• 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 |OT2| Pls print

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HylianTom

Banned
I got killed at work today, had an absolutely shitty day, but saw a tweet about that Rubio flip and did a quiet fist-pump. This news pleases me greatly.

He now looks a bit less concerning. That's tailor-made for a general election campaign commercial.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
HylianTom said:
I got killed at work today, had an absolutely shitty day, but saw a tweet about that Rubio flip and did a quiet fist-pump. This news pleases me greatly.

He now looks a bit less concerning. That's tailor-made for a general election campaign commercial.
Click to expand...

I don't think it will matter in the general. Everyone by now pretty much expects that each of the GOP candidates have to bargain with the devil when they run for the nomination. He will pivot back to center just like everyone else and act like nothing happened.
 
B

Brawndo Addict

Banned
Particle Physicist said:
You are using wiki. That wiki post is oversimplifying the explanation. A Jew who converts to another religion can come back to Judaism without having to go through conversion again if they are born to a Jewish mother. That is essentially what that is supposed to be about.

Once again, Jews For Jesus are a self identified Christian group made for the purpose of converting Jews to Christianity.
Click to expand...

I don't see anything wrong with looking to Wikipedia for information on things I'm unfamiliar about; one just has to be cautious considering the open nature of the site. The article seemed to be decently sourced and cognizant of potential disparities between sects. So when I saw the line: "But, those born Jewish do not lose that status because they cease to be observant Jews, even if they adopt the practices of another religion", I didn't think, hey, that could be a potential oversimplification, I thought, that's a very binary and absolutist statement, and if false, would likely have been removed. Given my unfamiliarity with the subject, I didn't recognize the nuance between status of being born Jewish and the status of being Jewish. That's on me for not being more careful.

The article does seem to go into more detail about this issue later on though:

Jews who have practiced another religion

In general, Orthodox Judaism considers individuals born of Jewish mothers to be Jewish, even if they convert to or are raised in another religion.[35] Reform Judaism views Jews who convert to or are raised in another religion as non-Jews. For example "...anyone who claims that Jesus is their savior is no longer a Jew..." [Contemporary American Reform Responsa, #68].[36][37][38]

Historically, a Jew who has been declared to be a heretic (Hebrew: min, מין) or Christian (Hebrew: notzri, נוצרי, meaning "Nazarene") may have had a cherem (similar to excommunication) placed on him or her; but the practice of communal and religious exclusion does not affect their status of Jewish birth.[39] Judaism also views as Jewish those who involuntarily convert from Judaism to another religion (Hebrew: anusim, אנוסים, meaning "forced ones"), and their matrilineal descendants are likewise considered to be Jewish.

Judaism has a category for those who are Jewish but who do not practice or who do not accept the tenets of Judaism, whether or not they have converted to another religion. The traditional view regarding these individuals, known as Meshumadim (Hebrew: משומדים‎), is that they are Jewish; however, there is much debate in the rabbinic literature regarding their status vis-a-vis the application of Jewish law and their participation in Jewish ritual,[39] but not to their status as Jews.
Click to expand...

So yeah, much more complicated then my cursory look would suggest. The religious aspect would seem to rule out a significant portion of Israel's population given its secular leanings though wouldn't it? Might be a case of a sometimes unfollowed rule in regards to the test being religious vs. ancestral. I would hazard a guess that most of Israel's secular population favors the ancestral viewpoint and most of the religious population favors the religious.
 
A

ArtFuzzy

Banned
I wonder if Jeb will start specifically targeting Mexican immigrants. Seems like he's just sort of held a luke warm stance towards the whole topic of debate. Said some things about Asian immigrants trying to appeal to the xenophobic voter base trump has captured, but lets be real here, most of the voters that cry about immigration are specifically singling out Mexicans. Thus attention regarding his illegal immigrant comments gained zero traction.

wonder what his wife would think if Jeb started targeting illegal immigrants from Mexico?

we all know Jeb is a career-family politician so I doubt he cares about his own ideology when it comes to the race. he'd say anything to get elected. I'm just wondering if her would specifically targeting the culture of his wife-mother of his children. has anybody else noticed how "weak on immigration*" Jeb has been? *Trump's words

Anybody else think this is because he doesn't want to say anything that will personally hurt his immediate family?
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
RustyNails said:
I don't think it will matter in the general. Everyone by now pretty much expects that each of the GOP candidates have to bargain with the devil when they run for the nomination. He will pivot back to center just like everyone else and act like nothing happened.
Click to expand...
I figure it won't be huge - I was just waiting for Rubio to officially take out his pen and sign his name on the devil's dotted line. The ink is dry, the deed done.

sc0la said:
I am sorry for you're loss.

RIP, going to miss your posts tbh.
Click to expand...
I have arisen!

---

Speaking of Rubio..

First on CNN: Trump sent prank care package to Rubio
Donald Trump is escalating his attacks on Sen. Marco Rubio with a special delivery for his rival: "Trump Ice Natural Spring Water."

Trump has previously trained his fire on Rubio, claiming he has the worst voting attendance record in the U.S. Senate and that he sweats a lot. But CNN learned that the Trump campaign sent a "care package" to Rubio's Washington campaign office that contained a 24-bottle case of "Trump Ice Natural Spring Water," with Trump's face on it, two "Make America Great Again" towels and bumper stickers and a note reading, "Since you're always sweating, we thought you could use some water. Enjoy!"

A Trump campaign aide said they added the towels "for him sweating," and described the overall gesture as a lighthearted prank.
Click to expand...

The water Trump sent..
trump_water_rubio.jpg
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
Feeling pretty safe about my pick right now. Rubio stans better hydrate.

But for reals, wish more presidential candidates engaged in old school politics like Trump. So intensely amusing. Kinda wish it was possible to collect data to determine if this sorta thing increases political interest.

Retromelon said:
So guys did we figure out if ethnic jews count as jews yet
Om8tHG5.png
Click to expand...

Just use the golden rule: would a nazi try to kill them?
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Thequietone said:
I said that Trump would destroy Rubio. This is only the beginning. It will be down to JEB! And Trump for the nomination.
Click to expand...

JEB! isn't going to survive another debate at the rate Trump has been going at him. Trump's been dropping that ether on everyone.
 
P

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
Brawndo Addict said:
I don't see anything wrong with looking to Wikipedia for information on things I'm unfamiliar about; one just has to be cautious considering the open nature of the site. The article seemed to be decently sourced and cognizant of potential disparities between sects. So when I saw the line: "But, those born Jewish do not lose that status because they cease to be observant Jews, even if they adopt the practices of another religion", I didn't think, hey, that could be a potential oversimplification, I thought, that's a very binary and absolutist statement, and if false, would likely have been removed. Given my unfamiliarity with the subject, I didn't recognize the nuance between status of being born Jewish and the status of being Jewish. That's on me for not being more careful.

The article does seem to go into more detail about this issue later on though:



So yeah, much more complicated then my cursory look would suggest. The religious aspect would seem to rule out a significant portion of Israel's population given its secular leanings though wouldn't it? Might be a case of a sometimes unfollowed rule in regards to the test being religious vs. ancestral. I would hazard a guess that most of Israel's secular population favors the ancestral viewpoint and most of the religious population favors the religious.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't mean it as a slight against you, just that wikipedia does not always delve deeply into explanations of certain topics. You are right that this is actually a complicated question that has even been up to debate within different factions of Jewish scholars. One thing is for certain, the movement Jews For Jesus use the term Jew or Judaism solely as a means to attempt to convert Jews to Christianity.

This can be an interesting topic to discuss further but I feel like we are so off topic right now haha.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
I'm going to laugh if Rubio - described by many as one of the GOP's best chances - gets the nomination and then loses by a comfortable margin in the electoral college. You thought we saw meltdowns in 2012? Ha!

And that McCarthy ad? Well-done. His comment was probably as big a gift as the GOP could give her, with the exception of perhaps them nominating Trumpy. Maybe I'm hallucinating, but she even looks and sounds like a newer, more confident campaigner all of a sudden.
 
R

RDreamer

Member
Good ad. That statement really gave her a lot. I mean not that it shouldn't have been enough to point out just how many stupid committees and hearing have been held on it, more than pretty much anything else ever, but yeah... Him saying that hurts the GOP in a big way.

Hillary basically has to sit back and let the republicans make stupid gaffes like that. Jeb! already has about a thousand of them. "Stuff happens" and "My brother kept us safe" would torpedo that campaign faster than you could imagine. Trump is... well, he's Trump. I think a blind and deaf person could still find some shit to put in an anti-trump ad.

The only GOP hope right now is Rubio and he's still a fucking long shot, and you still also have to hope he doesn't shoot himself in the foot.
 
R

Retromelon

Member
That music change when the ad switched to hillary wasn't subtle at all. *Im going to start bitching now* whenever advertisements start playing ukeleles or happy music i get enraged. These assholes that make commercials can't manipulate my feelings with music. I'm not that easy.
Sod off hillary
RustyNails said:
I am surprised even a dolt like Sean Hannity did not catch it.
Click to expand...
He's only a water carrier for the gop. He knew all along, most likely, (nobody's that stupid) but would never say it. Truth doesn't matter to people like him
QxwDDQi.png

ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Oh my god, you're dril/wint.

https://twitter.com/dril
Click to expand...
Dunno what Im supposed to be seeing here brah
 
R

RustyNails

Member
McCarthy ad lol

You can see it in his eyes he was trying to slobber up to the base with that bit about benghazi. I am surprised even a dolt like Sean Hannity did not catch it. The power of a bubble. I would not have in a million years could have predicted that the charade would be undone by their own.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Cheebo said:
It is surprising how few Republican nominees are not candidates who ran before and lost, which is rarely the case in the Democratic party. Most open primaries are won by first time Presidential candidates. Only time the Republicans didn't pick a previous losing candidate since 1976 was 2000.

Romney 2012: Ran in 2008 and lost.
McCain 2008: Ran in 2000 and lost.
Bush 2000: Did not run before.
Dole 1996: Ran in 1980 and lost.
Bush 1988: Ran in 1980 and lost.
Reagan 1980: Ran in 1976 and lost.

To keep this trend up either you have to be the spawn of George HW Bush or be a previous failed presidential candidate.
Click to expand...
Dole also ran in 1988 and did much better, his 1980 bid was more like George Pataki's. 1988 was when he got pissed at Bush and told him to STOP LYING ABOUT MY RECORD. Reagan "ran" in 1968.

One reason the Democrats have had it less so, is that they've been less successful at producing Presidencies. Having had exactly two (Carter and Clinton) in the modern primary era before Obama.

Gore had run in 1988 and was the nominee in 2000. Mondale was the nominee in 1984 which would have been "his turn" I guess if Carter won again, he only backed out of 1976 at the last second. Humphrey eventually wound up as the nominee in 1968 by becoming VP. He had made runs in 1952 and 1960.

Democrats interestingly have picked a pair of "almost-rans" as their candidates. Clinton backed out in 1988 at the last second, became nominee in 1992. Kerry did the same in 2000, became nominee in 2004. I mentioned Mondale.

One thing I find interesting and this goes back to the first conventions, is that parties seem to wind up with large crops of candidates, but no "obvious" one, at the same time or they have a basically unanimous pick with one opposing shot and this is even when they don't have incumbents. Reagan in 1976 and Obama in 2008 were in that role more or less. Obama was successful because of the open primary system, Ford held the convention vote.

Had Hillary not run, I imagine there would be a swarm of Democratic candidates but none of them sticking out much like the GOP field has been. Rising and falling, but mostly holding in the 5-10% range.

This is something PACs have helped. No longer can the field be pre-cleared for Nixon/Bush/Dole as easily as it was in 1960, 1968, 1988, 1996, and 2000. And we now see in the D race, that even what should be insurmountable poll numbers aren't an ideal indicator of the state of the race. If Hillary had been at 45% six plus months ago, there's no way people like Cuomo are fleeing the race instead of hanging around hinting at runs.

Our other D examples have spanners thrown into the works. 1976 has a party in disarray and only one candidate who figured out how the delegate system worked. Carter's re-election bid has the most popular Democrat of his era running as a challenger. Gore's bid has him intentionally running away from Clinton and still having the field mostly cleared for him despite Bradley not polling too badly.

1988 D race continues to be the most interesting to me, the by-far front-runner gets caught on a boat, the next-runner gets forced into being VP 20 years later as punishment for not doing proper sourcing in his speeches, and the rest all appeal to only one segment of the base. So you wind up with Michael Dukakis who nobody wanted as the candidate when the race started.

Of course, no model can compensate for the Donald, as he himself will tell you. Okay? As all the experts say, you simply cannot account for Donald Trump, you can't do it, ask anybody. Okay?

Black Mamba said:
Guys, I'm back! Someone fill me in super quick on the last 2 weeks. I have seriously ignored almost everything minus big news stories (like the shooting).

I know Scott Walker dropped out (lol PD) a while ago and Boehner announced his resignation, but other than that, been in the dark.
Click to expand...
The state admitted its illegitimacy and set a date for ending its violence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu 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