# Is it really necessary to portray the election of the opposing candidate as the end of humanity? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [August 10, 2012, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121 "2012-08-10T20:18:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/81 "2012-08-15T05:38:39Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > . . . The Republicans were demonized for opposing _yet another_ reflexive raising of the debt ceiling. But what good is a “ceiling” if it can be raised at will? . . . We’d already spent the money. The vote was on whether or not to borrow it. We’d SPENT IT already. Rejecting the debt limit increase would have been the rough equivalent of credit card fraud. I’m gonna buy me a whole bunch of stuff…and then simply refuse to pay the bank back. Because of this, the bank reduced our credit rating. You do NOT play chicken with creditors. Many of us supported the notion that the administration could unilaterally increase the debt limit – and would even be constitutionally required to. Your idea that it is just some “at will” fancy of the Democrats is beyond inane; it is ignorance of the most grievous sort. The Democrats were simply acknowledging the blunt truth: we had already spent the money! The Republicans were willing to hurt the country rather than accept this fact. Hint: after you’ve spent the money is no time to practice austerity! ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 10:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/82 "2012-08-15T10:49:59Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > This is a _great_ example of what I mean. The Republicans were demonized for opposing _yet another_ reflexive raising of the debt ceiling. But what good is a “ceiling” if it can be raised at will? The Republicans who opposed it that time around were saying, look, the administration that exists at the time of a proposed debt ceiling raise–Republican _or_ Democrat–raises the specter of a government shutdo No, shut up. You have no idea what the fuck you are talking about, and I’m not explaining the debt ceiling to _yet another_ person who does not understand how it works. I’m just not going to. Jesus dude, please _learn what the fuck you are talking about_, then you are qualified to come back to the discussion. Until then, you’re like a kid who doesn’t understand that ATMs don’t just spout free money who feels that his parents were wrong in spanking him for stealing their ATM card and draining it. If you want to have _any_ shred of respectability in this conversation, you will stop acting like you have no understanding of anything. Refusing to raise the debt ceiling is _disasterous_. > [@](#): > > So the Republicans believed they were acting out of a sense of fiscal responsibility, however misguided that may have been. Yes. Let me explain how misguided that may have been. Do you know how Kent Hovind claims that there are 6 types of evolution, only one of which has ever been demonstrated? Do you know how he also claims that the grand canyon was carved out by floodwater from Noah’s flood because it starts above ground level? The entire republican caucus would have to be full of Kent Hovind-level _ **idiots** _ to think that buying a bunch of shit on the credit card, then refusing the pay the bill was a good idea. There is no two ways about this: either the republican party is _insanely stupid_, like to the point of clinical retardation, or they’re fucking evil. I think I’m not giving them too much credit in claiming that they are smart enough to put a goddamn pair of pants on the right way. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 11:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/83 "2012-08-15T11:10:50Z")
And if I sound a little exasperated, it’s because I am. The debt ceiling debacle was the kind of one-of-a-kind telling fiascos that show just how fucked-up a political party is, and how backwards their priorities are. It isn’t hard to understand – in fact, it’s about as straightforward as it gets. The debt ceiling has been raised without a single peep [dozens of times](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_United_States_debt-ceiling_increases). This is rote politics – congress has already allotted the spending it will be doing in other bills. All the debt ceiling does is say, “You can’t borrow money to pay for the spending you have already done”. Obviously, this is really stupid. So every few years, congress votes to raise this. This is a rote procedure, and has been tied to policy exactly _once_ before, in the Nixon era, and I will agree that however much I like the legislature there, that was a really, _really_ bad idea. Why? Because negotiating over whether or not one can pay one’s credit card bill, with one side that _must say yes_ saying “No, not until you do completely unreasonable things that aren’t in your own best interest” in full view of your creditors is a good way to make your creditors stop trusting you. And let’s be perfectly clear here: _nobody wanted the default_. What the republicans did was akin to someone kidnapping their own wife to get the neighbors to comply to their demands. Complete government shutdown wouldn’t just have been a disaster for the democrats, it would have been a disaster for _everybody_. And again, I reject the notion that the republicans are collectively stupid enough to actually want that. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/84 "2012-08-15T13:31:41Z")
I agree with the logic: once you’ve agreed to appropriate a certain amount of money, it’s insane to then turn around and not let the money actually be raised. The responsible thing to do would be to always raise enough money to cover what you’re spending without having to borrow. Instead, we put revenue and spending on two completely independent tracks, which shows that the political system in general defies common sense. However, the debt ceiling fight is not proof that the GOP is extreme. They saw an opportunity to extract spending cuts, spending cuts that were needed, and they took that opportunity. They even tried to pass a bill that would have prevented default, but Democrats wouldn’t go for it because they called it the “pay China first” bill. Which I think is actually a lot more revealing, because it says that Democrats don’t consider our debts to be our top priority, despite what the Constitution says. Default is actually unconstitutional, IMO, and neither party should be under an illusions that we can just default when it gets really bad. We can’t. If it comes down to sullying our national honor and making seniors eat dog food, then tough cookies. Seniors eat dog food. Providing for seniors isn’t in the Constitution. The integrity of our debt is. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/86 "2012-08-15T14:52:42Z")
**adaher** , you’re not making sense. If paying the debt is paramount, then your guys shouldn’t have balked at paying the debt. They certainly should not have made us appear so untrustworthy that they made the cost of the debt even _higher_. But they did. If they had a problem with the budget, the \*responsible \*time to address that would have been in the budget process. Once it’s passed, and the money is committed, so is the debt. So what was the result of that particular tantrum? They continued it by refusing to negotiate in the “Supercongress” discussions. We are now looking at a crude, chainsaw-amputation-like budget sequestration in the Defense Department, the one department your guys profess to hold sacred and even insist on expanding. You have quite a remarkable view of the meanings of responsibility and rationality if you find them in that story. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/87 "2012-08-15T16:20:03Z")
You’re right about most of that, but they did submit a bill that would have paid our debts as a priority. But I also agreed with the general point that you don’t threaten default as a general principle if you respect our Constitution. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/88 "2012-08-15T16:49:51Z")
What bill was that? How responsibly written was it? And why, with their majority, didn’t they pass it? There’s no need to pretend that the Adults’ Party is somehow just as guilty as the Children’s Party. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/89 "2012-08-15T17:37:39Z")
The bill didn’t go anywhere, but Democrats’ reactions were revealing. THey pretty much directly said that if push comes to shove, we will default: > **[GOP intros bills to "Pay China First" before Soc. Sec. recipients](https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2011/01/31/940184/-GOP-intros-bills-to-Pay-China-First-before-Soc-Sec-recipients)** > > You might think the GOP hates the poor and the elderly and, really, all of those that rely on entitlement payments of one sort or another. But I'll bet you didn't know how much they hate them. They believe that our creditors need to go to the back of the line. If that’s true, our creditors have every right to take that into account when deciding whether to lend to us. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/90 "2012-08-15T20:26:02Z")
Ah, more silly posturing. As you note, the House \*GOP \*didn’t even take it up. I thought you might have meant they had a serious, responsible policy proposal that the Democrats shot down out of pure bloodyminded partisanship, that somehow missed making the outside-the-righty-bubble media out of their own partisanship. Unfortunately, you have just provided additional evidence that they’ve done \*nothing \*responsible with the deficit. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/91 "2012-08-15T20:30:57Z")
They held spending growth down to nearly nothing. That’s pretty responsible. Imagine what the deficit would be if Democrats had been allowed to grow spending another 5-8%? ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/92 "2012-08-15T20:32:23Z")
Now they only have to follow through on their sequestration deal and I’ll agree with you that the GOP House was pretty effective at keeping spending in check. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/93 "2012-08-15T20:33:13Z")
> **[2011 United States federal budget](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_United_States_federal_budget)** > > The 2011 United States federal budget was the United States federal budget to fund government operations for the fiscal year 2011. The budget was the subject of a spending request by President Barack Obama. The actual appropriations for Fiscal Year 2011 had to be authorized by the full Congress before it could take effect, according to the U.S. budget process. > No budget was passed by the September 30 deadline, and the government was funded by a series of seven continuing resolutions continu... The president wanted $3.8 trillion in spending. He actually got $3.6 trillion. Thank the House for that. ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/94 "2012-08-15T20:41:54Z")
I will readily thank the House for saving $200 billion dollars in the 2011 budget, and President Obama for signing the bills that made them reality. It pales in comparison to the cuts in the grand bargain, but sometimes making sure the president doesn’t get re-elected is more important. ---
**Author:** ![greenslime1951](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e9bcb4/32.png) [@greenslime1951](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/greenslime1951)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/95 "2012-08-15T21:22:36Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Refusing to raise the debt ceiling is _disasterous_. Falling asleep in grade school English class can be _harmfull_. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/96 "2012-08-15T21:52:50Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > Falling asleep in grade school English class can be _harmfull_. When you’ve got nothing, attack spelling. This kind of post really paints your “but why won’t the Democrats argue in good faith” posts in a pretty disingenuous light. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/97 "2012-08-15T23:21:48Z")
> [@greenslime1951](#): > > Falling asleep in grade school English class can be _harmfull_. … …Really? Seriously? Fuck off. Seriously, you’re a bad troll and need to either post something both intelligent and relevant or go away, preferably to SomethingAwful or 4Chan or some similarly horrible forum. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2012, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/98 "2012-08-15T23:52:49Z")
And for the record: I’m German. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2012, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/99 "2012-08-16T01:10:47Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Fuck off. Seriously, you’re a bad troll . . . . Direct personal insults are prohibited outside The BBQ Pit. Accusations of trolling are prohibited outside The BBQ Pit. This is a Warning to refrain from that behavior. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2012, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/100 "2012-08-16T04:02:08Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Not entirely. It should be possible to have a reasonable dialog over whether the assertion was true. > > Much of this thread appears to have consisted of evidence in support of the validity of the assertion. I could point to examples of you gainsaying the assertion, but not to examples of you posting evidence that supports a counter-assertion that it is not valid. > > I could be mistaken, however. If I am, would you be so kind as to link to the posts in which you have provided such evidence? > [@greenslime1951](#): > > One need not, nor will I bother to, provide “evidence” to refute an assertion that is already ludicrously self-refuting. This amounts to no more than a restatement of your original gainsayinig of the assertion. > [@greenslime1951](#): > > If there really was “no reasoning” with the Republicans, than no debate, dialogue, or discussion between them and the Democrats would have taken place in the entire last four years. I’ll concede that the assertion could be stated more narrowly, so as to rope off the specific issues that **Budget Player Cadet** was talking about when he submitted the evidence in favor of the assertion. **BPC** , take note: when you want to keep an assertion such as yours defensible, it is strategically important to keep it narrow enough that it can’t be refuted with no more than a wave in the direction of an inconsequential and trivial exception (remember, exceptions don’t _prove_ rules; they _disprove_ them). > [@greenslime1951](#): > > The more wild-eyed on this board may assert that that is the case, but reality refutes that assertion. (And I realize, of course, that “no reasoning with them” is code for “they didn’t cave in to any of the Democrats’ demands.”) I suppose the takeaway on this exchange is that, in your opinion, it is NOT possible to have a reasonable dialog over whether the assertion is true. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2012, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121/101 "2012-08-16T04:57:47Z")
In general, it’s nice to be able to say that your opponent is not a Nazi, and voting for him will not be a disaster. But it depends on the situation. Sometimes your opponent really is a disaster waiting to get a mandate. I stipulate that Dole and Clinton were both basically decent, reasonable candidates in 1996. And presumably some state-level elections are between two candidates who are both corrupt and horrid, so neither is that great. But in point of fact, W Bush was a disaster. So was Newt Gingrich as Speaker. The whole Grand Old Party–the party I grew up in–really is a dangerous-to-the-planet mess these days. I’m not helping if I pretend that it doesn’t matter what we do about global warming or the Endangered Species Act. I have an obligation not to vote for stupid, purblind, incorrigible evil, unless as a necessary lesser evil to stop an even worse evil. And the GOP, lately, is significantly more evil, more recklessly, stupidly, destructive than they used to be. I’m sorry to say that. But I won’t be the guy saying, “Well, Hitler’s a little bombastic, but it’s not that big a deal to make him Chancellor.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-really-necessary-to-portray-the-election-of-the-opposing-candidate-as-the-end-of-humanity/631121.md?page=6)