RustyNails
Member
Diablos I can assure you that Christie has bigger skeletons in his closet than Bridgegate could ever become.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News
- Thread starter bananas
- Start date
- Status
zero shift
Banned
So now that E3 is over, I was thinking, if the big 3 were countries what would their political ideologies be?
I'm pretty sure that Nintendo would definitely be very left wing as they strongly rely on the iron fist of first party titles and high taxes for third parties developing on their system.
I'm pretty sure that Nintendo would definitely be very left wing as they strongly rely on the iron fist of first party titles and high taxes for third parties developing on their system.
shadowsdarknes
Member
I'd consider voting for Jon Huntsman. That guy seems remarkably level headed.
That would be pretty heated. But exciting to see.
That would be pretty heated. But exciting to see.
shadowsdarknes
Member
Nintendo would be communist Russia.
Starving their gamers (citizens) for the sake of their principles. "You want games? You play what we give you. " (heavy russian accent)
Microsoft is the typical USA. Spend big money and muscle your way to get what you want.
Sony is probably the UK or Canada.
RustyNails
Member
Nintendo is North Korea, where the leaders are considered gods and talking bad about them gets you thrown in a gulag.
zero shift
Banned
I feel silly for taking it seriously but yeah Nintendo would be very far left. At least something like modern Cuba where nearly all of the big industries (games) are controlled by the state (console manufacturer). However what is odd is that Nintendo is incredibly inviting toward indie developers, but that wasn't uncommon in many far left countries.
Microsoft would definitely be very neoliberal. Outside of Halo and Forza I can't think of any even somewhat notable first party games they have. I mean this E3 was an exception but by and large Microsoft has had incredible minimal first party support, and even then so it often comes to PCs (such as Fable 3, or Viva Pinata). I think the United States would be the best comparison, especially since they have so much debt.
Sony would be similar to the a major country in the European Union. While they have fully embraced third parties (the private sector) they still have a visibly present first party. Gran Turismo (while it has seen better days) is still huge, and Naughty Dog needs no introduction.
One company that puzzles me is Valve. They have a very strong first party as well as third party support but also direct democratic elements with free services (online gaming and F2P). Maybe a souped up Switzerland?
Microsoft would definitely be very neoliberal. Outside of Halo and Forza I can't think of any even somewhat notable first party games they have. I mean this E3 was an exception but by and large Microsoft has had incredible minimal first party support, and even then so it often comes to PCs (such as Fable 3, or Viva Pinata). I think the United States would be the best comparison, especially since they have so much debt.
Sony would be similar to the a major country in the European Union. While they have fully embraced third parties (the private sector) they still have a visibly present first party. Gran Turismo (while it has seen better days) is still huge, and Naughty Dog needs no introduction.
One company that puzzles me is Valve. They have a very strong first party as well as third party support but also direct democratic elements with free services (online gaming and F2P). Maybe a souped up Switzerland?
RustyNails
Member
Chris Christie did a Facebook chat and here are the questions he answered:
Here's some he didn't
Nintendo is incredibly conservative and prudish, not exactly what I'd call "very left wing" (Yes, yes, single axis political spectrums don't work, etc.). North Korea is actually probably pretty close. Maybe China.
zero shift
Banned
Nintendo can be very progressive though. Look at how they don't mind copyrights for example. They also haven't had any problems with violent games on their platforms. Hell they are publishing Bayonetta and Devil's Third.
smokeandmirrors
Banned
lol he can barely deal with anything as is.
jamesinclair
Banned
Nate Silver is officially considered a joke now right?
Because his world cup prediction stats have been extraordinarily wrong. He moved to sports, and yet appears to know nothing about sports.
Also, his other big running story is about burritos?
Because his world cup prediction stats have been extraordinarily wrong. He moved to sports, and yet appears to know nothing about sports.
Also, his other big running story is about burritos?
Jesus christ, how old are you by chance? Nintendo has had plenty of problems with violent games on their platforms in the past. It shaped the entire landscape of the industry and has left them branded by their past actions for decades now.
They're literally the last to the party on this point after their competition beat them to the punch ages ago, they're the opposite of progressive.
Not sure what you mean about "not minding copyrights," either. This is the company that tried to shutdown Smash Bros at Evo.
UGH, please no.
The GOP is unkind to losers... but if there was anyone out there to go for a theepeat it would probably be Mittens.
Hillary vs. Romney would be crazy...
If sports were that predictable Las Vegas casinos would be trillionaires by now.
Sports is fundamentally less predictable by design. Otherwise it wouldn't be fun to watch.
zero shift
Banned
The Super Nintendo was ages ago. Nintendo hasn't really bothered to censor games since the 90s. Again they are publishing and funded Bayonetta and Devil's Third,
This is pretty damn progressive.
An election over the leftovers of 2008.
Microsoft is San Marino.
Sony is Liechtenstein.
Nintendo is Andorra.
I'm going to go with yes.
Also, his "statistical" analysis of the world cup is farcical, I always assumed that for the most part he understand that such prediction are based on really shoddy math, but fuck, I'm starting to suspect he drinks his own kool aid.
speculawyer
Member
I think this topic is stupid but this was funny.
jamesinclair
Banned
But I thought his whole thing was that he broke past the matrix and made excellent predictions.
The problem is, hes even botching the easy ones.
And read his articles, they spend like 3 paragraphs talking about how he has super computers running all night aiding his data.
What happened to Nate Sliver? He used to be the holy grail of polling/trends.
Also I'm already Diablosing at the mere notion of Mitt running again. I heard what's-his-name on Charlie Rose talking about it and how Ann is apparently okay with it this time around and I just wanted to hit my head off a wall. Please go away Romneys. PLEASE. I don't want the third time to be a charm.
Hillary seems to be acting a bit out of touch, I really hope she's not back into the same train of thought that made her think hiring morons like Mark Penn was a good idea.
Also I'm already Diablosing at the mere notion of Mitt running again. I heard what's-his-name on Charlie Rose talking about it and how Ann is apparently okay with it this time around and I just wanted to hit my head off a wall. Please go away Romneys. PLEASE. I don't want the third time to be a charm.
Hillary seems to be acting a bit out of touch, I really hope she's not back into the same train of thought that made her think hiring morons like Mark Penn was a good idea.
Soccer isn't as stats driven as other sports, he was never going to be very accurate. He was never going to be as accurate as Paul the Octopus, for example.
I have no doubt he could do a good job with baseball or football, but stats analysis doesn't lend itself to predicting the beautiful game.
speculawyer
Member
I still think he is one of their better candidates. Not good enough to beat Hillary though.
I really think the GOP is painted into the corner on presidential elections. You have to be so conservative to win the primary that you will be unable to win the general.
I mean FFS, Cantor was too liberal!
No no no. NOOOO. Obama put his ass AWAY. He can't come back!!
Mitt vs. Hillary could go down to the wire.
speculawyer
Member
Yeah, I think Soccer is too hard to make good predictions about. When one team is MUCH better than another, you can get some decent predictions. But if the teams are at all relatively closely matched, it is really hard. It is an inherently very low scoring game so you get very few data points to work with. Thus the data is very noisy.
But that is what makes it such wild sport to watch . . . you really don't know who will win.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Its more to do with stats doesn't work well game to game in any sport. It works over time. Its really stupid to try to predict world cup performances based on the data he did.
Baseball is the best sport for this because it isn't a continuous game. Its just game after game after game they just combine all these games into one game.
http://election.princeton.edu/
Nate wasn't the only one who got the 2012 election. So what he did was not as impressive as you might think.
I have no idea why he's so bad at world cup prediction. His March Madness prediction weren't anything special either. Maybe sports isn't his thing.
Yup, anyone can win. No one saw Costa Rica beating Uruguay, absolutely no one. Don't even get me started on Spain vs the Netherlands. Even when the teams are mismatched you can still see a big upset. The US has beaten both Brazil and done extraordinary well against Spain in the past.
Even if you look at the data it can be extremely misleading. For example Landon Donovan has scored more goals in the World Cup than Ronaldo, Rooney and Messi put together, yet no one is going to argue he's a better player. Though, in fairness to Donovan, he's always been a bit of a show horse.
jamesinclair
Banned
I agree, and I know that.
But does he? Hes spending a whole lot of time and putting a whole lot of focus onto a lost cause.
It reflects very poorly on him and his website.
It gets him hits. That's all there is to it.
You can't predict soccer using stats. It just doesn't work.
speculawyer
Member
Yeah, if he was wise he would have just written a good article about how soccer is too hard to forecast due to its limited data set. But no, his ego got to him and he tried to make predictions that will end up looking bad.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I just want to point out for the 80th time that I predicted the Obama-Romney EV count perfectly before the end of September.
Anyone who was paying attention to the polls should have known Obama would win OH, VA, and possibly FL.
Avon Barksdale
Member
I can't really see Romney getting any more votes than he did last time. He only got a million more votes than McCain and that was with the "Fuck Obama" factoring in.
JesseEwiak
Member
Huntsman agreed with Ryan's budget plan. He's just as right-wing as any other Republican on economics, except that he actually believes in climate change and doesn't hate gay people.
RustyNails
Member
Romney will not run. No one likes a sore loser.
Aaron Strife
Banned
The "Fuck Obama" factor was probably tied more to lower turnout than Romney actually gaining votes over McCain, which can just be attributed to population gains.
After 8 years of OBUMMER and the Democratic brand going somewhat stale, it might just make people want a Republican back in the WH... of course Obama is nowhere near Bush levels of unpopularity back in 07-08.
But I still think there is going to be a fairly large crowd who will be more eager than ever to stick it to Obama by doing everything they can to make sure his successor doesn't agree with him. It won't be 2008 levels though.
Aw fuck I just don't know how 2016 is going to shape up.
Anyone realizing that the GOP has TONS of women that could run? Haley, Martinez... it would be wise to counter what would otherwise be a huge strength for Hillary, because then no matter who wins, the US would finally have a first female President, and it could make less women (potentially) feel obligated to vote for Hillary.
I think it doesn't matter how tired the Obama brand is- I think there's a majority of folks who will nationally be anti-Republican no matter what, so as long as the Dems put up someone who isn't a disaster they'll win.
If the Republicans put out a candidate with legitimately new ideas, it might not, but that's not going to happen with the current primary system.
You don't vote for a candidate, you vote against the other candidate, and people understand that now.
If the Republicans put out a candidate with legitimately new ideas, it might not, but that's not going to happen with the current primary system.
You don't vote for a candidate, you vote against the other candidate, and people understand that now.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Uhm... It's not like women are going to suddenly start voting for Republicans just because they'd have a woman candidate. That's like saying black voters would have crossed over for Herman Cain.
I gotta get my Diablosing out before I hit the hay.
Nikki Haley scares me, btw. No, it isn't a race or gender thing... more like her views. She looks like such a nice, rational human being but she's CRAZY.
Avon Barksdale
Member
She's Sarah Palin with a Southern accent.
After 8 years of OBUMMER and the Democratic brand going somewhat stale, it might just make people want a Republican back in the WH... of course Obama is nowhere near Bush levels of unpopularity back in 07-08.
But I still think there is going to be a fairly large crowd who will be more eager than ever to stick it to Obama by doing everything they can to make sure his successor doesn't agree with him. It won't be 2008 levels though.
Aw fuck I just don't know how 2016 is going to shape up.
In all likelihood by 2016 the economy and jobs situation will have continued to improve, ACA benefits will be more obvious, and gay marriage and legalized marijuana will be more widespread and entrenched. The US might not even be involved in a major conflict. Even if the rate of improvement continues to be slow (a likelihood given an obstructionist congress), the country will be noticeably "better" than when Obama took office.
Even if the voting public is bored, what exactly is any GOP candidate going to run on that will win anybody over? With everything else "out of the way" the key issue of 2016 is likely to be immigration, and the GOP is lining up on the wrong side of that argument if they want to win the Presidency.
Yeahhh but Sarah Palin looks as crazy as she sounds. Haley looks normal. At first glance if you had political amnesia you might think she's your everyday left-leaning politician from some western country or what have you. But no. She's a loon. That in and of itself is terrifying. With Palin at least what you see is what you get.
Also Haley is a far better speaker. She sounds down to earth even if she isn't -- Palin sounds like, well, Palin.
I think there's a non-negligible chance that Wall Street manage to blow themselves up again before the 2016 election, and if they won't, it will most likely happen during Hillary's first term.
And that's how Republican administrations are born.
I think it's possible that if Hillary goes after Wall Street hard, it might help her if they go boom, and Hillary would stab Wall Street in the back to save her legacy. If it happens in 2019, then we might get 20 more years of the right. You'd see a real rise in extremism, especially left extremism, if this scenario happens in the next 5-6 years.
In some ways, I almost wish a Republican would win in 2016 so when Wall St blows up again they'd get the blame.
He should know better than trying to apply the same methodology to trying and predict football or basketball matches.
What makes you think she'll go after the banks hard?
She's more a Wall Street shill than Obama (and that's saying something).
Don't get me wrong, I hope she wins and I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see any reason to believe she'll be any better than Obama on that front.
To tie all the Diablosing in a neat bow, the return of Mitt Romney to the Republican Presidential race is the most clear sign so far that Chris Christie is out of it. Running Romney again is an obviously stupid idea. The only reason anybody might even talk about it is the same reason they ran him in the first place -- there are no actually plausible candidates willing to run. In 2012, Christie wasn't willing to run (he needed the lap band surgery to mount a real Presidential campaign). In 2016 he isn't plausible any more.
Yep. Well, to be fair anyone that gave him a close look knew that he was never a viable candidate. His temperament combined with the shady looking shit in his past would normally rule him out, the only reason anyone looked at him is there's no one else to look to.
There is going to be even more pressure from the far right next time around, meaning the the Republican Presidential primaries are going to be even more of a circus than last time.
Jon Stewart is going to have to expand The Daily Show to an hour to accommodate everything.
Jon Stewart is going to have to expand The Daily Show to an hour to accommodate everything.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked