the most important election of your lifetime: 2012 american general election thread

(xp) except poor and middle class minority people are less likely to own real estate and houses (imaginary or maginary) which should be a compensating factor to your above ^

xp except not - middle class and especially poor also most likely to have been receiving "You yes you can afford a house despite your shitty credit rating / no job" + house market collapsing / mortgage default between 2005 and 2009.

people who lucked out cause they were too poor to buy real estate...are still poor

yeah, i didn't consider the loansharking

like, poor ppl and minorities were systemically preyed upon and have disproportionally suffered - for sure - but the wealth drop says more about how poor we were in 2007 than how much money has disappeared. imaginary money became more explicitly imaginary.

Imaginary money wasn't just purchased by the poor.

people who lucked out cause they were too poor to buy real estate...are still poor

Lucky bastards.

yes, which is why the median white figure - that's gonna be a middle class person - also fell. but the poor were more likely to have almost all of their wealth in their house.

As soon as I track down some wealth it's going in a Vanguard index fund let me tell you

Jeb, off message!

“I think we’re in a period here for the next year of pretty slow growth; I don’t see how we get out, notwithstanding who’s president,” Bush said. “We’ve got major headwinds with Europe and a slow down for Asia as well.”

http://www.salon.com/2012/06/12/what_jeb_bush_really_said/singleton/

Jeb seems like a guy who doesn't want to be president anymore.

sometimes I fantasize that Dubya's disastrous presidency was all just an elaborate ploy to sabotage his bro's prospects

Phil --

We're adding a twist to the upcoming Dinner with Barack:

You not only have the chance to sit down for a meal with the President and a guest of your choice. You also get to help pick the President's guest.

Pitch in $3 or whatever you can to be automatically entered to win a seat at the table, and then make sure to weigh in on who you think should join President Obama.

Now this I like. I've worked up a shortlist:

1) Goose Gossage
2) Joe King Carrasco
3) the really big guy who calls everyone a mook in Mean Streets
4) Salma Hayek (I know that runs completely counter to the joke I'm crafting here, but I want her there anyway)
5) Abe Vigoda

you mean the band, right

Didn't know there was one till now, but no, I want the real thing. Looking good at 86:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Abe_Vigoda.jpg

6) The Rev. Jeremiah Wright

7) Mitt Romney

8) Legless Pakistani orphan underage combatant

9) Bradley Manning

10) Dr. Morbius

^^^seriously

Thanks for #8. You're the conscience that none of us has.

lol Jeb's party didn't want to nominate Poppy in '80 or '88.

what they want
and what they do
has been confused

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2012_06/wall_street_places_its_bets_on037921.php

As nice as Obama has been to Wall Street, the folks there are giving most of their money to Romney. Who would have guessed it.

shocking

I'm sure they're giving plenty of money to Obama too. Got to hedge your bets, right?

if there's one thing Wall Street has become notoriously terrible at, it's hedging bets

if only they could spin off some derivatives from their bets

i'd like to make a large bet on those bets, with all of my money

i'd like to make a large bet on those bets, with all of my your money

I bet the guy next door's house

Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign and the super PAC supporting it are outraising Obama among financial-sector donors $37.1 million to $4.8 million.

they really don't like their servants calling em names, even for show.

yep

i'd like to make a large bet on those bets, with all of my money

then have a bond rating certify it AAA!

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbertoni/2012/06/13/exclusive-adelsons-pro-romney-donations-will-be-limitless-could-top-100m/

George Will says (elsewhere)that this is just free speech

Does Adelson feel guilty about one American potentially steering the fate of the presidential election? “I’m against very wealthy people attempting to or influencing elections,” Adelson told me in February. “But as long as it’s doable I’m going to do it...."

After all the media burials OWS received from Dem pundits last week, watch the liberals hit the streets (for a few days) if Mittens is elected.

“I’m against very wealthy people attempting to or influencing elections,” Adelson told me in February. “But as long as it’s doable I’m going to do it...."

uh then you are not actually against it

kinda like Obama (in NYC to shake the cup again today)

I'm against murder. But as long as it's doable I'm going to do it...

no lover of shelly delly but i think shakey's wrong here. lots of wealthy left-leaners are against the low levels they're taxed at but they don't voluntarily write big checks to the feds, and that doesn't mean they actually support low tax rates.

more like "i'm against lotteries, but if you tell me i've won a couple million dollars, i'll take it."

no, he's talking about committing a specific act - not just benefitting from a situation through no fault of his own. this is different.

like it doesn't matter if you're against something you have no agency over. but he does have agency over whether or not he buys elections.

Can we ship Adelson to Macau finally?

I mean permanently

Or is this where Obama suddenly discovers that he's an enemy combattant?

no, he's talking about committing a specific act - not just benefitting from a situation through no fault of his own. this is different/

No, it isn't - it's the exact same ethics as voting for one of the two candidates who's going to win, to kick a tired horse. He believes the system is corrupt, but somebody is going to benefit from that corruption. If he abstains from being the one who corrupts it, then he gets moral high ground, but nothing changes about the corruption, so the moral high ground is useless. The corruption is in place & will be a part of the process. Declining to participate in it is foolish, if you are interested in the outcome of the election. Somebody else may do it on the other side if you don't; then you can say you stood the high ground when you could have bought the election for the greater good.

I don't follow the logic. committing an act is different from not committing an act, I don't care what you say.