PoliGAF 2015-2016 |OT3| If someone named PhoenixDark leaves your party, call the cops

Status
Not open for further replies.
B-Dubs said:
When everyone else has hands full of jokers that may just be enough.

Seriously, it's impossible to get a real picture of what's going on with him on the ground.
Click to expand...

http://thefederalist.com/2015/12/16...-why-donald-trump-leads-and-how-he-will-fail/

Second, a crucial concept in Boyd’s work is ambiguity. An opponent who wishes to counter your approach will want to ascertain your intentions, capabilities, and movements, and respond accordingly. It becomes much more difficult to do this if you are able to keep your intentions and actions unclear to the opponent for as long as possible.

Indeed, the ideal Boydian approach is to keep the opponent so confused he isn’t really sure who he’s fighting, where the battlefield begins or ends, or even if he’s in a fight at all! This is not a novel concept—it’s as old as Sun Tzu—but when combined with speed, ambiguity plays a crucial role in the OODA Loop in keeping the opponent from becoming oriented as a result of his observations.
Click to expand...
 
Wilsongt said:
Tom Cotton apparently feels the Bern. He endorses Bernie, LOL
Click to expand...

Response from the Sanders Campaign:
3FFEZur.gif
 
Y2Kev said:
I've now seen every possible argument about Trump's organization, especially in Iowa. It sucks! It's great! He's a master! He's a joke! He has all of Santorum and Huckabee's field captains! Ivanka is the only one on the field!
Click to expand...

Come on man. You saved Last Guardian. Work some of that magic on Jeb.
 
Rubio is not happening and Christie is done. I'm telling you Jeb will consolidate the establishment lane in NH.
 
The gloves are off between Trump and Cruz. Trump brought up Cruz' citizenship and Cruz says Trump has "jumped the shark"

Donald Trump: Ted Cruz's citizenship could 'be a big problem'
Birther-ism, Part II?

Donald Trump, who famously questioned whether President Obama was really born in Hawaii, is now raising questions about the Canadian birth of Republican presidential campaign rival Ted Cruz.

“Republicans are going to have to ask themselves the question: ‘Do we want a candidate who could be tied up in court for two years?’" Trump told The Washington Post in reference to the Texas senator. "That’d be a big problem ... It’d be a very precarious one for Republicans because he’d be running and the courts may take a long time to make a decision. You don’t want to be running and have that kind of thing over your head.”

While born in Canada, Cruz and allies have said he is eligible for the presidency because his mother's status as an American citizen made him a citizen upon his birth. His father was born in Cuba. Since his election to the U.S. Senate from Texas in 2012, Cruz has released his birth certificate and renounced his Canadian citizenship.

Still, some critics of Cruz have suggested taking the issue to court.

“I’d hate to see something like that get in his way," Trump told the Post. "But a lot of people are talking about it and I know that even some states are looking at it very strongly, the fact that he was born in Canada and he has had a double passport.”
Click to expand...
Cruz responded to Trump's jibe with a tweet showing a famous scene from the 1970s sitcom Happy Days, one in which the character Fonzie jumps over a school of sharks on water skis — inspiring the term "jump the shark," used to describe the moment at which a television show begins to lose its quality.
Click to expand...
 
Wilsongt said:
I should expect nothing less from Conservatives, but mocking Obama because be showed emotion when he talked about Newtown is disgusting.
Click to expand...

I've seen:

"Obama looks weak crying. Real men/leaders don't cry!"

"Look at those fake tears."

"Oh, he'll cry for Newtown, but not for the victims of blackonblack crime in Chicago?"
 
Jack Remington said:
It's already almost a month old and painfully outdated. The military stuff is great, but none of what the author predicted for Trump looks like it will come true any time soon.
Click to expand...

Yea I just finished it off and once he got done with describing Trump's basic strategy, which was great stuff, I feel like it all fell apart. If it's true that Trump's infrastructure is good, or at least serviceable, then everything after the description of Obama vs McCain is bunk.
 
I loathe the vast majority of what Ted Cruz stands for, but damn if he doesn't seem to have a decent sense of humor.

===

Also:
RTX211IR.jpg
Click to expand...
My theory? She's just awoken from a hypnotic spell, and has now realized where she is and what she's doing.
 
Iolo said:
I don't think the article fell apart at the end, but in that vein, it may come as no surprise to you that the link was tweeted out by Nate Silver himself.
Click to expand...

I'd complain about Nate but it's probably thanks to him that Trump shares were as low as they were.
 
B-Dubs said:
Oh man, this is it. This is the big fight we've all been waiting to see. If Trump can take him down before Iowa then this is all over.
Click to expand...

Don't pee your pants just yet b-dubs. Jeb still has this.

In other news:

Maggie Haberman ‏@maggieNYT 30m30 minutes ago
What are the multiple events that keep Trump from winning NH at this point? Just seems the hour is growing a bit late for those events...
Click to expand...
 
I really, truly hate how NRO does not cite its sources, or even LINK to its sources, as other publications do:

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...bc2b&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

None of these things is true. While rape is a very serious problem for women in their late teens and 20s, the best data show that roughly one in 30 (not one in five, as Obama and his allies claim) women are sexually assaulted while in college; that they are safer on campus than off; that the campus rape rate has plunged since 1997; and that false or likely false accusations are not uncommon, albeit impossible to quantify with confidence. On the last point, accusations against innocent students seem to be increasing at colleges, where accusers are urged by campus sex bureaucrats, professors, and activists to report dubious or simply false allegations. Institutions of higher learning also tend to define rape and sexual assault far more broadly than either the criminal law or common understanding, as in the suggestion that sex with a partner who in any degree is intoxicated constitutes sexual assault.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily even believe that campuses can handle sexual assault in the most judicious manner, but if you're going to say that "accusations against innocent students seem to be increasing at colleges", you better give me a peer-reviewed link for that.
 
ivysaur12 said:
I really, truly hate how NRO does not cite its sources, or even LINK to its sources, as other publications do:

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...bc2b&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter



I don't necessarily even believe that campuses can handle sexual assault in the most judicious manner, but if you're going to say that "accusations against innocent students seem to be increasing at colleges", you better give me a peer-reviewed link for that.
Click to expand...

That's just really shitty journalism.
 
Here we go!

Fairfax, Va. – The executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox, released the following statement on Tuesday regarding President Barack Obama's Executive Gun Control Order:

Once again, President Obama has chosen to engage in political rhetoric, instead of offering meaningful solutions to our nation's pressing problems. Today's event also represents an ongoing attempt to distract attention away from his lack of a coherent strategy to keep the American people safe from terrorist attack.

The American people do not need more emotional, condescending lectures that are completely devoid of facts. The men and women of the National Rifle Association take a back seat to no one when it comes to keeping our communities safe. But the fact is that President Obama's proposals would not have prevented any of the horrific events he mentioned. The timing of this announcement, in the eighth and final year of his presidency, demonstrates not only political exploitation but a fundamental lack of seriousness.

The proposed executive actions are ripe for abuse by the Obama Administration, which has made no secret of its contempt for the Second Amendment. The NRA will continue to fight to protect the fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms as guaranteed under our Constitution. We will not allow law-abiding gun owners to be harassed or intimidated for engaging in lawful, constitutionally-protected activity – nor will we allow them to become scapegoats for President Obama's failed policies.
Click to expand...

https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...mas-proposed-executive-actions-on-gun-control

aafa0cca875afc1eb17a955159b1b2f0.jpg
 
January 2017.

Fairfax, Va. – The executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox, released the following statement on Tuesday regarding President Clinton's Executive Gun Control Order:
Click to expand...

Once again, President Clinton has chosen to continue to engage in Former President Obama' political rhetoric, instead of offering meaningful solutions to our nation's pressing problems. Today's event also represents an ongoing attempt to distract attention away from her lack of a coherent strategy to keep the American people safe from terrorist attack.

The American people do not need more emotional, condescending lectures that are completely devoid of facts. The men and women of the National Rifle Association take a back seat to no one when it comes to keeping our communities safe. But the fact is that Former President Obama's proposals now continued by President Clinton would not have prevented any of the horrific events he mentioned. The timing of this announcement, in the first year of her presidency, demonstrates not only political exploitation but a fundamental lack of seriousness.

The proposed executive actions are ripe for abuse by the Clinton Administration, which has made no secret of its contempt for the Second Amendment. The NRA will continue to fight to protect the fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms as guaranteed under our Constitution. We will not allow law-abiding gun owners to be harassed or intimidated for engaging in lawful, constitutionally-protected activity – nor will we allow them to become scapegoats for now President Clinton's failed policies.
Click to expand...
 
Sam Wang has written an overview of the GOP race's current status. He started off the cycle very skeptical of Trump, but has now shifted somewhat, concluding that the candidates in #1 and #2 are in really good shape. Rubio (and the others) might be in danger.

Sam Wang said:
This emphasizes the fact that based on polling data, Donald Trump is in as strong a position to get his party’s nomination as Hillary Clinton in 2016, George W. Bush in 2000, or Al Gore in 2000.
Click to expand...

His piece lightly touches-upon one of the central questions about predicting this cycle: does a traditional data model fit?

http://election.princeton.edu/2016/01/05/what-december-polls-can-tell-us-about-the-gop-nomination/

I hope Sam is more active over the coming year. He's pretty interesting on Twitter, and does some really solid work.


===

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-the-gop-establishment-blowing-its-anti-trump-campaign/

And now 538 has published its own fresh article, asking:
Is The GOP Establishment Blowing Its Anti-Trump Campaign?

The confidence that a Trump win is improbable seems to be fading a bit. They seem genuinely stumped. And a bit incredulous that the GOP's party entities haven't moved more aggressively to bring Trump down.
 
HylianTom said:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-the-gop-establishment-blowing-its-anti-trump-campaign/

And now 538 has published its own fresh article, asking:
Is The GOP Establishment Blowing Its Anti-Trump Campaign?

The confidence that a Trump win is improbable seems to be fading a bit. They seem genuinely stumped. And a bit incredulous that the GOP's party entities haven't moved more aggressively to bring Trump down.
Click to expand...

natesilver: It can be hard to hit candidates on electability — until they actually start losing. But you could certainly hit Trump on the fact that he’s not a very reliable conservative. Run a campaign around how he’s an opportunist and “just another politician” who will say anything to get elected. How he’s not a true conservative — in fact, not any kind of conservative at all.
Click to expand...

Didn't Jeb try this strategy already? The Republican base doesn't seem to care and I could see another similar attack backfiring on them.
 
Veritigo_X said:
Didn't Jeb try this strategy already? The Republican base doesn't seem to care and I could see another similar attack backfiring on them.
Click to expand...
Yup, if anything, the base seems to treat such attacks as endorsements of a candidate's street cred. That's part of what made me smile about the article and this situation; everyone involved seems stumped.

Trump is like a new type of Pokemon; the party is still trying to figure out what his weakness is. 😂
 
HylianTom said:
Yup, if anything, the base seems to treat such attacks as endorsements of a candidate's street cred. That's part of what made me smile about the article and this situation; everyone involved seems stumped.

Trump is like a new type of Pokemon; the party is still trying to figure out what his weakness is. 😂
Click to expand...

Except I feel like the establishment candidates are all the same element type and Trump isn't weak against it.

At this point the party is probably hoping that losing Iowa will cause Trump to collapse, even though I think it would be easy for him to downplay that loss by pointing out Santorum/Huckabee wins. If he ends up winning they will probably downplay the win in a similar way.
 
Veritigo_X said:
Except I feel like the establishment candidates are all the same element type and Trump isn't weak against it.

At this point the party is probably hoping that losing Iowa will cause Trump to collapse, even though I think it would be easy for him to downplay that loss by pointing out Santorum/Huckabee wins. If he ends up winning they will probably downplay the win in a similar way.
Click to expand...
Well yeah. The republicans are poison type, spewing their toxic sludge bombs. But they can't break his iron defense because Trump is immune as a steel type like all the buildings he builds because he's a builder who'll Make America Great Again. Trump 2016!
 
Veritigo_X said:
Except I feel like the establishment candidates are all the same element type and Trump isn't weak against it.

At this point the party is probably hoping that losing Iowa will cause Trump to collapse, even though I think it would be easy for him to downplay that loss by pointing out Santorum/Huckabee wins. If he ends up winning they will probably downplay the win in a similar way.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

If he loses in Iowa, I'm betting that he has something up his sleeve to capture positive (well.. positive for him) media attention for the following week. He'll pull some kind of stunt that will rob Cruz of attention and keep himself in the headlines for the following crucial cycles.

(At least, that's what I'd do if I were running his style of campaign..)
 
Ashley Killough @KilloughCNN
Bush gave Zacharie, 13, a tiny turtle & told him "slow and steady wins the race." Bush carries them in his pocket.
Click to expand...

Ashley Killough ‏@KilloughCNN
Bush gives out the turtles to kids. "I got the little baby Jesus, I got my rosary beads and I got 3 turtles," he pulled out from his pocket
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/KilloughCNN/status/684753696610201601

He's totally got this. I wish there was a video to go with it. It'd make an amazing Vic Burger Vine.
 
Wait.. is Jeb handing-out king cake babies?!

010612_kingcake_sa_2.jpg

(He should have king cake at his events, especially starting today - the beginning of Mardi Gras season!)
 
Is there anyone living in a state so far off in the primary calendar that they would be willing to vote for Trump if he's still a factor?
 
HylianTom said:
Sam Wang has written an overview of the GOP race's current status. He started off the cycle very skeptical of Trump, but has now shifted somewhat, concluding that the candidates in #1 and #2 are in really good shape. Rubio (and the others) might be in danger.



His piece lightly touches-upon one of the central questions about predicting this cycle: does a traditional data model fit?

http://election.princeton.edu/2016/01/05/what-december-polls-can-tell-us-about-the-gop-nomination/

I hope Sam is more active over the coming year. He's pretty interesting on Twitter, and does some really solid work.
Click to expand...
I'm looking forward to reading more on this.
Unless Marco Rubio gets the lead out, he is on the edge of serious trouble.

The Republican Party’s state-by-state delegate selection rules penalize candidates who fall below a threshold of support that is often 15% or 20%. In a future post I will examine how this Procrustean rule affects each candidate’s likely delegate total. By simulating the state-by-state rules, I will show that a candidate with Rubio’s current level of support (12-13% nationally, in Iowa, and in New Hampshire) is at risk of having virtually no support by Super Tuesday, a major turning point of the campaign. Stay tuned for a full explanation with graphs.
Click to expand...
 
Sea Manky said:
This was linked in that Federalist article: http://www.nationaljournal.com/s/74221/return-middle-american-radical

The ghost of George Wallace haunts us still.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Wallace, Buchanan, etc. railing against the rich is something that's not usually mentioned; usually we just hear about the minorities.

Wallace fought integration, but he also complained that “the present tax laws were written to protect the Rockefellers, the Fords, the Carnegies, and the Mellons.” Buchanan defended “Middle America” against “atrocities” committed by an “invasion” from the south of “illegal aliens”; yet he also foresaw “a battle between the hired men of the Money Power who long ago abandoned as quaint but useless old ideas of nationhood—and populists, patriots, and nationalists who want no part of [Clinton administration Treasury Secretary] Robert Rubin’s world.”
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
UK PoliGAF |OT3| - Strong and Stable Government? No. Coalition Of Chaos!
37 38 39 40 41
2K
255K
firehawk12 replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT16| Unpresidented
395 396 397 398 399
20K
1M
PKrockin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT15| Orange is the New Black
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
The Technomancer replied
Top Bottom