Support NeoGAF

[B-Dubs]

Everyone knows the only way this works for Trump is if he ends up on the debate, right?

If advertisers really have started to pull out then FOX will fold within the day.

ART OF THE DEAL

 

[VanMardigan]

Trump is going to burn the house down. Took down governors, senators, Ailes, National Review, Macy's, Miss Universe.... Who is next? Murdoch? Clinton? Iowa?

 

[teiresias]

So Wells Fargo has pulled their GOP debate ads from the next debate, no reason given. FOX News to fold and give Trump everything within the next 24 hours.

Corporate and Wall Street money further dictating the kind of discourse we can have as part of our political system here in the USA. Debates and and the like should not be beholden to corporate sponsorship and ad-time buys to exist during campaign seasons.

 

[Cybit]

Amazing. I'm no 'Clinton plant' conspiracist, but Donald causing such chaos in both the GOP establishment/electorate and the Fox News world is just too good. Too good.

The Clinton Plant might be the conspiracy I can see at this point. He's deliberately targeting and ripping apart the biggest alliance in the GOP.

 

[Into]

If he holds a event where money is going to charity for, eh, vets or something. He ends up looking like an angel.

Meanwhile the republican debate is full of people who are also asking for money, for themselves.

That said, i think Fox will fold.

I have not read Art Of The Deal, but i imagine there is chapter about how to put yourself in a situation whever regardless of what happens - you win.

 

[PBY]

If he holds a event where money is going to charity for, eh, vets or something. He ends up looking like an angel.

Meanwhile the republican debate is full of people who are also asking for money, for themselves.

That said, i think Fox will fold.

I don't think Fox can fold. It's not like he wants Kelly to tone it down - he wants her off the whole fucking debate. That's a lot to plan for, and they would look dumb as fuck if they took her off. Not to mention she'd be pissed.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Mounmoth IA poll for Democrats is tomorrow as well as IA, NH & SC for D and R by NBC/Marist. PPP IA has to be by the end of the week along with DMR.

As for Trump GAF:

Mark Murray ‏@mmurraypolitics 2m2 minutes ago
Key from Monmouth IA poll:
200K turnout: Trump 32, Cruz 21
170K turnout: Trump 30, Cruz 23
130K turnout: Trump 26, Cruz 26

Was 121K in '12

 

[B-Dubs]

I don't think Fox can fold. It's not like he wants Kelly to tone it down - he wants her off the whole fucking debate. That's a lot to plan for, and they would look dumb as fuck if they took her off. Not to mention she'd be pissed.

If enough advertisers pull out they'll have no choice. Everyone knows Trump is the only reason people watch these things and they'll be leaving millions on the table if they do it without him.

 

[Y2Kev]

Everyone knows the only way this works for Trump is if he ends up on the debate, right?

I agree but MORNING JOE disagrees and his political instinct is flawless

Also trump can't do the debate without MEANINGFUL concessions or he will be branded a huge loser.

 

[brainchild]

So you see no difference at all in getting people to vote FOR YOU in a primary vs getting them to vote for SOME OTHER GUY in a midterm?

Keeping in mind that some other guy is probably going to be a filthy corporate establishment moderate running. Somehow I have a really hard time believing a large number of Sanders supporters will be turning up to vote in a situation like that.

No, there is a difference, but I believe that the a person who participates in primary caucuses has a better understanding of the importance of voting in the mid-terms than a person who doesn't. This is especially true of Bernie supporters who do so because they understand that this is not just about voting for Bernie, but partaking in a 'political revolution' where they are actively trying to improve things like voter turnout. This is the mindset of many of the early Sanders supporters.

Bernie has done well in setting the goals and expectations of his supporters. Of course, his supporters aren't guaranteed to follow through, but IF they do in the primaries, I don't believe they'd be doing it just because they like Bernie. He may be charismatic, but not in the same way that Obama is charismatic. If Bernie is able to get his supporters to be more proactive and politically engaged, it will be because he's educated them on the importance of being politically engaged.

 

[Poodlestrike]

Also, that article from the NYmag is terrible. Sanders is arguing that the wealthy have a disproportionately large impact on the American political system. The NYmag's response is to say "yes, but not all things are decided by the wealthy, therefore you are wrong". This is like saying to someone who has correctly observed that your house is on fire and something should be done about this that the fire isn't causing all of the collapse, some of it was just rotten timbers, so there's no point doing anything about the fire.

That's... a pretty charitable interpretation of Sanders' stances. I can't really think of an instance where his first (and generally only) take on things wasn't "fix wealth disparity and [problem] disappears."

The piece also doesn't seem to say that it'd be pointless to reduce the influence of money in politics, just that it's only one piece of the puzzle. Which implies that it is a piece, and will need to be addressed.

 

[pigeon]

On the topic of whether this is an anti-establishment wave election, something I know is dear to PoliGAF's heart:

Donald Trump is angry. Bernie Sanders is angry. And Americans think their neighbors are very angry, too.

Except that they're simply not — or at least, not abnormally angry. Despite the rise of two candidates who have embraced the idea of anger, our country simply isn't unusually angry about how things are going in Washington.

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows just 24 percent of Americans describe themselves as "angry" about the way the federal government works. I say "just," because that's actually on the low end of where that number has been in recent years. (An additional 47 percent describe themselves as "dissatisfied but not angry.")

n October 2013, shortly after the end of the government shutdown, 35 percent of Americans said they were angry. On the eve of the 2014 election, in September of that year, the number was 25 percent.

Despite this, the perception of an angry electorate is catching on quickly — thanks in no small part to Trump and Sanders embracing the term.

A Monmouth University poll released Monday showed that 62 percent of Americans think all or most of their fellow Americans are angry at Washington....

But the numbers just don't back up any of these assertions. Republicans are angrier, yes, but no more so than they have been in recent years. The 35 percent of Republicans who told the Post-ABC poll that they were angry is par for the course — as is the 12 percent of Democrats who said they were angry. And the fact that about 1 in 8 Democrats are angry can't really be made to account for the rise of Sanders.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-voter/?postshare=8991453825308154&tid=ss_tw

 

[Kyosaiga]

Am I the only one here who hates the Young Turks? They've been fellating sanders to the point where one point they even had the nerve to Argue that's he'd be the next FDR if elected.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Am I the only one here who hates the Young Turks? They've been fellating sanders to the point where one point they even had the nerve to Argue that's he'd be the next FDR if elected.

No worse than Devine thinking Bernie's going to usher in a Johnson Landslide.

 

[Makai]

Fox News’s Greta Van Susteren polled her viewers on whether or not they will watch Thursday’s debate with Trump not participating.

More than 83 percent have said they will not be watching the debate.

 

[PBY]

Fox News’s Greta Van Susteren polled her viewers on whether or not they will watch Thursday’s debate with Trump not participating.

More than 83 percent have said they will not be watching the debate.

rekt

 

[Holmes]

Am I the only one here who hates the Young Turks? They've been fellating sanders to the point where one point they even had the nerve to Argue that's he'd be the next FDR if elected.

Yeah my husband listens to it all the time. It's pretty delusional and Cenk is just too much.

 

[B-Dubs]

Am I the only one here who hates the Young Turks? They've been fellating sanders to the point where one point they even had the nerve to Argue that's he'd be the next FDR if elected.

So that's where DanB got that line :lol

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Am I the only one here who hates the Young Turks? They've been fellating sanders to the point where one point they even had the nerve to Argue that's he'd be the next FDR if elected.

I never bothered with them, even before they became a propaganda station for Sanders.

 

[Makai]

Am I the only one here who hates the Young Turks? They've been fellating sanders to the point where one point they even had the nerve to Argue that's he'd be the next FDR if elected.

I liked them when I was a kid but analysis is too superficial. I listen to Sam Seder now, who does a better job of bridging the gap between comedy and analysis - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gD5maVdM--s

 

[Coriolanus]

You're right, it isn't ignorance. The fucker is intentionally misleading people to satisfy his own personal ambitions.

Sorta? His personal ambitions seem to be to make the country a better place, so...?

I mean, those voters are idiots. If you cant even mislead them into favouring you, what does that make you?

Tactic is hope and change 2.0

 

[Into]

Okaaay which one of is this?

Man Charged for Throwing Tomatoes at Donald Trump During Iowa City Stop

 

[B-Dubs]

Okaaay which one of is this?

Man Charged for Throwing Tomatoes at Donald Trump During Iowa City Stop

If I did it they never would have caught me.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

I wonder if that's a fake last name to play on the "ayy lmao" meme.


Either way, kudos to Andrew.

 

[brainchild]

Am I the only one here who hates the Young Turks? They've been fellating sanders to the point where one point they even had the nerve to Argue that's he'd be the next FDR if elected.

I don't hate them, but they're clearly biased. I do appreciate their candor though.

 

[Bowdz]

Fox News’s Greta Van Susteren polled her viewers on whether or not they will watch Thursday’s debate with Trump not participating.

More than 83 percent have said they will not be watching the debate.

I feel we all have a responsibility to the eventual Dem nominee to not watch the debate. I won't turn to Fox at all tomorrow.

 

[Makai]

I feel we all have a responsibility to the eventual Dem nominee to not watch the debate. I won't turn to Fox at all tomorrow.

I don't think ratings count the stream.

 

[Wilsongt]

of course.

No lies detected. They are rabid. Reminds me of the Ron Paulites.

 

[Thequietone]

Okaaay which one of is this?

Man Charged for Throwing Tomatoes at Donald Trump During Iowa City Stop

Is that his real last name?

Spoiler

Aaay lmao

 

[ErasureAcer]

Why Bernie Sanders doesn't participate in organized religion.

Washington Post:

“I think everyone believes in God in their own ways, “ he said. “To me, it means that all of us are connected, all of life is connected, and that we are all tied together.”

The proper view to have.

 

[Gotchaye]

Everyone knows the only way this works for Trump is if he ends up on the debate, right?

I think it's pretty likely that this works out for him regardless. It's not like he needs more visibility, and he's going to be mentioned in all of the debate coverage anyway. People will wonder why Trump wasn't at the debate, but the answer is generally going to make him look good to the people he's trying to turn out. I don't think the "coward" attack works here at all, just because of this sense that it's a really dangerous and unconventional move to skip a debate.

This is a really effective way for him to perform "standing up to the establishment", and Fox is helping him sell this with their statements. Meanwhile Cruz was happy to play their game. If the debate's ratings aren't as high as the others' have been Trump gets to declare victory, and any response he's got to whatever happens at the debate is going to get covered too.

 

[Kyosaiga]

No lies detected. They are rabid. Reminds me of the Ron Paulites.

I don't know which I look forward too more. Conservative reaction when Hillary shit stomps trump or rabid Sanders fans salty reactions when he loses the primary

 

[B-Dubs]

I think it's pretty likely that this works out for him regardless. It's not like he needs more visibility, and he's going to be mentioned in all of the debate coverage anyway. People will wonder why Trump wasn't at the debate, but the answer is generally going to make him look good to the people he's trying to turn out. I don't think the "coward" attack works here at all, just because of this sense that it's a really dangerous move to skip a debate.

This is a really effective way for him to perform "standing up to the establishment", and Fox is helping him sell this with their statements. Meanwhile Cruz was happy to play their game. If the debate's ratings aren't as high as the others' have been Trump gets to declare victory, and any response he's got to whatever happens at the debate is going to get covered too.

He should have someone watching the debate for him and piping the attacks into an ear piece so he could respond in real time on the stage of his own event. "Oh, apparently Ted Cruz thinks this, but he's a loser and everyone hates him!" He could just slam them all endlessly.

 

[Frank the Great]

Sorta? His personal ambitions seem to be to make the country a better place, so...?

I mean, those voters are idiots. If you cant even mislead them into favouring you, what does that make you?

Tactic is hope and change 2.0

It is nothing like hope and change. Obama did not run on blatant socialist policies that had zero chance of working. He explicitly ran on making the parties work together to get shit done. Naive, yes, but not intentionally misleading. He earnestly tried to do that when in office.

Bernie, on the other hand, is simply full of shit. He is literally promising to give everyone free stuff, relying upon some non-existant "revolution.". He's full of shit and he knows it. He is simply lying to people at this point.

 

[Kyosaiga]

It is nothing like hope and change. Obama did not run on blatant socialist policies that had zero chance of working. He explicitly ran on making the parties work together to get shit done. Naive, yes, but not intentionally misleading. He earnestly tried to do that when in office.

Bernie, on the other hand, is simply full of shit. He is literally promising to give everyone free stuff, relying upon some non-existant "revolution.". He's full of shit and he knows it. He is simply lying to people at this point.

Yet Bernie has the reputation of being more "honest" than Hillary.

Fucking gross.

 

[NeoXChaos]

I don't know which I look forward too more. Conservative reaction when Hillary shit stomps trump or rabid Sanders fans salty reactions when he loses the primary

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=171522527&postcount=131

I think this is a dangerous game to play. You've now moved the goalposts such that anything less than a 5-10% margin in Hillary's favor is tainted. While we're at it, let's add voter fraud and miscounted votes as a reason to discount any Hillary victory as legitimate. Is this the road Bern supporters want to go down?

Some? absolutely

Let's at least address these policies on their merits. If your sincere belief is that Bernie is selling single-payer healthcare and tuition-free public college as "free stuff", you're considerably misinformed or deliberately lying. Disagreeing on politics is one thing, but this kind of misrepresentation of views and policies is what turns people away from being involved in the process. It's fine to disagree about issues, but at least be honest in doing so. That's not much to ask.

If you can produce one video of Bernie saying, verbatim, that he is promising everyone free stuff, I will gladly admit that I'm wrong here.

"free stuff" is exactly what he's promising

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

It is nothing like hope and change. Obama did not run on blatant socialist policies that had zero chance of working. He explicitly ran on making the parties work together to get shit done. Naive, yes, but not intentionally misleading. He earnestly tried to do that when in office.

Bernie, on the other hand, is simply full of shit. He is literally promising to give everyone free stuff, relying upon some non-existant "revolution.". He's full of shit and he knows it. He is simply lying to people at this point.

Let's at least address these policies on their merits. If your sincere belief is that Bernie is selling single-payer healthcare and tuition-free public college as "free stuff", you're considerably misinformed or deliberately lying. Disagreeing on politics is one thing, but this kind of misrepresentation of views and policies is what turns people away from being involved in the process. It's fine to disagree about issues, but at least be honest in doing so. That's not much to ask.

If you can produce one video of Bernie saying, verbatim, that he is promising everyone free stuff, I will gladly admit that I'm wrong here.

 

[Suikoguy]

Am I the only one here who hates the Young Turks? They've been fellating sanders to the point where one point they even had the nerve to Argue that's he'd be the next FDR if elected.

Other than too much attention to Flint (which arguably is important, especially without any accountability), I've been loving Rachael Maddow over the last couple of weeks.

Also, to be fair, she blew the whistle while everyone else was ignoring the situation months ago. She is just giddy about this election cycle, which is no surprise given the deck being played with.

 

[Iolo]

But yes, if Sanders loses the delegates by 3% or less, you can almost certain he won the popular vote - not that it will be reported that way. Even up to about a 5% loss there's a reasonable probability he was the popular vote winner.

I think this is a dangerous game to play. You've now moved the goalposts such that anything less than a 5-10% margin in Hillary's favor is tainted. While we're at it, let's add voter fraud and miscounted votes as a reason to discount any Hillary victory as legitimate. Is this the road Bern supporters want to go down?

Why Bernie Sanders doesn't participate in organized religion.

Ad: "Bernie Sanders: not just a communist—a godless communist."

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

What's the caucus delegate picture look like for Trump / Cruz? If the IA popular vote is close does one of them have an inherent advantage like Clinton?

 

[B-Dubs]

What's the caucus delegate picture look like for Trump / Cruz? If the IA popular vote is close does one of them have an inherent advantage like Clinton?

Depends on which of Trump's two ground games is real. If he really does have a Death Star then he'll win, if it's a paper tank then he'll lose. No one has any goddamned idea at this point.

 

[VendettaRed07]

Am I the only one here who hates the Young Turks? They've been fellating sanders to the point where one point they even had the nerve to Argue that's he'd be the next FDR if elected.

Those comparisons really annoy me because Its almost as if people don't even realize what FDR had to do in order to give himself the type of power he had. Not to mention how no person will ever be able to emulate his presidency or even have the guts to even try it

The man averaged nearly an executive order each day for 12 straight years, tried to seriously pass a second bill of rights and increase the number of Supreme Court judges so he could load it and have infinite power. The balls you have to have to ever even think of the stunts he tried to pull are unimaginable

No one will ever do that kind of stuff again, and honestly it's a good thing. He made a mockery of our countries politicial system

 

[disastermouse]

Am I the only one here who hates the Young Turks? They've been fellating sanders to the point where one point they even had the nerve to Argue that's he'd be the next FDR if elected.

Not any worse than Greg Dworkin insisting on finding every way that every bit of news is good for Hillary on Kagro in the Morning.

 

[brainchild]

Why Bernie Sanders doesn't participate in organized religion.

Washington Post:


The proper view to have.

He's as close to an atheist president as we're going to get right now, though he honestly sounds more like a Buddhist philosopher.

 

[noshten]

It is nothing like hope and change. Obama did not run on blatant socialist policies that had zero chance of working. He explicitly ran on making the parties work together to get shit done. Naive, yes, but not intentionally misleading. He earnestly tried to do that when in office.

Bernie, on the other hand, is simply full of shit. He is literally promising to give everyone free stuff, relying upon some non-existant "revolution.". He's full of shit and he knows it. He is simply lying to people at this point.

I think you are being purposelessly obtuse because you want a particular reaction - I won't give that to you and finding your post to be greatly offensive towards Sanders.
Obama was as vague about his policies as any other politician running for office.
For example Sander's health care proposal is about as long as the one Obama released in 2007. After we saw the product of working together with Republicans for 8 years getting "shit" done. Obama and Hillary are/were being far more naive than Sanders expecting for bi-partisanship from Republicans. Sanders is the only one that has come out and said that as the way things stand right now there is no way for him to effectively implement a lot of his ideas.

 

[Metaphoreus]

Papa Bear's going rouge!

Eh?

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=171522527&postcount=131



Some? absolutely



"free stuff" is exactly what he's promising

So, when asked about how he would pay for these programs, his answer is that they're free?

 

[disastermouse]

Source?

It was in Flipboard. I'll try to find it.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I think this is a dangerous game to play. You've now moved the goalposts such that anything less than a 5-10% margin in Hillary's favor is tainted. While we're at it, let's add voter fraud and miscounted votes as a reason to discount any Hillary victory as legitimate. Is this the road Bern supporters want to go down?

I'm just saying something that is true. I can literally go back and quote at least ten Hillary supporters in this thread who have said Clinton will win in Iowa because her distribution means she can get a higher delegate count per person. It is a logical consequence of that that Clinton can win more delegates yet lose the popular vote. You can deny neither of those statements or both, but not only one.

I don't think voter fraud or miscounted votes will have much if any impact. Caucuses are pretty close to fraud immune because of the in-person non-secret nature of the voting and miscount of preference groups are unlikely to make much of a difference at any individual precinct because of the way delegates are allocated and therefore no difference overall even if the sum of the miscounts is quite large.

No Sanders bias in either of the two paragraphs above, just facts.

 

[dabig2]

Man, it's really disheartening to see so-called Progressives falling into the same trap that neocons laid out so long ago.

"Free stuff"

Two santa claus theory still in great effect I see and now even "liberals" are proclaiming it from the mountain.