• 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.
N

NeoXChaos

Member
DrGonzo615 said:
Ugh, anticipating a Hilary v. Bush election coming up.

Unless she fucks up royally, the dems have already practically given her the nod. Who's going to run against her in the primaries?

All I have to say is that political dynasties are bad
Click to expand...

I keep seeing this Poligaf. Why?
 
C

CrimzonSamurai

Member
Poodlestrike said:
Because leveraging institutional power to beat out actual policy concerns is a bad thing.

I still say the Clintons don't count as a dynasty, though. At least, not compared to the Bushes.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I don't think two people constitute a dynasty by any means. Especially when they're husband and wife and it's not a multigenerational thing.
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
NeoXChaos said:
I keep seeing this Poligaf. Why?
Click to expand...

Consolidation of power in a few individuals/families over a long time facilitates corruption more than power diversification.

You know who to bribe with a reasonable assurance that the money will go a long way. On the other hand, if you don't play their game, you know they'll be around long enough to make sure you regret it.

Also why reelections shouldn't be allowed.
 
C

Chichikov

Member
APKmetsfan said:
CCPIuvfUgAAcMKT.png:large
Click to expand...
HANIstX.jpg
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Coriolanus said:
Consolidation of power in a few individuals/families over a long time facilitates corruption more than power diversification.

You know who to bribe with a reasonable assurance that the money will go a long way. On the other hand, if you don't play their game, you know they'll be around long enough to make sure you regret it.

Also why reelections shouldn't be allowed.
Click to expand...

Look to VA and Mexico and see this doesn't prevent corruption or solve the problems you highlighted....

It lessens popular control and the ability to reward a politician who is responsive as well. I'd argue it increase corruption and lessens democracy. I hate term limits I don't see how they are the solution for corruption and money's influence. There are much better avenues including better corruption laws, public financing, better electoral systems, etc. Term limits is the laziest and anti-democratic way out and can backfire (would we have had bush if Clinton could have run again?).

benjipwns said:
18j3h1di06j1yjpg.jpg
Click to expand...

I wish I still had all my old game mags. Those ads were so amazing.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
pigeon said:
I hate to be that guy, but of the four names on that list, two ran companies that imploded. Carmack ran Ion Storm into the ground, and apparently everybody forgot that Jobs was FIRED from Apple because of his inability to budget and manage people. And this isn't even a particularly meaningful list, since it only includes successful entrepreneurs. Obviously you don't know of very many unsuccessful entrepreneurs because they never become notable enough for you to hear about them.

Basically I'm incredibly dubious about this entire line of reasoning. Yes, managers who know nothing about their subject have weaknesses, but managers who have a deep knowledge of the subject matter and no actual organizational or leadership skills are way worse.
Click to expand...
Wait what? Ion Storm was John Romero and Warren Spector. Everyone knows that Romero was a hack. Spector is more respectable but Romero ran the business and ran it into the ground.

I give you Steve Jobs, but looking at entirety of his career he was alright. But as others mentioned, Wozniack was the brains and it would have been interesting to see how things had turned out if he ran the business. On the whole, if this discussion proves anything its that you do not need an MBA to run a tech business. On the contrary it is a disadvantage in this domain.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
Black Mamba said:
I agree with megamind. Test cruz's history as an attorney is irrelevant. Who he defensed does not matter so long as he did it ethically.

Stupid criticism.
Click to expand...

Yet, the GOP was quick to attack a defense attorney running for gov in SC for the prople he defended. Another lawyer, also.
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
APKmetsfan said:
Look to VA and Mexico and see this doesn't prevent corruption or solve the problems you highlighted....

It lessens popular control and the ability to reward a politician who is responsive as well. I'd argue it increase corruption and lessens democracy. I hate term limits I don't see how they are the solution for corruption and money's influence. There are much better avenues including better corruption laws, public financing, better electoral systems, etc. Term limits is the laziest and anti-democratic way out and can backfire (would we have had bush if Clinton could have run again?).
Click to expand...

Reducing =/= preventing. Implementing better measures on an already corrupt system will seldomly produce results by itself. As for rewarding a politician, a good politician should be able to point out an adequate successor. If one can't do what, who the heck has he been surrounding himself with? Tbh the whole idea of rewarding a politician sounds grotesquely wrong to me. It should be a call of duty, not a call for phat lewtz.

If you feel you need more direct control you can install a system for popular initiatives to start votes of no confidence to trigger immediate reelections, given that longer terms would most likely be implemented if no reelection is possible.

As for the mexico example, here, an equivalent, look to saddam era iraq and every country where a dictator gets reelected with large swathes of the vote to see why allowing reelections fosters corruption.

Or to the US congress. bloody thing is near single digits in aproval rating and yet so many fuckers keep their jobs cuz "better the devil you know. mine is one of the good ones". Yay.

Either way, dont let perfect be the enemy of stalin-era stalin.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Coriolanus said:
Reducing =/= preventing. Implementing better measures on an already corrupt system will seldomly produce results by itself. As for rewarding a politician, a good politician should be able to point out an adequate successor. If one can't do what, who the heck has he been surrounding himself with? Tbh the whole idea of rewarding a politician sounds grotesquely wrong to me. It should be a call of duty, not a call for phat lewtz.

If you feel you need more direct control you can install a system for popular initiatives to start votes of no confidence to trigger immediate reelections, given that longer terms would most likely be implemented if no reelection is possible.

As for the mexico example, here, an equivalent, look to saddam era iraq and every country where a dictator gets reelected with large swathes of the vote to see why allowing reelections fosters corruption.

Or to the US congress. bloody thing is near single digits in aproval rating and yet so many fuckers keep their jobs cuz "better the devil you know. mine is one of the good ones". Yay.

Either way, dont let perfect be the enemy of stalin-era stalin.
Click to expand...
I mean rewarding in the sense that if your doing things the people want done you get your job and the ability to keep doing them. Why should we kick out people like FDR who were doing what the people wanted because time passed by?

And successors can be different, people are different. Its not the same as having the same person.

If you have those imediate snap polls of no-confidence then why have a representative system, just switch to Swiss direct democracy.

edit: new republican tears image I found on twitter
CCPpWqCUsAASFiv.jpg:large
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
APKmetsfan said:
I mean rewarding in the sense that if your doing things the people want done you get your job and the ability to keep doing them. Why should we kick out people like FDR who were doing what the people wanted because time passed by?

And successors can be different, people are different. Its not the same as having the same person.

If you have those imediate snap polls of no-confidence then why have a representative system, just switch to Swiss direct democracy.
Click to expand...
Except that you know that the system doesn't play out like that. What happens is that the prez pussyfoots around the first term, walking on eggshells to make sure that he gets that sweet sweet reelection, then, after that is done, he is more prone to behaving how he always wanted to behave. God forbid that we get more honesty in power. See 2nd term Chicago Jesus for a recent example.

The FDR argument is the equivalent of saying "well, we got a good king once, so why should we ditch monarchy?". Because obviously shit kings will come, and then you'll have to suffer through them. This is the downside of the Great Men theory, obv. Shit men are far more common.

Yes, successors are different, that's the bloody point. Either way, you're rewarding the previous holder of the job by making sure that their party remains in power.

As for swiss direct democracy, i dont get what you're implying. Are you hating on snap polls? Why? They increase democratic power, which is theoretically A Good Thing.

But yes, i'd love those. But i live in brazil, where the first thing we did after we got out of dictatorship? no reelection. What we did not a decade after that as soon as the first not-complete shit prez happened, coincidentally, right after we force-punted the previous one? Changed the constitution to allow reelections. Ever since then? Our corruption perception index keeps on climbing. Quite easy to see a general trend of the members of congress that have been at it the longest being the ones that have their names most often involved with corruption scandals.

Fucksake, we had to pass a bloody law to make convicted criminals unable to run for office. Because people kept reelecting the fuckers.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Coriolanus said:
Except that you know that the system doesn't play out like that. What happens is that the prez pussyfoots around the first term, walking on eggshells to make sure that he gets that sweet sweet reelection, then, after that is done, he is more prone to behaving how he always wanted to behave. God forbid that we get more honesty in power. See 2nd term Chicago Jesus for a recent example.

The FDR argument is the equivalent of saying "well, we got a good king once, so why should we ditch monarchy?". Because obviously shit kings will come, and then you'll have to suffer through them. This is the downside of the Great Men theory, obv. Shit men are far more common.

Yes, successors are different, that's the bloody point. Either way, you're rewarding the previous holder of the job by making sure that their party remains in power.

As for swiss direct democracy, i dont get what you're implying. Are you hating on snap polls? Why? They increase democratic power, which is theoretically A Good Thing.

But yes, i'd love those. But i live in brazil, where the first thing we did after we got out of dictatorship? no reelection. What we did not a decade after that as soon as the first not-complete shit prez happened, coincidentally, right after we force-punted the previous one? Changed the constitution to allow reelections. Ever since then? Our corruption perception index keeps on climbing. Quite easy to see a general trend of the members of congress that have been at it the longest being the ones that have their names most often involved with corruption scandals.

Fucksake, we had to pass a bloody law to make convicted criminals unable to run for office. Because people kept reelecting the fuckers.
Click to expand...
Well we don't have the same experience as Brazil, but elections even with outrageous money I feel are much more fair here.

And I don't like direct democracy. I like the representative model but with fair and democratic selection of those representatives. Snap polls and popular referendum I don't think are very good except for circumstances that are few and far between
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Who among you has not teared up reading Hilary's new epilogue? I think she needs to keep these themes for the whole campaign. People know she has the policy chops. She just needs to be human. If she is. I dunno.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/lindsey-graham-rand-paul-2016-116837.html
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham may still be weighing whether to run for president, but he already has a strategy — distancing himself from fellow senator Rand Paul.

In TV appearances, on the campaign trail, and even in private fundraisers, Graham, an Air Force reservist and one of his party’s most prominent defense hawks, has gone after Paul repeatedly and by name, casting him as weak-kneed and unwilling to protect the country from aggressors.

In interviews, Graham aides said he was laying out a plan to position himself as Paul’s foil, and will repeatedly contrast his foreign policy positions to that of the Kentucky senator’s more isolationist views, especially in debates. They believe that going after Paul — or “putting wood on him,” in the words of one aide — drives attention to Graham and, at a time of rising concern about threats from abroad, helps establish himself as the hawk of the Republican field.

...

The Kentucky senator, he said, “in many ways is to the left of Barack Obama.” To defeat Hillary Clinton, Graham argued, Republicans would need a nominee with robust national defense strategy. “Sen. Paul isn’t in a good position to do that,” he said.

Paul, 52, declined to comment on his relationship with Graham, and many of his advisers — who over the years have observed Graham launch similar broadsides against Paul’s father, former Texas Rep. Ron Paul — are hesitant to respond to Graham’s attacks, believing that it will only help the South Carolina senator.

“Punching down third-tier candidates doesn’t often make a lot of sense,” said Jesse Benton, a former Paul campaign manager who is now helping to lead a super PAC that will be supporting his candidacy.
Click to expand...
The most recent flareup came on Sunday, when Graham, appearing on Fox News, said Paul’s “foreign policy is to the left of President Obama.” He added that any Republican candidate would have struck a better Iran deal than Obama. “Except maybe Rand Paul.”

Appearing on the same network just minutes after he formally declared himself a candidate for president, Paul was asked about Graham’s comments. He chuckled. “Well, almost anyone in the Congress would better defend the Bill of Rights than this particular senator,” he said. “So touché.”
Click to expand...
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
http://time.com/3763552/hillary-clinton-age-president/

The long phase of perimenopause is marked by seismic spikes and troughs of estrogen levels, which can last for more than a decade in many women. But afterward, there is a hormonal ebbing that creates a moment of great possibility. As a psychiatrist, I will tell you the most interesting thing about menopause is what happens after. A woman emerging from the transition of perimenopause blossoms. It is a time for redefining and refining what it is she wants to accomplish in her third act. And it happens to be excellent timing for the job Clinton is likely to seek. Biologically speaking, postmenopausal women are ideal candidates for leadership. They are primed to handle stress well, and there is, of course, no more stressful job than the presidency.

Estrogen is a stress hormone that helps a woman be resilient during her fertile years. Its levels rise and fall to help her meet her biological demands, which are often about giving to others: attracting a mate, bearing children and nurturing a family. When estrogen levels drop after menopause, the cyclical forces that dominated the first half of our lives have been replaced with something more consistent. Our lives revolve less around others and become more about finally taking our turn.

In my new book, Moody Bitches, I look at how women are taught from an early age that moodiness is a problem to be fixed. That is simply wrongheaded. Women’s moods are our body’s intelligent feedback system. If we learn to manage them properly, they are a great resource and a tremendous source of power. They show us when we are primed for certain challenges and opportunities.
Click to expand...

i just...
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...mas-foreign-policy-virtually-guarantees-wwiii
Former Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) on Wednesday said President Obama’s friendly overtures toward Cuba and Iran could eventually spark a global war.

“This virtually guarantees, in my opinion, World War III, and I think that alone would qualify Barack Obama for being the worst president that the United States has ever had to endure,” she said in an interview with "NewsTalk Florida."

“You can get economics wrong, and you can turn it around,” Bachmann added. “Where we have problems decades into the future are disasters with foreign policy.”

Bachmann, a 2012 GOP presidential candidate, called Obama’s diplomatic approach to longtime U.S. enemies “the worst part” of his presidency.

...

The ex-congresswoman said those actions had strengthened terrorists. She said that, overall, Obama’s Middle East decisions were “pro-jihad” and “anti-Christian” blunders.

“This president, Barack Obama, has been almost just heartless and bloodless, when it comes to the persecution of Christians and Jews across the world,” Bachmann argued.

“He has been the best friend of the terrorist,” she charged. “I don’t mean that in a flip way, but his actions and rhetoric have been such that he has dated the rise of the goals of terrorists across the world.”

Bachmann said a nuclear-armed Iran was a graver threat than even the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) that the president did not understand.

“But the biggest problem of all is Iran, and that’s where we need to focus because Iran cannot get a nuclear weapon, and that’s why it’s imperative that this Congress wake up and hold this president accountable,” Bachmann urged.
Click to expand...
 
Rhomega Beta

Rhomega Beta

Member
The message I'm getting from conservatives is that World War III is coming, and there's nothing we can do about it except prepare, whether it's Russia or Iran that kicks it off. They don't want to repeat Iraq's mistakes, so the best thing to do is stock up on supplies and wait for Iran's EMPs.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
White House defends trolling Netanyahu
The White House is standing by a tweet mocking Israeli Prime Minister Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu despite concerns it could further sour relations between the two countries.

A White House tweet defending the framework nuclear agreement with Iran contained a cartoon bomb that was nearly identical to one in a chart used by Netanyahu in a 2012 speech urging the U.S. to take a harder line against Iran’s nuclear program.

“Prime Minister Netanyahu has issued very strong criticisms of this deal,” deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes said on Friday. “That’s entirely his right, but we are also going to issue strong defenses of this deal.

“It would make no sense for us to essentially not make our case,” Rhodes said.
Click to expand...

NRA's LaPierre: 'Hillary Rodham Clinton Will Bring A Permanent Darkness Of Deceit And Despair'
NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre dedicated his speech today at the group’s annual meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, to attacking Hillary Clinton, at one point even resorting to listing a series of “gate” scandals attributed to her and her husband, including “Vince Foster Gate” and “White House Coffee Gate.”

“Hillary Clinton has more ‘gates’ than a South Texas cattle ranch,” LaPierre said. “And Americans know it.”

Later, he warned that “Hillary Rodham Clinton will bring a permanent darkness of deceit and despair, forced upon the American people to endrue.”
Click to expand...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEWfvK0Oxe0
 
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