Political Roundtable - Part VII

[AFM]

Real talk I would vote for Gortat, I'm assuming he was born in Poland doe

Also how the fuhk is Putin 63? He my dads age

[montestewart]

Real talk I would vote for Gortat, I'm assuming he was born in Poland doe

Also how the fuhk is Putin 63? He my dads age

How is Vince McMahon 70?



I forget, did he run for office ever, or was that just his wife?

[AFM]

Real talk I would vote for Gortat, I'm assuming he was born in Poland doe

Also how the fuhk is Putin 63? He my dads age

How is Vince McMahon 70?



I forget, did he run for office ever, or was that just his wife?

[bsilver]

Linda McMahon twice ran for the senate in Connecticut, and lost.
Vince McMahon admits taking steroids in the past, but claims his current body is just from working out.
Gortat's tattoo of his father looks odd. Probably wanted it near his heart, but maybe would have looked better on his arm.

[montestewart]

Linda McMahon twice ran for the senate in Connecticut, and lost.
Vince McMahon admits taking steroids in the past, but claims his current body is just from working out.
Gortat's tattoo of his father looks odd. Probably wanted it near his heart, but maybe would have looked better on his arm.

If his opponent went negative, there could be all sorts of dark insinuations about "daddy issues," with the rest painted as overcompensation.

[Dat2U]

I was just reflecting this morning that, liberal as my social views are, working as an economist for Democrats is making me miserable. I think I would, on the whole, actually be HAPPIER if Trump beats Clinton.

Ugh, weird.

The idea of Hillary Clinton winning does not appeal to me. And I'm a democrat. In my opinion she's just a sloppy politician that blows with the wind with not an original idea or bone in her body.

[bsilver]

I was just reflecting this morning that, liberal as my social views are, working as an economist for Democrats is making me miserable. I think I would, on the whole, actually be HAPPIER if Trump beats Clinton.

Ugh, weird.

Would working as an economist for the Republicans be any better. All the republican candidates are in the "supply side" column. Big tax breaks for the wealthy will stimulate the economy, etc. The problem is that to realistically help, both sides would have to put aside party dogma and find a compromise.

[Zonkerbl]

I was just reflecting this morning that, liberal as my social views are, working as an economist for Democrats is making me miserable. I think I would, on the whole, actually be HAPPIER if Trump beats Clinton.

Ugh, weird.

Would working as an economist for the Republicans be any better. All the republican candidates are in the "supply side" column. Big tax breaks for the wealthy will stimulate the economy, etc. The problem is that to realistically help, both sides would have to put aside party dogma and find a compromise.

I worked for the Republicans for 8 years and it was great. When Republicans encounter situations where they're not sure what their policy should be they often turn to their staff economists for advice. Democrats turn to their lawyers.

I don't know how much fun it will be to work for Tea Party Republicans. I assume they will not like my advice about immigration.

[dckingsfan]

Obviously tongue and cheek

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKosd0xJadE

[Ruzious]

I was just reflecting this morning that, liberal as my social views are, working as an economist for Democrats is making me miserable. I think I would, on the whole, actually be HAPPIER if Trump beats Clinton.

Ugh, weird.

I actually would be perfectly fine with Jeb Bush winning it all, and I find it alarming that Republicans in the majority prefer guys like Trump and Carson - who have no background (among other deficiencies) to begin to consider running for President.

[Zonkerbl]

Trump would do fine as POTUS. It would be interesting, he's like the anti-Reagan.

He's the president we deserve!

[Induveca]

Wow Politico just lost a ton of credibility......ouch.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/06/media/ben-carson-politico-west-point/index.html

[popper]

The former U.S. comptroller general says the real U.S. debt is closer to about $65 trillion than the oft-cited figure of $18 trillion.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/259476-ex-gao-head-us-debt-is-three-times-more-than-you-think

[dckingsfan]

The former U.S. comptroller general says the real U.S. debt is closer to about $65 trillion than the oft-cited figure of $18 trillion.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/259476-ex-gao-head-us-debt-is-three-times-more-than-you-think

And that doesn't take into account local and state debt. Regardless, there doesn't seem to be an appetite for fixing the problem from either side of the aisle. The vast majority of Rs are just as onboard in their willingness to spend.

[pineappleheadindc]

A couple of observations with regard to ongoing discussions on the debt.

"Johnnie come lately" debt concern types would actually generate some credibility if they had been posting their concerns during the administrations of both parties, not just the other side.

I observe that it's a short walk from a call about concern about debt to an exceptionally simplified (and false) accusation that the debt belongs to a President. (Congress, the Constitution, power of the purse and all that stuff).

And since most politically-minded debt concern trolls like to assign debt fault by Presidents (the Obama debt, etc), I also note that it's been crickets when discussing the Clinton surplus (using the same blame/credit logic). It would add some credibility if you'd hold Clinton up as your role model.

dckingsfan is completely exempt from the rant, above. P.S. If you want to target spending, it's the Congress, stupid. [NOTE: Not calling anyone stupid, just trying to riff off of a Clinton campaign slogan].

Pine

[Zonkerbl]

The former U.S. comptroller general says the real U.S. debt is closer to about $65 trillion than the oft-cited figure of $18 trillion.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/259476-ex-gao-head-us-debt-is-three-times-more-than-you-think

So he's basically saying we should close the spending gap in social security and medicare and stuff.

Phoo, I got all excited and wrote up a big post about M3 and everything and it turned out to be much more boring.

[popper]

A couple of observations with regard to ongoing discussions on the debt.

"Johnnie come lately" debt concern types would actually generate some credibility if they had been posting their concerns during the administrations of both parties, not just the other side.

I observe that it's a short walk from a call about concern about debt to an exceptionally simplified (and false) accusation that the debt belongs to a President. (Congress, the Constitution, power of the purse and all that stuff).

And since most politically-minded debt concern trolls like to assign debt fault by Presidents (the Obama debt, etc), I also note that it's been crickets when discussing the Clinton surplus (using the same blame/credit logic). It would add some credibility if you'd hold Clinton up as your role model.

dckingsfan is completely exempt from the rant, above. P.S. If you want to target spending, it's the Congress, stupid. [NOTE: Not calling anyone stupid, just trying to riff off of a Clinton campaign slogan].

Pine

Wow Pine. I just reread the article and there is nothing in it that assigns blame for the debt to one particular party or the other. There is also nothing in the article that assigns blame to a particular President. Regarding your comment on "generating credibility", I think you will find that David Walker is both non-partisan and highly credible when it comes to matters of U.S. debt and unfunded obligations. Your comments directed at me personally are perplexing (and inaccurate) given that I offered zero editorial or opinion in the post.

[closg00]

Carson appears to be a narcissist
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3310771/Inside-Ben-Carson-s-home-look-Republican-presidential-candidate-s-Maryland-mansion-complete-huge-shrine-portrait-Jesus.html

...and a compulsive liar
http://www.cc.com/full-episodes/fd06ks/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-november-9--2015---pras-season-21-ep-21021

[nate33]

Carson appears to be a narcissist
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3310771/Inside-Ben-Carson-s-home-look-Republican-presidential-candidate-s-Maryland-mansion-complete-huge-shrine-portrait-Jesus.html

Like any other major presidential candidate isn't? For cryin' out loud, Obama had two autobiographies published before even becoming president.

[Zonkerbl]

A couple of observations with regard to ongoing discussions on the debt.

"Johnnie come lately" debt concern types would actually generate some credibility if they had been posting their concerns during the administrations of both parties, not just the other side.

I observe that it's a short walk from a call about concern about debt to an exceptionally simplified (and false) accusation that the debt belongs to a President. (Congress, the Constitution, power of the purse and all that stuff).

And since most politically-minded debt concern trolls like to assign debt fault by Presidents (the Obama debt, etc), I also note that it's been crickets when discussing the Clinton surplus (using the same blame/credit logic). It would add some credibility if you'd hold Clinton up as your role model.

dckingsfan is completely exempt from the rant, above. P.S. If you want to target spending, it's the Congress, stupid. [NOTE: Not calling anyone stupid, just trying to riff off of a Clinton campaign slogan].

Pine

Wow Pine. I just reread the article and there is nothing in it that assigns blame for the debt to one particular party or the other. There is also nothing in the article that assigns blame to a particular President. Regarding your comment on "generating credibility", I think you will find that David Walker is both non-partisan and highly credible when it comes to matters of U.S. debt and unfunded obligations. Your comments directed at me personally are perplexing (and inaccurate) given that I offered zero editorial or opinion in the post.

I will say this though... it would help if you would copy and paste maybe a snippet summarizing what you feel interesting about the article. Really interesting article but you wouldn't know from what you posted. I assumed it was some sort of sensationalist Tea Party exaggeration based on a misunderstanding of how hard it is to actually measure debt. Turned out to be not that at all and actually pretty vanilla stuff.