The 2012 Three Ring Circus AKA The US Presidential Election

[Revolutopia]

First, George talking about being brainwashed about Vietnam and now Anne worrying Mitt's mental well-being if he wins the election. Do the Romney men just have a history of problems relating to their mental health and a need to share that with the public?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/28/ann-romney-worries-about-mitts-mental-well-being-if-he-wins-election/

[Felix Terra]

First, George talking about being brainwashed about Vietnam and now Anne worrying Mitt's mental well-being if he wins the election. Do the Romney men just have a history of problems relating to their mental health and a need to share that with the public?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/28/ann-romney-worries-about-mitts-mental-well-being-if-he-wins-election/

I wanted to post that.

"I'll go take Romney to the quiet room."
"The one with the big red button?"
"Yeah. Why?"
"Ah, crap."

[Gauthier]

First, George talking about being brainwashed about Vietnam and now Anne worrying Mitt's mental well-being if he wins the election. Do the Romney men just have a history of problems relating to their mental health and a need to share that with the public?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/28/ann-romney-worries-about-mitts-mental-well-being-if-he-wins-election/

Romney's campaign is starting to look like The Dead Zone. Hmm... I wonder if someone manages to sneak a sniper rifle at his next appearance he'll grab a baby and use it as a bullet shield?

[Geilinor]

First, George talking about being brainwashed about Vietnam and now Anne worrying Mitt's mental well-being if he wins the election. Do the Romney men just have a history of problems relating to their mental health and a need to share that with the public?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/28/ann-romney-worries-about-mitts-mental-well-being-if-he-wins-election/

Romney's campaign is starting to look like The Dead Zone. Hmm... I wonder if someone manages to sneak a sniper rifle at his next appearance he'll grab a baby and use it as a bullet shield?

Thankfully the debates are coming and we'll be able to better judge what's going to happen.

[The Black Forrest]

First, George talking about being brainwashed about Vietnam and now Anne worrying Mitt's mental well-being if he wins the election. Do the Romney men just have a history of problems relating to their mental health and a need to share that with the public?

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/28/ann-romney-worries-about-mitts-mental-well-being-if-he-wins-election/

Oh FFS,

If he has issues with his mental well being, then POTUS is the last thing he should be.

I do like:

“Mitt is a person who cares,” she said. “That’s why we are running, because we care … he does not fail. As president of the United States, he will not fail.”

About what sweet heart? For some reason I see her saying "Let them eat cake"

There is also this gem:

“This economy has been under his control for the last four years, and we have seen no jobs,” Romney said. “It’s been a jobless recovery.”

In my neck of the woods, my wife is working. Just about everybody is working again. The foreclosures are at "normal" levels and people are starting to improve their homes again. The recovery has been small but it's not in freefall and it won't collapse like it would under Mitt.

[The Black Forrest]

Romney's campaign is starting to look like The Dead Zone. Hmm... I wonder if someone manages to sneak a sniper rifle at his next appearance he'll grab a baby and use it as a bullet shield?

Thankfully the debates are coming and we'll be able to better judge what's going to happen.

Such as what?

[Farnhamia]

Thankfully the debates are coming and we'll be able to better judge what's going to happen.

Such as what?

How badly Romney's going to lose?

[Rubiconic Crossings V2 rev 1f]

I swear the Romney campaign is one of the greatest comedies ever made. Truth is often more funny than something manufactured...and this is so ably demonstrated every time either Romney or his hangers on open their mouths. The icing on the cake will surely be the debates.

I propose a drinking game - a snifter for each Romney gaffe.

Actually perhaps not a good idea.

I don't want to promote binge drinking.

[Ashmoria]

here's a little something so scary that it will make an atheist pray to god that mitt romney doesnt get elected.

mitt romney's real agenda

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... a-20120928

There is no longer any ambiguity about the path that Romney would pursue as president, because it's the same trajectory charted by Ryan, the architect of the House GOP's reactionary agenda since the party's takeover in 2010. "Picking Ryan as vice president outlines the future of the next four or eight years of a Romney administration," GOP power broker Grover Norquist exulted in August. "Ryan has outlined a plan that has support in the Republican House and Senate. You have a real sense of where Romney's going." In fact, Norquist told party activists back in February, the true direction of the GOP is being mapped out by congressional hardliners. All the Republicans need to realize their vision, he said, is a president "with enough working digits to handle a pen."

The GOP legislation awaiting Romney's signature isn't simply a return to the era of George W. Bush. From abortion rights and gun laws to tax giveaways and energy policy, it's far worse. Measures that have already sailed through the Republican House would roll back clean-air protections, gut both Medicare and Medicaid, lavish trillions in tax cuts on billionaires while raising taxes on the poor, and slash everything from college aid to veteran benefits. In fact, the tenets of Ryan Republicanism are so extreme that they even offend the pioneers of trickle-down economics. "Ryan takes out the ax and goes after programs for the poor – which is the last thing you ought to cut," says David Stockman, who served as Ronald Reagan's budget director. "It's ideology run amok."

its 3 pages of stomach churning possibility.

its not that you didnt know it. its putting it all in one place that hits you in the gut.

[Natapoc]

I'm glad that "third party" has more supporters than Romney on this forum. I suspect that's the way it is in the real world too except that the people who are most against Romney are also the least likely to vote.

[Farnhamia]

I'm glad that "third party" has more supporters than Romney on this forum. I suspect that's the way it is in the real world too except that the people who are most against Romney are also the least likely to vote.

You've been around here long enough to realize that one should never equate NSG to "the real world."

[New Chalcedon]

here's a little something so scary that it will make an atheist pray to god that mitt romney doesnt get elected.

mitt romney's real agenda

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... a-20120928

There is no longer any ambiguity about the path that Romney would pursue as president, because it's the same trajectory charted by Ryan, the architect of the House GOP's reactionary agenda since the party's takeover in 2010. "Picking Ryan as vice president outlines the future of the next four or eight years of a Romney administration," GOP power broker Grover Norquist exulted in August. "Ryan has outlined a plan that has support in the Republican House and Senate. You have a real sense of where Romney's going." In fact, Norquist told party activists back in February, the true direction of the GOP is being mapped out by congressional hardliners. All the Republicans need to realize their vision, he said, is a president "with enough working digits to handle a pen."

The GOP legislation awaiting Romney's signature isn't simply a return to the era of George W. Bush. From abortion rights and gun laws to tax giveaways and energy policy, it's far worse. Measures that have already sailed through the Republican House would roll back clean-air protections, gut both Medicare and Medicaid, lavish trillions in tax cuts on billionaires while raising taxes on the poor, and slash everything from college aid to veteran benefits. In fact, the tenets of Ryan Republicanism are so extreme that they even offend the pioneers of trickle-down economics. "Ryan takes out the ax and goes after programs for the poor – which is the last thing you ought to cut," says David Stockman, who served as Ronald Reagan's budget director. "It's ideology run amok."

its 3 pages of stomach churning possibility.

its not that you didnt know it. its putting it all in one place that hits you in the gut.

As one of the commenters to the piece notes, the Republican Party are truly today's Pharisees, whited sepulchres who loudly proclaim their piety and rectitude whenever in public, but act as they see fit in private.

Jesus would be appalled at them.

[Natapoc]

I'm glad that "third party" has more supporters than Romney on this forum. I suspect that's the way it is in the real world too except that the people who are most against Romney are also the least likely to vote.

You've been around here long enough to realize that one should never equate NSG to "the real world."

I do not equate NSG with the real world.

[New Chalcedon]

Hopefully, this will go viral and put to rest (permanently) the myth of the poor, oppressed businessman:

I am a Job Creator, hear me roar whine.

[Gauthier]

Hopefully, this will go viral and put to rest (permanently) the myth of the poor, oppressed businessman:

I am a Job Creator, hear me roar whine.

Socialist propaganda!!!1111one

[Alien Space Bats]

I swear the Romney campaign is one of the greatest comedies ever made. Truth is often more funny than something manufactured...and this is so ably demonstrated every time either Romney or his hangers on open their mouths. The icing on the cake will surely be the debates.

I propose a drinking game - a snifter for each Romney gaffe.

Actually perhaps not a good idea.

I don't want to promote binge drinking.

What are you going to do when half the Nation checks into rehab?

[Gauthier]

I swear the Romney campaign is one of the greatest comedies ever made. Truth is often more funny than something manufactured...and this is so ably demonstrated every time either Romney or his hangers on open their mouths. The icing on the cake will surely be the debates.

I propose a drinking game - a snifter for each Romney gaffe.

Actually perhaps not a good idea.

I don't want to promote binge drinking.

What are you going to do when half the Nation checks into rehab?

The rehab industry clearly has a vested interest in a Romney presidency.

[Evraim]

here's a little something so scary that it will make an atheist pray to god that mitt romney doesnt get elected.

mitt romney's real agenda

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... a-20120928



its 3 pages of stomach churning possibility.

its not that you didnt know it. its putting it all in one place that hits you in the gut.

As one of the commenters to the piece notes, the Republican Party are truly today's Pharisees, whited sepulchres who loudly proclaim their piety and rectitude whenever in public, but act as they see fit in private.

Jesus would be appalled at them.

Being Jewish, I do not have much of a problem with this.

Also, may I claim the use of the word "white" as a dog whistle?

here's a little something so scary that it will make an atheist pray to god that mitt romney doesnt get elected.

mitt romney's real agenda

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... a-20120928

There is no longer any ambiguity about the path that Romney would pursue as president, because it's the same trajectory charted by Ryan, the architect of the House GOP's reactionary agenda since the party's takeover in 2010. "Picking Ryan as vice president outlines the future of the next four or eight years of a Romney administration," GOP power broker Grover Norquist exulted in August. "Ryan has outlined a plan that has support in the Republican House and Senate. You have a real sense of where Romney's going." In fact, Norquist told party activists back in February, the true direction of the GOP is being mapped out by congressional hardliners. All the Republicans need to realize their vision, he said, is a president "with enough working digits to handle a pen."

The GOP legislation awaiting Romney's signature isn't simply a return to the era of George W. Bush. From abortion rights and gun laws to tax giveaways and energy policy, it's far worse. Measures that have already sailed through the Republican House would roll back clean-air protections, gut both Medicare and Medicaid, lavish trillions in tax cuts on billionaires while raising taxes on the poor, and slash everything from college aid to veteran benefits. In fact, the tenets of Ryan Republicanism are so extreme that they even offend the pioneers of trickle-down economics. "Ryan takes out the ax and goes after programs for the poor – which is the last thing you ought to cut," says David Stockman, who served as Ronald Reagan's budget director. "It's ideology run amok."

its 3 pages of stomach churning possibility.

its not that you didnt know it. its putting it all in one place that hits you in the gut.

We actually left the era of George W. Bush? I never got the memo.

Your source confounds me in all the wrong ways. Do you have anything with more substance?

[Nightkill the Emperor]

Interesting read about Romney.

[PapaJacky]

I'd like to issue a correction. In this post, I did some math with data that which I thought were adjusted for inflation; they weren't. While replying to skepticism over the data's "inflation-adjustedness" and it's "GDP comparability", I gave the skeptic the tables from the same source that which had GDP in it. I did not, however, notice in the rush of things, that that same table had the data adjusted for inflation for 2005 USD. And so, I reran my analysis again, this time after remembering how to use excel!

Anyways, as this is excel, I was able to do multiple calculations easily, and thus have done so. I've calculated overall outlays (spending) growth by president nominally, overall outlays growth by president in percentage growth, spending as a % of GDP, and average outlay growth by president, nominally, in percentage growth by year and increase in % of GDP by year. Unfortunately, the data doesn't stretch back to Hoover, or even back to the first years of FDR (the data starts in 1940), so I've shrunk the analysis to 12 Presidents total, 6 on each party, coincidentally.

So here are the numbers:

Truman - Spending shrunk overall by about 34%, or 3.8% annually. Spending shrunk nominally by $347 billion, or about $43 billion annually. Spending as apart of GDP of that time shrunk by 21.5%, or about 2.7% annually.

Eisenhower - Spending shrunk overall by about 4.2%, or 0.47% annually. Spending shrunk nominally by about $28.6 billion, or $3.18 billion annually. Spending as apart of GDP of that time shrunk by 2%, or, 0.2% annually.

Kennedy - Spending grew overall by about 14.2%, or, 3.5% annually. Spending grew nominally by about $92.3 billion, or $23 billion annually. Spending as apart of GDP of that time grew by 0.1%, or, 0.025% annually.

Johnson - Spending grew overall by about 31.8%, or, 6.3% annually. Spending grew nominally by about $236 billion, or, $47 billion annually. Spending as apart of GDP of that time grew 0.9%, or, 0.18% annually.

Nixon - Spending grew overall by about 17.8%, or, 2.5% annually. Spending grew nominally by about $174 billion, or, $24.8 billion annually. Spending as apart of GDP of that time grew 1.9%, or, 0.27% annually.

Ford - Spending grew overall by about 5.5%, or, 1.4% annually. Spending grew nominally by about $63.7 billion, or, $16 billion annually. Spending as apart of GDP of that time shrunk by about 0.6%, or, 0.15% annually.

Carter - Spending grew overall by about 16.7%, or, 3.3% annually. Spending grew nominally by about $202 billion, or, $40.5 billion annually. Spending as apart of GDP of that time grew by about 1.5%, or 0.3% annually.

Reagan - Spending grew overall by about 21.7%, or, 2.4% annually. Spending grew nominally by about $307 billion, or, $34 billion annually. Spending as apart of GDP of that time shrunk by about 1%, or, 0.1% annually.

Bush sr. - Spending grew overall by about 7%, or, 1.4% annually. Spending grew nominally by about $121 billion, or, $24.28 billion annually. Spending as apart of GDP of that time grew by 0.2%, or, 0.04% annually.

Clinton - Spending grew overall by about 12.3%, or, 1.4% annually. Spending grew nominally by $227 billion, or, $25.2 billion annually. Spending as apart of GDP of that time shrunk by 3.2%, or, 0.36% annually.

