• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sirpopopop

Member
Allard said:
A lot of the things that we as a country would need to do to combat Global Warming or Climate Change likely will require going through the Supreme Court and the more 'pro business' conservative judges we have on that court the less likely things like more stringent EPA regulations and corporate penalties and the like aren't going to stick by pure ideological reasons. The Supreme Court is a very important factor for Climate change as much as any other progressive based agenda keeps getting stopped or threatened at the court level. The key is to try and do both at the same time.
Click to expand...

I can agree with that.

However, it's the type of nuanced interconnected view that isn't indicative of the "Voting Democrat only for the Supreme Court" crowd. For them, both parties are the same, except the Dems are less likely to nominate Clarence Thomas' types than Reps.
 
Joe Molotov

Joe Molotov

Member
Vahagn said:
So just putting this out there. Michelle left to Camp David separately. She didn't go with the President or the kids. He also came down and did the "latte salute" and she didn't walk down with him.

When I saw Beyonce not react in the elevator the first thing I thought was "Jay must have cheated on her". I'm really hoping something isn't going on there between them.
Click to expand...

Obama and Holder were having an affair, Holder was forced to resign when Michelle found out.
 
S

Skiptastic

Member
PhoenixDark said:
2016 would be the perfect time to dust off Moderate Romney 1.0.
Click to expand...
I voted for Romney last time because (oddly enough) I didn't believe the person who ran for president and won the nomination was the real Romney. So I voted for the person I thought he actually was and how I thought he would act as president rather than the person who was campaigning. I would love for Moderate Romney 1.0. (Sorry if I've shamed you all with my weird logic on voting, but there are people who put less thought into it and voted the same/differently so whatever...)

That being said, I also don't believe Moderate Romney Version Whatever could get through the Republican primary. It's pretty terrible that they will continue to lose national elections (barring some disaster like 2007-2008) but still have enough Congressionally to not hand a supermajority to the Democrats. Even losing three presidential elections in a row wouldn't be enough to shift the party appropriately.

The foundation of the Republican party isn't "Democrats put too much bloat, let's make government efficient and effective". It's "government is the problem and we're going to break it as much as possible to prove that point". The only way to shift that thinking is to get trounced on the whole instead of little by little.

Just my two cents.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
Jooney said:
So Romney said he would run, and he has said that he's not going to run.

Classic Romney.
Click to expand...
Romney flip-flopping? No way!

Aaron said:
Moderate Romney would get the nom because they literally have no one else who has a chance.
Click to expand...

Chris Christie?

Aaron Strife said:
PPP has Udall down 2 in Colorado, but they've always had problems polling there. I feel like Udall has a slight advantage.
Click to expand...
There is no way Udall would lose in a presidential election year. Mid-terms . . . I still think he'll win.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
speculawyer said:
Romney flip-flopping? No way!



Chris Christie?


There is no way Udall would lose in a presidential election year. Mid-terms . . . I still think he'll win.
Click to expand...

LOL Christie

Even if the bridge thing doesn't take him down, he'll implode the first time he's challenged at a town hall.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
No matter whom they nominate, they have to address their electoral pickle. With the GOP candidate having to run the table near-perfectly on swing states, I sometimes wonder if the party's financial backers would ever see the writing on the wall and thus divert money from the Presidential contest over to Congressional efforts.

One candidate would help in securing Florida, but he's double-cursed in that:
(1) the Bush name is electoral poison; and,
(2) the extreme right won't forgive him for his "act of love" comments on immigration.
 
A

AntoneM

Member
Skiptastic said:
I voted for Romney last time because (oddly enough) I didn't believe the person who ran for president and won the nomination was the real Romney. So I voted for the person I thought he actually was and how I thought he would act as president rather than the person who was campaigning. I would love for Moderate Romney 1.0. (Sorry if I've shamed you all with my weird logic on voting, but there are people who put less thought into it and voted the same/differently so whatever...)

That being said, I also don't believe Moderate Romney Version Whatever could get through the Republican primary. It's pretty terrible that they will continue to lose national elections (barring some disaster like 2007-2008) but still have enough Congressionally to not hand a supermajority to the Democrats. Even losing three presidential elections in a row wouldn't be enough to shift the party appropriately.

The foundation of the Republican party isn't "Democrats put too much bloat, let's make government efficient and effective". It's "government is the problem and we're going to break it as much as possible to prove that point". The only way to shift that thinking is to get trounced on the whole instead of little by little.

Just my two cents.
Click to expand...

Isn't a moderate Romney basically Obama? I'm so confused.
 
W

WayneMorse

Banned
HylianTom said:
No matter whom they nominate, they have to address their electoral pickle. With the GOP candidate having to run the table near-perfectly on swing states, I sometimes wonder if the party's financial backers would ever see the writing on the wall and thus divert money from the Presidential contest over to Congressional efforts.

One candidate would help in securing Florida, but he's double-cursed in that:
(1) the Bush name is electoral poison; and,
(2) the extreme right won't forgive him for his "act of love" comments on immigration.
Click to expand...

I think the American people have forgotten about W and mainly pin his failures on the economy and Iraq on Obama.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
B-Dubs said:
LOL Christie

Even if the bridge thing doesn't take him down, he'll implode the first time he's challenged at a town hall.
Click to expand...

Well . . . who else could suggest? Cain? No. Perry? No. Bachmann? No. Newt? No. Rand (or Ron) Paul? No. They really seem to have a weak bench.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Skiptastic said:
I voted for Romney last time because (oddly enough) I didn't believe the person who ran for president and won the nomination was the real Romney. So I voted for the person I thought he actually was and how I thought he would act as president rather than the person who was campaigning. I would love for Moderate Romney 1.0. (Sorry if I've shamed you all with my weird logic on voting, but there are people who put less thought into it and voted the same/differently so whatever...)

That being said, I also don't believe Moderate Romney Version Whatever could get through the Republican primary. It's pretty terrible that they will continue to lose national elections (barring some disaster like 2007-2008) but still have enough Congressionally to not hand a supermajority to the Democrats. Even losing three presidential elections in a row wouldn't be enough to shift the party appropriately.

The foundation of the Republican party isn't "Democrats put too much bloat, let's make government efficient and effective". It's "government is the problem and we're going to break it as much as possible to prove that point". The only way to shift that thinking is to get trounced on the whole instead of little by little.

Just my two cents.
Click to expand...
Romney in a liberal state with a liberal legislator is obviously going to be a lot further left than a President Romney with a house completely under control, senate control for 2015-2017, and potentially even a suspension of filibuster rules given the erosion of Madisonian styled politics that Republicans have been getting away with. The change you're seeing isn't him hiding his convictions, but simply him changing environments.

The one honestly moderate thing is his willingness to compromise to get something done, but he honestly really wouldn't have to compromise much in that environment.
 
A

Averon

Member
Will GOP voters hold their nose and vote for Romney a second time in the primaries in 2016? I'm not sure they will, especially if someone like Rand Paul is running as well.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
RustyNails said:
So my brother went for notary certification service at cook county office and guess what, the lady at the front was playing candy crush and got rude with him for asking questions and went back to playing after she found out his document had notary from the wrong commission. He became upset at her attitude and complained to the supervisor who apologized but defended the lady's behaviour.


Tax dollars at work etc.
Click to expand...
It's because she was upset at the news over Michelle and Barack's impending divorce.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Gaming side is scary bros:
TjJb4k4.jpg
 
F

FyreWulff

Member
When you have a bunch of juniors rolling up with white power scripts for their responses... the right wingers are trying to use this as a booster for recruitment.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidne...precedented-campaign-against-pro-marr#44ih635
WASHINGTON — Conservative activists are launching “an unprecedented campaign” against three Republican candidates — two of whom are out gay men — because of their support for marriage equality and abortion.

The National Organization for Marriage, Family Research Council Action, and CitizenLink “will mount a concerted effort to urge voters to refuse to cast ballots” for Republican House candidates Carl DeMaio in California and Richard Tisei in Massachusetts and Republican Senate candidate Monica Wehby in Oregon, according to a letter sent to Republican congressional and campaign leaders on Thursday.

“We cannot in good conscience urge our members and fellow citizens to support candidates like DeMaio, Tisei or Wehby,” the presidents of the three groups write. “They are wrong on critical, foundational issues of importance to the American people. Worse, as occupants of high office they will secure a platform in the media to advance their flawed ideology and serve as terrible role models for young people who will inevitably be encouraged to emulate them.”

DeMaio and Tisei are the only out LGBT federal candidates from the Republican Party to be appearing on the ballot this fall.

“The Republican Party platform is a ‘statement of who we are and what we believe.’ Thus, the platform supports the truth of marriage as the union of husband and wife, and recognizes the sanctity and dignity of human life,” NOM President Brian S. Brown said in a statement.

Brown called it “extremely disappointing” to see candidates supported “who reject the party’s principled positions on these and other core issues.”

Of the effort to urge people to oppose DeMaio, Tisei, and Wehby, he said, “We cannot sit by when people calling themselves Republicans seek high office while espousing positions that are antithetical to the overwhelming majority of Republicans.”

The letter was sent to House Speaker John Boehner, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Greg Walden, National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman Jerry Moran, and others in Republican congressional leadership.

In it, the three conservative groups also warned that it is a “grave error” for the party to be supporting “candidates who do not hold core Republican beliefs and, in fact, are working to actively alienate the Republican base.”
Click to expand...

Also lol: http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczy...-gubernatorial-candidate-somehow-plag#44ih635
 
V

Vahagn

Member
benjipwns said:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidne...precedented-campaign-against-pro-marr#44ih635
Click to expand...

What I was talking about regarding going to the middle while having to appease the base. Republicans sold their soul to the proverbial devil when they aligned with social conservatives, it's going to be a hard road to presidential victories with that constituency mish mash

benjipwns said:
Also lol: http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczy...-gubernatorial-candidate-somehow-plag#44ih635
Click to expand...

I think all 3 women hired the same consultant and he was too lazy to write different copy.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Vahagn said:
What I was talking about regarding going to the middle while having to appease the base. Republicans sold their soul to the proverbial devil when they aligned with social conservatives, it's going to be a hard road to presidential victories with that constituency mish mash
Click to expand...

Yup. They'll win their small-EV rural states and run-up high margins, but in doing so, they've killed themselves everywhere else.

Then, when they lose yet another presidential election, their rabid base will call Morning Journal in droves on the day after the election, wondering why "their" country voted against "real America" once again.

And the fun part? There's no easy way for them to untangle the party from its dependence on that base.
 
W

WayneMorse

Banned
benjipwns said:
Gaming side is scary bros:
TjJb4k4.jpg
Click to expand...

Did the person who posted that get permabanned?

Do you think the reason why Gamergate is a thing at all is because most "gamers" see video games as the last bastion of white male hegemony and see women rising in the industry as the destruction of everything they hold sacred.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
“We cannot in good conscience urge our members and fellow citizens to support candidates like DeMaio, Tisei or Wehby,” the presidents of the three groups write. “They are wrong on critical, foundational issues of importance to the American people. Worse, as occupants of high office they will secure a platform in the media to advance their flawed ideology and serve as terrible role models for young people who will inevitably be encouraged to emulate them.”
Click to expand...
tumblr_mrbl3zczfs1sxudx7o1_r2_500_zps8f15b439.gif
 
S

speculawyer

Member
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
cooljeanius said:
It's not as hypocritical when Democrats do it because they only run on "fiscal responsibility" in an attempt to reach out to Republicans and Independents.
Click to expand...

eBay Huckster said:
Do similar things happen to Democrats outside of the state of Illinois?
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to point out a hypocrat but why people vote the way they do. Is a screw up, or failure by someone in your party going to get you to vote for the other person or not vote?

See:
http://www.vox.com/2014/9/15/6127683/candidate-quiz
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
zargle said:
That's not satire/parody? How am I supposed to interpret that they misspelled shield? That they are just dumb because they didn't get the FAFSA loans to turn into a social justice warrior feminazi?
Click to expand...

Satire. It has to be.

If it were real, either money grubbing indie game developers or power hungry feminist girlfriends would be the instigators at the top.
 
Z

zero shift

Banned
I've seen some really freaky graphics:
TtYFpsb.jpg

Half of US GDP comes from these 23 orange blotches

Half of America’s gross domestic product comes from the 23 orange blotches on this map. The other half comes from the vast acres of blue. Those orange blotches are America’s largest metro areas — and they absolutely power the American economy. But though small in size, they’re large in population: about 110 million people live in those orange blotches, says Reddit user Atrubetskoy, who created the map. So what you’re seeing on this map isn’t just that there’s a lot of economic activity compressed into some very small spaces in America, but that there are huge swaths of the American landscape where not that many people live.
Click to expand...

vwe0QLC.png
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
I'm loving #Bendghazi.

So with Holder out, I guess we're waiting until, what, 2020? 2024? For a new AG? No one Bams or Hillary are getting put in until Dems have a super majority.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Wilsongt said:
I'm loving #Bendghazi.

So with Holder out, I guess we're waiting until, what, 2020? 2024? For a new AG? No one Bams or Hillary are getting put in until Dems have a super majority.
Click to expand...
I believe Attorney General confirmations were included in Reid's nuclear thing. I don't see why they couldn't just appoint a new one in the next 3 months.

I do wonder if republicans would reinstate the filibuster and somehow protect it from being changed back with a simple majority. I don't know if they'd have the power to do that, but these types of things have shown to have absolutely 0 impact on voters, and it seems republicans who like a non-functioning government might prefer the rules like that, especially if they're facing a future where holding the house, senate, and presidency seems unlikely any time soon. Particularly with the presidency unlikely to be theirs until 2020, and the demographic changes coming in by 2020.

Even if they do get to the point where they'd have the senate and presidency, they'd still have the upper hand on any fight since any ugly filibuster battle would just prove to the public that government doesn't work, making it more likely for democrats to fold first.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
thepotatoman said:
I believe Attorney General confirmations were included in Reid's nuclear thing. I don't see why they couldn't just appoint a new one in the next 3 months.

I do wonder if republicans would reinstate the filibuster and somehow protect it from being changed back with a simple majority. I don't know if they'd have the power to do that, but these types of things have shown to have absolutely 0 impact on voters, and it seems republicans who like a non-functioning government might prefer the rules like that, especially if they're facing a future where holding the house, senate, and presidency seems unlikely any time soon. Particularly with the presidency unlikely to be theirs until 2020, and the demographic changes coming in by 2020.

Even if they do get to the point where they'd have the senate and presidency, they'd still have the upper hand on any fight since any ugly filibuster battle would just prove to the public that government doesn't work, making it more likely for democrats to fold first.
Click to expand...

Cruz has already spouted nonsense about waiting until the new Congress begins until the appoint a new AG. He would say that, though, the fucking troll.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom