Democrat Debate 10 |CNN| Sometimes I just wanna punch you in your perfect teeth.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Her vote was based on the best information they had at the time and something she has repeatedly admitted to being wrong about and apologized for.

Blaming her for every negative consequence that happened as a result of her vote to authorize the use of force (which was misused by GWB) is like blaming Sanders for every wrong and racially motivated imprisonment that happened as a result of his vote for the 1994 crime bill.

This is actually pretty good
 
Fracking is good for the environment actually, but that answer require a lot more nuance then you seem willing to tolerate.


My sarcasm detectors are off today, must be the weather.

Yeah it's great how my state has had a 600% increase in man made earthquakes thanks mostly to fracking, all that structural damage is great for when the environment eventually reclaims the damaged and abandoned homes.
 
What is this "it wasn't her line" nonsense? You thought she was saving the joke when in actuality she was just being playful with it. Does CP time actually mean "cautious politician time?" No, it means "black people are fucking late for everything." Please stop.

And how exactly did Bernie imply that southern blacks don't know what's good for him by saying "We lost the deep South" (or whatever he said)?

You're comparison has to stop. What Deblasio stated =/= what Hillary stated. What Bernie stated = what Bernie stated. Being purposefully dense is not a good defense.
 
Why is Hillary deviating from the transcripts? What's to hide?

It's more like why do your opponent's opposition research for them? If she releases it the GOP, and probably Bernie, will just plaster out of context quotes where she didn't tell the banks to go fuck themselves all over the air waves in an attempt to beat her. Why would you give your opponents ammo? Especially when you've still got a fight coming up against a party who is going to spend upwards of 10 billion dollars to beat you?
 
200w.gif

I hadn't considered it from this angle. Thank you for the nuanced and well-thought-out response.

Edit: Didn't notice it was after midnight. Goodnight GAF (Hillary and Bernie supporters alike).
 
It's more like why do your opponent's opposition research for them? If she releases it the GOP, and probably Bernie, will just plaster out of context quotes where she didn't tell the banks to go fuck themselves all over the air waves in an attempt to beat her. Why would you give your opponents ammo? Especially when you've still got a fight coming up against a party who is going to spend upwards of 10 billion dollars to beat you?

If there's nothing to hide, there should be no repercussions. The money flowing around these talks is very concerning. Maybe she isn't fit?
 
Yeah, they both look pretty dirty because of all the mud-slinging they've been doing, IMO.

And of course, the media is foaming at the mouth now about how "the gloves are off." They've been desperate for the Democratic Primary to become the shitshow that the Republican Primary has been. Gotta drive them ratings up.

The Republicans have gotten pretty boring lately, no one cares about the latest Trump-Cruz personal insults anymore. I think they've finally saturated the trash-o-meter on the Elephant side. At this point both Trump and Cruz are playing out the string because both are expecting a contested convention and absolute chaos.

So...the media need the Democrats to amuse people until the conventions. It can't be helped at this point. Good thing Hillary and Bernie seem like they are both spoiling for a fight lately. Resistance was supposed to be futile but it seems many people refuse to be assimilated and suddenly Hillary seems anxious to spar with Bernie even though she's supposed to have locked up the nomination by February 5th. Bernie on the other hand has been looking forward to this fight more than Nate Diaz was looking forward to his unexpected shot at Conor McGregor. So here we are.
 
It's more like why do your opponent's opposition research for them? If she releases it the GOP, and probably Bernie, will just plaster out of context quotes where she didn't tell the banks to go fuck themselves all over the air waves in an attempt to beat her. Why would you give your opponents ammo? Especially when you've still got a fight coming up against a party who is going to spend upwards of 10 billion dollars to beat you?

If there aren't any bad in context quotes, then it looks worse to withhold the transcripts than it would to release them, regardless of any out of context quotes. Let's treat the voting public like the are smart enough to know the difference.
 
What is this "it wasn't her line" nonsense? You thought she was saving the joke when in actuality she was just being playful with it. Does CP time actually mean "cautious politician time?" No, it means "black people are fucking late for everything." Please stop.

And how exactly did Bernie imply that southern blacks don't know what's good for him by saying "We lost the deep South" (or whatever he said)?

He didn't just say "we lost the deep south." He basically called the south unimportant because they're "conservative" and said that they're not moving to brighter pastures. As though conservative, Southern Democrats...aren't still Democrats.
 
Laughing at the people in the early pages making light of the war in Iraq.

I'm glad Americans have decided for the rest of the world that the war in Iraq is no longer relevant. Be sure to tell that to the millions of Iraqis who saw their country go to shit because of a decision Hillary had a literal role in.

It's a bit sad when people keep trying to hammer any candidate on topics that they've vigorously apologized for about a million fucking times already. It comes off as desperate, as if there aren't real and active issues to be contended with.
 
If there aren't any bad in context quotes, then it looks worse to withhold the transcripts than it would to release them, regardless of any out of context quotes. Let's treat the voting public like the are smart enough to know the difference

Unlikely. It would only be good for the talking heads.
 
If there aren't any bad in context quotes, then it looks worse to withhold the transcripts than it would to release them, regardless of any out of context quotes. Let's treat the voting public like the are smart enough to know the difference.

But it's the smart people that you have to be worried about.

It's the smart people who would cut up the quotes and turn them into attack ads.

Or ask for video footage.

Or probe further looking for another scandal to uncover.

If people were dumb there wouldn't be a problem with releasing the transcripts.

If there's nothing to hide, there should be no repercussions. The money flowing around these talks is very concerning. Maybe she isn't fit?

Fitter by 2.5 million votes must count for something.

And there's always repercussions, even for doing nothing... like if the government was monitoring you for example.
 
1. She didn't make the joke. You keep saying this but it is factually incorrect. Deblasio made the joke.

2. You don't even know what he said.

I'd love to continue discussion this non-issue with you but its way past my bedtime.

1. Would you stop with this strawman. Nobody is saying she "made the joke". She was part of the joke. Can you please make this distinction?

I've said it twice already that she neither uttered the words "CP time", nor "made the joke."

2. Bernie said "we lost the deep South," right? I was just highlighting the fact that I was paraphrasing. What else did he say? Because so many GAFFers started to take issue with his use of the phrase "deep South" and then someone said it "implied something." So did he actually say something else or am I just wasting my time? Because you could have simply stated exactly what he said tonight.

And I don't know why you're being so facetious about it when just a few minutes ago you didn't even know that the racist banter Hillary was a part of was a PRE-PLANNED sketch (despite the fact it was pretty obvious anyway).
 
Rewind to 2008. "Why is Obama deviating from his birth certificate? What's to hide?"

You can't honestly be making that leap of logic to compare the two. Holy shit.

It wouldn't hurt ANYONE for her transcripts to just be... Out there. It'd shut people up.

It is not comparable to a group of racist conspiracy theorists that had convinced themselves Obama was a Muslim from Kenya.
 
If there's nothing to hide, there should be no repercussions. The money flowing around these talks is very concerning. Maybe she isn't fit?

I know I said I was going to bed, but then I saw this. The burden of proof isn't on her. It's on Sanders (the claimant) to back up his insinuations.

The argument you're using is the exact same one many Republicans used when pushing to pass the original Patriot Act, as people complained about possible over-reach and invasion of privacy: "Well, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear."

Now I'm going to bed. So as not to be disrespectful, if you have a response and you want to be sure I see it, feel free to PM me and we can continue a polite discussion.
 
Fracking is good for the environment actually, but that answer require a lot more nuance then you seem willing to tolerate.

Wut. I mean you can argue "it is not as bad as ____", but saying it is "good for the environment..

I mean, you joking or did you not think that through?
 
Unlikely. It would only be good for the talking heads.

Her not releasing the transcripts is CURRENTLY good for the talking heads. There's a reason that the monster you can't see in movies is scarier than the one you can. Your imagination always goes in crazy places, hell, I'm sure there are tons of anti-Clinton people who are convinced that she is literally promising them votes.
 
My sarcasm detectors are off today, must be the weather.

Yeah it's great how my state has had a 600% increase in man made earthquakes thanks mostly to fracking, all that structural damage is great for when the environment eventually reclaims the damaged and abandoned homes.

The man-made earthquakes are pretty small. The reduction in coal usage thanks to natural gas is much more important. It's that nuance thing I was talking about.
 
Her vote was based on the best information they had at the time and something she has repeatedly admitted to being wrong about and apologized for.

Blaming her for every negative consequence the happened as a result of her vote to authorize the use of force (which was misused by GWB) is like blaming Sanders for every wrong and racially motivated imprisonment that happened as a result of his vote for the 1994 crime bill.

Except voting to invade a country in violation of international law and without UN approval, and then voting nay on an amendment that would have ensured any military action in Iraq was pursuant to a UN resolution (and thus assured that weren't being, you know, blatant imperialists) is not a decision you only recognize as wrong in hindsight. It is telltale of shitty judgement.

You're drawing a false analogy with the 1994 crime bill. There is a difference between voting in favor of legislation which then had unintended consequences and realizing it was wrong in hindsight, and voting to enable an invasion of another country that was plainly and unequivocally illegal from the start.

Or like blaming him for the imposition of the Libyan no-fly zone that the 2011 joint resolution he co-sponsored called for as a potential course of action.

US intervention in Libya was UN-sanctioned.
 
Yeah it's great how my state has had a 600% increase in man made earthquakes thanks mostly to fracking, all that structural damage is great for when the environment eventually reclaims the damaged and abandoned homes.

You're welcome to come up with a different alternative to coal and, apparently, nuclear that can serve as a backbone power source.

US intervention in Libya was UN-sanctioned.

What does that have to do with the fact that Sanders supported the intervention and is now being a craven little pissbaby about that fact? Regime change charges only count when they're against the Butcher or something?
 
Wut. I mean you can argue "it is not as bad as ____", but saying it is "good for the environment..

I mean, you joking or did you not think that through?

Book I was reading about fracking a few months back talks about some health issues; As well as the people getting their property jacked so fracking can happe.

You're welcome to come up with an alternative to coal and, apparently, nuclear that can serve as a backbone power source.

Is momentum energy?
 
Her not releasing the transcripts is CURRENTLY good for the talking heads. There's a reason that the monster you can't see in movies is scarier than the one you can. Your imagination always goes in crazy places, hell, I'm sure there are tons of anti-Clinton people who are convinced that she is literally promising them votes.

The number of people that actually care about the issue is tiny though. If she wasn't running away with this thing then you'd have a point, but it's only a small number of Bernie supporters that care about it.
 
People are dancing around the real answer here. And it's a simple one.

Hillary will release the transcripts when she has to. And right now? She ain't got to. Why? Because the person calling for them is thoroughly losing.

You don't have bargaining chips when you're losing. You can't make demands when you're losing. Because you're losing.

Clearly, Bernie calling for Hillary's speeches and Hillary responding with a long-winded version of "LOL #GurlBye" ain't that big a deal. Why? Because Bernie is still losing, and Hillary Clinton is winning.
 
Let's say that I buy Bernie's argument that Hillary is ahead only because of the "conservative" :cough Not White cough : states....

Could he please explain to me his electoral map if the voters of Ohio, Virginia, Florida, Iowa and North Carolina are out of reach because his liberal majesty is too much for us red state heathens?
 
Her vote was based on the best information they had at the time and something she has repeatedly admitted to being wrong about and apologized for.

Blaming her for every negative consequence that happened as a result of her vote to authorize the use of force (which was misused by GWB) is like blaming Sanders for every wrong and racially motivated imprisonment that happened as a result of his vote for the 1994 crime bill.
No! I remember it quite different.

He warned everyone that it was an issue at the time.
 
Sanders is on CNN refusing to answer a direct question as to whether or not he'll help unify the Party if he were to lose. He pivoted to how Democrats win when turnout is large, and that he's drawing in large numbers of voters (Nevermind her having 2+ million more votes than him. They're from the South so I guess they don't count).

Kinda scary, tbh.


Lol is he actually saying that? Turnout is down. He's not only losing by millions he's losing by millions in a primary smaller than 08
 
It's a bit sad when people keep trying to hammer any candidate on topics that they've vigorously apologized for about a million fucking times already. It comes off as desperate, as if there aren't real and active issues to be contended with.
When a considerable portion of the world is in disarray, and there's a new terrorist threat looming over Europe, admitting you made a mistake isn't enough. It shows her deep incompetence in foreign affairs, just like the "No Fly" zones.
 
You can't honestly be making that leap of logic to compare the two. Holy shit.

It wouldn't hurt ANYONE for her transcripts to just be... Out there. It'd shut people up.

It is not comparable to a group of racist conspiracy theorists that had convinced themselves Obama was a Muslim from Kenya.

Certainly that situation is not comparable to a group of conspiracy theorists that had convinced themselves that Clinton was a right wing Republican lite. It wouldn't shut them up at all instead of feeding into their little conspiracy fantasy.
 
If there's nothing to hide, there should be no repercussions. The money flowing around these talks is very concerning. Maybe she isn't fit?

Honestly Bernie and his supporters are just out of ammo, and they all know it. They have thrown everything including the GOP talking points at Hillary and they are losing. The "transcripts" are like the emails. They want them to try and comb through and take something, hell ANYTHING out of context so they can reload.

But seeing as she is winning and in a few weeks Bernie will be toast and an afterthought anyway, there's literally no need to bother. Hold the transcripts, starve his desperate team of material until he is literally dead in the delegate race and release them then or afterwards, long after him taking some transcript quote out of context could possibly help his campaign numbers in any meaningful manner.

You'll get the transcripts, just not early enough to use them to your advantage in any way.

Welcome to politics.
 
He didn't just say "we lost the deep south." He basically called the south unimportant because they're "conservative" and said that they're not moving to brighter pastures. As though conservative, Southern Democrats...aren't still Democrats.

Well I just read an MSNBC article about Sander's take on how the South didn't "represent reality" (something another poster said a little while ago). While it may not have been the wisest of comments, he's certainly not making implications that a lot of the people here are saying (that black votes are unimportant)

Comments like these are an extension of a standard argument from the Sanders campaign: it may look like Hillary Clinton enjoys a sizable advantage, but her lead only exists because of the South. The “reality,” when it’s not “distorted,” is a lot different.

But the more Sanders makes this argument, the less sure I am of the point he’s trying to make.

I’m absolutely certain that the senator isn’t trying to dismiss the importance of African-American voters – such an argument would be completely contrary to his progressive values and campaign strategy – but when Sanders says “reality” is “distorted” by primary results from states in which black voters dominate, it’s not at all clear which reality he’s referring to.

Perhaps Sanders’ aides have encouraged him to make this argument. Maybe it’s not too late for him to remove this rhetorical arrow from his quiver.

It’s possible the senator is arguing that conservatives tend to dominate in the South, so the primary results in the region are less important. At first blush, this may seem compelling, except Republicans also dominate in states like Utah and Idaho – states Sanders won easily. Do they distort reality, too? Why would Kansas represent reality more than Georgia?

[...]

As a tactical matter, this made perfect sense. There was no reason for the senator and his operation to build an electoral strategy around states he was likely to lose.

But as a rhetorical matter, arguing that states in which black voters were decisive “kind of distort reality” is a very different kind of message, one that Sanders still has time to change.
 
People are dancing around the real answer here. And it's a simple one.

Hillary will release the transcripts when she has to. And right now? She ain't got to. Why? Because the person calling for them is thoroughly losing.

You don't have bargaining chips when you're losing. You can't make demands when you're losing. Because you're losing.

Clearly, Bernie calling for Hillary's speeches and Hillary responding with a long-winded version of "LOL #GurlBye" ain't that big a deal. Why? Because Bernie is still losing, and Hillary Clinton is winning.

Absolutely. I just want her to release them to shut people the hell up and tackle actual issues, rather than small shit like Hillary's transcripts.

Let's say that I buy Bernie's argument that Hillary is ahead only because of the "conservative" :cough Not White cough : states....

Could he please explain to me his electoral map if the voters of Ohio, Virginia, Florida, Iowa and North Carolina are out of reach because his liberal majesty is too much for us red state heathens?

I'm convinced Bernie beat up your grandad

Certainly that situation is not comparable to a group of conspiracy theorists that had convinced themselves that Clinton was a right wing Republican lite. It wouldn't shut them up at all instead of feeding into their little conspiracy fantasy.

It's still an entirely different beast. I DO agree with you that it won't stop everyone from peddling their bullshit about her "corruption", but I don't put it on the same level as the birther movement. However, it'd quell the majority of Sanders and Trump supporters crying foul - I personally think that, at least.
 
People are dancing around the real answer here. And it's a simple one.

Hillary will release the transcripts when she has to. And right now? She ain't got to. Why? Because the person calling for them is thoroughly losing.

You don't have bargaining chips when you're losing. You can't make demands when you're losing. Because you're losing.

Clearly, Bernie calling for Hillary's speeches and Hillary responding with a long-winded version of "LOL #GurlBye" ain't that big a deal. Why? Because Bernie is still losing, and Hillary Clinton is winning.

Yep. Bernie was desperate tonight. Clinging for one word gotcha moments, the transcript stuff, constantly trying to hit the applause lines, you name it. He can't give thought out answers for anything, and he's worked his supporters up into such a Hilary-hating frenzy that they can't even process the words she's saying.
 
When a considerable portion of the world is in disarray, and there's a new terrorist threat looming over Europe, admitting you made a mistake isn't enough. It shows her deep incompetence in foreign affairs, just like the "No Fly" zones.

You mean like the No Fly Zone the Resolution Bernie helped co-sponsor called for in the Senate? That type of No Fly Zone?
 
When a considerable portion of the world is in disarray, and there's a new terrorist threat looming over Europe, admitting you made a mistake isn't enough. It shows her deep incompetence in foreign affairs, just like the "No Fly" zones.

So, should Hillary commit seppeku or will just a few fingers be enough?

Regardless, still better foreign policy than Bernie "Iran and Saudi Arabia should just be buddies and fight ISIS" Sanders.
 
When a considerable portion of the world is in disarray, and there's a new terrorist threat looming over Europe, admitting you made a mistake isn't enough. It shows her deep incompetence in foreign affairs, just like the "No Fly" zones.


Which No Fly zones, these ones?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/senate-resolution/85/text

(7) urges the United Nations Security Council to take such further action as may be necessary to protect civilians in Libya from attack, including the possible imposition of a no-fly zone over Libyan territory;


Check out the co-sponsors. Go ahead.
 
Absolutely. I just want her to release them to shut people the hell up and tackle actual issues, rather than small shit like Hillary's transcripts.



I'm convinced Bernie beat up your grandad

Bad policy, a crap campaign and hurting the party are enough of a reason for me to not be a huge fan of Senator Sanders.

I can't say that I much care for him, no. I won't lie. If, somehow, the universe goes into crazy mode and he becomes the nominee, I will vote for him. I'll hold my nose the whole time, but I won't lift a finger to help him win. And it's the first time in my life I've ever said that. I'll spend my time and money working on down ballot people.
 
And then voted for it.

Goodnight :)

But I've been told he is an unreasonable idealist who will only take the perfect options.

You can't play it both ways. It shows his reasoning is more sound if he could see the potential problems when it was forming.
 
It's a bit sad when people keep trying to hammer any candidate on topics that they've vigorously apologized for about a million fucking times already. It comes off as desperate, as if there aren't real and active issues to be contended with.

As if the ongoing consequences of the US invasion of Iraq weren't an active issue.

It's amazing that the total collapse of a country and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people matters so little to you that you would suggest it's something that can be simply brushed aside with a mere "oops, I was wrong". Partisanship is a hell of a thing.
 
2. Bernie said "we lost the deep South," right? I was just highlighting the fact that I was paraphrasing. What else did he say? Because so many GAFFers started to take issue with his use of the phrase "deep South" and then someone said it "implied something." So did he actually say something else or am I just wasting my time? Because you could have simply stated exactly what he said tonight.

I don't have the exact wording, but he went out of his way to refer to the South as the most conservative part of the country.

His tone definitely touched on ideas like "It was expected that I would lose the South" and "The South is less important than the rest of the country for the General". There wasn't a whole lot of apology or explanation for why he failed to appeal to Southern voters, just suggestions that he doesn't need to appeal to them. It's not dissimilar from Romney's 47% comment, just more tactful and directed at a more specific group.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom