Krugman/Stiglitz vs O'Reilly/Limbaugh
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 24, 2024, 11:06:43 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs?
  Alternative Elections (Moderator: Dereich)
  Krugman/Stiglitz vs O'Reilly/Limbaugh		 « previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: who do you vote for?/who wins?
#1
K&S / K&S		  
#2
K&S/ O&L		  
#3
O&L / K&S		  
#4
O&L / K&S		  
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results
Total Voters: 40

Author Topic: Krugman/Stiglitz vs O'Reilly/Limbaugh  (Read 3947 times)
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 25, 2012, 04:33:19 PM »
Paul Krugman (I-NJ) and Joseph Stiglitz (I-NY) vs Bill O'Reilly (I-NY) and Rush Limbaugh (I-FL)

Who wins?  Post maps please.
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 25, 2012, 04:37:12 PM »
Suicide
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: December 25, 2012, 04:42:20 PM »
lol
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,152
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: December 25, 2012, 04:51:39 PM »
Why exactly are you pitting two renowned economists against a duo of failed clowns?
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: December 25, 2012, 05:02:53 PM »
Quote from: Antonio V on December 25, 2012, 04:51:39 PM
Why exactly are you pitting two renowned economists against a duo of failed clowns?

Well anti-intellectualism is really strong in this country, and those two clowns could be considered the spokespeople of that movement.
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,637
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.13, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: December 25, 2012, 05:04:31 PM »
Quote from: Antonio V on December 25, 2012, 04:51:39 PM
Why exactly are you pitting two renowned economists against a duo of failed clowns?

I don't think I would call O'Reilly or Limbaugh 'renowned economists'...
Logged
Donerail
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,345
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: December 25, 2012, 05:11:48 PM »
O'Reilly and Limbaugh are idiots, but they're the would-have-no-idea-what-they're-doing kind of idiots; Krugman and Stiglitz are the dangerous kind.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,152
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: December 25, 2012, 05:26:20 PM »
Quote from: Vosem on December 25, 2012, 05:04:31 PM
Quote from: Antonio V on December 25, 2012, 04:51:39 PM
Why exactly are you pitting two renowned economists against a duo of failed clowns?

I don't think I would call O'Reilly or Limbaugh 'renowned economists'...

Roll Eyes
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,414


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: December 25, 2012, 05:36:20 PM »
Quote from: IDS Speaker SJoyce on December 25, 2012, 05:11:48 PM
O'Reilly and Limbaugh are idiots, but they're the would-have-no-idea-what-they're-doing kind of idiots; Krugman and Stiglitz are the dangerous kind.

Would-have-no-idea-what-they're-doing is dangerous, even though the moral culpability is less.
Logged
Donerail
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,345
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: December 25, 2012, 06:49:16 PM »
Quote from: Nathan on December 25, 2012, 05:36:20 PM
Quote from: IDS Speaker SJoyce on December 25, 2012, 05:11:48 PM
O'Reilly and Limbaugh are idiots, but they're the would-have-no-idea-what-they're-doing kind of idiots; Krugman and Stiglitz are the dangerous kind.

Would-have-no-idea-what-they're-doing is dangerous, even though the moral culpability is less.

They'd have no idea what they would do as President; an O'Reilly/Limbaugh administration would probably be run by capable hands behind the scenes, with the President serving largely as a figurehead, kind of like how Hastert was a figurehead for DeLay. President Krugman, however...
Logged
Niemeyerite
JulioMadrid
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,803
Spain


Political Matrix
E: -8.65, S: -9.04

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: December 25, 2012, 06:51:55 PM »
Stop this threads, please. You have the what-if section to create this.
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,990
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 25, 2012, 07:16:27 PM »
Quote from: IDS Speaker SJoyce on December 25, 2012, 05:11:48 PM
O'Reilly and Limbaugh are idiots, but they're the would-have-no-idea-what-they're-doing kind of idiots; Krugman and Stiglitz are the dangerous kind.

Textbook Keynesian economics is dangerous?
Logged
NewYorkExpress
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,823
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 25, 2012, 08:01:33 PM »
O'Reilly and Limbaugh win because they turn out their base and run an excellent smear campaign... The only states Krugman and Stiglitz would carry are New York, California, Massachusetts, and maybe Illinois.  (although that's a horrible outcome for the country.)
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 25, 2012, 09:38:27 PM »
« Edited: December 25, 2012, 09:41:42 PM by blagohair.com »
Quote from: NewYorkExpress on December 25, 2012, 08:01:33 PM
O'Reilly and Limbaugh win because they turn out their base and run an excellent smear campaign... The only states Krugman and Stiglitz would carry are New York, California, Massachusetts, and maybe Illinois.  (although that's a horrible outcome for the country.)

I'm pretty sure all New England states would vote for the bearded professors, probably NJ, MD, DC, WI, WA, OR too.  Actually the result wouldn't be too different than what we end up with in pretty much every election since 2000.  Guys like Gore and Obama do come off as arrogant professor types (Obama was after all a university lecturer) while guys like Bush or McCain came off as guys who detest 'murrica-hatin' overeducated elites.

The reason I picked two economists for the poll was because on one hand you have America's rejection on intellectuals while on the other you have everyone claiming the economy is the most important issue to them.  So what do people go for?  Do they go for the experts on an issue they clearly care about or does their hatred of experts of any kind prove to be more powerful?
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 25, 2012, 09:47:55 PM »
Switzerland.
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,990
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: December 25, 2012, 09:53:46 PM »
« Edited: December 25, 2012, 09:56:29 PM by TheDeadFlagBlues »

Columbia's pedagogy at work: great leaders of the 21st century.
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,268
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: December 25, 2012, 10:02:08 PM »
Krugman/Stiglitz, only because of Joseph Stiglitz. Paul Krugman is more interested in being a political commentator than an economist (though admittedly the former pays better).

A more analogous Republican ticket might be Arthur Laffer and Martin Feldstein. Again, Laffer is basically a political hack while Feldstein is more substantive.

Or, if you prefer, Chris Matthews/Rachel Maddow versus Bill O'Reilly/Rush Limbaugh.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: December 25, 2012, 10:12:30 PM »
« Edited: December 25, 2012, 10:14:40 PM by blagohair.com »
Quote from: independentTX on December 25, 2012, 10:02:08 PM
Krugman/Stiglitz, only because of Joseph Stiglitz. Paul Krugman is more interested in being a political commentator than an economist (though admittedly the former pays better).

A more analogous Republican ticket might be Arthur Laffer and Martin Feldstein. Again, Laffer is basically a political hack while Feldstein is more substantive.

Or, if you prefer, Chris Matthews/Rachel Maddow versus Bill O'Reilly/Rush Limbaugh.

I would replace Rachel Maddow with someone like Bill Maher.  Rachel is actually a pretty decent journalist.
But as I explained above, my question was more about the battle between intellectuals and anti-intellectuals with the added dimension of the intellectuals being experts in a field that interests many people as it happens to affect their lives.
Logged
CatoMinor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,007
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: December 26, 2012, 12:52:53 AM »
Logged
Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends
Anton Kreitzer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,167
Australia


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: 3.11

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: December 26, 2012, 01:47:42 AM »
I'd vote for a third-party ticket or abstain.
Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,836
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: December 26, 2012, 04:25:18 AM »
The concept of two Nobel laureates, who correctly predicted and analyzed the crisis, being "dangerous" just shows what a good job Fox News has done when it comes to brainwashing its viewers.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: December 26, 2012, 04:31:58 AM »
Quote from: Landslide Lyndon on December 26, 2012, 04:25:18 AM
The concept of two Nobel laureates, who correctly predicted and analyzed the crisis, being "dangerous" just shows what a good job Fox News has done when it comes to brainwashing its viewers.

but they're university professors and Rick Santorum says we should homeschool our children because those dirty liberal university professors will teach them unamerican things.  They also have beards.

Another reason I started this thread was because once you look at someone like Joseph Stiglitz, you realize what lightweights the politicians that govern us and make laws really are.  It's sad and pathetic.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: December 26, 2012, 04:59:56 AM »
OK, I think it's time to send any matchups involving non-politicians with no realistic chance of running in 2016 to the "alternate elections" board....
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,778


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: December 26, 2012, 11:26:53 AM »
Would I pick actual smart experts over total idiots?

...yes?
Logged
Oak Hills
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,076
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: December 30, 2012, 06:33:20 PM »
I'd vote for Krugman/Stiglitz, and I think they'd win too.  Do you guys really think people will vote to put Rush Limbaugh in elective office?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.057 seconds with 14 queries.