• 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 |OT2| We need to be more like Disney World

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
I'd love to see Obama completely shun television "journalists" for interviews/press conferences, and instead focus on print journalists...but not Buzzfeed and Vox. Buzzfeed is a joke and Vox is pretty weak.
 
C

Cloudy

Banned
PhoenixDark said:
I'd love to see Obama completely shun television "journalists" for interviews/press conferences, and instead focus on print journalists...but not Buzzfeed and Vox. Buzzfeed is a joke and Vox is pretty weak.
Click to expand...

I think BuzzFeed should split into 2 portals. Their long-form politics stuff is good but you just cant take the site seriously based on that homepage. Even if it is being run by an ex-Politico guy now...
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Cloudy said:
I think BuzzFeed should split into 2 portals. Their long-form politics stuff is good but you just cant take the site seriously based on that homepage. Even if it is being run by an ex-Politico guy now...
Click to expand...

They just got adam sewer from MSNBC.com too, he's great.

Buzzfeed is a great news outlet, but yeah they need to differentiate. Though I'm sure that clickbait drives their news.

That vox interview is great. Bams is a really smart guy. I just can't see romney play professor like that.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
PhoenixDark said:
I'd love to see Obama completely shun television "journalists" for interviews/press conferences, and instead focus on print journalists...but not Buzzfeed and Vox. Buzzfeed is a joke and Vox is pretty weak.
Click to expand...

Buzzfeed's been legit for a long time. Their long form articles are great and they have some really well respected editors.
 
Metaphoreus

Metaphoreus

This is semantics, and nothing more
So did anybody else notice how an anonymous Congressman (probably a Democrat) admitted to violating federal campaign finance law on Vox?

ZCEDvZI.png
Click to expand...

It's illegal for a corporation to make campaign contributions to candidates for federal office.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
D

Diablos

Member
That congressman is right... we are like a Parliament without a Prime Minister. Such a dumb idea.

We are still, despite our shortcomings, the most successful experiment in self-government in history.
Click to expand...
Maybe so, but we are still deeply flawed and given the wealth and power in this nation there's really no excuse for all the bullshit.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
Fun fact: @Taniel/@Bill Kristol through twitter

If Jeb Bush wins, all the Republican Presidents for a stretch of 36 years will have been members of the Bush family!

If Jeb Bush wins & runs for reelection, in 2024 every winning GOP ticket since 1928--96 years--will have had a Nixon or a Bush.

Seriously think about it, about the humongous share of the population in 2024 who'd never have known any GOP President who isn't a Bush.

Think about it this way: If Jeb wins, in 2024 no one younger than 54 (!!!) will have ever voted for a winning GOP president who's not a Bush

In 2024, no one under 70 would ever have voted for a winning GOP ticket that didn't include a Bush.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
NeoXChaos said:
Fun fact: @Taniel/@Bill Kristol through twitter

If Jeb Bush wins, all the Republican Presidents for a stretch of 36 years will have been members of the Bush family!

If Jeb Bush wins & runs for reelection, in 2024 every winning GOP ticket since 1928--96 years--will have had a Nixon or a Bush.

Seriously think about it, about the humongous share of the population in 2024 who'd never have known any GOP President who isn't a Bush.

Think about it this way: If Jeb wins, in 2024 no one younger than 54 (!!!) will have ever voted for a winning GOP president who's not a Bush

In 2024, no one under 70 would ever have voted for a winning GOP ticket that didn't include a Bush.
Click to expand...

wow thx
 
T

Trouble

Banned
NeoXChaos said:
Fun fact: @Taniel/@Bill Kristol through twitter

If Jeb Bush wins, all the Republican Presidents for a stretch of 36 years will have been members of the Bush family!

If Jeb Bush wins & runs for reelection, in 2024 every winning GOP ticket since 1928--96 years--will have had a Nixon or a Bush.

Seriously think about it, about the humongous share of the population in 2024 who'd never have known any GOP President who isn't a Bush.

Think about it this way: If Jeb wins, in 2024 no one younger than 54 (!!!) will have ever voted for a winning GOP president who's not a Bush

In 2024, no one under 70 would ever have voted for a winning GOP ticket that didn't include a Bush.
Click to expand...

w0UdGqs.jpg
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
NeoXChaos said:
Fun fact: @Taniel/@Bill Kristol through twitter

If Jeb Bush wins, all the Republican Presidents for a stretch of 36 years will have been members of the Bush family!

If Jeb Bush wins & runs for reelection, in 2024 every winning GOP ticket since 1928--96 years--will have had a Nixon or a Bush.

Seriously think about it, about the humongous share of the population in 2024 who'd never have known any GOP President who isn't a Bush.

Think about it this way: If Jeb wins, in 2024 no one younger than 54 (!!!) will have ever voted for a winning GOP president who's not a Bush

In 2024, no one under 70 would ever have voted for a winning GOP ticket that didn't include a Bush.
Click to expand...
Hey you know what's neat? All of this will happen if Bush doesn't win and Clinton is a two-termer! And we won't have to deal with Bill Kristol jizzing himself and making dumbass predictions that are immediately repudiated by fate.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Actually, from Bloomberg's new NH poll, since it's semi-related:

7. When it comes to Jeb Bush, do you think the
strength of his potential candidacy is based
more on his unique qualities and achievements,
or his family connections to politics?
Click to expand...
GOP voters say:
31% achievements, 59% family
DEM voters say:
14% achievements, 78% family

Same question but for Hillary:
GOP voters say:
22% achievements, 68% family
DEM voters say:
74% achievements, 21% family

Also 41% of GOP Primary voters say it's a Deal Killer if Jeb Bush supports allowing illegal immigrants to stay in the country.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
How did it come to this though? How does a party nominate and win* with the same two names over a period of 100 years?

We seem to never go over 8 years without one of the name in the case of bush being on the ballot.*

Dad runs and loses, the son runs 8 years later and now the brother wants to run 8 years later. Nixon runs 3 times, loses on 3rd and comes back 8 years later.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
You forgot that Prescott was a Senator.

John Adams and John Quincy Adams. William Henry Harrison and Benjamin Harrison.

Henry Clay was nominated four times in 20 years for President.

From 1900 to 1948, a Roosevelt was on the ballot in 8 of the 12 elections.

People are living longer. The Kennedy's might have looked like this had they not all either died or killed people. Especially if you include future President Schwarzenegger.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
We really are a dynasty lol. Everyone and their dad was a Congressman, Senator or Governor. I guess like someone mentioned earlier it was bound to make its way to the Presidency. Obama really was an out of nowhere unconventional candidate.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
I think Carter and Clinton were much more obscure than Obama. Who had a big stage Senate campaign and then almost immediately began running for President and getting that media attention.

Carter, while running for President but before he won in Iowa, appeared on that show where actors and famous people tried to guess the person profession or whatever and they had no clue who he was.

Clinton got cheered at the 1988 DNC when he said "in closing..." while introducing Dukakis because his speech had been so long-winded and boring.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
benjipwns said:
You forgot that Prescott was a Senator.

John Adams and John Quincy Adams. William Henry Harrison and Benjamin Harrison.

Henry Clay was nominated four times in 20 years for President.

From 1900 to 1948, a Roosevelt was on the ballot in 8 of the 12 elections.

People are living longer. The Kennedy's might have looked like this had they not all either died or killed people. Especially if you include future President Schwarzenegger.
Click to expand...
Lol

the bushes do want it to be known this is bipartisan
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
B-Dubs said:
Who else can at this point? He's gonna have all the money behind him.
Click to expand...

Actually multiple candidates will have money, unlike in 2012. Jeb might have the most money but that won't translate into votes. Especially with his immigration stance. I expect Jeb to be roundly rejected in many of the more conservative states, and eventually it'll become clear that Scott Walker is the best compromise candidate.

Consider the primary/caucus schedule...
http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2016-presidential-primary-schedule-calendar/

Jeb isn't winning Iowa. Maybe he wins NH. If it's true that Romney wants someone other than Jeb to be the nominee, perhaps he'll endorse someone early. I think Scott Walker's midwest appeal could make him the favorite in Minnesota, and maybe a Romney endorsement could nab him Utah; both are on Feb 2nd. A Romney endorsement could also be beneficial in Nevada on February 6th.

South Carolina is next on the 13th of Feb...Jeb isn't winning that. Michigan a week later...another midwest state Walker should do well in (and another state where a Romney endorsement could help). Florida's primary is on March 1st and I honestly think that could be the first big win for Jeb. I just don't think he's a good candidate...
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Actually, speaking of political "families" and stuff. And Cheney.

Rumsfeld was Ambassdor to NATO under Nixon, Chief of Staff and Secretary of Defense under Ford, and then Secretary of Defense under W. Bush.

Cheney was Chief of Staff under Ford, Secretary of Defense under H.W. Bush then Vice President under W. Bush.

H.W. himself was Ambassador to the UN under Nixon, then made Chairman of RNC by Nixon, then Ambassador to China under Ford, then Director of CIA under Ford.

James Baker was Chief of Staff, Secretary of Treasury and Secretary of State under Reagan and Bush. Then Iraq Study Group and Special Envoy under W. Bush.

To be bipartisan, Leon Panetta was Director of OMB under Clinton, then Chief of Staff under Clinton, then Director of CIA under Obama and then Secretary of Defense under Obama.

The Kings and Champions though are Elliott Richardson and George Schultz.
Richardson: Secretary of HEW, Secretary of Defense, Attorney General, Ambassador to the UK, Secretary of Commerce under Nixon and Ford.
Schultz: Secretary of Labor, Director of OMB, Secretary of Treasury, Secretary of State under Nixon and Reagan.

Casper Weinberger did alright before his indictment:
Chairman of the FTC and Director of OMB under Nixon, Secretary of HEW under Nixon and Ford, then Secretary of Defense under Reagan.

There's also a whole swath of W. Bush people who came up through Nixon/Ford/Reagan/Bush as like mail room guys who later become NSA or some shit.

The Obama Administration rehashed so many old Clinton people simply because there weren't any of these type of people left in the Democratic Party from Carter and Johnson.

PhoenixDark said:
Consider the primary/caucus schedule...
Click to expand...
Worth noting that any states between Mar 1 and Mar 15 will be proportional allocation. Something new in the GOP primaries. After that will be winner take all.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
PhoenixDark said:
Actually multiple candidates will have money, unlike in 2012. Jeb might have the most money but that won't translate into votes. Especially with his immigration stance. I expect Jeb to be roundly rejected in many of the more conservative states, and eventually it'll become clear that Scott Walker is the best compromise candidate.

Consider the primary/caucus schedule...
http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2016-presidential-primary-schedule-calendar/

Jeb isn't winning Iowa. Maybe he wins NH. If it's true that Romney wants someone other than Jeb to be the nominee, perhaps he'll endorse someone early. I think Scott Walker's midwest appeal could make him the favorite in Minnesota, and maybe a Romney endorsement could nab him Utah; both are on Feb 2nd. A Romney endorsement could also be beneficial in Nevada on February 6th.

South Carolina is next on the 13th of Feb...Jeb isn't winning that. Michigan a week later...another midwest state Walker should do well in (another another state where a Romney endorsement could help). Florida's primary is on March 1st and I honestly think that could be the first big win for Jeb. I just don't think he's a good candidate...
Click to expand...

but how are delegates proportioned? winner take all? With dozens of candidates possibly all winning different states, none of the candidates could have a majority of delegates to get the nomination and a brokered convention is possible where jeb benefits. Split conservative vote: jeb benefits.

Jeb as nominee? you betcha
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Primaries and caucuses before March 1st, it's up to them. March 1st to 15th, they are proportional. After March 15th, winner take all.

Rand Paul has a better chance of winning the nomination before a brokered convention happens.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Kennedy doesn't count because that was a conspiracy that went higher than him, he was just follow LBJ and the East Germany Stasi's orders.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
If you are a Clinton supporter, and want to feel a surge of optimism, consider this challenge: Name a presidential candidate who was in this solid a position at this point in the cycle, and didn't win? (Political historians can argue that one out in the comments.)
Click to expand...

by Steve Singiser/

not me
 
M

Mike M

Nick N
NeoXChaos said:
If you are a Clinton supporter, and want to feel a surge of optimism, consider this challenge: Name a presidential candidate who was in this solid a position at this point in the cycle, and didn't win? (Political historians can argue that one out in the comments.)
Click to expand...
Clinton 2008?
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
NeoXChaos said:
If you are a Clinton supporter, and want to feel a surge of optimism, consider this challenge: Name a presidential candidate who was in this solid a position at this point in the cycle, and didn't win? (Political historians can argue that one out in the comments.)
Click to expand...

Politics is a bit older than the last few cycles
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Despite PD's insistance, I just dont see Scott Walker as Presidential material. Ted Kasich, maybe. But not Scott Walker. Scott has all the charisma of a wet diaper and looks like a sesame st puppet. He does not seem "driven" or forceful...I think a candidate's presence goes a long way towards overcoming any deficits. In my opinion, if he decides to run, he will be Tim Pawlenty of 2016.
 
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