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

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CCS

Banned
Cybit said:
I sort of hope we have old Hillary staffers here who know the actual story / full story and can tell it better then I can. I (alas) only got the Cliffs notes version, and it's hard to tell without having the pantomime aspect our friend was doing along with telling the story.

Mind you, I have NO idea if this is true - but it's not that surprising, and the entertainment value of my mind canon having a drunken, snarky, trash-talking HRC is totally worth it to me.

Basically it comes down to drunken Trivial Pursuit games. They're somewhere (might have been traveling via plane?), and someone gets the bright (read: tipsy) idea to break out Trivial Pursuit and challenge HRC. She accepts, they break out a bottle of wine, and the idea is, every time a right answer is gotten, you take a drink of wine. Mind you, it's multiple people vs just HRC.

So, none of them drink any wine, as HRC proceeds to win the game straight without missing a single question, and proceeds to drink the entire bottle. At which point, someone jokes out loud "best two out of three!", which is promptly accepted by a (probably inebriated) HRC, who then proceeds, while probably drunk as hell, to one-turn the entire game (after letting them go first this time) again. After which, she starts (jokingly) trash-talking them for a solid 15 minutes after the fact.
Click to expand...

I now believe this entirely and will probably dream about it tonight. Thank you.
 
C

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
CCS said:
I now believe this entirely and will probably dream about it tonight. Thank you.
Click to expand...

You're welcome! :-D

The mental image (and pantomime of my friend) of HRC just flat out chugging a bottle of wine, and then drinking a second one is waaaaaaaaay too entertaining not to enjoy.
 
J

JesseEwiak

Member
Y2Kev said:
This is the most disappointing bullshit I've seen this cycle on the left. I saw someone citing news max before.
Click to expand...

Like I've said before, this is a whole new generation of kids who don't realize what right-wing sources are just kind of bullshit (Wall Street Journal) and which sources are complete bullshit (Newsmax).
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
adam387 said:
There was also a story in the DMR about a woman Hillary spoke with about how she lost her home because of cuts that affected her as a widowed woman. The woman was very impressed by Hillary. When people actually see her, see her speak, see her interact with people....they typically like her.

http://i.imgur.com/DAUOmcI.jpg
Click to expand...
That almost looks like real human emotion on her face. That's some good programming.

Also, I thought we banned the Moonie Times, but it may have been Breitbart.
 
H

Holmes

Member
shinra-bansho said:
That almost looks like real human emotion on her face. That's some good programming.

Also, I thought we banned the Moonie Times, but it may have been Breitbart.
Click to expand...
Mods be stifling our freedom of speech so much that they can't remember what they've banned and what they haven't!
 
O

OrangeGrayBlue

Member
JesseEwiak said:
Like I've said before, this is a whole new generation of kids who don't realize what right-wing sources are just kind of bullshit (Wall Street Journal) and which sources are complete bullshit (Newsmax).
Click to expand...

Someone on my Facebook news feed linked to a hitpiece from a site called daily conservative or something like that. I think some people don't even consider the source of a story. And this girl is about 28. She's not some college freshman.
 
M

Makai

Member
pigeon said:
The Washington Times must be super excited at their sudden circulation boost among the hard left.
Click to expand...
At least Washington Times sounds like a normal source if you're unfamiliar with newspapers. But I see people quoting Breitbart and The Blaze for news about the Democrats!
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
I think many people have a very naive sense of trust in the news media. Oh, well the sharply dressed anchorman said it, so it must be true. Oh, well it was in the newspaper so of course it's factual.

And everyone knows Snopes is liberally biased, so this chain email I got checks out.
 
I

Iolo

Member
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Spider from Mars said:
Does anyone know what would happen if a democratic caucus location didn't have the capacity for the amount of people who showed up to caucus?
Click to expand...

I assume they'll move it, but after 2008 I bet most precincts are in bigger rooms. I doubt it'll be an issue, there's no sign of insane turnout past the 08 levels.
 
I

Iolo

Member
This is from the Politico article on Iowa college students:

nW39M5x.jpg


He doesn't even look like the oldest guy there
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
Devine insists Sanders would scramble the traditional Electoral College map. The battleground states – states in which the campaign is legitimately contested – remain largely unchanged since George W. Bush eked out a 4-vote victory in 2000.
Citing his candidate’s appeal to younger voters, independents and those otherwise disillusioned with politics, Devine said Sanders could put in play a number of states that have been reliably Republican for decades.
He mentioned specifically a number of states in the Deep South with high African-American populations but that have still backed Republicans by wide margins.
“We’d have to take a real hard look at a state like Georgia, for example,” Devine said. “A state like Louisiana, where Democrats haven’t competed since Bill Clinton won it in 1996, we’re going to have to take a look at that.”
(President Barack Obama didn’t campaign in either state, despite wide popularity with black voters – and lost Georgia and Louisiana by 7 and 17 points, respectively.)
Click to expand...
He didn’t stop there, mentioning Alabama, which Mitt Romney won by 23 points, and Mississippi, which has the greatest black share of the population of any state (excepting the District of Columbia) but still gave Romney an easy, 11-point victory four years ago.
Outside the South, Devine pointed to Montana, which Obama nearly won in 2008 but lost by a double-digit margin four years later) and Arizona, where demographic change is making the state more competitive, but Republicans still dominate.
“I think a lot of states which haven’t been part of the overall [Democratic] targeting could come into play,” he said.
Click to expand...
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/...-an-electability-problem-218432#ixzz3ygGhITge
 
S

Spider from Mars

tap that thorax
B-Dubs said:
They're not going to change the format. That'd completely change the dynamic of the whole thing. If anything they'd just move to the parking lot or something. Why ask?
Click to expand...
A friend of mine asked what would happen and I said that it probably wasn't an issue, but didn't have a legit answer and couldn't find anything online so I threw it out there to satiate his curiosity. Thanks!
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
NeoXChaos said:
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/...-an-electability-problem-218432#ixzz3ygGhITge
Click to expand...

Is he drunk?

Spider from Mars said:
A friend of mine asked what would happen and I said that it probably wasn't an issue, but didn't have a legit answer and couldn't find anything online so I threw it out there to satiate his curiosity. Thanks!
Click to expand...

I'm not from Iowa so I wouldn't know for sure, a precinct captain would I assume, but I seriously doubt they'd change the format of the caucus under any circumstances.
 
M

Makai

Member
I dunno how many people were taking this seriously, but I think appointing Obama to SCOTUS would be a bad plan. Guaranteed filibuster and plenty of "he circumvented the Constitution" pleas.
 
I

Iolo

Member
Spider from Mars said:
Does anyone know what would happen if a democratic caucus location didn't have the capacity for the amount of people who showed up to caucus?
Click to expand...

They would make it work somehow. Here is an anecdote from 2008 (remember, the plural of anecdote is please God let this primary be over soon):

The video highlights the "fog of war" in campaigns and unpredictability of the Iowa caucuses. Even within hours of the voting in 2008 it was not clear to experienced professionals what was about to unfold. A tidal wave of Obama Iowa supporters effectively ended the campaigns of every other candidate except Clinton. At the Des Moines caucus I attended the Obama supporters kept arriving and arriving. The school gym was packed and beyond capacity. The excess Obama supporters were sent to the school cafeteria. And then the cafeteria was filled to capacity.
Click to expand...

http://www.bleedingheartland.com/20...day-2008-iowa-caucus-day-richardson-campaign/
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Makai said:
I dunno how many people were taking this seriously, but I think appointing Obama to SCOTUS would be a bad plan. Guaranteed filibuster and plenty of "he circumvented the Constitution" pleas.
Click to expand...

They'd look like real salty assholes doing it. I can't see that going well for them. I imagine Hillary wouldn't even try it if she didn't know he'd make it through though.
 
K

Kangi

Member
OrangeGrayBlue said:
Someone on my Facebook news feed linked to a hitpiece from a site called daily conservative or something like that. I think some people don't even consider the source of a story. And this girl is about 28. She's not some college freshman.
Click to expand...

If it plays into my biases, fits into my narrative, and will make me look informed, it's the word of God Himself.

It definitely has been strange. Users who have been here for ages have been linking to Russian propaganda sites and ones with no ground to stand on at all; one user, quite sure of himself, linked to a website that prides itself on calling Hillary "Satan". Not a hint of irony in his post. At least most people just disappear and stop posting after getting called out instead of doubling down, but it may not stop them from peddling it again. And again.
 
B

Bam Bam Baklava

Member
The people who Sanders has picked to run his campaign leave me with little confidence in his GE outcome. I thought Clinton had some weak people working her campaign but this is even more ridiculous.
 
B

Bowdz

Member
Bam Bam Baklava said:
The people who Sanders has picked to run his campaign leave me with little confidence in his GE outcome. I thought Clinton had some weak people working her campaign but this is even more ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Robby Mook was on With All Due Respect and he was incredible. Probably the most clear headed, confident (without sounding cocky), and articulate description of the election mechanics as they stand today. I was completely put at ease after watching it and have MUCH more confidence in the Clinton campaign because of it.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
So, I'm kind of curious whether people on the whole consider it a good thing (will help to win the general etc. etc.) or a bad thing (undue influence etc. etc.) that the Priorities SuperPAC has pledged donations already in excess of their total 2012 haul for Obama?

(Their expenditure might be higher since Obama was uncontested, not sure if they've been running any ads etc. since last reporting and don't know whether they had any expenditure at this stage in '12)
 
I

Iolo

Member
Coriolanus said:
Sounds like the early pitches of a renewed 50 state initiative.

That they don't have the resources to even start to get it off the ground is secondary.
Click to expand...

It is nice to dream big, as Obama expanded the map in 2008, but Alabama? Mississippi? Devine is insane.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
shinra-bansho said:
So, I'm kind of curious whether people on the whole consider it a good thing (will help to win the general etc. etc.) or a bad thing (undue influence etc. etc.) that the Priorities SuperPAC has pledged donations already in excess of their total 2012 haul for Obama?

(Their expenditure might be higher since Obama was uncontested, not sure if they've been running any ads etc. since last reporting and don't know whether they had any expenditure at this stage in '12)
Click to expand...

Depends on what they're spending so far. If they haven't spent crap then it's good since they can just unleash a flood of ads once the GOP picks a guy.

I may not like SuperPACs, but all of the Dems have said they'll picks justices that would put the genie back in the bottle given the chance so this is a good thing.
 
C

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
Kangi said:
If it plays into my biases, fits into my narrative, and will make me look informed, it's the word of God Himself.

It definitely has been strange. Users who have been here for ages have been linking to Russian propaganda sites and ones with no ground to stand on at all; one user, quite sure of himself, linked to a website that prides itself on calling Hillary "Satan". Not a hint of irony in his post. At least most people just disappear and stop posting after getting called out instead of doubling down, but it may not stop them from peddling it again. And again.
Click to expand...

This is my only fear about HRC in a general election - for some reason or another (and we saw in this in 08 w/ Obama) - she manages to get people to really, really dislike her. Not just Republicans / conservatives, but even a lot of democratic / liberal voters. I don't know what it is, (and I don't even think it is particularly fair) - but that woman inspires irrational hatred when normally dislike is where it would be. My fear is that would come into play in a general election. I actually kind of think it is why there are at least some Bernie fans who won't vote for her in the GE as well.
 
R

Roland_Gunner

Member
shinra-bansho said:
So, I'm kind of curious whether people on the whole consider it a good thing (will help to win the general etc. etc.) or a bad thing (undue influence etc. etc.) that the Priorities SuperPAC has pledged donations already in excess of their total 2012 haul for Obama?
Click to expand...

Well part of it is that Obama's SuperPac was a total joke. You could tell that the Pres wished he could run without one. I think Bill Clinton did more to raise funds for it than Obama did. The other part is that moderate Dems (and maybe some Republicans who hate Trump) are starting to sweat Sanders. 2016 is setting up better than they could have dreamed and loosing it because of the primary must be a nightmare to them.
 
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