Mitt Romney and the 47% who support Obama

[Jagos]

Bush wasn't elected by the people. He was elected by the Supreme Court that stopped the Florida recount. People didn't respect him as president until he gave us two wars that distracted everyone from the 2000 elections.

[Magus]

While IQ is maybe not a valid measurement the whole way across the entire socio-economic-racial spectrum, it was a test basically designed for white people, so being a Harvard-educated rich white man if he were to score low on an IQ test it would be pretty laughable, in that I would laugh at him.

EDIT: Also I forgot what this topic was about in reading it by the time I got down to here. HERE'S WHAT I THINK ABOUT THAT THERE TOPIC:

This 47% thing is inane, since the 47% that support Obama and the 47% who do not pay federal income tax are being conflated together, idiotically, by Romney. There are plenty of working poor Republicans who support Romney, and plenty of affluent rich Democrats who support Obama. It's just dumb, besides being alienating.

[Solid Snake]

The caliber of discourse in NPF Discussion threads has taken such a nosedive here that I'm beginning to view my infrequent visits as more due to a sense of morbid curiosity in how embarrassingly awful a forum can become than of any genuine interest in intellectual conversation and fellowship with decent people.

Seriously the minute NPF proves that it's actually capable of rational conversation without inappropriate insults, ad hominem attacks, brazen trolling, GIFs and JPGs as substitutes for well-reasoned positions, conclusory arguments without factual support, and so-called 'subtle' sexism / ableism / racism / homophobia cloaked in empty rationalizations of said dispositions as 'socially normal' and therefore 'inoffensive', bells will ring, angels will sing on high, order will be restored, and NPF News threads will be a cool place to hang out again.

...Feel free to take that as an insult, by the way. Not one that's deserving in application to every one of you, but consider this an indictment of what NPF's becoming as a social community moreso than an indictment of any specific individual. Insofar as it's certainly socially acceptable to typecast conservatives (and it is, and it should be,) it also should be permissible to have a frank conversation about what NPF is becoming, and when every other serious discussion thread seems to inevitably descend to a point where Moderators have to become intimately involved to stop the tide of bullshittery, something is utterly and irredeemably wrong.

RE: Calling Bush dumb -- I'm always shocked when liberals rely so heavily on a supposed lack of intelligence as an insult because A: doing so seems to actually absolve Bush of responsibility for terrible decisions liberals can and should hold him responsible for, B: it's an assumption at least partially based on the kinds of cultural stereotypes liberals supposedly decry as intolerant, as well as partially based on the kinds of assumptions regarding people with conditions like dyslexia that reasonable well-educated societies should avoid, and C: it's simply untrue anyway, and if you're interested in saying awful things about Bush, why not stick to the 99.9% of awful narratives about him that are accurate?!?

Now personally, I view Bush as below-average intelligence for a politician, insofar as I do believe that people like Cheney and Wolfowitz and Condi Rice in his Administration (and Gore / Kerry as political opponents) continually outsmarted and outplayed him (not that it helped Gore or Kerry win elections, mind you.) To be frank, though, Bush is probably more or less someone of 'average' intelligence who simply had the misfortune of being surrounded by geniuses who completely outshone him, because whether you're a Democrat or Republican, if you have a high-ranking position in government or business and you've acquired a fair deal of power you probably are pretty smart, unless you just inherited a certain name, which is what Bush Jr. did.

...And the fact that Karl Rove and Dick Cheney are 'geniuses' shouldn't be interpreted as a positive endorsement of their batshit evil policies and beliefs. Rather, it's important to acknowledge that there's no correlation between intelligence and morality, or between intelligence and other positive traits. Very often, we assume there is such a correlation to our detriment, and often associate positive qualities with a person merely because they're 'smart.' To the contrary, the smartest among us can also be fucking selfish intolerant piece-of-shit assholes. In Cheney and Rove's cases and the cases of many other conservative politicians, that description is certainly apt.

To reiterate: Part of the problem with liberals resorting to calling Bush 'dumb' is that assumes negative stereotypes regarding character and judgment with people of below-average 'booksmart' intelligence that simply aren't true. My Uncle was born with Down's Syndrome, and he also had a fantastic moral code, treated people with more respect than you'd ever believe, was universally beloved, wouldn't purposefully hurt anyone, and while I wouldn't have recommended the Presidency as a career path for him, suggesting he's anything like Bush is an insult to my Uncle.

And some people I know with below-average 'bookish' intelligence would actually make phenomenal Presidents. In politics as in life, it's often not about what you know but moreso about your integrity, your vision, your emotional stability, your charisma, who trusts you, and your capability to at least identify those around you who'd be best suited to make the tough policy calls. If you're surrounded by the best progressive advisers and can delegate efficiently, you can be a great President without the IQ points.

[Bells]

Originally Posted by Meister

Well, yeah, since 100 is per definition the average. It's a bell curve.

What? What did i do?! ...oh wait. Right...

Can i just ask people to relax a bit here? Yeah yeah... internet discurse is often like that. Mudslinging, pot shots and emotional gut reactions, and it's fine (and good) that you guys pull together to improve the bar level of quality regardless of personal feeling and thought... But let's not go to the other extreme ok?

Comment made, comment Challenged, problem dealt with, move on. If it repeats itself the mod team will surely deal with it properly.

As for the --content-- of this thread... quite often i see interviews swinging around about Bush and Romney usually working in the lines of "He is actually a nice guy and a great person overall... just not a good nation leader."

So i wouldn't take statements like these for granted, i would say they probably have merits. Just cause you're a good person, that doesn't mean you can run a country. Just cause you can't run a country it doesn't mean you're an overall bad person.

as for what Romney is trying to do... he will simply not win. And i believe that for him, in a personal level, it doesn't matter that much... cause he will make money out of this. And he will bank and coach the next Challenger when the Obama age is over.

And the next run for office in the usa will be Romney's Secret Apprentice vs either Clinton of Hilary.

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by Bells

Yeah yeah... internet discurse is often like that. Mudslinging, pot shots and emotional gut reactions, and it's fine (and good) that you guys pull together to improve the bar level of quality regardless of personal feeling and thought... But let's not go to the other extreme ok?

It's funny because the one thing I always (used to?) love about NPF was that the atmosphere was generally conducive to producing the opposite of typical internet discourse.
After all, if NPF wanted to be just like any other website, we could just go to...any other website.

[Azisien]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

It's funny because the one thing I always (used to?) love about NPF was that the atmosphere was generally conducive to producing the opposite of typical internet discourse.
After all, if NPF wanted to be just like any other website, we could just go to...any other website.

Rose-tinted glasses. Definitely, definitely, rose-tinted glasses.

[Marc v4.0]

The "other extreme" of mudslinging, pot-shotting, emotional gut reaction arguments is rational, reasoned, thoughtful discourse.

So, yes, let's go there

[Tev]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

It's funny because the one thing I always (used to?) love about NPF was that the atmosphere was generally conducive to producing the opposite of typical internet discourse.
After all, if NPF wanted to be just like any other website, we could just go to...any other website.

It's because Fifth always showed up to mock and ban people who got out of hand.

[shiney]

The news forum has never really been a shining example of NPF. It's a great example of how intelligent we can be, but it reflects the opposite. There has not been a point in the news forum's existence that it hasn't been a giant pain in the ass. Not back when fifth went nuklear on me, not during the repeated attempts to shut it down or reform it, not now. Every time we close it, the topics bleed out into the rest of the forum.

Thoughtful, reasoned discourse is a goal to strive for, but what we have lately is people arguing emotionally, arguing beliefs irrespective of fact or evidence. Not all the time, but often. We have people trumpeting ignorance, refusing to accept alternate viewpoints, justifying discrimination. We have the entire Liz story-arc that consumed the forum for a few months. The news forum is the center of activity here, it's what dew a lot of people in, but managing it has always been a difficulty.

I didn't like

Originally Posted by Tev

It's because Fifth always showed up to mock and ban people who got out of hand.

because I feel like being banned is punishment enough and it's vulgar and savage to mock and belittle someone who is being banned. I felt like it just brings us down to the same level and I wanted to hold mods and the forum at large to a higher standard. But maybe it worked? This could be an example of my failure to manage effectively. I don't know.

I feel pretty responsible for what's happened though. I've thrown some ideas at POS but I would like to hear from you guys as to what you think can reasonably be done to "fix" things. I am open to any idea and I won't take offense, so I guess just go to town. I'd rather not see the forum die; it's already fractured with a portion of the community spending time elsewhere, I would like to see it be repaired even if it means I have to hand off the reins or restructure or something. The community is a hell of a lot more important than me.

[Jagos]

Am I missing something here?

I could swear I started this more for discussion on Mitt and his taxes but now it's a moratorium on what happened months ago.