• 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.
It's just a great tell, that's all.

I put it up there with "who cares if conservatives have SCOTUS for another 40 years?" and "we can lobby the Supreme Court on certain cases!"
I know, we'll call the Supreme Court hotline!

I think everyone's civics knowledge in this country comes exclusively from cartoon episodes revolving around local elections like dog catcher or soil and water or something where the determination of 8-year old kids is enough to fix some minor inconvenience.
 
It's just a great tell, that's all.

I put it up there with "who cares if conservatives have SCOTUS for another 40 years?" and "we can lobby the Supreme Court on certain cases!"
I never said it didn't matter, I said it isn't the most important thing that erases all the other problems with Hillary Clinton.

There are all sorts of reasons to settle for a bad candidate, but they don't add up to a reasonable strategy.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Jennifer Epstein ‏@jeneps 6m6 minutes ago
Is not getting NYT endorse a blow? "No not really. Establishment forces like the NYT are going to line up behind HC," Jeff Weaver says on MS

lowering expectations:

Jennifer Epstein ‏@jeneps 6m6 minutes ago
Weaver on Iowa expectations for Sanders: "we never said it's a must-win state"
 

User 406

Banned
Guys, it's time to understand that disastermouse is just the bizarro version of benji.

His position is wildly extreme and also laid out clearly -- the only thing that matters is the glorious communist revolution, and literally every other issue is a smokescreen created by the rentiers to distract the laboring class with internal conflict -- so there's probably no point in arguing with alternate versions of him that, say, have any political interests that don't involve productive labor.

At least he's not an accelerationist!

Actually, he promoted accelerationism in other threads before he started showing up here.
 

damisa

Member
You'll find similar quotes from the largest energy corporations about climate change as well, but what he said again doesn't mean Goldman actually supports these things. Lloyd also doesn't unilaterally control the bank either, he answers to his shareholders.

They were also big Obama supporters, the guy who campaigned on income inequality and tried to raise the minimum wage. If both their words and actions indicate they support an increase in the minimum wage and you still refuse to believe them just because they are "Wall Street" then there's nothing I can do to convince you
 
5 hours until Selzer poll, if Hillary has the lead and Trump has a big lead, then it's overwhelmingly likely that we're heading for Hillary and Trump cruising through the primaries and Hillary easily becoming president.

lowering expectations:

... I don't understand. Democrats like their establishment right now (outside of the hard left types that are mostly part of the Green Party).
 
They were also big Obama supporters, the guy who campaigned on income inequality and tried to raise the minimum wage. If both their words and actions indicate they support an increase in the minimum wage and you still refuse to believe them just because they are "Wall Street" then there's nothing I can do to convince you
He campaigned on them but didn't do very much about them. Just like Hillary Clinton.
 
They were also big Obama supporters, the guy who campaigned on income inequality and tried to raise the minimum wage. If both their words and actions indicate they support an increase in the minimum wage and you still refuse to believe them just because they are "Wall Street" then there's nothing I can do to convince you

What are their actions? I somehow doubt goldman sachs as an organization is really gonna fight to change the nature of capitalism but I've been surprised before and this would be a pleasant surprise.
 

dabig2

Member
No, I am saying that Wall Street isn't actually against minimum wage increases and Bernie and his supporters blaming them for EVERYTHING is ridiculous.

Yeah, they say nice things. What they did (and might still do) is usually quite the opposite. For example,

Rolling Stone: The People vs. Goldman Sachs
Thanks to an extraordinary investigative effort by a Senate subcommittee that unilaterally decided to take up the burden the criminal justice system has repeatedly refused to shoulder, we now know exactly what Goldman Sachs executives like Lloyd Blankfein and Daniel Sparks lied about. We know exactly how they and other top Goldman executives, including David Viniar and Thomas Montag, defrauded their clients. America has been waiting for a case to bring against Wall Street. Here it is, and the evidence has been gift-wrapped and left at the doorstep of federal prosecutors, evidence that doesn't leave much doubt: Goldman Sachs should stand trial.

When it came time for Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein to testify, the banker hedged and stammered like a brain-addled boxer who couldn't quite follow the questions. When Levin asked how Blankfein felt about the fact that Goldman collected $13 billion from U.S. taxpayers through the AIG bailout, the CEO deflected over and over, insisting that Goldman would somehow have made that money anyway through its private insurance policies on AIG. When Levin pressed Blankfein, pointing out that he hadn't answered the question, Blankfein simply peered at Levin like he didn't understand.

But Blankfein also testified unequivocally to the following:

"Much has been said about the supposedly massive short Goldman Sachs had on the U.S. housing market. The fact is, we were not consistently or significantly net-short the market in residential mortgage-related products in 2007 and 2008. We didn't have a massive short against the housing market, and we certainly did not bet against our clients."

Levin couldn't believe what he was hearing. "Heck, yes, I was offended," he says. "Goldman's CEO claimed the firm 'didn't have a massive short,' when the opposite was true." First of all, in Goldman's own internal memoranda, the bank calls its giant, $13 billion bet against mortgages "the big short." Second, by the time Sparks and Co. were unloading the Timberwolves of the world on their "unicorns" and "flying pigs" in the summer of 2007, Goldman's mortgage department accounted for 54 percent of the bank's risk. That means more than half of all the bank's risk was wrapped up in its bet against the mortgage market — a "massive short" by any definition. Indeed, the bank was betting so much money on mortgages that its executives had become comically blasé about giant swings on a daily basis. When Goldman lost more than $100 million on August 8th, 2007, Montag circulated this e-mail: "So who lost the hundy?"

This month, after releasing his report, Levin sent all of this material to the Justice Department. His conclusion was simple. "In my judgment," he declared, "Goldman clearly misled their clients, and they misled the Congress." Goldman, unsurprisingly, disagreed: "Our testimony was truthful and accurate, and that applies to all of our testimony," said spokesman Michael DuVally. In a statement to Rolling Stone, Goldman insists that its behavior throughout the period covered in the Levin report was consistent with responsible business practice, and that its machinations in the mortgage market were simply an attempt to manage risk.

When Bernie and others go at Wall St guys like the do, it's mainly because of bullshit like this. They can say all the nice and good things, but it doesn't change the fact of their past behavior and attempt to obfuscate it.

Koch brothers have also said lots of nice things about progressive liberalism. They're still shitstains.
 
5 hours until Selzer poll, if Hillary has the lead and Trump has a big lead, then it's overwhelmingly likely that we're heading for Hillary and Trump cruising through the primaries and Hillary easily becoming president.



... I don't understand. Democrats like their establishment right now (outside of the hard left types that are mostly part of the Green Party).
You're right, Obama and Hillary still enjoy high favorability ratings within their own parties. In fact Obama's approval ratings have been remarkably steady as of late (48% on Gallup for three days in a row now). I don't think as many people care about the establishment as some would believe.
 

damisa

Member
He campaigned on them but didn't do very much about them. Just like Hillary Clinton.

Bernie sanders put out a bill in the senate to increase the minumum wage and Republicans blocked it, just like they block everything Obama tries.

Guess Bernie is a do nothing guy like Obama, why are you even supporting him? :b
 

NeoXChaos

Member
That NYT thread got locked.

When you don't have much of a conservative presence anymore there is going to be fighting among the left. Most of our conservative GAF is crying over the possibility of Trump being their nominee.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
You're right, Obama and Hillary still enjoy high favorability ratings within their own parties. In fact Obama's approval ratings have been remarkably steady as of late (48% on Gallup for three days in a row now). I don't think as many people care about the establishment as some would believe.

The GOP has completely turned on their establishment, but the Dem establishment is still wildly popular within the party (outside of DWS who everyone rightly hates for being horrible). People are taking what they see across the aisle and apply it to the Dems despite there being no real proof of mass dissatisfaction.
 
That NYT thread got locked.

When you don't have much of a conservative presence anymore there is going to be fighting among the left. Most of our conservative GAF is crying over the possibility of Trump being their nominee.

Arthur Brooks and Ross Douthat's meltdowns have been fun to watch for the NYT though.
 
The GOP has completely turned on their establishment, but the Dem establishment is still wildly popular within the party (outside of DWS who everyone rightly hates for being horrible). People are taking what they see across the aisle and apply it to the Dems despite there being no real proof of mass dissatisfaction.
Just the fact that Bernie is catching on with certain pockets of the Democratic Party, I guess. But that was bound to happen in what is essentially a two person race.
 
Bernie sanders put out a bill in the senate to increase the minumum wage and Republicans blocked it, just like they block everything Obama tries.

Guess Bernie is a do nothing guy like Obama, why are you even supporting him? :b
Yeah...but I don't hear Obama making it a foundation of his platform and so I don't trust that his desire is legitimate. I also think his economic appointments have been terri-bad.
 

Bowdz

Member
So I'm watching CNN interview Jeb!s policy adviser Michael Steel and the guy is just as boring, jilted, and awkward as Jeb! himself. Everyone on that campaign is so fucking awkward.
 

damisa

Member
If you want to be mad at Goldman Sachs betting against the housing market and making lots of money that's fine, but that doesn't change the fact that they support a minimum wage increase and recognize that wage inequality is bad

Wall Street is not evil sorry.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Just the fact that Bernie is catching on with certain pockets of the Democratic Party, I guess. But that was bound to happen in what is essentially a two person race.

Exactly. I remember saying as much once Biden said he wasn't going to jump in, the race was always going to tighten a bit. When it's a two party town everyone's going to join one of them, regardless if they agree completely or not. I'm sure there's some dissatisfaction with the establishment among Bernie's supporters, but there's also people wanting to make a statement, to push Hillary left, those who just don't like her, college students who caught onto the hot new thing (like they did with Ron Paul 8 years ago), Paultards who made the jump (because they can't help but latch themselves onto anything that remotely resembles their thing) and those who really believe in him. Everyone who would normally be spread among three or four candidates has basically fallen in with Bernie (which I'm sure I'll have my head chopped off for saying) since he's the only other game in town.
 
If you want to be mad at Goldman Sachs betting against the housing market and making lots of money that's fine, but that doesn't change the fact that they support a minimum wage increase and recognize that wage inequality is bad

Wall Street is not evil sorry.

How much did they pay you to say that (JK)

Wall Street isn't evil but it needs to be changed and reformed. I don't think its good to characterize anyone as evil. It's a pointless word in politics (well its good for people to eat up but its generally useless).
 

HylianTom

Banned
Arthur Brooks and Ross Douthat's meltdowns have been fun to watch for the NYT though.

The existential crisis that's been happening for some on the right has be quite entertaining.

..

And I just got the "alligator in a tutu" email. Funny stuff.
FE8ACE66-3852-4496-85A4-1CAEFFC67DEA.png.jpeg
I found it funny/goofy - typical of Carville. I could see a CNN anchor doing a Sensible Chuckle at it.
 
The existential crisis that's been happening for some on the right has be quite entertaining.

..

And I just got the "alligator in a tutu" email. Funny stuff.

I found it funny/goofy - typical of Carville. I could see a CNN anchor doing a Sensible Chuckle at it.

So the berniebro's on reddit were right ;)

I don't see whats so bad with this email, hillary's campaign wants her to win no shock.
 
If you want to be mad at Goldman Sachs betting against the housing market and making lots of money that's fine, but that doesn't change the fact that they support a minimum wage increase and recognize that wage inequality is bad

Wall Street is not evil sorry.
Wall Street is capital. People in Wall Street aren't bad, but the institution itself is fundamentally capitalist and hence fundamentally against wage increases.

So yeah, Wall Street is evil.
 

daedalius

Member
The existential crisis that's been happening for some on the right has be quite entertaining.

..

And I just got the "alligator in a tutu" email. Funny stuff.

I found it funny/goofy - typical of Carville. I could see a CNN anchor doing a Sensible Chuckle at it.

I'm literally reading this with carville's voice in my head

Was there something wrong with this? Sounds just like carville's usual schtick
 
The most interesting aspect of political news coverage is their increasingly desperate racism denial.

After saying for six months that Trump couldn't win the Republican nomination because of how offensive he was, those same writers are claiming that if Trump can win the Republican nomination, he could win the general too! Ignoring that 90% of Republicans are white compared to only 70% of GE voters.

Trump is running a racist platform and the Republicans have a lot of racists so he's winning, but political writers refuse to accept that idea and consistently make bad theories about why he's successful and use those theories to make embarrassingly bad predictions.

What might be strangest about this phenomena is that most major writers are on Twitter now... and the white supremacists that Trump has drug into the mainstream have constantly attacked these writers and used anti-Semitic language against them. But even when confronted with evidence and abuse, these political writers refuse to believe.
 

dabig2

Member
If you want to be mad at Goldman Sachs betting against the housing market and making lots of money that's fine, but that doesn't change the fact that they support a minimum wage increase and recognize that wage inequality is bad

Wall Street is not evil sorry.

They certainly do evil things that screw us over, constantly. Again, Koch Brothers have also said really great things about inequalities in social life. Nixon himself was more progressive on some issues compared to modern democrats. He also said some very nice things.

They're still shit. And when left to their own devices with little push back and rebuke from the rest of us when they fuck up this country, then we all suffer.
 

User 406

Banned
one thing people need to realize is that uneducated blue collar whites who are struggling are a voting block that don't like to hear about political correctness or openness towards refugees. They see themselves to be left out of the equation and screwed in terms of shitty jobs, non-accessibility to go to college, bad housing, and etc.

IMO, the best way to treat it is not to complain about them being white and they have it better because that drives them towards the Trump camp.

the best way to deal with it is to stear the country further Left in terms of Maternity leave, equal pay, Single Payer, and cheaper affordable Colleges.

When educated Democrats turn a blind eye towards the working class whites just because "they don't have it as bad as minorities". That is when Republicans exploit that gap and attract a lower income voting block to vote Right Wing against their best interests baiting them into identity politics.

The problem with this is that in order to attract those voters, you need to abandon minorities. This is why we've been having calls to get rid of identity politics, because it reframes everything in terms of what is good for white men, which would attract more of them.

The question is, do we want to be Democrats, or Dixiecrats?

Personally, I'm standing with women and minorities. They need a party to represent them too, and we're all they've got.


Commenters are saying Carville wrote it, which would make sense at least.

Heh, my first thought was, "Tighter than an alligator in a tutu? You're no James Carville, buddy." He's totally phoning it in. :p


The GOP has completely turned on their establishment, but the Dem establishment is still wildly popular within the party (outside of DWS who everyone rightly hates for being horrible). People are taking what they see across the aisle and apply it to the Dems despite there being no real proof of mass dissatisfaction.

There was that article from a little while ago that showed that a lot of people think everyone else is angry, but they aren't themselves. Funny how narratives work.
 
So the berniebro's on reddit were right ;)

I don't see whats so bad with this email, hillary's campaign wants her to win no shock.
Yeah but if Hillary wants to be president, that's bad. What an entitled shill!

Unlike every other man who's run for president. None of them wanted to, we just bequeathed it on them.
 

damisa

Member
How much did they pay you to say that (JK)

Wall Street isn't evil but it needs to be changed and reformed. I don't think its good to characterize anyone as evil. It's a pointless word in politics (well its good for people to eat up but its generally useless).

Oh I agree. I actually work on financial compliance, and there's a lot of good work going on in that area. It's just tiring when people act like everything wrong with this country is somehow wall street's fault
 
Yeah but if Hillary wants to be president, that's bad. What an entitled shill!

Unlike every other man who's run for president. None of them wanted to, we just bequeathed it on them.

I was just pointing fun at how no one trusted the sanders reddit. I like hillary, I just like bernie more. I think getting mad at her wanting to win is dumb or her campaign people sending slightly corny/cringey emails is pretty dumb.
 

East Lake

Member
They were also big Obama supporters, the guy who campaigned on income inequality and tried to raise the minimum wage. If both their words and actions indicate they support an increase in the minimum wage and you still refuse to believe them just because they are "Wall Street" then there's nothing I can do to convince you
If you have data to support this that's fine, but I still don't find it convincing to take Lloyd's words as an accurate description of Goldman's views or goals.
 
The more debates go on the more likely a one note hero like Bernie will trip. He's already becoming a caricature.

The sad thing is that I think he has a lot of good views outside of economics he just barely advertises them on debates. Hopefully he starts talking about the social justice/criminal justice views he has.
 

egruntz

shelaughz
The existential crisis that's been happening for some on the right has be quite entertaining.

..

And I just got the "alligator in a tutu" email. Funny stuff.

I found it funny/goofy - typical of Carville. I could see a CNN anchor doing a Sensible Chuckle at it.

lol I'm sorry but those first two paragraphs are just awful.
 
No, I don't think that Capitalism caused racism or colonialism. I think that it is an expression of those things, as any system of coercion is. It's much less an expression of them than what came before.

I'm not sure how much I agree with the bolded. It's kind of reductively unhelpful to note that historical colonialism and slavery were the worst. Nobody is going to dispute that, but it's not super relevant to an analysis of our modern economic world and whether X drives Y or vice versa. In any event, I think that capitalism's continued operation is intrinsically dependent on the modern equivalents of those systems, i.e., you won't find success replacing capitalism unless you attack the supporting structures of racism/colonialism/sexism first, as they exist today.
 

User 406

Banned
The sad thing is that I think he has a lot of good views outside of economics he just barely advertises them on debates. Hopefully he starts talking about the social justice/criminal justice views he has.

If you look at his campaign in its original context, where it was an obvious attempt to shift the conversation leftward, his insistence of focus on one critical economic issue is actually a good thing, because it forces it into the mainstream discussion.

It's just that now that he has some unexpected voter enthusiasm behind him, he's having trouble switching gears into being a fully rounded out candidate.
 

Mike M

Nick N
5 hours until Selzer poll, if Hillary has the lead and Trump has a big lead, then it's overwhelmingly likely that we're heading for Hillary and Trump cruising through the primaries and Hillary easily becoming president.
While I still think Clinton v Trump results in a Clinton victory, I'm no longer confident that it will be by crushing margins. Trump's been too canny in this campaign for me to think he doesn't have *some* plan to walk his shit back. Whether or not it would succeed is a different question, but he's too obsessed with polls to not recognize his deficit.
 
I'm not sure how much I agree with the bolded. It's kind of reductively unhelpful to note that colonialism and slavery were the worst. Nobody is going to dispute that, but it's not super relevant to an analysis of our modern economic world and whether X drives Y or vice versa. In any event, I think that capitalism's continued operation is intrinsically dependent on the modern equivalents of those systems, i.e., you won't find success fixing capitalism unless you attack the supporting structures of racism/colonialism/sexism first. Black unemployment and poverty being so much higher

Por que no los dos.jpeg?

I think lots of bernie's reforms will help all citizens, IF significant effort is taken to guarantee it is actually applied fairly to all. You also need criminal justice reform big time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom