I think he made the point in the debate. Hillary thinks assad needs to go and a whynotboth policy could easily backfire and should be treated with a gigantic dose of skepticism.
-
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
- Thread starter Diablos
- Start date
- Status
And as Hillary explained the only reason they have these boots on the ground supporting us is because we are supporting their efforts to oust Assad. They're not going to take it on faith that the US will come back and support them once our objectives are complete.
Yellowtail
Member
Coriolanus
Banned
That most coveted of demographics, the independets? Sure is.
Code:
Quinnipiac University. Nov. 23-30, 2015. N=1,453 registered voters nationwide. Margin of error ± 2.6.
"Would you support or oppose the U.S. sending ground troops to fight ISIS in Iraq and Syria?"
Support Oppose Unsure/
No answer% % %
11/23-30/15 54 41 6
Republicans 71 23 5
Democrats 39 56 5
Independents 53 42 6My concern is precisely with Hillary, trying to pretend that she'll be on top of shit in the ME, committing to boots on the ground in the general in order to look tuff and accrue favor with that demographic.
That, however, is an aside.
The real question is how can one expect to solve the situation in syria in one fell swoop with less support than what afghanistan took? You had way more there and still you produced nothing, and yet Syria will be settled not only with less, but also while having to deal with Russia? That's extremely unlikely.
Yep. We ain't getting anything sincere for a while for this country while it all accelerates and get worse.
What an interesting cocktail.
All worth it for the Supreme Court. You only get one shot in a generation at tipping that balance.
Not sure I get the point you're making. Ousting assad in no way guarantees that these "boots on the ground" can hold Syria together after he goes.
And yet Paul Ryan just passed a budget bill that contains a lot of Democratic priorities through a GOP house and sent it to a GOP senate that will probably pass it.
If the GOP ever want to be taken seriously as leaders again, they'll need to start passing compromise legislation. Again I'd refer you to Tip O'Neill.
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
Sometime during the debate while sitting in the audience, I felt like Bernie and Hillary supporters are too hostile to each other. I guess it's just the realization the internet really brings out the worst in people.
Coriolanus
Banned
And how will they do that without being Cantored?
Retromelon
Member
Are you implying that Huma Abedin engages in ass play with Hillary Rodham ClintonThen again...
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
It's not like Democrats were in harmony for 2008 either.
At least the candidates themselves have kept it mostly civil this time. It just sucks that Schultz fanned the flames of both sides with her overreaction.
You mean you wouldn't?
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
I didn't follow it in 2008, so this is all new to me. It's sad.
RustyNails
Member
If that's bad I wonder how the atmosphere is during GOP debates. Surprised their audience didn't break into scuffles and fisticuffs. Yet.
They do that to minorities, based on Trump's shit.
2008 was so much worse. Hell, it's why I'm still not quite on the Hillary train. I mean, I'll punch a ticket when needed to but until then...meh. MEH.
Coriolanus
Banned
If memory serves, the audience for most republican debates has been carefully selected, so no such scuffles should occur.
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
Her supporters starting the rumor Obama is a Muslim is an example of the worse in people. It probably would have come out anyway with Republicans, but it should have been beneath people in the party to stoop so low.
I think they'd all rather be president with a Republican house than not be president. We all know this stuff and that 2018 will be hard. That's not the long game. 2020 is the long game.
What sort of point differential in a theoretical Clinton / Trump general would Clinton have to win by in order to flip Congress? I assume a massive amount given how entrenched they are? Possible in a blowout, and off the back of a year of possible Republican infighting?
If she is blocked by Republicans holding Congress should she win, Empress Clinton should just consider liberal use of Executive Orders.
I think the math put it somewhere in the ballpark of 8 points to retake the House, which could be feasible if Trump is the nominee. The Senate would be far less. That's why she hit him a few times in the debate, she's trying to get the GOP to rally around him before Iowa and NH so he'll be the nominee. I think you'll start to see her focus on him more and more as we get closer, hit the GOP with some of that reverse psychology.
eBay Huckster
Member
i mean, either they do that, get cantored, and the democrats win the house again
or they do that, don't get cantored, and the democrats still get a lot of their priorities passed
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Yeah, especially certain market segments. Sometimes the government is the only entity capable of efficiently handling and providing some things. Say for example, Single Payer Health Care. The government would have the leverage to lower prices while simultaneously forcing efficiency via a single online medical portal and health records sharing. As of now, there are several 3rd party health record portals, and if you have multiple doctors like my mom, you have 3 or 4 portals you have to deal with.
In other news:
Some of the markets are coming around to it either being Trump or Cruz with the nomination. The GOP must be fervently shitting bricks.
https://www.predictit.org/Market/1233/Who-will-win-the-2016-Republican-presidential-nomination
OrangeGrayBlue
Member
This narrative that there's a conspiratorial effort against Sanders regarding polling, media etc really needs to stop. As a Bernie supporter, it's just embarrassing. You have to keep in mind that Bernie is about as far left as American politics get. If you rank the senate, he is literally the most progressive member. He is the left-most edge of electable politicians. It shouldn't be hard to consider that maybe, just maybe, there simply aren't enough far-left progressives in this country to strong-arm Bernie into the nomination. I'd say he has a chance, but it is admittedly slim. That said, all the tinfoil hat bullshit paints Bernie as a guy who attracts the kind of people that might one day join a cult. That's not helpful. No one wants to be counted amongst that.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Surely you cannot expect this to continue. It's Ryan's first at bat appearance. I'm going to assume he won't be able to wheel and deal that freely next time, or the time after that.
I don't know if the narrative in conservative circles is that they lost. I mean, besides the EXTREME conservative circles that always say they lost. Like for most of Obama's deals, we all knew we got fleeced and felt as such. Does ConservaGAFequivalent feel that way about this?
This kinda feels like a legit deal from the 90s. It's...a deal.
Also Hillary crushed. I love me some Hillary but Bernie needs to more effectively communicate the benefits of social democracy.
ANYWAY, I think Obamacare had a really good first two years in terms of premium growth but this year it seems to be moderating, unfortunately, a little bit. If you look at a 3 year CAGR, it's still better than it would have been, but it's a very significant jump this year. I looked at my premiums that I now have to pay at work and I thought it was a mistake. My per-pay-period expenditure went up by like a third. If Hillary wants to play into the third year without acknowledging the first two, that's unfortunate but I get why. It is a much harder position to take, I think, to go, "b..b...b..3 year CAGR." Just play into that public bitching about everything.
This kinda feels like a legit deal from the 90s. It's...a deal.
Also Hillary crushed. I love me some Hillary but Bernie needs to more effectively communicate the benefits of social democracy.
ANYWAY, I think Obamacare had a really good first two years in terms of premium growth but this year it seems to be moderating, unfortunately, a little bit. If you look at a 3 year CAGR, it's still better than it would have been, but it's a very significant jump this year. I looked at my premiums that I now have to pay at work and I thought it was a mistake. My per-pay-period expenditure went up by like a third. If Hillary wants to play into the third year without acknowledging the first two, that's unfortunate but I get why. It is a much harder position to take, I think, to go, "b..b...b..3 year CAGR." Just play into that public bitching about everything.
Black Republican
Member
Now hugging a socialist, oh Christie, you dont wanna win?
Third Strike
Member
Yup. Replacing Scalia and Kennedy is top priority. Plus, in the meantime, let the courts continue to rule against gerrymandered maps in several states. This might lead to the Democrats having a fair chance in 2020, on the state and congressional level. Just need Clinton to make all eight years, and I think we're good.
*snicker*
And you just have to know that when Hillary goes after Trump, they can't help but love him more for it. She and Obama are Br'er Rabbiting the shit out of the GOP electorate on this, and they're falling for it splendidly.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
LOL at Kristol thinking republicans won't just fall in line and vote for Trump. That's cute.
They'll see five minutes of Hillary in the general election debates and they'll all carry the water buckets for the party. It will never change.
They'll see five minutes of Hillary in the general election debates and they'll all carry the water buckets for the party. It will never change.
Lucky Forward
Member
Butts-a-plenty
Banned
I don't understand why you think this. It certainly has no historical basis. Party realignment and voter realignment has been a given throughout the entire history of the USA. I don't know why you think that's it's all of a sudden not a factor.
Just when you think it can't get any lower...
I love the fact he has to be wearing cowboy boots. In front of the fire, with his family, on the couch, and he's wearing cowboy boots. Completely natura!
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
This is sort of amazing
Yellowtail
Member
This is one of the great upsides of a Trump nomination: the fallout among the conservative commentariat - and conservative movement at large - is going to be incredible to watch.
http://theweek.com/articles/592973/why-conservative-pundits-hate-donald-trump
User 463088
Banned
I don't really go on Kos anymore, simply because every diary is about how Bernie Sanders sneezed and the oligarchs are running in terror....
But I ventured there this morning. The conspiracy theories about Hillary's "And may the force be with you" line are just freaking amazing.
Some are saying it's because Disney owns ABC and Star Wars, so they forced her to say it as an act of obedience to her corporate overlords. Some are running with the idea that she was forced to say it because JJ Abrams is a supporter of hers.
I just....lawd.
But I ventured there this morning. The conspiracy theories about Hillary's "And may the force be with you" line are just freaking amazing.
Some are saying it's because Disney owns ABC and Star Wars, so they forced her to say it as an act of obedience to her corporate overlords. Some are running with the idea that she was forced to say it because JJ Abrams is a supporter of hers.
I just....lawd.
My friend told me he is rooting for Bernie but would have difficulty deciding between Hillary and Trump. Was a Ron Paul supporter a few years ago and hates Obamacare. Some candidates just have that integrity x-factor for a lot of people who don't think about where they fit on an ideology compass.
VendettaRed07
Member
Maybe wishful thinking but I have hope gridlock under Hillary won't be, at least quite as bad as we've seen under Obama.
The GOP strategy was to get back the House, then shut everything down until they win back the white house again. It didn't work for 2012, and if it doesn't work again in 2016, I'm going to have to think that they, or at least Paul Ryan, will try to implement a new strategy.
Congress' favorability ratings are in the gutter. I'd have to assume that Ryan will want to do what he can to bring up those numbers because if he wants to make a case to be President one day, which I think he does, he'll want to have some sort of record or list of accomplishments under his time as speaker of the house. I don't think a record of nothing but gridlock will help him. After being away from the Whitehouse for so long and being seemingly out of Bushes, he's the best prospect and closest GOP politician to the White House.. But idk, what do I know.
The GOP strategy was to get back the House, then shut everything down until they win back the white house again. It didn't work for 2012, and if it doesn't work again in 2016, I'm going to have to think that they, or at least Paul Ryan, will try to implement a new strategy.
Congress' favorability ratings are in the gutter. I'd have to assume that Ryan will want to do what he can to bring up those numbers because if he wants to make a case to be President one day, which I think he does, he'll want to have some sort of record or list of accomplishments under his time as speaker of the house. I don't think a record of nothing but gridlock will help him. After being away from the Whitehouse for so long and being seemingly out of Bushes, he's the best prospect and closest GOP politician to the White House.. But idk, what do I know.
Republic of Ezo
Member
No offense, but your friend is an idiot.
VendettaRed07
Member
People just want to be cool by voting for someone non establishment because they think they are above voting for a perceived stuffy politician and too evolved to be "associated" with either party. They don't care about policy at all and are only interested in making themselves feel better than people in power by denouncing them all.
It is one of the hardest forms of thinking to fight against, because it seems to be so many people's natural gut reaction to politics for whatever reason.
gutter_trash
Banned
I concur, swinging 180 from Libertarian Right to Socio-Democrat Left says allot about a "voter" "(who probably won't even vote anyway)
Republic of Ezo
Member
Yeah, like... I have some hard-left friends (I work in academia so there are quite a lot of them) and I can at least understand their ideological position when they say it's Sanders or bust for them. I don't think that's really a logically defensible position with the Supreme Court up for grabs, but at least I understand where they're coming from ideologically. But if you're swinging between Ron Paul to Bernie Sanders and having trouble differentiating Clinton and Trump, then you either don't understand public policy or civics (or maybe both).
You can hate Obamacare, but you should have a good reason. It being not good enough of itself is a fair complaint. I would imagine he has rose-tinted glasses for what was, for an age where getting tinnitus prevented you from getting heart medicine.
It's a step up, but we're ankle deep in filth still.
That said, how does one really have to compare Hillary and Trump as a choice? One is clearly for one for major reasons, whatever the fuck they are.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I pay attention to both ends of the political spectrum and have since 2004. Yes, that means wading through the likes of Hannity forums, Free Republic, et al.
It clearly has a "historical basis." McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012? Remember those? Republicans were shouting from the rooftops during the primaries about those "RINOs" and how they'd never vote for anybody like them, because they wanted a real conservative! Then, the election came around, and lo and behold, what did they do? Voted for the GOP candidate because "We can't let Obama in/remain in the White House."
The exact same thing will happen with Hillary.
i honestly thought 2012 would be their come to jesus moment but they walked away from it like falling off a 20 story building head first and getting up and walking away like nothing happened. they're just sore losers and will double down after every loss. ... maybe if the democratic nominee were joe schmoe things would turn around but hillary's been their public enemy no. 2 for awhile now
i dunno how things turn out for ryan but being speaker is probably the worst job to have in washington. it pretty much requires you to make decisions that will piss off everybody unless you're working with a super majority. maybe things will play out different but his political aspirations are probably going to be toast soon
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked