[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
I guess that the American people are a bit brighter as a whole than the sample I see on T-Nation.[/quote]
I have a low opinion of you - now it’s even lower. Well done.
There is a lot to be said for class and character in victory and defeat - go hunt some up.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I guess Obama gets a free pass on Libya. [/quote]
Not for too much longer, I suspect.[/quote]
This may be a tough one for you, TB…but I’ll throw it out there anyway.
Do second term President’s tend to “learn lessons” from their first term that serves them well in their second?
(There is the thought that Clinton did, especially when it came to governing and compromise. Reagan also?).
Bush is unclear.
I just don’t have a good feel for this at all.
Mufasa
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I hope, but do you think the media will suddenly change their tune? [/quote]
Well, the election is over, so it can no longer be “politicized” (although, it should have been, it’s germane to the election), and facts have come to light that make this an irresistable story to investigate.
I think the Benghazi story has just begun.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]punchedbear wrote:
When they read history 200-300 years from now of our country this will be the turning point where it dies. [/quote]
Nope. That was the minute Bush took office, lost millions of jobs, 17 American factories closed, and the worst terror attack on American soil happened on his watch.[/quote]
Blame Bush, it’s the American way![/quote]
Ya no kidding. I guess the dot-com bubble was his fault too, right? Hell Enron and Worldcom, definitly on Bush. I wish he had done something. Maybe he can call his buddy Sarbanes up and come up with some regulation, it’s never too late 
I’d say Pearl Harbor is the worst terror attack ever. At least Bush actually did something about 9/11. I guess Obama gets a free pass on Libya. [/quote]
It is funny you mention Sarbanes Oaxley as I recently read a paper that argues that Sarbanes Oaxley and the requirement of all corporate board members to adhere to proper accounting standards has been an attributing factor to the economic stagnation of the US. Sarbane Oaxley is great in theory as it forces more transparency in the market yet the cost of compliance is high.
And for any of you drive-by superheroes who may feel I’m just being bitter, an quick read through the threads will reveal that I and, as far as I know all of the PWI regulars have remained very civil and even friendly to each other, even when we occupy completely different quadrants of the political grid.
I have no respect for anyone who comes here with their chin in the air, gloating at members who’ve spent literally thousands of posts engaged in actual arguments and managed to maintain more poise and civility over half a years worth of discussion than you could muster in a single drunken paragraph.
Go back to GAL or whatever crevice it was you scuttered out of.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
There is a lot to be said for class and character in victory and defeat[/quote]
A good thing for all to keep in mind.
A little victory dance is fine, but laying it on heavy does nothing more than make you look like a fool.
Exactly. Politics in the nostalgic era of years gone by had nowhere near the marketing potential that it does today. TV’s were new, stations were few, the internet didnt exist, or social media. The rise of the importance in marketing can be both good and bad.
The emotional bond is exactly what marketing is designed to do, and is why I study it. I just worked on a case competition for a major consumer goods brand. My team won the competition primarily because we focused on the emotional aspect of the consumer (I go to a numbers happy quant school). Sell the dream. In my case, it was taking a standard every day food product, and talking about the working mother who wants a good product for her money so that she can provide a healthy and nutritious meal to her family, without worrying about reading labels. We highlighted the quality of the product by their selectivity metrics for inputs. This in turn was incorporated into our campaign for Ms. So and so. We showed images of families around the dinner table and pristine fields where the product would come from. This played to the recent trend in natural foods as well as local jobs.
Politics is no different in the current arena of marketing. Who is your consumer? What are their values? How can you play to their emotional connection in a simple and succinct “pitch”.
While explaining the nuances of macroeconomics and taxation policy is great to an audience like myself, or perhaps countingbeans, it doesnt resonate with your average person. That message needs to be streamlined, coated with emotion, and sent out in a simple fashion to people.
Look at Obama’s hope and change slogan from 2008. Fucking brilliant. Look at the early, and I mean early branding of their opponent, Romney, as out of touch, rich and white. It worked- for the people that did not do their own research. There are people that simply go to the store without a list, and there are people that clip coupons. Voting is no different.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I guess Obama gets a free pass on Libya. [/quote]
Not for too much longer, I suspect.[/quote]
I hope, but do you think the media will suddenly change their tune? [/quote]
If Clinton wants to run in 2016, she will release her info that keeps her ass clear… This info will bury Obama. I’m pretty sure the truth about Libya died last night.
