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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nate started his data analysis for Iowa 3 weeks before the caucus last time.

tVXKGAb.png


Santorum ended up winning.

I suppose we still have 8 weeks to go before Iowa this time.

Bonus graph from 2011 era 538:
2OnsGoi.png


Polls do slowly start to mean more every month, but polls really get a lot better in the last week.
 
pigeon said:
They forgot "IN A WORLD". It's like they're not even trying.
Click to expand...

The video starts exactly like that.

"In a world where we may never fully recover from George Bush's economic collapse, only one man can save America from a never ending recession."
 
HylianTom said:
Robert Reich posted something interesting on Facebook this morning:
7BCBA14C-4B25-4BB0-8BD3-321D05F1DE7D.png.jpeg


I'd love to know whom he spoke with. Even more, I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the GOP's national HQ. Time's growing short for them to stop this. The Christmas break is going to put everything on ice.
Click to expand...
The possibility of this happening gets me giddy.

Trump/Cruz vs. Clinton/Kaine. Shit wouldn't be close. She could even pick Castro at that point, why not.
 
HylianTom said:
Robert Reich posted something interesting on Facebook this morning:
7BCBA14C-4B25-4BB0-8BD3-321D05F1DE7D.png.jpeg


I'd love to know whom he spoke with. Even more, I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the GOP's national HQ. Time's growing short for them to stop this. The Christmas break is going to put everything on ice.
Click to expand...

Steve LaTourette?
 
Where the hell were all these non-crazies when we were getting dog whistled for 30 years. Now Trump and Cruz are cutting the filter and they suddenly freak out?
 
Bam Bam Baklava said:
Where the hell were all these non-crazies when we were getting dog whistled for 30 years. Now Trump and Cruz are cutting the filter and they suddenly freak out?
Click to expand...
Even now they don't care about the racism, they care about their chances of winning the White House. That's all it is.
 
Cerium said:
Even now they don't care about the racism, they care about their chances of winning the White House. That's all it is.
Click to expand...

I'm sure they're pretty scared about their economic policy too. They may want tax breaks for the rich and regulation policies that only cares about business interests, but that doesn't mean they're excited about policies that'll throw the economy into chaos thanks to Trump's trade policies or Cruz's monetary policies.
 
thepotatoman said:
I'm sure they're pretty scared about their economic policy too. They may want tax breaks for the rich and regulation policies that only cares about business interests, but that doesn't mean they're excited about policies that'll throw the economy into chaos thanks to Trump's trade policies or Cruz's monetary policies.
Click to expand...

Does Trump have a trade policy? All he seems to say is "I'll make great deals. I'm a great negotiator!"
 
Cerium said:
Does Trump have a trade policy? All he seems to say is "I'll make great deals. I'm a great negotiator!"
Click to expand...

Mercantilism, the zero-sum trade policy. Trump speaks as though if other countries are winning, it necessarily means we're losing.
 
Cerium said:
Does Trump have a trade policy? All he seems to say is "I'll make great deals. I'm a great negotiator!"
Click to expand...

It's not hard to imagine how his generally xenophobic campaign plus all his talk about China taking our jobs is going to lead toward anything but less trade with China.

But honestly, I have no clue how much Trump believes the crap he says. His goals are egotistical, not political, and he answers to no one. That makes it very hard to figure out where the pandering ends and the policy begins. Hopefully we don't ever have to find out.

Edit:
Ecotic said:
Mercantilism, the zero-sum trade policy. Trump speaks as though if other countries are winning, it necessarily means we're losing.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
CVejp6cWUAAVqvU.jpg


Yeah, yeah, go fuck yourself.
Click to expand...

How do these people think these shootings start?

People are ready and holding their guns?

These people start shooting and even with a gun you can't react. Never mind these attackers wore body armor and often times (not sure if its happened in the US) they take drugs so they can not feel much pain
 
NYCmetsfan said:
How do these people think these shootings start?

People are ready and holding their guns?

These people start shooting and even with a gun you can't react. Never mind these attackers wore body armor and often times (not sure if its happened in the US) they take drugs so they can not feel much pain
Click to expand...

western7.jpg
 
sangreal said:
I can't wait for trump to use this line in a debate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm9BDH77r00&t=38m20s
Click to expand...

First of all, he does the same thing kerry kinda did with "justifying pearl harbor"

Secondly, when these people say this is tells me they have no idea how to tackle terrorism.

Bush save for Iraq seemed to have a better handle on what causes terrorism. And Obama did pretty well his first term and a half.

As much as I like him he's really been poor at recognizing homegrown terrorism and the fear it creates. I don't think there needs to be a massive policy change (besides really trying to work with the muslim community to make sure the rise in islamaphobia doesn't cause them to withdraw from society). but his attitude towards terrorism is kind of disturbing.

There's a different between calming and seemingly ignoring and pretending something will go away
 
HylianTom said:
Robert Reich posted something interesting on Facebook this morning:
7BCBA14C-4B25-4BB0-8BD3-321D05F1DE7D.png.jpeg


I'd love to know whom he spoke with. Even more, I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the GOP's national HQ. Time's growing short for them to stop this. The Christmas break is going to put everything on ice.
Click to expand...

It's interesting to hear how GOP insiders speak behind the scenes. Sometimes I get the impression that The Base™ doesn't actually believe in "bigotry;" to them Trump's talk is simply "politically incorrect." Historically the establishment has been happy to accommodate this notion - in public, at least.
 
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Cruz's military strategy basically is *PossibleNukeArea?.png*
Click to expand...

These people, when in control of the vast American military industrial complex, are waaaaay more dangerous than ISIS, Boko Haram, and every other terrorist group out there. Once we collectively admit that, maybe then we can work on absolutely rooting out disgusting shit like this instead of treating it like "well, he's got an opinion"!
 
RustyNails said:
He's doing more low-key, backyard bbq stuff as opposed to Trump or even Jeb's big townhall/speaking events.
Click to expand...
I know. The vidyas that I've found were actually quite good. He needs to have his internet team pushing out every event he speaks at, in HD. I've seen a few decent events filmed in crap potato cell phone recording. There's such a void in his campaign in terms of resources.
 
I've never been on the record as being critical of Obama, but his approach to terrorism and ISIS has been absolutely embarrassing. "We are safe and there is no existential threat. ISIS is contained." Bullshit. As they destroy Russian planes, attack Paris, and inspire shootings... They are contained. They just massacred another large group in Nigeria and are doing it daily. You've been a half-decent president, but your ISIL policies are fucking ridiculous.
 
SourShoes said:
I've never been on the record as being critical of Obama, but his approach to terrorism and ISIS has been absolutely embarrassing. "We are safe and there is no existential threat. ISIS is contained." Bullshit. As they destroy Russian planes, attack Paris, and inspire shootings... They are contained. They just massacred another large group in Nigeria and are doing it daily. You've been a half-decent president, but your ISIL policies are fucking ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I agree that the fight against ISIL hasn't been very effective, but I guess I think it's weird that Paris, Russia and Nigeria are supposed to be the US President's responsibility.

The shooting sucks, but it's not like it's that much different from the hundreds of other mass shootings that happen in this country except for the motivation.
 
SourShoes said:
I've never been on the record as being critical of Obama, but his approach to terrorism and ISIS has been absolutely embarrassing. "We are safe and there is no existential threat. ISIS is contained." Bullshit. As they destroy Russian planes, attack Paris, and inspire shootings... They are contained. They just massacred another large group in Nigeria and are doing it daily. You've been a half-decent president, but your ISIL policies are fucking ridiculous.
Click to expand...

He's clearly talking about ISIS's ability to exist as a functioning state in the regions they occupy. All these terrorists attacks are from a hurting, small faction against a governing body and we won't stop them all, no matter how much we rampage across the Middle East/Africa.

If he's claiming we're winning the war on terror, then yeah, I agree that he's delusional. But that's not what he's talking about. We'll never win that war because you can't bomb an ideology.
 
Aaron Strife said:
I agree that the fight against ISIL hasn't been very effective, but I guess I think it's weird that Paris, Russia and Nigeria are supposed to be the US President's prerogative to stop.
Click to expand...

I was going to point that out. Talk about adding stuff to the long list of things a President is responsible for but not in control of.

But the thing with ISIL is that they are two pronged. You have the group on the battlefield which is losing territory due to all these airstrikes and the terror group that is basically openly encouraging for people to get violence everywhere.

It's fairly obvious they are lashing out because they know they can't survive with planes raining fire down on them continuously. In that sense, the weaker they get in their stronghold, the more likely they are to lash out.
 
thepotatoman said:
It's not hard to imagine how his generally xenophobic campaign plus all his talk about China taking our jobs is going to lead toward anything but less trade with China.

But honestly, I have no clue how much Trump believes the crap he says. His goals are egotistical, not political, and he answers to no one. That makes it very hard to figure out where the pandering ends and the policy begins. Hopefully we don't ever have to find out.
Click to expand...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDrfE9I8_hs
 
Anger over ISIS is largely rooted in the ridiculous notion that the US is all powerful and can defeat anything. ISIS had lost a quarter of their territory in the last few months, the Kyrds have stymied them on multiple fronts, etc. The fact that they can only pull off small scale attacks should be telling you that they are not some major threat.

Unless you want to round Muslims up I see no way to prevent small scale mass shooting attacks. That type of attack is the future of terror. Grand, complex plots like 911 aren't very feasible today given US intelligence/spying. But how do you effectively spy on people who don't talk on the phone, have no network, etc. Yes I know informants and undercover work is prevalent but you realize that can't catch everything.

How do you defeat an ideology? Hundreds if not thousands of people are being radicalized monthly. In this country, in France, etc. Who do you bomb to stop that?
 
Bam Bam Baklava said:
I was going to point that out. Talk about adding stuff to the long list of things a President is responsible for but not in control of.

But the thing with ISIL is that they are two pronged. You have the group on the battlefield which is losing territory due to all these airstrikes and the terror group that is basically openly encouraging for people to get violence everywhere.

It's fairly obvious they are lashing out because they know they can't survive with planes raining fire down on them continuously. In that sense, the weaker they get in their stronghold, the more likely they are to lash out.
Click to expand...

That's already been happening in terms of losing territory.

This is a war against persistent zealots with combat and military experience it won't be over soon. If people want this conflict to over with using more efficient ground force , then people have to be prepared for similar Iraq War.

ISIS has been losing, but their terror attacks is something they easily do and cost much less than some of the stuff they might be doing I think, besides time. Stopping terror attacks is something up to individual countries to combat using their intel. Expect more terror attacks when ISIL starts to lose more badly.

SourShoes said:
I've never been on the record as being critical of Obama, but his approach to terrorism and ISIS has been absolutely embarrassing. "We are safe and there is no existential threat. ISIS is contained." Bullshit. As they destroy Russian planes, attack Paris, and inspire shootings... They are contained. They just massacred another large group in Nigeria and are doing it daily. You've been a half-decent president, but your ISIL policies are fucking ridiculous.
Click to expand...

They are contained in the sense their main force is only in Syria and Iraq and they have been losing badly. Those areas in Egypt and France is not up to the US to keep safe in a strict sense. The best the US can do is provide intel on possible attacks in which they probably did. It is up to those countries to do what it needs doing in their country. And what can you do if some terrorist groups shouts they are part of ISIL? That inherently does not mean anything because they aren't in close contact and are largely segregated.

His policies are decent and are working in Iraq and Syria, but Obama doesn't control the world there's only so much the US can do.
 
SourShoes said:
I've never been on the record as being critical of Obama, but his approach to terrorism and ISIS has been absolutely embarrassing. "We are safe and there is no existential threat. ISIS is contained." Bullshit. As they destroy Russian planes, attack Paris, and inspire shootings... They are contained. They just massacred another large group in Nigeria and are doing it daily. You've been a half-decent president, but your ISIL policies are fucking ridiculous.
Click to expand...

What should he be doing?
 
adamsappel said:
What should he be doing?
Click to expand...
Special op. Trying to form an actual regional force that can advance. Engaging forcefully in a political plan for assad to leave that Russia can live with. He also has continued the bad habit of pretending stability it Peace in places like egypt.

I mean a lot of this stuff he's doing but for once I think there's an optics problem that actually matters. People are scared and more public action will likely quell some of this. Also Obama just seems silly when he says ISIS is contained and they commit Paris a few hours later. I know what he was saying but his passivity I think helps Isis recruit. I readily acknowledge the kind of catch 22 of giving Isis legitimacy or letting them seem like losers but I really don't think recognizing them as a real threat and force hurts, especially if your bombing them and readily causing them to withdraw from land they hold.

Obama handled AQ pretty well with this strategy of almost ignoring them publicly while bombing the hell out of them and really doing a number on their leadership but ISIS and its idea of a caliphate really needs to be challenged.
 
NYCmetsfan said:
Special op. Trying to form an actual regional force that can advance. Engaging forcefully in a political plan for assad to leave that Russia can live with. He also has continued the bad habit of pretending stability it Peace in places like egypt.

I mean a lot of this stuff he's doing but for once I think there's an optics problem that actually matters. People are scared and more public action will likely quell some of this. Also Obama just seems silly when he says ISIS is contained and they commit Paris a few hours later. I know what he was saying but his passivity I think helps Isis recruit. I readily acknowledge the kind of catch 22 of giving Isis legitimacy or letting them seem like losers but I really don't think recognizing them as a real threat and force hurts, especially if your bombing them and readily causing them to withdraw from land they hold.

Obama handled AQ pretty well with this strategy of almost ignoring them publicly while bombing the hell out of them and really doing a number on their leadership but ISIS and its idea of a caliphate really needs to be challenged.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure I told you that already being happening since months ago and I'm sure I explained this in the last thread. It might be more of him not explaining strategies more publicly in which he might be doing just that tomorrow. But he, news outlets, and officials mentioned parts of the things he is been doing plenty of times .
 
I can only laugh at the notion that the United States hasn't done enough about ISIS, or that doing more in Syria and Iraq would make us safer at home. ISIS as a "state" has only lost ground since the US began its operations against them and their organization has essentially nowhere to go but down in the long term (even though taking important holdings like Mosul from them will still be a long and difficult task). But, ultimately, there is no realistic domestic political solution on the horizon for the regions they inhabit, and furthermore none would be created by injecting 100,000+ US ground troops. As "permanent ground troops" is the only prescription that the right will offer which the US is not already pursuing, I have no regard for any criticism that the right will make on the issue.

Meanwhile, we cannot stop every manipulable nutjob in the world who might do something terrible in the name of ISIS. The only way you could begin to address that would require a totalitarian approach that would still fail to guarantee 100% safety and would harm society far more than anything like San Bernardino. I say this as someone whose mother is a county government worker in California, whose workplace was put on lockdown the day after San Bernardino happened due to a gun sighting. Living in fear and buying into hysteria accomplishes nothing.
 
I don't know how to deal with ISIS directly, but I just hate how reactive instead of proactive U.S. foreign policy is. Egypt's human rights abuses are so severe and Sisi is so stupid that Egypt will likely be the next Syria the next time there's a major recession and or drought. Yet we're giving billions to Sisi without dealing with his human rights abuses. Sisi killed over a dozen Mexican tourists in Egypt a couple of months ago for no reason (Mexico! One of our neighbors!) and we gave negative fucks.

As for the lone wolf killers, we need more mandatory anger management education in the United States for all children and high school students.
 
I'm of the opinion that Obama's strategy on ISIS is the only acceptable strategy that causes least problems for everyone involved as far as America is concerned. Airstrikes and dronestrikes targeting ISIS needs to be very judicial and cautious. One airstrike against a children's hospital and it's over. Under no circumstances should we allow troops and tanks inside any middle-eastern country. Sneak attacks under the cover of darkness by US Spec Ops like the one that freed those 90 prisoners or the OBL raid in Pakistan are also acceptable because they don't leave any footprint.

Even though we created the mess in the middle-east, sadly it's up to the Arabs to bear the burden and clean it up. Ideally, Arab and Islamic countries should create a NATO like organization that deals with their local problems in the region. America and Europe should contribute towards it's creation and funding. In the long run, this will be the best case scenario. But for that to happen Iran and Saudi Arabia need to kiss each other first and that's not happening any time soon.
 
RustyNails said:
I'm of the opinion that Obama's strategy on ISIS is the only acceptable strategy that causes least problems for everyone involved as far as America is concerned. Airstrikes and dronestrikes targeting ISIS needs to be very judicial and cautious. One airstrike against a children's hospital and it's over. Under no circumstances should we allow troops and tanks inside any middle-eastern country. Sneak attacks under the cover of darkness by US Spec Ops like the one that freed those 90 prisoners or the OBL raid in Pakistan are also acceptable because they don't leave any footprint.

Even though we created the mess in the middle-east, sadly it's up to the Arabs to bear the burden and clean it up. Ideally, Arab and Islamic countries should create a NATO like organization that deals with their local problems in the region. America and Europe should contribute towards it's creation and funding. In the long run, this will be the best case scenario. But for that to happen Iran and Saudi Arabia need to kiss each other first and that's not happening any time soon.
Click to expand...
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
UK PoliGAF |OT3| - Strong and Stable Government? No. Coalition Of Chaos!
37 38 39 40 41
2K
258K
firehawk12 replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT16| Unpresidented
395 396 397 398 399
20K
1M
PKrockin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT15| Orange is the New Black
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
The Technomancer replied
Top Bottom