Bush jr. - Spending grew overall by about 53.2%, or, 5.9% annually. Spending grew nominally by about $1,101 billion, or, $122.4 billion annually. Spending as apart of GDP of that time grew by 7%, or, 0.78% annually.

Obama - Spending shrunk overall by about 0.5%, or, 0.1% annually. Spending shrunk nominally by about $16 billion, or, $3.2 billion annually. Spending as apart of GDP of that time shrunk by about 1.9%, or, 0.38% annually.

So the tally:

Republican Affiliated Presidents
Total Spending Growth (Nominally) - $1.739 trillion dollars
Average Spending Growth (Nominally) - $0.289 trillion dollars
Average Spending Growth (% of each President's starting budget) - 16.8%
Average Spending Growth (% change of each President's spending as a % of GDP) - 0.92%

Democrat Affiliated Presidents
Total Spending Growth (Nominally) - $0.394 trillion dollars
Average Spending Growth (Nominally) - $0.065 trillion dollars
Average Spending Growth (% of each President's starting budget) - 6.8%
Average Spending Growth (% change of each President's spending as a % of GDP) - -4%


Now to find the median for average spending growth as a % of each President's starting budget.

Republican Affiliated Presidents:

Bush jr. - 53.2%
Reagan - 21.7%
Nixon - 17.8%
(Median) - 12.5%
Bush sr. - 7.1%
Ford - 5.5%
Eisenhower - -4.2%

Democrat Affiliated Presidents:

Johnson - 31.8%
Carter - 16.7%
Kennedy - 14.2%
(Median) - 13.25%
Clinton - 12.3%
Obama - -0.5%
Truman - -34%


So some analysis and thoughts. Republican affiliated Presidents spent more money and at a faster rate than Democratic affiliated Presidents. The only real difference I've spotted was that median spending increases during each Presidents terms increased at a rate of about 0.75% faster for Democrat affiliated Presidents than Republican ones. One should note the extremes in spending growth by party. For future prediction purposes, it's probably better to find the population standard deviation for each party. I used an online calculator easiness. Average Spending Increase when in Office:

Republican Affiliated Presidents - mean of 16.8%, SD of 18.3%.
Democrat Affiliated Presidents - mean of 6.8%, SD of 20.5%

Based on that, assuming a standard distribution, a regular Republican president has a 95% chance of increasing outlays by 53.4% of what they started with. A regular Democratic president has a 95% chance of increasing outlays by 47.8% of what they started with.

Notes
1. Again, the math may have been wrong for Presidents who didn't finish their terms.
2. Truman got credit for cutting the budget by 1/3 because he took office before the middle of the year, which is my arbitrary place in time when I can start to attribute budgets to Presidents
3. This time, I'm sure that the data has been adjusted for inflation; all of them have been adjusted to the 2005 USD.
4. Source

[Ashmoria]

here's a little something so scary that it will make an atheist pray to god that mitt romney doesnt get elected.

mitt romney's real agenda

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... a-20120928



its 3 pages of stomach churning possibility.

its not that you didnt know it. its putting it all in one place that hits you in the gut.

We actually left the era of George W. Bush? I never got the memo.

Your source confounds me in all the wrong ways. Do you have anything with more substance?

source for what? the source for the rolling stone article is the rolling stone article. if you disagree with their analysis of the republican/romney agenda feel free to say why.

[Demphor]

I put NC as Democratic as it is beginning to waver in the Republican storm, and Virginia is going to be Obama as polls indicate Obama has a 12-17 point lead over Romney, but any who this is what I see in the future.
http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_p ... ?mapid=CWx

[Khadgar]

I put NC as Democratic as it is beginning to waver in the Republican storm, and Virginia is going to be Obama as polls indicate Obama has a 12-17 point lead over Romney, but any who this is what I see in the future.
http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_p ... ?mapid=CWx

You're really optimistic on the western states. You've got Obama winning Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming and 3/5ths of Nebraska. That's absurd really.

[Arumdaum]

I put NC as Democratic as it is beginning to waver in the Republican storm, and Virginia is going to be Obama as polls indicate Obama has a 12-17 point lead over Romney, but any who this is what I see in the future.
http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_p ... ?mapid=CWx

Republicans winning Maine's popular vote, Democrats winning Nebraska's popular vote, and Democrats winning Wyoming but not Arizona?

[Geilinor]

100% Debt Removal ideal > Countries without debt doing it wrong > San Marino doesn't have debt so shut up > San Marino isn't a country worth talking about when discussing economy.

And now we're back to the original point:

The great economies of Russia and Iran are also near-debt free, as is Saudi Arabia!

Oil tax revenue investment funds.