ErasureAcer
Banned
Conservatives you know are upset about it? Conservatives that voted for Trump?
PoliGAF 2016 |OT16| Unpresidented
- Thread starter ItWasMeantToBe19
- Start date
- Status
Conservatives you know are upset about it? Conservatives that voted for Trump?
balladofwindfishes
Member
I don't know what their political affiliation is, they never post about politics before and suddenly this is a huge deal to them.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
I'm assuming the point is that it doesn't matter if Trump voters aren't changing their mind?
This nihilistic view that has permeated GAF has made many political threads unreadable. "Nothing matters because Republicans aren't going to change" It just ends up being self-fufilling
ErasureAcer
Banned
Well. The easiest way to win moving forward is to flip conservatives to liberals. Where it's a +2 swing. -1 Conservative +1 Liberal. Getting knew blood is good but it only counts as +1. Anywhoo, glad people who didn't care before are upset.
If an apolitical person who upset yet does not vote, do their political FB posts matter? Dude also mentioned how it was blowing up...I'd assume there'd be some conservatives in the lot...just wondering what their take was.
No, it's not, because they don't flip.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Yep. This whole "woe is me, everything is terrible, oh my god, we're all going to die, it's hopeless, nobody ever votes, democrats will never win again, pity party pity party sad sad frowny face
" is incredibly annoying and does absolutely nothing. It makes this thread and other political threads incredibly hard to read. Sitting around moaning about how nothing is ever going to get done or change and life is terrible forever just keeps the cycle going. On one face, they say "nobody ever votes, why is that" and then cry themselves to sleep about how nothing matters anymore and it's hopeless and what's the point in even bothering.The GOP wants you to feel hopeless! That's the point! Breaking your enemy's spirit is the primary objective. Low morale means nobody votes and nobody voting means the GOP wins and the cycle continues.
And yea, it's hard to actually thinking about the future in a positive light, and go out and try and change things. The easy way is to curl into a ball and rock back and forth until "something" changes. But that "something" will never come if you don't believe it can change!
Cesare Borgia
Banned
That's not really how it works though. A diehard Trump voter is going to stick with him for the same reasons a diehard Obama voter stuck with him. Even if things don't go as planned they're going to believe he has their best intentions in heart, is "one of them" etc etc. For instance how many people here stopped supporting Obama in December 2008 when you realized his cabinet would feature a variety of former Clinton aides, people with ties to Goldman Sachs, etc? I'm going to assume that most diehard Trump supporters couldn't care less about what has happened over the last few weeks.
Any noticeable voting shifts that happen will occur with voters who were on the fence and sided with Trump. That group will be enough to shift an election, assuming democrats turn out for the next nominee.
Trump has largely unified the republican party and brought some democrats back into the republican fold. It's a formidable group. Any hope democrats have will revolve around high base turnout and winning moderates+some "independents."
The real alarming thing is that these were just rank and file R's without a clear backing from republican leaders. Or at least no immediately obvious go ahead from leaders. Just goes to show how emboldened they are at the moment when average joe repub feels confident enough to take steps without worry of backlash.
balladofwindfishes
Member
They're cocky. Nobody stopped and thought "what are we doing, is this really important?" because they think they're invincible and will rule forever
Hmm...
I'm a bit reminded of another political party in 2008.
Cesare Borgia
Banned
She also did well in super white Washington and Oregon.
According to Costa, it looks like the GOP is backing off on the more controversial rules changes. https://twitter.com/costareports/status/816330465099608065
balladofwindfishes
Member
This is a really bizarre hill to die on. Ultimately, it won't really matter in 2 years, but this looks terrible, right now. But the commercials write themselves. "He voted to gut the ethics committee. Why? What are you hiding Representative?"
It's a simple thing anyone can rationalize. "Why are they gutting the ethics committee? What are they planning?" And the GOP hasn't even offered any real reason to gut the committee, other than "we can."
This is a prime target the Democrats can use for messaging, right now, and prepare themselves for the bigger fights coming up.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Trump tweeted about it
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/816298944456232960?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/816300003442495488?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
Fucking unreal. Trump vs. GOP is a real possibility
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Someone made a good point that its probably better now.
If we do have corruption, which we will. The ads write themselves. Remember republicans own everything that happens. Dems just need to blame them.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
hahaha they walked back the ethics gutting.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Someone higher up must have finally came to their senses that it was a terrible fight.
Just the fact they brought it up, though, might have already done some damage, I hope.
Cesare Borgia
Banned
Literally every infrastructure project funded by the stimulus featured big ass road/construction signs that said "this project is funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act," in all 50 states. There was plenty of information out there, plenty of news reports, etc etc.
I'm not convinced Trump's mastery of the media would simply translate to any other politician/person.
Carpe Libertatem
Member
I read a series of tweets that the only reason they did this is that they were mad about the OCE coming public with a report about corruption and receiving gifts from Azeri interests (after the House committee asked them not to). Supposedly a big deal with a lot of GOP congresspeople taking official trips to Azerbaijan
Probably just some vindictive members who thought they could sneak this through
Edit: https://mobile.twitter.com/cjcmichel/status/816068902652411905
Probably just some vindictive members who thought they could sneak this through
Edit: https://mobile.twitter.com/cjcmichel/status/816068902652411905
It's all about being "excited" to some people.
And those people lose us elections if we attempt to rely on them.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
I thought it was just seeking to eliminate the "under ethics investigation" tag that can pretty much be launched by anyone if they have some evidence.
Grayson was a victim of this and way used by Murphy
Carpe Libertatem
Member
Maybe that was part of it, but if what that guy says in the twitter thread is accurate it sounds like there's been a schism growing larger and larger over the past few years
edit: more on this
Veritigo_X
Member
With Kelly gone, does Fox News even have any anchors that would question Trump's administration? Or are they just going to be more of a mouthpiece than they currently are?
I'm not even sure she would keep up her anti-Trump stance given the outcome of the election, but she was still a prominent Never Trumper. Either way, both networks move more to the right with this change.
I'm not even sure she would keep up her anti-Trump stance given the outcome of the election, but she was still a prominent Never Trumper. Either way, both networks move more to the right with this change.
Sirpopopop
Member
I'm fine with pissing the Bernie people off.
I think it's more important to do that, then to let them have their way. I'm fairly convinced their end game is to get rid of anyone who doesn't subscribe to their purity tests. Purity tests based on sketchy ideology.
We might lose some elections as a result, but it's worth it to avoid letting the Dem's internal Tea Party revolution lead us to something disastrous following Trump.
I think it's more important to do that, then to let them have their way. I'm fairly convinced their end game is to get rid of anyone who doesn't subscribe to their purity tests. Purity tests based on sketchy ideology.
We might lose some elections as a result, but it's worth it to avoid letting the Dem's internal Tea Party revolution lead us to something disastrous following Trump.
VendettaRed07
Member
It isn't worth losing anything for as the result of not winning in 2020 and getting back in the White House ASAP would be far worse.
I honestly think there is a massive over exaggeration as to how long the "purity test" list of the socialist liberal base is.
It's pretty much "don't be a corporate stooge who plays footsies with wall street" and that's it. Like I mentioned before and I'm sure poligaf is sick of the mention but the fact that they like Tulsi despite her basically being a republican on a massive number of issues shows it isn't difficult to get on their favorable side when someone knows what they are doing.
Reality is we need them. It shouldn't be hard to find someone to run who both the larger liberal base and the green tea party both like. Most of them ended up voting for Hillary anyway despite not liking her at all.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
Cuomo is having an event with Bernie where he's talking about free tuition for middle-income New Yorkers?
I will die laughing if in 2020 my friends are going "CUOMO: A FUTURE WE CAN BELIEVE IN". It would be kind of funny to have two NY v NY battles again though. People hate him because he's cartoonishly corrupt, right? All I really know about him is that he passed gay marriage and $15 minimum wage and that his dad gave a really good speech.
I will die laughing if in 2020 my friends are going "CUOMO: A FUTURE WE CAN BELIEVE IN". It would be kind of funny to have two NY v NY battles again though. People hate him because he's cartoonishly corrupt, right? All I really know about him is that he passed gay marriage and $15 minimum wage and that his dad gave a really good speech.
whyamihere
Banned
hahahaahahahahahhaahahaahahaahahaahhahah
ahahahaah
aaahahaha
ahahahahaha
hahahahahah
AHHAHAHAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAA
thehypocrite
Member
Lol, is this throwing minorities under the bus? I don't know anymore.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
Bernie SandersVerified account
‏@SenSanders
We must make public colleges and universities tuition free for working families. That is what @NYGovCuomo is fighting for in New York.
This is pretty amazing.
‏@SenSanders
We must make public colleges and universities tuition free for working families. That is what @NYGovCuomo is fighting for in New York.
This is pretty amazing.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Sirpopopop
Member
We lost the fight on the Supreme Court. We're going to be dealing with some massive changes as a result of global warming. Any attempt to curb it even slightly is now over. Trump's going to be able to do massive damage on so many fronts in 4 years.
Losing in 2020 won't have the dire consequences of losing in 2016.
I think it's dangerous to appease that type of philosophy. It's vacuous policy based on appearances rather than actual beliefs.
It's a smear that could be used against anyone who decided to work in the private sector. It's very similar to Tea Party politics.
I don't want Democrats & Republicans to both be parties of shouting screaming demagogues.
We don't need them if they are going to turn Democrats into a left version of the Republican party.
We're at the point now, where we are so scared of losing them that the most important reason to nominate someone to a position of leadership within the party is, "It will make the Bernie supporters happy."
That's a cult of personality. I think better reasons would be, "Would this choice represent our diverse cultural identity?" or, "Does this candidate align with the beliefs we want the party to represent in the coming years?"
Why would I throw myself under the bus?
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Two days ago, Cuomo vetoed a bill funding public defenders. That veto massively fucked over the poor.
So, uhhhhhhhhhhhh.
So, uhhhhhhhhhhhh.
Shep, maybe. He needs to jump ship, too. Join Anderson and have a nightly sexy duo on CNN.
Retromelon
Member
It's really not. Trump's tweets about this can best be summed up like so
Oh you naughty house reps, tut tut!
And if anyone says a fucking word about labels I'm slapping you
Veritigo_X
Member
Oh yeah, I forgot about Shep. He mainly does breaking news stories though, I can't really recall him covering politics much.
Come on now. You're acting like there's a gulf between "Bernie people" and dems. I disagree with some of their weird purity tests (Tulsi Gabbard wtf??), but we can work with them more often than not.
Is there anything you have against Ellison, or do you just not want to give any concessions? If you can even call going with Ellison a concession.
They think literally anyone who does anything tangential to business interests is a "corporate stooge who plays footsies with wall street" because they're the same unreliable know-nothing leftists they've always been.
If you give them a cookie, they will want some milk. You cannot let them take over.
You completely misunderstand why they like Tulsi- it's because Bernie has a cult of personality, and she endorsed him. That's it. That's all there is to it. It's not about her doing a "good job", she's completely terrible and awful. It's about a complete and total lack of critical thinking out of the Bernie cult hivemind. This is why they embrace socialism in the first place.
I might have some qualms about a few bits on Ellison's platform (but none of that is set in stone) but otherwise I have no qualms with him. Once he showed he was committed to the job by pledging to vacate his House seat I'm not sure where the problem is. Ellison has been making an effort to distance himself from Sanders (to be his own man), doesn't seems to have the HUGE blindspots Sanders has and unlike Canova or "liberal icon" Tulsi Gabbard he isn't a fuckface or Republican in disguise. Ellison seems like a man with mostly good ideas and good intentions rather than a moron elevated or anointed by Sanders. I also do think we need to get a Democrat in MD governor's office and Perez seems like he has a real shot there. I don't know why Ellison doesn't have a shot for higher office in MN though - is there something I don't know?
So, our of curiosity, what does providing free tution actually do economically?
Sure, a student won't have crushing debt when they leave, but what economic benefits are there for the state and the school? Not everyone who graduates will have a job immediately to begin putting money back into the economy that would otherwise go into paying back debt.
So... I'm not trying to do any devil's advocate nonsense. I am genuinely curious.
Sure, a student won't have crushing debt when they leave, but what economic benefits are there for the state and the school? Not everyone who graduates will have a job immediately to begin putting money back into the economy that would otherwise go into paying back debt.
So... I'm not trying to do any devil's advocate nonsense. I am genuinely curious.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
And people wonder why there's still infighting going on!
thehypocrite
Member
Well, ultimately the compact majority are part of the problem. Evidence: Global warming and the externalities of capitalism and the free reign given to extractive endeavors.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Increased entrepreneurship, more educated work force attracts businesses, higher wages, less crime, etc.
Ellison's a Democrat. Bernie's not. That makes all the difference.
I don't think Ellison could get elected in a less liberal constituency.
We've been fighting to keep these people from trainwrecking the party since the Clinton years, and we'll be fighting to keep them from doing it after we're all gone.
When a drunk driver's trying to get the keys, the correct response isn't to let them have them.
VendettaRed07
Member
Voters in general are dumb. We are in the social media age and whoever makes the best tweet or most convincing YouTube video makes the best impact. The 80s and 90s era of long forums on cable networks don't decide elections anymore and it's as simple as that.
We can grandstand and blame voters and call them dumb and hypocrites all we want but the reality is that getting on voters good side even if their reasoning doesn't make sense is a political skill and part of the game
I see no downside in them being apart of the party as it gave republicans literally everything they could imagine and more. And it is unlikely that a candidate that doesn't get sizable support from black voters in the south can make it out of the primary anyway. So someone who appeals to both factions would be really useful going forward.
thehypocrite
Member
So nothing is worth doing if it doesn't provide an economic benefit?
It does increase tax revenue in the long run as they do tend to make better choices in life and obtain better incomes.
I do think that way of framing things is somewhat reprehensible though. But, Americuh!!!!
Abinash117
Member
Taking a guess more families are likely to go to college; a lot more. Those families will still have to buy books and supplies, I think. Additionally millions more people have a higher chance of being in skilled or more professional job which is a long term thing.
The article said about a million families would be affected; so that is actually a few million people even if only less than half finish school; that is potentially hundreds of thousands of people that will have a degree now. Business would be attracted to NY.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked