - Posted      Profile for moron   Email moron   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
ETA: This was addressed to mjg.

I realize now my ignorance about this and plead your forbearance.
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
tclune speaks for me on this topic.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
McCain's followers may shout slogans at rallies, but Obama's followers are the true thugs.

I skimmed that National Review article. Seems like, at worst, some Dems took a page from Rush Limbaugh's Dittoheads.

Funny thing, though. As someone posted earlier, Christopher Buckley--you know the son of that WFB guy ( [Votive] ) who founded NR?--has come out in favor of Obama.

[Big Grin]

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Orb

Eye eye Cap'n!
# 3256

 - Posted      Profile for Orb   Author's homepage   Email Orb   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Figbash:
I found this on the Economist web site and thought it was fascinating.

That is fascinating. Not altogether unexpected, but fascinating. Thanks!

Interesting that Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran are showing up for Obama, isn't it?

--------------------
“You cannot buy the revolution. You cannot make the revolution. You can only be the revolution. It is in your spirit, or it is nowhere.” Ursula K. Le Guin, The Dispossessed

Posts: 5032 | From: Easton, Bristol | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
How is that anything other than expected? One guy says he'll pull out troops from your country, the other says he'll keep them in. Who would you want to win? Duh.

It says absolutely nothing, of course, on whether or not having the troops there in the first place is a good thing. Or whether pulling them out now or at any other time is a good thing.

Not that that will stop the GOP from twisting this into an attack ad on Obama of course.

[ 14. October 2008, 05:23: Message edited by: mousethief ]

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438

 - Posted      Profile for Zwingli   Email Zwingli   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Figbash:
I found this on the Economist web site...

The Economist has done this in previous elections. In 2004 it delivered a fairly comprehensive (and unsurprising) victory to Kerry.
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Orb:
Interesting that Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran are showing up for Obama, isn't it?

Just like Paraguay, Poland and the Philipines.

And the point is?

At the moment it seems that the only couintries in the whole world (INCLUDING America) where McCain is more popular than Obama are very small countries occupied by Russian troops.

No big surprises there.

Restart the Cold War why don't we?

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Hiro's Leap

Shipmate
# 12470

 - Posted      Profile for Hiro's Leap   Email Hiro's Leap   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
At the risk of being a killjoy about this (again), the votes seem to be tallied from people registered with The Economist's website - it's self-selecting.

I'd be very interested to see a similar map done with properly sampled polls though. My guess is it'd still show a strong global win for Obama, but McCain wouldn't be so totally wiped out.

Posts: 3418 | From: UK, OK | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Hiro's Leap:
At the risk of being a killjoy about this (again), the votes seem to be tallied from people registered with The Economist's website - it's self-selecting.

Which, interestingly, tells us that American readers of The Economist are overwhelmingly in favor of Obama.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861

 - Posted      Profile for sabine   Email sabine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
Ayers was a radical back in the 1960s; today he's a respected member of the Chicago education establishment.

Respected by whom? Bin Laden? He's an unrepentant terrorist pure and simple.

McCain's followers may shout slogans at rallies, but Obama's followers are the true thugs.

Doesn't living with that level of paranoia get exhausting?
I don't know folks here well enough to know if anyone is suffering from too much paranoia or not, but I do know that the general anxiety level in our country is quite high at the moment--we're all feeling it in one way or another.

How to express the anxiety in an election year is a matter of real seriousness. Yelling "kill him" or "off with his head" at rallies is very close to a mob mentality in my mind.

Here and there (not on the Ship) I see people posting about the coming "Nazi regime" if Obama is elected, and I wonder how frustrated these folks must be. Eight years of a Republican administration has not protected us from some of the most pressing issues of the day, issues that relate to us on a personal level as well as on a national level.

Is demonizing the Democratic candidate the answer? Sure, it may feel good (anger usually does at first), but it isn't going to solve anything? I believe, if left unchecked, it's going to change the anxiety into a sort of seething anger that I think could put Obama at risk if he is elected.

Perhaps that's my paranoia.

I'm glad that the McCain campaign appears to have finally figured out that they need to find a way to keep the crowds from whipping themselves into a frenzy of hate speech (or they need to stop whipping the crowds themselves). In the end, it could be disasterous--not just to the election, but to the need to avoid civil unrest.

ETA: "appears to" [Biased]

sabine

[ 14. October 2008, 13:59: Message edited by: sabine ]

--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano

Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290

 - Posted      Profile for Horseman Bree   Email Horseman Bree   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
An American reading the Economist could be assumed to be among the subset of Americans who realise that there actually a whole world out there, not just what's on the horizon of Joe Six-Pack.

--------------------
It's Not That Simple

Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
An American reading the Economist could be assumed to be among the subset of Americans who realise that there actually a whole world out there, not just what's on the horizon of Joe Six-Pack.

Fucking elitist scum.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438

 - Posted      Profile for Zwingli   Email Zwingli   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
An American reading the Economist could be assumed to be able to read (it's a pretty light read, but still, you have to be able to comprehend complete sentences) which probably skews against the Republicans in this election. When I voted, the US was about as favourable to Obama as Europe, Australia etc, no more or less, so it isn't really telling us anything about the views of the world at large.
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331

 - Posted      Profile for Jane R   Email Jane R   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Here and there (not on the Ship) I see people posting about the coming "Nazi regime" if Obama is elected, and I wonder how frustrated these folks must be.
[Eek!] I wonder which planet they're on. Don't they know what the Nazis thought of blacks?

Jane R

Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
agrgurich
Shipmate
# 5724

 - Posted      Profile for agrgurich   Email agrgurich   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Zwingli:
An American reading the Economist could be assumed to be able to read (it's a pretty light read, but still, you have to be able to comprehend complete sentences) which probably skews against the Republicans in this election. When I voted, the US was about as favourable to Obama as Europe, Australia etc, no more or less, so it isn't really telling us anything about the views of the world at large.

Even those of us who choose mot to support St. Barack can read & comprehend whole sentences,
Insulting people who disagree with you may make feel superior, but does your cause no good.

--------------------
Life is a comedy to those who think & a tragedy to those who feel.-Horace Walpole

AJG

Posts: 4478 | From: Michigan's Copper Country | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438

 - Posted      Profile for Zwingli   Email Zwingli   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
[Killing me]

Did you watch the VP debate? Speaking in complete, coherent, grammatically correct sentences is not one of Governor Palin's strengths. I'm guessing that many of those who support her are not the type to read complex articles about policy in their spare time.

Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
An American reading the Economist could be assumed to be among the subset of Americans who realise that there actually a whole world out there, not just what's on the horizon of Joe Six-Pack.

Non-Americans reading the Economist would be assumed to be likely to be more conservative than most. Its pretty much the paper of the non-rabid Right. Stongly in favour of free trade and globalisation, mildly libertarian, very pro-business. Slightly hawkish on the Middle East. A bit snobbish. The sort of people who, were they American, would have to vote Republican if the Republicans were to have a chance.

The paper used to strongly support McCain - they thought he was the best candidate befoe he got the nomination. Now they seem to think he's compromising too much with the rednecks.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
trouty
Shipmate
# 13497

 - Posted      Profile for trouty   Email trouty   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
The Economist is not conservative or liberal. Apart from the FT, it is the only newspaper of record left in the UK (it designates itself as a newspaper not a magazine). None of its articles have a byline and it is not at all partisan. It may favour conservative policies on some, but not all, issues, but whatever position it takes is based on proper argument, not emotion.
Posts: 205 | From: Somewhere out there | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Hiro's Leap

Shipmate
# 12470

 - Posted      Profile for Hiro's Leap   Email Hiro's Leap   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by trouty:
It may favour conservative policies on some, but not all, issues, but whatever position it takes is based on proper argument, not emotion.

Surely everyone believes that their position is based on proper argument, not emotion?
Posts: 3418 | From: UK, OK | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
trouty
Shipmate
# 13497

 - Posted      Profile for trouty   Email trouty   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I wouldn't say so. Many people take no account of facts at all when trying to make an argument.
Posts: 205 | From: Somewhere out there | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Hiro's Leap

Shipmate
# 12470

 - Posted      Profile for Hiro's Leap   Email Hiro's Leap   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Yet people inevitably believe their views are rational and logical. They also believe their preferred newspapers make well-argued points, based on proper argument.

The Economist does have a political viewpoint - I suspect it's less visible to you because you agree with it.

Posts: 3418 | From: UK, OK | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by trouty:
The Economist is not conservative or liberal. Apart from the FT, it is the only newspaper of record left in the UK (it designates itself as a newspaper not a magazine). None of its articles have a byline and it is not at all partisan. It may favour conservative policies on some, but not all, issues, but whatever position it takes is based on proper argument, not emotion.

Huh? Basing positions on proper arguments doesn't prevent those positions from being liberal or conservative. There are good non-emotional arguments for both free-market capitalism and socialism, but the The Economist tends to favor free-market capitalism, which makes it essentially conservative.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984

 - Posted      Profile for Doublethink.   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by agrgurich:
]Even those of us who choose mot to support St. Barack can read & comprehend whole sentences,
Insulting people who disagree with you may make feel superior, but does your cause no good.

I agree. I asked you a while back - why do you think terrorists are attacking the USA ?

--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell

Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659

 - Posted      Profile for Choirboy   Email Choirboy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
... an Obama win is essentially a given and the only questions are how big the margin will be,

I am a raddled old hack, and I have heard people say things like that far, far, too often, at every level from general elections down to the committee of a social club.... [edited]....Its not over till the fat lady sings.
This may mean nothing to you, but I am a life-long Red Sox fan. I have seen defeat snatched from the jaws of victory far too many times to count.

This election is still all over but the shouting. The President is a done deal and all that remains to argue over is the Senate. The fact that it is a done deal is already contingent on everyone working to the end of the campaign season, but it is a done deal nonetheless [barring as I said in my last email, a terrorist attack in the U.S. or a major terrorist attack against an ally or U.S. troops abroad].

[ 14. October 2008, 18:58: Message edited by: Choirboy ]

Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
This may mean nothing to you, but I am a life-long Red Sox fan. I have seen defeat snatched from the jaws of victory far too many times to count.

They're one game down. Lighten up!

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Organ Builder
Shipmate
# 12478

 - Posted      Profile for Organ Builder   Email Organ Builder   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by trouty:
The Economist is not conservative or liberal...

Whether or not that perception has any connection with reality in the UK I cannot say--I'll leave that to UK shipmates. In the US, however, it has long been a favorite among those who, as Ken so aptly said, would normally vote Republican.

That was certainly true when I went to college--back when we wore spats, read by gas light, and wrote with true fountain pens (not those nasty cartridge jobs that are the spawn of Satan). The Republican party has changed a bit since then, but I still can't imagine it being the favorite rag of a US flaming leftist.

--------------------
How desperately difficult it is to be honest with oneself. It is much easier to be honest with other people.--E.F. Benson

Posts: 3337 | From: ...somewhere in between 40 and death... | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
Alfred E. Neuman

What? Me worry?
# 6855

 - Posted      Profile for Alfred E. Neuman     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Zwingli:
[Killing me]

Did you watch the VP debate? Speaking in complete, coherent, grammatically correct sentences is not one of Governor Palin's strengths. I'm guessing that many of those who support her are not the type to read complex articles about policy in their spare time.

Marge interviews Sarah Palin

--------------------
--Formerly: Gort--

Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Organ Builder:

That was certainly true when I went to college--back when we wore spats, read by gas light, and wrote with true fountain pens (not those nasty cartridge jobs that are the spawn of Satan). The Republican party has changed a bit since then, but I still can't imagine it being the favorite rag of a US flaming leftist.

Well, when I was in college, the only Brit rag that anyone would have been willing to be seen reading was Punch. It was even believed that being seen reading it could get you laid -- the real aspiration of every campus intellectual of my acquaintence...

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Orb

Eye eye Cap'n!
# 3256

 - Posted      Profile for Orb   Author's homepage   Email Orb   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
This may mean nothing to you, but I am a life-long Red Sox fan. I have seen defeat snatched from the jaws of victory far too many times to count.

They're one game down. Lighten up!

--Tom Clune

And a good thing, too...
[Devil]

--------------------
“You cannot buy the revolution. You cannot make the revolution. You can only be the revolution. It is in your spirit, or it is nowhere.” Ursula K. Le Guin, The Dispossessed

Posts: 5032 | From: Easton, Bristol | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
trouty
Shipmate
# 13497

 - Posted      Profile for trouty   Email trouty   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by trouty:
The Economist is not conservative or liberal. Apart from the FT, it is the only newspaper of record left in the UK (it designates itself as a newspaper not a magazine). None of its articles have a byline and it is not at all partisan. It may favour conservative policies on some, but not all, issues, but whatever position it takes is based on proper argument, not emotion.

Huh? Basing positions on proper arguments doesn't prevent those positions from being liberal or conservative. There are good non-emotional arguments for both free-market capitalism and socialism, but the The Economist tends to favor free-market capitalism, which makes it essentially conservative.
I think you are missing my point. I am saying that the Economist bases its arguments on evidence, facts and reason, not on partisan emotion. Different conclusions could be reached by using the same facts but the Economist owes its reputation to being dispassionate with the evidence. In any case, like any political publication, the Economist is not only concerned with economics. Its views on many political topics might be difficult to classify. In all cases, a sober analysis, not a partisan scream, is wha the Economist gives. The British broadsheets, other than the FT, gave up any claim to being newspapers of record a long time ago, and the views of the Guardian and the Daily Telegraph are entirely predictable. This could not be said of the Economist.
Posts: 205 | From: Somewhere out there | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Figbash

The Doubtful Guest
# 9048

 - Posted      Profile for Figbash   Author's homepage   Email Figbash   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Organ Builder:
In the US, however, it has long been a favorite among those who, as Ken so aptly said, would normally vote Republican.


Well if so, the fact that their map shows the US currently sitting on 81% to Obama means that McCain is truly screwed. [Big Grin]
Posts: 1209 | From: Gashlycrumb | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Organ Builder
Shipmate
# 12478

 - Posted      Profile for Organ Builder   Email Organ Builder   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Figbash:
Well if so, the fact that their map shows the US currently sitting on 81% to Obama means that McCain is truly screwed. [Big Grin]

We live in hope...

--------------------
How desperately difficult it is to be honest with oneself. It is much easier to be honest with other people.--E.F. Benson

Posts: 3337 | From: ...somewhere in between 40 and death... | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

 - Posted      Profile for Josephine   Author's homepage   Email Josephine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by trouty:
... the Economist is not only concerned with economics. Its views on many political topics might be difficult to classify.

It's been a while since I've read it, but I think its views on political topics are easily classified as "corporate libertarian."

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438

 - Posted      Profile for Zwingli   Email Zwingli   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Huh? Basing positions on proper arguments doesn't prevent those positions from being liberal or conservative. There are good non-emotional arguments for both free-market capitalism and socialism, but the The Economist tends to favor free-market capitalism, which makes it essentially conservative.

Whether or not there are good non-emotional arguments for socialism is it self a matter of opinion; it depends, I suppose, which of the arguments under the heading 'socialism' you are referring to. But I also think you are missing the point somewhat: taking a particular view on an economics question, based on sound reasoning and the available evidence, does not make one politically biased, even if one side of politics chooses to deny those conclusions. To continue an analogy I used earlier, is a magazine called The Scientist argued that, based on available evidence and expert opinion, it was exceedingly likely that anthropocentric global warming was occurring, and if, hypothetically, the conservative side of politics chose to deny that, it wouldn't suddenly make The Scientist a liberal publication. If The Scientist chose to argue in favour of climate change because current liberal political opinion supported that view, and if it usually agreed with liberal opinion whether or not the scientific consensus supported it, that would be a different matter. But, to return from the analogy, that is not the case of The Economist, which started life as a liberal magazine, and became nominally conservative when liberals became more opposed to free trade, and which usually only takes a strong line on economics issues which have been exceedingly well proven (in the case of free trade, for well over two centuries now).
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438

 - Posted      Profile for Zwingli   Email Zwingli   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
It's been a while since I've read it, but I think its views on political topics are easily classified as "corporate libertarian."

Could you define this please? I've never heard the phrase "corporate libertarian" and "corporatist libertarian" is of course a contradiction in terms, so I'm not quite sure how you think it's views can be so easily classified.
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  84  85  86  87  88  89  90  ...  109  110  111 
 
Post new thread  
Thread closed  Thread closed
Open thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools