• 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 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On

Status
Not open for further replies.
Metaphoreus

Metaphoreus

This is semantics, and nothing more
Retromelon said:
Ted cruz ofen uses politeness to offset his rhetoric and make himself seem reasonable. He remains the garlean emperor
Click to expand...

I felt dumb when I didn't immediately get that reference. Then I Googled it and felt less dumb. I'm content with not getting it.
 
K

KingK

Member
Metaphoreus said:
I felt dumb when I didn't immediately get that reference. Then I Googled it and felt less dumb. I'm content with not getting it.
Click to expand...
I've not played FFXIV nor do i know anything about it (not interested in MMOs) but somehow i still associated that reference with final fantasy before Googling it. Wasn't that the name of one of the empires in final fantasy XII?
 
Metaphoreus

Metaphoreus

This is semantics, and nothing more
KingK said:
I've not played FFXIV nor do i know anything about it (not interested in MMOs) but somehow i still associated that reference with final fantasy before Googling it. Wasn't that the name of one of the empires in final fantasy XII?
Click to expand...

I played some of FFIII on DS, some of FFVII on PS1, and very little of FFX on PS2. So, I'm not going to be losing any sleep over missing the allusion.
 
J

Jack Remington

Banned
Honestly, if we had to have a Republican president, like if a sorcerer came up to me and told me that a Republican was going to win the 2016 election via magic, but I could pick which Republican, I'd pick Donald Trump.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
Jack Remington said:
Honestly, if we had to have a Republican president, like if a sorcerer came up to me and told me that a Republican was going to win the 2016 election via magic, but I could pick which Republican, I'd pick Donald Trump.
Click to expand...

He's a racist POS (or intentionally appearing to be one) but somehow he'd do the least damage to the country if he'd win. He doesn't buy the whole extreme right wing economics BS. Hell, he supports universal health care IIRC!

Among those candidates, he probably is the best choice. And there'd be endless lulz.

Oh god....what a nightmare when Donald Trump is the most sensible choice...
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Black Mamba said:
He's a racist POS (or intentionally appearing to be one) but somehow he'd do the least damage to the country if he'd win. He doesn't buy the whole extreme right wing economics BS. Hell, he supports universal health care IIRC!

Among those candidates, he probably is the best choice. And there'd be endless lulz.

Oh god....what a nightmare when Donald Trump is the most sensible choice...
Click to expand...

Dear god, he can't be the best choice. I just refuse to believe this is the world we live in.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
B-Dubs said:
Dear god, he can't be the best choice. I just refuse to believe this is the world we live in.
Click to expand...

All the other GOPers are war mongers except for Rand. They're all going to be led by the neocons.

Rand, economically, is a fucking dunce. The rest of the GOP just want to blow up social safety nets, deregulate industry even more, etc etc. They believe racism is dead and hate homosexuals.

Trump...wants to build a wall between the US and Mexico. And other than that, what's so bad about his policies compared to the other GOPers? I doubt he wants to send guys to war and domestically i highly doubt he's GOP bad domestically. Does he care about same sex marriage? He'd probably tell people to get over it.

Sounds weird, but I feel like Trump would try to get people to work, somehow...he'd likely fail but at least I think his heart would be in it. The other dudes don't give a shit about regular folk in any way (other than maybe Kasich).

can't believe I just wrote all that defending Trump. This is what it's come down to. The GOP is staring into the abyss and the abyss is staring right back.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Black Mamba said:
All the other GOPers are war mongers except for Rand. They're all going to be led by the neocons.

Rand, economically, is a fucking dunce. The rest of the GOP just want to blow up social safety nets, deregulate industry even more, etc etc. They believe racism is dead and hate homosexuals.

Trump...wants to build a wall between the US and Mexico. And other than that, what's so bad about his policies compared to the other GOPers? I doubt he wants to send guys to war and domestically i highly doubt he's GOP bad domestically. Does he care about same sex marriage? He'd probably tell people to get over it.

Sounds weird, but I feel like Trump would try to get people to work, somehow...he'd likely fail but at least I think his heart would be in it. The other dudes don't give a shit about regular folk in any way (other than maybe Kasich).

can't believe I just wrote all that defending Trump. This is what it's come down to. The GOP is staring into the abyss and the abyss is staring right back.
Click to expand...

Let's wait and see what happens at the debates before we decide Trump, of all people, is the lesser of 16 evils.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Black Mamba said:
All the other GOPers are war mongers except for Rand. They're all going to be led by the neocons.

Rand, economically, is a fucking dunce. The rest of the GOP just want to blow up social safety nets, deregulate industry even more, etc etc. They believe racism is dead and hate homosexuals.

Trump...wants to build a wall between the US and Mexico. And other than that, what's so bad about his policies compared to the other GOPers? I doubt he wants to send guys to war and domestically i highly doubt he's GOP bad domestically. Does he care about same sex marriage? He'd probably tell people to get over it.

Sounds weird, but I feel like Trump would try to get people to work, somehow...he'd likely fail but at least I think his heart would be in it. The other dudes don't give a shit about regular folk in any way (other than maybe Kasich).

can't believe I just wrote all that defending Trump. This is what it's come down to. The GOP is staring into the abyss and the abyss is staring right back.
Click to expand...

I want to know what kind of SCOTUS justices he'd appoint. Would there be a Karl Rove in his ear, whispering guidance on this issue?

But otherwise.. I pretty much agree. Sad state of affairs when this is the preferred Republican.
 
E

Ecotic

Member
Trump would be the best choice if you had to pick a Republican President because he would be a one-term disaster who seems to have no understanding that the President isn't a ruler by fiat. He'd be so unpopular and crazy that Republicans wouldn't be able to unite behind him. Democrats would do well in the midterms and they might be able to field a top talent to be the next President.
 
E

East Lake

Member
Trump also wants to insource offshore manufacturing. See his anecdotes about Apple and charging Ford a huge tax for every car they ship here from their plant in Mexico. Said Jeb! would fold on these issues because he's the donors lapdog lol.
 
F

Farmboy

Member
Aaron Strife said:
Yeah I think a lot of people (Republicans) would hold Obama accountable for another 9/11-type event in a way that Bush wasn't, although depending on his reaction there might be a smaller rallying effect.

I don't think any sitting president will ever see 90% approval ratings again, and especially not a Democrat. Generally I think Democrats are more open to liking a Republican than vice-versa, but even then the advent of the Internet has produced echo chambers for each side to a point where there will always be 20-30% dead enders who refuse to support someone on the other side. Clinton's 73% in that one poll is probably the most one could hope for (and his approval will probably go down once the Clintons are more active on the campaign trail). Obama's approvals were high 60s/low 70s when he came into office and that could very well be where he ends up after a few years out of office.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. The main difference isn't that Obama is black and Bush is white, it's that one is a Democrat and the other a Republican.

Another reason why 90% approvals probably aren't happening again is that we already had 9/11, and people did support Bush yet ended up rating him as the worst post-war president to the point that he didn't attend his own party's convention in '08 (has that ever happened with a sitting president?). So it's a case of, as Bush himself would put it, "fool me twice, won't get fooled again".
 
T

Third Strike

Member
So the email thing might actually be a legitimate problem for Clinton? The Verge is saying that it could be a federal offense.

Federal officials have asked the US Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether Hillary Clinton misused sensitive information on the private email account she used during her tenure as secretary of state, The New York Times reports. The request was filed by two inspectors general, though the Justice Department has not decided whether it will launch an investigation.

The request comes amid an ongoing State Department review of Clinton's private email account, which she used for government business during her four years as secretary of state under the Obama administration. Clinton has said that she used the account (and the private server that hosted it) as "a matter of convenience," though it also exempted her from some federal transparency obligations. Revelations about the account have raised concerns over the transparency and security of Clinton's correspondence, sparking controversy as her 2016 presidential campaign kicks into gear.
Click to expand...

http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/24/9...ivate-email-criminal-investigation-classified
 
B

Bowdz

Member
Third Strike said:
So the email thing might actually be a legitimate problem for Clinton? The Verge is saying that it could be a federal offense.



http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/24/9...ivate-email-criminal-investigation-classified
Click to expand...

Does anyone honestly think that the DoJ of a Democratic president would launch a criminal investigation into said Democratic president's former SoC during a presidential election year? Serious question.

Does anyone with more knowledge on DoJ investigations want to weigh in on what's likely to happen?

DoJ refuses to launch investigation -> Might make it look like they are covering up for Clinton

DoJ launches investigation -> Who knows what the outcome would be and when it would be handed down
 
A

AndyD

aka andydumi
Wilsongt said:
Not wanting be outdone by Trump, here comes Jeb!



http://thinkprogress.org/health/2015/07/23/3683804/jeb-bush-medicare/

Time until backtrack or "clarification"?
Click to expand...

It has the old safeguard of no changes for the current seniors, but forget it for everyone else. So with the right messaging seniors would totally vote for it.

Jack Remington said:
I wouldn't mind so much if they just phased out Medicare now. Seniors gave us Majority Leader Boehner in 2010 and Majority Leader McConnell in 2014. Give them what they want.

Just so long as it happens right now. I've got 40 years to put together a retirement portfolio.

Apologies to besada and others who would be wrecked by this.
Click to expand...

If this means that those who won't get benefits can stop paying right now (and can shift to some other personal account), then I am kind OK with it, regardless of when the cutoff is. I would prefer that is stays, and expands, but if it were to be "cut" I would rather it's not some convoluted 20 years from now thing where everyone keeps paying to support seniors but won't actually get anything themselves. If the cutoff is say 35 year olds to where those at 35 and above keep paying, but will get it at retirement. Those below don't pay but don't get it either.

Edit: wait I'm thinking Social Security, not Medicare. Ignore everything I said.
 
Y

Yellowtail

Member
The Clinton story has already been walked back by the NYT. They've changed their url and article. It's not a request for a criminal investigation into Clinton but rather a request for an investigation into the State Department's review of the emails and whether they accurately identified classified information in emails that were a part of FOIA requests. There's no reference to any Clinton wrongdoing.

The request is a very generic one, asking whether the State Department misclassified some documents, and criticizing it for "its reliance on retired senior Foreign Service officers to decide if information should be classified, and for not consulting with the intelligence agencies about its determinations." Aside from the fact that the buck stops at the top, there's nothing here that's specifically about Clinton. And yet, the Times writers originally made their lede all about Hillary, almost as if on autopilot.
Click to expand...
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/07/hillary-vs-press-round-one-million-times-screws-scoop
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/2...-reports-of-criminal-probe-of-clintons-emails

The NYT hadn't seen the referral and essentially allowed their anonymous (House GOP) sources to characterize it in its absense.
 
F

FiggyCal

Banned
Yellowtail said:
The Clinton story has already been walked back by the NYT. They've changed their url and article. It's not a request for a criminal investigation into Clinton but rather a request for an investigation into the State Department's review of the emails and whether they accurately identified classified information in emails that were a part of FOIA requests. There's no reference to any Clinton wrongdoing.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/07/hillary-vs-press-round-one-million-times-screws-scoop
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/2...-reports-of-criminal-probe-of-clintons-emails

The NYT hadn't seen the referral and essentially allowed their anonymous (House GOP) sources to characterize it in its absense.
Click to expand...

That's actually a huge mistake on their part. Wow
 
B

Bowdz

Member
Yellowtail said:
The Clinton story has already been walked back by the NYT. They've changed their url and article. It's not a request for a criminal investigation into Clinton but rather a request for an investigation into the State Department's review of the emails and whether they accurately identified classified information in emails that were a part of FOIA requests. There's no reference to any Clinton wrongdoing.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/07/hillary-vs-press-round-one-million-times-screws-scoop
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/2...-reports-of-criminal-probe-of-clintons-emails

The NYT hadn't seen the referral and essentially allowed their anonymous (House GOP) sources to characterize it in its absense.
Click to expand...

If true, then holy shit at the misreporting of this by other outlets.

From the Verge quote up the page:

Verge said:
Federal officials have asked the US Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether Hillary Clinton misused sensitive information on the private email account she used during her tenure as secretary of state, The New York Times reports.
Click to expand...
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
Yellowtail said:
The Clinton story has already been walked back by the NYT. They've changed their url and article. It's not a request for a criminal investigation into Clinton but rather a request for an investigation into the State Department's review of the emails and whether they accurately identified classified information in emails that were a part of FOIA requests. There's no reference to any Clinton wrongdoing.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/07/hillary-vs-press-round-one-million-times-screws-scoop
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/2...-reports-of-criminal-probe-of-clintons-emails

The NYT hadn't seen the referral and essentially allowed their anonymous (House GOP) sources to characterize it in its absense.
Click to expand...

and you wonder why she hates the press. Can you blame her?
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
A 911 attack could bring the country together or implode Obama's presidency depending on the context. IE the response as well as the reason for the attack. The media is faster today than in 2001 and if it became clear the administration was asleep at the wheel, ignored a threat, didn't deport someone that should have been deported, etc it would be a problem. People don't like Obama's foreign policy and if it was ISIS related (I know, I know...) his own dismissal of them would ultimately doom his popularity.

The other damaging issue would be 2016. Republicans would have no trouble running a campaign on defending/protecting America, and I think they'd be handed the presidency. Especially against Hillary.
 
J

Jason's Ultimatum

Member
My friend keeps thnkimg his capital gains tax will increase, and said Hillary is saying it herself. I told him its for the top earners, and average joes like us won't be affected.

she's only raising capital gains on 0.5% that'll be affected right?
 
Metaphoreus

Metaphoreus

This is semantics, and nothing more
The prosecution of Rick Perry is beginning to fall apart (as it should):

The former governor, who is running for the GOP nomination for president, repeatedly failed in efforts get the indictment dismissed by state Judge Bert Richardson. He took his case to the 3rd Court of Appeals in Austin.

The 3rd Court agreed with Richardson that it was too early in the case to decide whether the first count against Perry, charging abuse of official capacity, was unconstitutional as applied to the former governor. It is a first-degree felony.

But the appeals court rejected the second count, coercion of a public servant, saying that the law on which it is based violates the First Amendment.
Click to expand...

The remaining count is the absurd one that alleges, in effect, that Perry literally received the money appropriated to the Public Integrity Unit and, by vetoing the appropriation, misused that money.

For those interested, the opinion is here.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Yellowtail said:
The Clinton story has already been walked back by the NYT. They've changed their url and article. It's not a request for a criminal investigation into Clinton but rather a request for an investigation into the State Department's review of the emails and whether they accurately identified classified information in emails that were a part of FOIA requests. There's no reference to any Clinton wrongdoing.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/07/hillary-vs-press-round-one-million-times-screws-scoop
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/2...-reports-of-criminal-probe-of-clintons-emails

The NYT hadn't seen the referral and essentially allowed their anonymous (House GOP) sources to characterize it in its absense.
Click to expand...

With regards to the clinton this is the M.O. of the press. Its the print first fact-check later on the chance that you are the first to bring down the empire.

Right wing radio will still push this as something that was covered up by the clintons
 
Metaphoreus

Metaphoreus

This is semantics, and nothing more
Jason's Ultimatum said:
My friend keeps thnkimg his capital gains tax will increase, and said Hillary is saying it herself. I told him its for the top earners, and average joes like us won't be affected.

she's only raising capital gains on 0.5% that'll be affected right?
Click to expand...

According to this WSJ article discussing what Clinton will propose, yes:

WSJ said:
The campaign’s proposal would affect only the top 0.5% of taxpayers, hitting top-bracket single filers with taxable income above $413,201 and married couples filing jointly with taxable income above $484,850.

The rate for top-bracket taxpayers would be set on a sliding scale, with the lowest rate applied to investments held the longest. To qualify for the existing 20% rate, one would have to hold an investment for at least six years.
Click to expand...

I don't know about the rates involved, but I do like her sliding-scale idea. It makes more sense than the one-day difference between short-term and long-term capital gains that we currently have.
 
J

Jason's Ultimatum

Member
I haven't followed this thread in years, and many poligaffers know this. I really don't follow politcs anymore, either, but he started. Always bringing up trump and shit. All I did was finish.

I really feel sorry for these ignorant people.
 
J

Jeels

Member
I am sitting at lunch with coworkers and these people actually consider trump a serious presidential candidate...

Texas GAF save me...
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
Jeels said:
I am sitting at lunch with coworkers and these people actually consider trump a serious presidential candidate...

Texas GAF save me...
Click to expand...

How is that a negative? Agree with them and point out how The Donald is superior to all other candidates. That's an opportunity, m8
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
wat how

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...ns-prefer-trump-over-mccain-by-double-digits/

CKshaSPVEAALiCo.png
 
B

BertramCooper

Banned
Ultimately I think establishment Republicans are really going to start unearthing and pushing dirt on Trump and his decidedly not hardcore conservative past.

The whole "secret Democrat" thing might be able to gain some traction if they play it right.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
BertramCooper said:
Ultimately I think establishment Republicans are really going to start unearthing and pushing dirt on Trump and his decidedly not hardcore conservative past.

The whole "secret Democrat" thing might be able to gain some traction if they play it right.
Click to expand...

If they do that they risk him running third party, and unless the candidate the GOP puts out is ultra-conservative Trump will get the tea party vote.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu replied
  • 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
Top Bottom