PoliGAF 2015-2016 |OT3| If someone named PhoenixDark leaves your party, call the cops
- Thread starter Diablos
- Start date
- Status
oh well.
User 463088
Banned
Not sure if this was posted yet.
NBC?Survey Monkey
Trump 35
Cruz 18
Rubio 13
Carson 9
Bush 6
Hillary 53
Bernie 36
Gov Abs McHottington 2
Hillary's support is also more firm than Bernies. She's leading by 61 points among AA, and behind only 2% with Whites (which is a problem for Bernie) She leads men by 6% among men and 24% among women.
*Edit: Holy shit at those demographics...only 2% Hispanic? That's just horrible...
NBC?Survey Monkey
Trump 35
Cruz 18
Rubio 13
Carson 9
Bush 6
Hillary 53
Bernie 36
Gov Abs McHottington 2
Hillary's support is also more firm than Bernies. She's leading by 61 points among AA, and behind only 2% with Whites (which is a problem for Bernie) She leads men by 6% among men and 24% among women.
*Edit: Holy shit at those demographics...only 2% Hispanic? That's just horrible...
Basileus777
Member
Fuck.
Edit: Can a mod overturn his perm? Who will I discuss GoT now over PMsits ridiculous. Just last week I asked him to please stay unbanned until GoT premieres. Guess it really was too much to ask.
What will we do without his eternally optimistic projections on the release dates of GRRM's books.
Avon Barksdale
Member
Nicole "Nikki" Haley will deliver the GOP response to the State of the Union.
Didn't she already do this once? Are they just going to be replaying the old tape?
Orbis Tabula
Member
Never thought I'd see the day that PD was permed. Which is odd, considering it seems like he's been banned two dozen times in just the few years I've been here. Guess someone else will have to start writing HillBama Erotica.
"PLEASE PICK HER FOR VP PLEASE"
Third Strike
Member
I bet she's warming up for 2020. I wonder if she counts as "establishment".
Trump's going with Omarosa, deal with it.
Veritigo_X
Member
Jeb did drop that VP hint that one time. "She'd be a great partner. Oops... did I say that out loud?"
Oh she's absolutely establishment. Female, nonwhite (but not too dark), helped bring down the Confederate flag in South Carolina. Establishment loves her.
Black Republican
Member
what did PD do?
Retromelon
Member
Fess up homie.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Absolutely 100% establishment.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I will never, ever, ever understand how anyone can argue against background checks on gun sales. It makes absolutely zero sense to me.
The second and third words of the 2nd Amendment are literally "well regulated."
The second and third words of the 2nd Amendment are literally "well regulated."
This picture has the potential to kill what's left of Rubio's campaign.
A Vote for Marco Rubio Is a Vote for Mens High-Heeled Booties
http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/01/vote-for-marco-rubio-is-a-vote-for-boots.html
A Vote for Marco Rubio Is a Vote for Mens High-Heeled Booties
http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/01/vote-for-marco-rubio-is-a-vote-for-boots.html
I don't think it does.
Baraka in the White House
2-Terms of Kombat
PD was perm'd?
I thought it turned into sort of a running gag where he would just catch a ban every few weeks and come back.
I thought it turned into sort of a running gag where he would just catch a ban every few weeks and come back.
Roland_Gunner
Member
Really good story from WaPo on how the other establishment Rs are blasting Christie to weaken him in NH. Still waiting for the inevitable Trump collapse, I guess....
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?postshare=3511452030122875&tid=ss_tw
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?postshare=3511452030122875&tid=ss_tw
It's the establishment circular firing squad which has me feeling good about Trump's chances in NH. None of those clowns are going to drop out, and all of them think it's a must win. Waters will be bloody while Trump sails over them in his luxurious yacht.
Manmademan
Member
Trump is guaranteed top 2. Even top 3 is a stretch.
It's trivial to paint a near loss in Iowa at the feet of the same evangelicals who gave Huckabee and Santorum the win.
Damn, just when my parents got redistricted into the NY-03, a small part of Queens got folded into it. That's another election I'm going to need to keep track of that I thought I could safely ignore.
Hillary is going to be at the top of the ticket. Expect a home state bounce.
Probably. But with Clinton on the ticket, and if the Republicans run Cruz (or even Trump), the Democrats should be favored.
Hillary is tight with the establishment here but I don't think the average voter has any great loyalty to her because she represented New York for a term. She was always seen as a carpetbagger, and her tenure here was just a stepping stone. If there's a bounce it'll be because it's a Presidential year.
RastaMentality
Banned
This line she keeps repeating really isn't particularly good. Considering Trump's kids wouldn't be going to a public school.
Jack Remington
Banned
Hypothetical question. Suppose Trump or some other Republican wins next year.
Who do the Democrats run in 2020 against the incumbent Republican president?
Who do the Democrats run in 2020 against the incumbent Republican president?
User 463088
Banned
At least it's not "God given potential"
: head desk : I hate that line so much.....I hate it with a passion.
RastaMentality
Banned
I can't believe she brought it into this election. I know she wants to put a hint of Christian values into her speeches but it just doesn't work.
It probably does. That doesn't make it not dumb as fuck though. But I totally get why they use it.
Just watched Todd interview with Ben Ginsberg who wrote those 3 scenario on the R Nomination.
Ben: "Mathematically the earliest you are looking at the R Nominee is April." He's puts that happening at 40%. Todd mentioned that the establishment is basically conceding the early states to the conservatives hoping to bounce back beginning March 15th.
I actually did the Math on Hillary last year and found the same result. If she sweeps she won't mathematically get it until April 26th.
Ben: "Mathematically the earliest you are looking at the R Nominee is April." He's puts that happening at 40%. Todd mentioned that the establishment is basically conceding the early states to the conservatives hoping to bounce back beginning March 15th.
I actually did the Math on Hillary last year and found the same result. If she sweeps she won't mathematically get it until April 26th.
User 463088
Banned
I mean, I love the woman....but that line. It just irks the living hell out of me. I hated it in 2008. When she trotted that old pony out again, I just gritted my teeth. My mom, a retired special education teacher, likes the line. When Hillary said it at one of the debates, she just kinda nodded and smiled. I'm thinking it must play well with someone, or she wouldn't keep using it.
On the other hand, she's always been an advocate for children, so it might just be something she's going to do regardless of how people feel about it.
On the other hand, she's always been an advocate for children, so it might just be something she's going to do regardless of how people feel about it.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
What do you not like about that line? God?
User 463088
Banned
On a good day I'm agnostic, on most days I'm an atheist. I'm not one of those people who get offended when people invoke religion in a positive manner, though. But it's just such a stupid line, really. If she said she wanted to create an education system that would help each child live up to their own unique potential, I'd like it better, I guess. I just don't like int on the whole.
It reminds me of one of those lines that people at my university use to pad the page length. I mark that shit out when I do peer reviews like no ones business.
That word panders to ghosts and monarchy.
It is paradoxical to have a culture that believes in a monarchical Big Boss but believes democracy is the best form of government. The oddity of the human/American social ego, I suppose.
Never saw why people need to look beyond their images of themselves for wellbeing. You're almost promised to be pulling at strings.
User 463088
Banned
I agree. I don't think I'm capable of being a religious person, or at least not dogmatic.
Hi everyone first time posting here.
I wanted to ask a few questions to the Americans here.
I'm from Europe, Belgium more precisely. Here we have a healthcare system in place that that everyone pays for, so that everyone can have affordable healthcare.
I wanted to know if the outrage about implementing such a system is caused by the face that a lot of people are fundamentally against it? Or do you think it's more of a question of not wanting to pay for other people? Or afraid of change?
I'd just like to have an American point of view. Since it easy for us Europeans to point a finger and assume certain things but I'd rather have a conversation about it to understand what you guys actually think.
I wanted to ask a few questions to the Americans here.
I'm from Europe, Belgium more precisely. Here we have a healthcare system in place that that everyone pays for, so that everyone can have affordable healthcare.
I wanted to know if the outrage about implementing such a system is caused by the face that a lot of people are fundamentally against it? Or do you think it's more of a question of not wanting to pay for other people? Or afraid of change?
I'd just like to have an American point of view. Since it easy for us Europeans to point a finger and assume certain things but I'd rather have a conversation about it to understand what you guys actually think.
Some people think its communism.
Mrs. Manky
Banned
This picture has the potential to kill what's left of Rubio's campaign.
A Vote for Marco Rubio Is a Vote for Mens High-Heeled Booties
http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/01/vote-for-marco-rubio-is-a-vote-for-boots.html
According to Google, Marco Rubio is 5'10". Which isn't bad. Cruz is 5'8". Of course, Trump, Carson, and Jeb! are all 6'0" or over, so maybe he was feeling a little inadequate. Or maybe he wants to be RDJ, who is known to rock heeled shoes.
Also, that style of shoe is called a "Cuban heel". Which is either him repping his people, or letting us know his wrestling style.
thezerofire
Banned
There are a fair few people who do not want to be responsible for other people and those people are usually branded as lazy, immoral, criminals , etc. but in reality I think they're just plain selfish
I hold the personal/"spiritual" view that if anything is true, it has to be an innate process in what we call reality. This means no "becoming" or acquiring things on a path, for it's already in the flow. At best, all we can do is be more mindful to, for lack of a better phrase, of what is. It's why I harp on nondualism a lot, for it's really the only compatible view of various philosophies that encompassess naturalism, which is later shared through the sciences.
Of course, this also means standing fully against various social norms that are unaccountable to this level of inquiry. It means disregarding the notion of a self, soul, or ego with free will, and this is a position almost universally held by people to be a real thing. This assumption creates a lot of suffering, both internally and socially.
This is also why I also am not happy with social measures that don't go the whole way. I'm of the view if we promote anything in society, it must blanket the natural world as compassionately as possible. It's why I call out the problems to labor and healthcare as their models promote conflict, not compassion. All or nothing kind of has to be the approach on those topics, for those in the have not category is simply unjustifiable no matter what argument can be made.
It's a lot of things, friend, so I'll try and highlight a few of the views.
- People think socialism is innately inferior to free market capitalism
- People think for-profit companies work better than "for-control" government
- People think very dangerously in regards to individualism, for man is an island and all of that bullshit
- People assimilate to norms, so anything even promoting change, even better change, is met with fear
- People assume people are naturally inferior via the belief of Original Sin and the like, so one must prove to be a "worthy" member in society, as we inherit the idea everyone starts off in probation from religion
It's mostly a combination of that. Americans in particular are very high on the idea one exists in a bubble separate from the rest of society, let alone the cosmos, and uses this as a kind of character ranking in terms of social wellbeing. We very much look at our system of a have/have not social game to infer who is a worthy person, and who is a parasite. Social failings become character weaknesses, which only justifies the inequality.
Rhomega Beta
Member
The arguments I've heard are:
1. You also pay higher taxes to afford it. Gas is more expensive than it is here. If we had the same rates you did, our economy would collapse.
2. It would stifle innovation. America has created more healthcare breakthroughs than any other nation because of our free market model.
3. It would create cramped hospitals where people wait for months or years to get surgery, and people die in emergency rooms because they can't get care quickly enough.
Abinash117
Member
The line is not for you then, but the average American who believes in god. I don't know it would it upset anyone considering that politicians and Obama use similar phrases, and considering they are Christians I don't see why it would be a bad thing.
User 463088
Banned
There's a deep seated distrust of government in the United States. I'm sure you've heard the jokes about how we love boot straps and all that jazz. There's this sense that individuals should be responsible for themselves. That increased government programs create increased dependency. There's also a disconnect between what Americans say we want and what that means. A lot of Americans say they want single payer, but they don't want the government involved. It's a disconnect that cannot be rationalized outside "gubbmint is bad." There's also resistance because of how much money our healthcare and insurance systems generate.They have a vested interest in making sure that they keep getting their money. We also have so many private companies that own different aspects of our health care system. There's no way that they could be nationalized a la the NHS.
The way I see it working would be to add a public option to the ACA. Use that as a foothold. Transition people from the Exchange plans to the Federal Plan. Let anyone be able to buy into it. That type of change could be possible if we had a decent majority. Jumping from what we have now to single payer is just something that won't happen. I have no problems with keeping that as the end goal, but I think we have to be realistic about where we are politically.
wow ok some of these arguments are completely baffling to me.
Especially this one: It would create cramped hospitals where people wait for months or years to get surgery, and people die in emergency rooms because they can't get care quickly enough.
Now the media here tends to paint the picture that ALL Americans appear to think this way which I know is an exaggeration. But how widespread are these opinions? Definitely the majority?
And how big is the issue exactly? Are people upset about this on a daily basis? And Obamacare? This got implemented started 2016 if I understood it correctly? Are people still upset about this?
Especially this one: It would create cramped hospitals where people wait for months or years to get surgery, and people die in emergency rooms because they can't get care quickly enough.
Now the media here tends to paint the picture that ALL Americans appear to think this way which I know is an exaggeration. But how widespread are these opinions? Definitely the majority?
And how big is the issue exactly? Are people upset about this on a daily basis? And Obamacare? This got implemented started 2016 if I understood it correctly? Are people still upset about this?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked