Support NeoGAF

[Y2Kev]

Jebra really could have been something this cycle if he were like a truth teller. Like Ted Cruz is feeding you bullshit, Hillary is not going to prison so let me tell you why I could beat her. Instead he reads off a script written in September 2013. Jebraaaaaa

 

[Holmes]

Every Republican presidential candidate's response to Flint is hideous and sad:

http://www.salon.com/2016/01/21/ted...er_in_flint_but_only_to_anti_abortion_groups/

Horrible.

 

[ugaboga232]

Someone wake me up when the primary is over and the Bernie crazies leave this thread.

Let's not pathologize the side we don't like now (unless you are a board certified psychiatrist in which case I'd love to hear about it because I'm considering it)

When I hear family values I definitely think santorum style family values and not actual family values (whatever those are? love and stuff).

 

[Abinash117]

Someone @ PD.

Obama not feeling the Bern.


http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...6862-obama-2016-dem-primary-isnt-a-2008-redux

“No ... I don't think that's true,” Obama said in an interview with Politico, when asked if he sees Clinton’s chief rival, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), as his alter ego in this year’s race.

In his most extensive comments on the 2016 campaign to date, Obama conceded there are some parallels to the campaign he won eight years ago. He views the race as a contest between Clinton’s experience and Sanders’s novelty and idealism.

Obama said Clinton is “wicked smart and knows every policy inside and out” but said that her years in government are also weakness because it “could make her more cautious and her campaign more prose than poetry.”

“I think Hillary came in with the — both privilege and burden of being perceived as the frontrunner,” Obama said. “And, as a consequence, you know, where they stood at the beginning probably helps to explain why the language sometimes is different.”

Sanders, who has earned plaudits on the left for his focus on the issue of income inequality, “came in with the luxury of being a complete longshot and just letting loose.”

Obama said Clinton and Sanders are “both passionate about giving everybody a shot.” But in a comment aimed at Sanders, Obama said “this job right here, you don’t have the luxury of just focusing on one thing.”

The president also suggested that the Vermont senator has yet to be completely vetted by the media.

“I think that if Bernie won Iowa or won New Hampshire, then you guys are going to do your jobs and, you know, you're going to dig into his proposals and how much they cost and what does it mean, and, you know, how does his tax policy work and he's subjected, then, to a rigor that hasn't happened yet, but that Hillary is very well familiar with.” he said.

 

[The Technomancer]

......................................

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/02/01/the-duel-faceoff-ryan-lizza?mbid=social_twitter

She added, “My husband is in his fifties. He’s got one leg. But he gets out there and works two almost-full-time jobs, seventeen hours every day, Monday through Friday. And he works on the weekends. But there are people out there that we’re paying welfare who’ve got two perfectly good legs, and they just won’t get up off of their tushies to get a job.”

...

you know, I've shied away from using the phrase "voting against their own best interest" lately because I felt it was overly reductive, but I'm not sure how else to describe this

 

[HylianTom]

Obama not feeling the Bern.


http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...6862-obama-2016-dem-primary-isnt-a-2008-redux

I read that article again and it reminds me of our referencing Hillary's 2008 "the skies will open" speech recently.

I have no access to cable right now; is this making any sort of waves on TV? We're running out of media cycles between now and Iowa, and this could be a nice start to the final week..

(I also keep forgetting that there's a non-debate event on tonight.)

 

[User 406]

.

Hey, if militia is considered negatively, maybe this is the opportune time to revisit that whole 2nd amendment thing? :X

Also, put me in the negative bar for "states rights". Our meth labs of democracy don't seem to want to cook up much but new ways to stop women from having abortions and keep black people from voting. And don't get me started on civil asset forfeiture.

 

[NeoXChaos]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/26/u...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

There are even questions about how many of Mr. Sanders’s supporters are actually registered to vote. He has not yet led in an Iowa poll that was conducted using data from voter registration files, the technique preferred by most campaigns but only occasionally used by media pollsters. All but one of the surveys using random digit dialing — a kind of poll that contacts all types of adults, including those who are unregistered — have shown a Sanders lead in the state.

It’s important to remember that voters can register on the day of the caucuses, so Mr. Sanders could overcome a voter registration problem on Feb. 1, caucus day. But the voter registration statistics from 2008 indicate that only a fraction of voters were unregistered before the caucuses. Turnout increased mainly because of voters who were already registered but had not previously participated in the caucuses.

Mr. Sanders’s weakness among “definite” and past voters is underpinned by the crucial demographic divide of the race: age.

There aren’t too many things that affect turnout more than age. Young voters turn out at far lower rates than older voters — even in the elections in which they vote in pretty high numbers. In the 2012 general election, just 45 percent of 18-to-29-year-olds turned out, compared with 72 percent of those over age 65, according to census data. In lower-turnout elections, these figures are even more lopsided. Not even in the 2008 primary season was Mr. Obama able to get the young to vote at near the same rate as older voters.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

I read that article again and it reminds me of our referencing Hillary's 2008 "the skies will open" speech recently.

I have no access to cable right now; is this making any sort of waves on TV? We're running out of media cycles between now and Iowa, and this could be a nice start to the final week..

(I also keep forgetting that there's a non-debate event on tonight.)

I doubt it's going to make much hay since Obama stumping for Hillary a little is entirely unsurprising.

Edit: re that chart: "states rights" and "family values" are entirely right-wing dog whistley code language

 

[East Lake]

You guys need to post links if you're going to picture quote. That said the idea Obama or Clinton are waging trench warfare against corporate interests is laughable. In a fight to the death, with the people who got us elected. The great fight of our age.

That and making sure the Haitians provide us with cheap coffee.

 

[gutter_trash]

I doubt it's going to make much hay since Obama stumping for Hillary a little is entirely unsurprising.

Edit: re that chart: "states rights" and "family values" are entirely right-wing dog whistley code language

your damn right

 

[Abinash117]

I read that article again and it reminds me of our referencing Hillary's 2008 "the skies will open" speech recently.

I have no access to cable right now; is this making any sort of waves on TV? We're running out of media cycles between now and Iowa, and this could be a nice start to the final week..

(I also keep forgetting that there's a non-debate event on tonight.)

I don't think so, but I think it would some news if Obama express support to Hillary even if many people think that's not very unlikely for Obama to support Hillary.

 

[Ogrekiller]

You guys need to post links if you're going to picture quote. That said the idea Obama or Clinton are waging trench warfare against corporate interests is laughable. In a fight to the death, with the people who got us elected. The great fight of our age.

That and making sure the Haitians provide us with cheap coffee.

So now even Obama is thrown under the bus now.

Bernie will suffer the same fate once he gets into office and has to work with corporate interests.

 

[The Technomancer]

“Mr. Trump’s virulent combination of ignorance, emotional instability, demagogy, solipsism and vindictiveness would do more than result in a failed presidency; it could very well lead to national catastrophe,” he warned. “If Mr. Trump heads the Republican Party, it will no longer be a conservative party; it will be an angry, bigoted, populist one." [said Pete Wehner]

Its already been that Pete, you're just noticing for the first time

 

[Roland_Gunner]

You guys need to post links if you're going to picture quote. That said the idea Obama or Clinton are waging trench warfare against corporate interests is laughable. In a fight to the death, with the people who got us elected. The great fight of our age.

If this is the kind of stuff Sanders' supporters are going to keep pushing Bloomberg may have a shot after all.

 

[FiggyCal]

So now even Obama is thrown under the bus now.

Bernie will suffer the same fate once he gets into office and has to work with corporate interests.

Obama's administration has done a lot of bad things. It's not throwing him under the bus to point it out.

 

[East Lake]

Are we living in a world where Obama isn't heavily reliant on corporate interests?

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon made calls to lawmakers on Thursday urging them to support the “cromnibus” spending bill, House Financial Services Committee ranking member Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) told reporters.

Dimon's involvement came amid progressive outrage that the House cromnibus included a provision that they said would weaken Wall Street regulations.

"I think we got hurt when Jamie Dimon and the president started to whip," Waters told reporters after the vote. "That's when I think we lost some votes."
"What does it say? It just seems very odd," Waters said. "It is just very strange that the two of them would be working for the support of this bill."

The Washington Post first reported news of Dimon's involvement in the negotiations.

The House voted to approve a $1.1 trillion bill funding most of the government through September on a 219-206 vote. Fifty-seven Democrats voted for the bill, while 139 Democrats — including Waters — opposed it.

Waters and progressives opposed the budget due to changes to the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Law that were supported by Dimon and other big banks.

When asked if she thought that Obama had sold out to Wall Street, Waters replied: "That's not for me to determine. I know that the president was whipping. I know that Jamie Dimon was whipping and calling directly into members' offices. And that's odd. That's an odd combination."

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/226907-jpmorgan-ceo-helped-whip-dem-votes

I'll be ready to eat crow when this happens for Bernie.

 

[Armaros]

Are we living in a world where Obama isn't heavily reliant on corporate interests?

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/226907-jpmorgan-ceo-helped-whip-dem-votesI'll be ready to eat crow when this happens for Bernie.

It's called running a government.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

I'm just amazed that "state's rights!" survived as a term post-Civil War. It really says something about how hard the Confederates worked to reframe the Civil War.

 

[FiggyCal]

It's called running a government.

There has to be a better way!

 

[East Lake]

*With business interests first. There shouldn't be delusions about it.

 

[Y2Kev]

And that is because he is a pro business democrat! TRICKED YALL IN 08

 

[pigeon]

Are we living in a world where Obama isn't heavily reliant on corporate interests?

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/226907-jpmorgan-ceo-helped-whip-dem-votes

I'll be ready to eat crow when this happens for Bernie.

That article and bill are from 2014.

It's been a year. What are the negative consequences of that provision? Can you explain how Wall Street has gotten less safe in its trading as a result of it?

 

[Holmes]

It's been fun and interesting to watch Clinton's potential VP prospects all on the campaign trail over the past few days. Castro's been in Nevada, Iowa (where he appeared with her) and New Hampshire today. Booker was in Iowa yesterday and had a rally with her. Kaine's also been in Iowa recently. I really think it'll be one of those three.

 

[East Lake]

That article and bill are from 2014.

It's been a year. What are the negative consequences of that provision? Can you explain how Wall Street has gotten less safe in its trading as a result of it?

Sure? Regulation changes might not show up as economic disasters in one years time, but you might know more than I do.

So, about that provision. One of the goals of financial reform was to stop banks from taking big risks with depositors’ money. Why? Well, bank deposits are insured against loss, and this creates a well-known problem of “moral hazard”: If banks are free to gamble, they can play a game of heads we win, tails the taxpayers lose. That’s what happened after savings-and-loan institutions were deregulated in the 1980s, and promptly ran wild.

Dodd-Frank tried to limit this kind of moral hazard in various ways, including a rule barring insured institutions from dealing in exotic securities, the kind that played such a big role in the financial crisis. And that’s the rule that has just been rolled back.

Now, this isn’t the death of financial reform. In fact, I’d argue that regulating insured banks is something of a sideshow, since the 2008 crisis was brought on mainly by uninsured institutions like Lehman Brothers and A.I.G. The really important parts of reform involve consumer protection and the enhanced ability of regulators both to police the actions of “systemically important” financial institutions (which needn’t be conventional banks) and to take such institutions into receivership at times of crisis.

But what Congress did is still outrageous — and both sides of the ideological divide should agree. After all, even if you believe (in defiance of the lessons of history) that financial institutions can be trusted to police themselves, even if you believe the grotesquely false narrative that bleeding-heart liberals caused the financial crisis by pressuring banks to lend to poor people, especially minority borrowers, you should be against letting Wall Street play games with government-guaranteed funds. What just went down isn’t about free-market economics; it’s pure crony capitalism.

And sure enough, Citigroup literally wrote the deregulation language that was inserted into the funding bill.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/15/o...maged-by-the-budget-bill.html?ref=todayspaper

 

[RustyNails]

Where's the townhall OT for tonight? Will be an interesting talk. Hillary never struck me as particularly smart when put on the spot, at least so far. For example, biggest enemies? Republicans! Why are you different? Cuz I'm a woman! How are you not like our abuela? Your abuela is not running for president! Just duds all around. Sanders is also bad but at least doesn't try to go for the wink wink appraoch.

 

[disastermouse]

That article and bill are from 2014.

It's been a year. What are the negative consequences of that provision? Can you explain how Wall Street has gotten less safe in its trading as a result of it?

Yep. This shit totally matures in a year. The results should be evident by now, yeah?

I mean, it was only SIX MONTHS after the repeal of Glass-Stegall that the Great Recession happened.

Oh. Wait.

 

[disastermouse]

There's a difference between discussing Policy issues and discussing in-depth details about Marxism. PoliGAF is about Politics and Policy within the confines of the US Government--something the intricacies of Marxism have almost nothing to do with. Half of the back and fourth exchanges were arguing semantics, and we went like a full page without anything mentioning US Politics, Policy, or the Politicians tied into them.

And? It's hardly OT to talk about economics in a politics thread, seeing as they are so entwined. With Bernie and the 'socialist!' discussion, I don't think it's a huge leap to, you know, talk about Marx.

 

[disastermouse]

.

April of what year?

 

[B-Dubs]

Where's the townhall OT for tonight? Will be an interesting talk. Hillary never struck me as particularly smart when put on the spot, at least so far. For example, biggest enemies? Republicans! Why are you different? Cuz I'm a woman! How are you not like our abuela? Your abuela is not running for president! Just duds all around. Sanders is also bad but at least doesn't try to go for the wink wink appraoch.

I'm putting it up in a little bit.

 

[disastermouse]

I like buying and owning stuff, though. And I don't want to work for a nationalized software firm.

How would you feel about working at a software firm you owned along with everyone else that worked there? Maybe it's not for you, but if it was an option, the wage competition would still help you as a rented employee.

Also, socialism is not about the government owning your toothbrush.

 

[disastermouse]

I thought we were doing a pretty good job.



Cool, the Pol in poligaf doesn't stand for policy or politics, but polls.

I'll note that and shut up.

We did do okay. Not a single pot-shot fired, IMHO.

 

[pigeon]

Yep. This shit totally matures in a year. The results should be evident by now, yeah?

I mean, it was only SIX MONTHS after the repeal of Glass-Stegall that the Great Recession happened.

Oh. Wait.

I'm not asking for you to point to a financial crisis. But I also don't think it's unreasonable to say, hey, if you think this regulatory change will lead people to do bad things, and then they make the regulatory change, to ask whether people are leaning more in the direction of doing those bad things now. That's, like, pretty data-driven I feel. Otherwise you can just wait for a global financial meltdown and say it was because of the regulatory change you don't like, just like you did now with suggesting that Glass-Steagall repeal caused the Great Recession when there's really no evidence that that's true. After all, investment banks were perfectly capable of creating an interdependent web of derivatives based on a speculative bubble without being merged with consumer banks! And the consequences would be more or less the same.

 

[Roland_Gunner]

Yep. This shit totally matures in a year. The results should be evident by now, yeah?

I mean, it was only SIX MONTHS after the repeal of Glass-Stegall that the Great Recession happened.

Oh. Wait.

Passing new legislation with barriers similar to Glass - Stegall is probably a good idea but leaving GS in place would have done very, very little to prevent the Great Recession. The housing bubble was driven by financial instruments that could easily bypass those restrictions and many of the key actors including Fannie Mae and AIG weren't even regulated by GS.

 

[Makai]

How would you feel about working at a software firm you owned along with everyone else that worked there? Maybe it's not for you, but if it was an option, the wage competition would still help you as a rented employee.

Also, socialism is not about the government owning your toothbrush.

If I own company stock, I am an owner of the company. Stock options are a standard benefit.

Government firms dominate the socialist marketplace. This is really not a good fit for the fast-moving "startup" industry.

 

[gutter_trash]

Loto-Quebec has non-sporting bets available today for the Presidential Election with 4 different bets. (Mise-O-Jeux)

I bet 100 on Trump winning the GOP nomination = win x1.90
I bet 100 on Clinton wining it all = win x1.70

 

[Makai]

Trump’s campaign manager: If Fox won’t remove Megyn Kelly as moderator, maybe we’ll hold our own townhall on Thursday night

 

[RastaMentality]

I feel Trump skipping a debate to hold his own thing would actually end up beneficial for him since it'd absolutely dominate the news cycle.

 

[Makai]

I feel Trump skipping a debate to hold his own thing would actually end up beneficial for him since it'd absolutely dominate the news cycle.

Crazy to risk it right before the primary.

 

[PBY]

I feel Trump skipping a debate to hold his own thing would actually end up beneficial for him since it'd absolutely dominate the news cycle.

And you just know every network would fall over themselves to televise that shit.

 

[PBY]

Also HARRY!
Harry Enten ‏@ForecasterEnten 35s35 seconds ago
The trendline for Cruz in Iowa is bad.

Harry Enten ‏@ForecasterEnten 30s31 seconds ago
Last ARG IA poll also had Sanders +3... That race may have stabilized somewhat.

I think its happening guys.

 

[disastermouse]

If I own company stock, I am an owner of the company. Stock options are a standard benefit.

Government firms dominate the socialist marketplace. This is really not a good fit for the fast-moving "startup" industry.

Can you get fired? If the answer is 'yes', you don't own shit. Your stock ownership is a wage in leu of an actual wage, not something used to determine the management of your company at the level of ownership that you possess. Also, the 'fast-moving startup' industries (there's more than one, yeah?) are totally incapable of funding long-term ventures or acting against the profit motive for the sake of the society or species as a whole. Also, I'd like to point out that if government firms own everything, there really isn't a 'marketplace'.

Central planning is an aspect of many socialist ideas, but it's not the only one and certainly the bureaucracy-dominated models provided by the USSR and Pre-Reform China are not considered models to emulate in the greater socialists community.

 

[Roland_Gunner]

Crazy to risk it right before the primary.

Trump's like the football team that wins by passing every play. He can't start trying to run out the clock now. Gotta keep pushing, at least through Super Tuesday.

 

[Into]

Trump IS this election. He is by far and away the most interesting person on that stage, for any party.

You can screech about how he is Hitler 2.0 til you run out of breath, but even on a leftist forum, Trump is the talk of the town.

They will cover him holding a speech in a sewer at this point. And i dont mean downtown New Jersey.

Also Ted is Ded it seems.

 

[Makai]

Can you get fired? If the answer is 'yes', you don't own shit.

Then does nobody own public companies? Even CEOs get fired.

I do not want to work at a company where nobody can get fired.

 

[Teggy]

Trump’s campaign manager: If Fox won’t remove Megyn Kelly as moderator, maybe we’ll hold our own townhall on Thursday night

Why doesn't the RNC run their own "debates" where the candidates ask and answer their own questions. It's just a sham at this point anyway.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Id suppose my biggest issue of the election cycle this time around is that it's not really about the issues or what is the best plan to solve them as much as people seemingly make it out to be. Its all about campaign donations and who gets what from where and what that says about your trust worthiness.

For all the talk about wallstreet I have not seen Bernie or his campaign talk exactly about why Hillarys plan for wallstreet reform won't work or why theirs is better. It's just an assumption that she won't do anything based on how she has raised money and how much she made in speaking fees as if that's indicative of why she won't do anything as president.

We've seen this before and know that it isn't true, politicians work against people and corporations who donate them all the time.It still is an issue however and it does play a huge part in how things are run here, and things really should be done to work against it but I can't help but feel like it's being overplayed as to how much discussion time it's even worth.

The problem with campaign finance becoming more important than what your actual policies are is that it doesn't translate to support of the Democratic Party. It's one reason why a lot of people will jump from Bernie to Trump if he isn't the nominee. "Why vote for lying shill Hillary when she gets large campaign donations ? Atleast Trump won't be bought out like she is." Is what a lot of people are thinking/saying who are getting swept up in the 'political revolution'.

 

[Makai]

Why doesn't the RNC run their own "debates" where the candidates ask and answer their own questions. It's just a sham at this point anyway.

Every debate is an RNC debate.

 

[B-Dubs]

And you just know every network would fall over themselves to televise that shit.

Exactly, if FOX doesn't bend they just play into Trump's narrative. If they do bend they still play into his narrative. He's managed to create a no lose situation for himself.

 

[Teggy]

Every debate is an RNC debate.

You know what I mean. An RNC debate where everyone involved is just a party member.

Trump campaign manager: "Mr. Trump, should voters support you because you are a winner and Cruz is a loser?"

Trump: "yes"

Trump campaign manager: "would you like Mr. Cruz to respond?"

Trump: "no"

Trump campaign manager: "very well, next question"