Otherwise, you guys better get ready for Liz Warren in 2016. The progressive is strong in this one, so people need to start getting their act together now.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I guess Obama gets a free pass on Libya. [/quote]
Not for too much longer, I suspect.[/quote]
Yeah, look at the bright side, maybe now Obama will be impeached and forced to resign. Then he won’t be the President anymore, and…Biden will…
Oh, wait…[/quote]
This is why Liyba died last night. No one, and I mean no one wants JB in the hot seat.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
This may be a tough one for you, TB…but I’ll throw it out there anyway.
Do second term President’s tend to “learn lessons” from their first term that serves them well in their second?
(There is the thought that Clinton did, especially when it came to governing and compromise. Reagan also?).
Bush is unclear.
I just don’t have a good feel for this at all.[/quote]
I’d say for Obama, probably not. Clinton triangulated because he had to to effectively govern with a divided government. But Clinton believed in limits to executive power and that he had to respect the lawmaking branches - i.e., now that he had obstacles to his legislative agenda, he couldn’t dimply do an end-around via executive fiat.
Obama believes in no such constraints, as we have already seen. He operates by an odd principle that “if they won’t act, I will” - well, there’s no actual justification for that, and he knows it. Congress is there for a reason - they pass laws, they aren’t a subordinate body simply there for an advisory opinion that the president can simply override if he disagrees with their take on things. Clinton knew this, so did his presidential forbears. Obama simply rejects that.
In a way, I’ve thought 2014 will be more important than 2012, in terms of truly figuring out where we are. If the GOP and rogue Democrats pick up seats in the House (rogue Democrats being those who differ from the president - and there are many, from what I know - and are no longer consigned to carry his water since he isn’t up for re-election in four years), Obama will find himself marginalized even more - and his tactics won’t play well with the American people.
Obama has two years to really, truly learn his lesson from 2008-2012 and govern accordingly. Problem is, his left flank will not tolerate “selling out” to reformers, and he will be in a very tough place.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Maybe he can call his buddy Sarbanes up and come up with some regulation, it’s never too late
[/quote]
I’ll be honest, shit like this is great for me.
Sucks for the rest of you, but great for me.
[quote]666Rich wrote:
@Nick.
Exactly. Politics in the nostalgic era of years gone by had nowhere near the marketing potential that it does today. TV’s were new, stations were few, the internet didnt exist, or social media. The rise of the importance in marketing can be both good and bad.
The emotional bond is exactly what marketing is designed to do, and is why I study it. I just worked on a case competition for a major consumer goods brand. My team won the competition primarily because we focused on the emotional aspect of the consumer (I go to a numbers happy quant school). Sell the dream. In my case, it was taking a standard every day food product, and talking about the working mother who wants a good product for her money so that she can provide a healthy and nutritious meal to her family, without worrying about reading labels. We highlighted the quality of the product by their selectivity metrics for inputs. This in turn was incorporated into our campaign for Ms. So and so. We showed images of families around the dinner table and pristine fields where the product would come from. This played to the recent trend in natural foods as well as local jobs.
Politics is no different in the current arena of marketing. Who is your consumer? What are their values? How can you play to their emotional connection in a simple and succinct “pitch”.
While explaining the nuances of macroeconomics and taxation policy is great to an audience like myself, or perhaps countingbeans, it doesnt resonate with your average person. That message needs to be streamlined, coated with emotion, and sent out in a simple fashion to people.
Look at Obama’s hope and change slogan from 2008. Fucking brilliant. Look at the early, and I mean early branding of their opponent, Romney, as out of touch, rich and white. It worked- for the people that did not do their own research. There are people that simply go to the store without a list, and there are people that clip coupons. Voting is no different.[/quote]
@666 Rich
Clayton Christensen would also say that you identified what the job that needed to be accomplished was. You not only created an emotional bond but you identified that mothers who work and raise a family need a product that can quickly provide a nutritious meal for a family on the run. Creating or branding a product as a job accomplisher is what IKEA does all the time. Nice work.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I think the economic recovery is underway anyway just as a result of the business cycle, and I’m curious what Obama turns his eyes towards as a new agenda as well. [/quote]
Then you will be surprised at the massive asset sell-off that is expected and the impact of the tidal wave of Obamacare regulations that are scheduled to hit after the election - as in, now. Also, fiscal cliff.
Business cycle? Uh no - big storm clouds.
[quote]As you might imagine, I am massively excited that
Those were the most important things to come out of this election, by far.[/quote]
Problem with health care is that it remains unpopular. If it remains a big drag on the economy (i.e., causing small business not to hire) and there is a big Bowles-Simpson-type push for comprehensive reform, Obamacare might very well get put on the chooping block.
Justices? I completely agree. That was big for Democrats.
I will concur with your prediction about Warren-2016. It secures the democrat female vote. She has an “everyman” characteristic, much as Obama did, but at the same time, can espouse her academic drivel. She has a background story that will emotionally resonate with voters. I strongly think she would get the nod over hillary, due to novelty and personality.
Other than Rubio, I dont think the Repubs have anyone who is “marketable” to the empowered demographics. I would imagine finding that person is their biggest concern in the next 4 years…seeing how McCain and Romney worked for them.
@66 Rich
Enjoy
By the way, for what its worth, I have from a credible source that there is a very comprehensive, bi-partisan reform package that seriously tries to tackle deficits, etc. waiting to be introduced till after the election but obviously in advance of the fiscal cliff problem.
If so, and I believe it is based on what I’ve heard, the honeymoon for Obama will be over very quickly, and he will be tested on the issue of fiscal rectitude very quickly after winning re-election.
lol @ every market down 1.75% right now… Should see a little bump up.
God I hope there isn’t a panic run this early.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I think the economic recovery is underway anyway just as a result of the business cycle, and I’m curious what Obama turns his eyes towards as a new agenda as well. [/quote]
Then you will be surprised at the massive asset sell-off that is expected and the impact of the tidal wave of Obamacare regulations that are scheduled to hit after the election - as in, now. Also, fiscal cliff.
[/quote]
Correct… No competent individual isn’t advising people to lock in their gains at 15% before the end of the year.
Apple
Google
Tech bubble
Oh god, every winner is likely to take a hit.
[quote]nickj_777 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]punchedbear wrote:
When they read history 200-300 years from now of our country this will be the turning point where it dies. [/quote]
Nope. That was the minute Bush took office, lost millions of jobs, 17 American factories closed, and the worst terror attack on American soil happened on his watch.[/quote]
Blame Bush, it’s the American way![/quote]
Ya no kidding. I guess the dot-com bubble was his fault too, right? Hell Enron and Worldcom, definitly on Bush. I wish he had done something. Maybe he can call his buddy Sarbanes up and come up with some regulation, it’s never too late
I’d say Pearl Harbor is the worst terror attack ever. At least Bush actually did something about 9/11. I guess Obama gets a free pass on Libya. [/quote]
It is funny you mention Sarbanes Oaxley as I recently read a paper that argues that Sarbanes Oaxley and the requirement of all corporate board members to adhere to proper accounting standards has been an attributing factor to the economic stagnation of the US. Sarbane Oaxley is great in theory as it forces more transparency in the market yet the cost of compliance is high.
It wouldn’t suprise me. SOX is overkill in certain ways. Accounting has plenty of issues that’s for sure, but any profession does.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
lol @ every market down 1.75% right now… Should see a little bump up.
God I hope there isn’t a panic run this early.[/quote]
What are you talking about ?
Like the rule says, follow the money, in this case, follow it swirl the bowl.
Nothing changes, Bam stays in, Dems keep Senate, Repulsicans keep the House.
Back to work everyone, the millions on food stamps are depending on you.
Another sad point, in Bam’s acceptance speech, he didn’t thank the two people who got him re-elected…GW Bush and Bill “I didn’t have sexual relations with that woman” Clinton.