Support NeoGAF

[Makai]

I'll bet you were cackling over your keyboard as you typed that part

No way thats unintentional

I came this close to falling for it.

 

[Abinash117]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/president-obama-60-minutes-syria-isis-2016-presidential-race/

Here is the interview. Syria is a complex problem, and it got more complicated as it went on. Combined with a lot of people not wanting to get involved with the ME it probably was not an easy thing to deal with. Although, some people think he was/is being too cautious which lead to what we are now partially. He is changing strategies now though which might look aggressive.

 

[User1608]

Sounds like Obama got owned on 60 Minutes. It's stunning seeing liberals so focused on climate change, an issue no one gives a fuck about (outside of liberals). I guess it's the only area he can have any impact on today, so he wants to run the score up on his list of "accomplishments." But still, with the world burning, pointing to climate change as your leadership example seems laughable.

LOL. Never a dull post.

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

It's stunning seeing liberals so focused on climate change, an issue no one gives a fuck about (outside of liberals)..

This sentence is completely meaningless. I mean, you have no idea what the fuck you're even saying.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Too bad the interview couldn't be about how cheap gas prices are.

 

[Retromelon]

Dunno why it would be. That's opec's shit

Are you familiar with politics? President is responsible for everything.

Yea but, in your scenario, the interviewer would only ask about that if they were high, and what he would do about it. No interviewer in a plausible fantasy would say, btw mr president just wanted to thank you for this fortuitous event that was completely out of your control, good job.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Dunno why it would be. That's opec's shit

Are you familiar with politics? President is responsible for everything.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

I hate how cheap gas prices are.

 

[PhoenixDark]

This sentence is completely meaningless. I mean, you have no idea what the fuck you're even saying.

Am I wrong?

I agree Kroft was disingenuous and frankly rather pathetic; he clearly has a kindergarten view of foreign policy. But Obama came off quite unimpressive, and the climate change line was the icing on the cake.

 

[Roland_Gunner]

Am I wrong?

I agree Kroft was disingenuous and frankly rather pathetic; he clearly has a kindergarten view of foreign policy. But Obama came off quite unimpressive, and the climate change line was the icing on the cake.

Yes, completely and utterly wrong. Climate change is the biggest issue facing the globe right now and for the next 100 years. President Obama and every public official have an obligation to drive this home every chance possible.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Yea but, in your scenario, the interviewer would only ask about that if they were high, and what he would do about it. No interviewer in a plausible fantasy would say, btw mr president just wanted to thank you for this fortuitous event that was completely out of your control, good job.

There's no need to dissect a joking comment so deeply.

 

[Retromelon]

Does the general public not caring make it right to ignore global warming tho

 

[PhoenixDark]

Yes, completely and utterly wrong. Climate change is the biggest issue facing the globe right now and for the next 100 years. President Obama and every public official have an obligation to drive this home every chance possible.

Ok. Still does not change the fact that most people don't care. Nor am I sold that anything we do is going to magically change things. We're probably fucked long term given that there's no guarantee other countries agree to lower their own emissions long term.

I've seen Daily Kos and other liberal sites saying dems should focus a lot on this in the debate. The delusion is baffling.

 

[The Technomancer]

Ok. Still does not change the fact that most people don't care. Nor am I sold that anything we do is going to magically change things. We're probably fucked long term given that there's no guarantee other countries agree to lower their own emissions long term.

I've seen Daily Kos and other liberal sites saying dems should focus a lot on this in the debate. The delusion is baffling.

I mean, as long as every country thinks the same way no-one will

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

Am I wrong?

Yeah I think you are. There's no evidence that only "liberals" care about climate change. In fact, we almost certainly know that to be false because even in polls about climate change where people who identify themselves other than liberal are questioned, some percentage are always in the "climate change is real and should be addressed" category.

And you do realize that there are people around the world, living in rural, sometimes fairly remote parts of the world who are already experiencing the effects of climate change, acknowledge it and most certainly care about it? Just look at how it's affecting farmers in South America. Do you think they're "liberal"?

Even if liberals were the only people who cared about climate change, that would not say anything about the validity of caring about climate change.

 

[RustyNails]

I mean, as long as every country thinks the same way no-one will

Problem with global warming is that even though it's real, it's not at all on the minds of common man anywhere, unless we're talking about fishermen from tiny islands. It's a big deal at UN and world politics, but sadly PD is correct that no one really cares that much about it outside of academic, scientific and politic circles. When you have ferocious civil wars raging like in Syria, poverty and widespread corruption in Africa, lack of clean water and sanitation in much of the 3rd world, people don't really give a shit about climate change because of much more serious threats right in front of them. I was watching this bit earlier about the lack of basic sanitation goods for women in Refugee camps, and how this one nonprofit organization was trying to fix it...You can't really blame people if they don't care about it when they can't even take care of themselves physically.

 

[East Lake]

Problem with global warming is that even though it's real, it's not at all on the minds of common man anywhere, unless we're talking about fishermen from tiny islands. It's a big deal at UN and world politics, but sadly PD is correct that no one really cares that much about it outside of academic, scientific and politic circles. When you have ferocious civil wars raging like in Syria, poverty and widespread corruption in Africa, lack of clean water and sanitation in much of the 3rd world, people don't really give a shit about climate change because of much more serious threats right in front of them. I was watching this bit earlier about the lack of basic sanitation goods for women in Refugee camps, and how this one nonprofit organization was trying to fix it...You can't really blame people if they don't care about it when they can't even take care of themselves physically.

People still care more about climate change here than any of that stuff, PD is just recycling concern trolls he finds on twitter.

What they don't want is to hurt the economy over it. So that means solving it though investment and R&D, which is what will be done. I'd also add some poorer countries are much more aware since it compounds their drought problems.

 

[Muzy72]

Hillary Clinton is coming to San Antonio this Thursday with our former mayor (and future Vice President ;D) Julian Castro. Hopefully I can clear out my schedule so I can go.

 

[eBay Huckster]

Problem with global warming is that even though it's real, it's not at all on the minds of common man anywhere, unless we're talking about fishermen from tiny islands. It's a big deal at UN and world politics, but sadly PD is correct that no one really cares that much about it outside of academic, scientific and politic circles. When you have ferocious civil wars raging like in Syria, poverty and widespread corruption in Africa, lack of clean water and sanitation in much of the 3rd world, people don't really give a shit about climate change because of much more serious threats right in front of them. I was watching this bit earlier about the lack of basic sanitation goods for women in Refugee camps, and how this one nonprofit organization was trying to fix it...You can't really blame people if they don't care about it when they can't even take care of themselves physically.

all of this having been said, there's a pretty big distinction between "no one gives a shit about climate change" and "it's a secondary issue to most people"

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Ok. Still does not change the fact that most people don't care. Nor am I sold that anything we do is going to magically change things. We're probably fucked long term given that there's no guarantee other countries agree to lower their own emissions long term.

I've seen Daily Kos and other liberal sites saying dems should focus a lot on this in the debate. The delusion is baffling.

This is exactly what Paris is accomplishing. Never mind that China and India just released plans

 

[ivysaur12]

for benji:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rubycramer/...sweat?utm_term=.xwRmvPoor&bftw=pol#.dw9EWGllV

ANOTHER ROUND: I don’t mean sweat because you’re nervous just mean physically, I’m genuinely curious what your deodorant is.

HILLARY CLINTON: You know, I just turned off the thermostat. [Glances at the wall.] No, I don’t know.

ANOTHER ROUND: Do you have a spray situation, is it a liquid? I’m not joking.

HILLARY CLINTON: Solid. Solid block. I like the solid. Solid block is much better.

ANOTHER ROUND: Ok. This is an odd question that I lobbied for a lot because it’s one of my favorite questions to ask people. If you don’t have an answer, that’s fine, but I will be a little sad. What’s the weirdest thing about you?

HILLARY CLINTON: The weirdest thing about me is that I don’t sweat.

ANOTHER ROUND: Obviously. Best argument for Hillary as a robot: zero sweat.

HILLARY CLINTON: You guys are the first to realize that I’m really not even a human being. I was constructed in a garage in Palo Alto a very long time ago. People think that, you know, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, they created it. Oh no. I mean, a man whose name shall remain nameless created me in his garage.

ANOTHER ROUND: Are there more of you?

HILLARY CLINTON: I thought he threw away the plans, at least that’s what he told me when he programmed me — that there would be no more. I’ve seen more people that kind of don’t sweat, and other things, that make me think maybe they are part of the new race that he created: the robot race.

ANOTHER ROUND: So there’s a cyborg army is what you’re saying.

HILLARY CLINTON: But you have to cut this, you can’t tell anybody this. I don’t want anybody to know this. This has been a secret until here we are in Davenport, Iowa, and I’m just spillin’ my electronic guts to you.

ANOTHER ROUND: And without bourbon.

HILLARY CLINTON: Without any bourbon. Yeah. That’s why I have to wait ‘til the end of the day.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

PD is just trolling, but it's weird in general to go "but people don't care about X so why talk about X"

For an extreme example, ISIS has killed fewer Americans in their existence than domestic violence killed today, but people care far more about ISIS. That doesn't mean the government should care more about ISIS.

 

[Big Green Anus]

for benji:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rubycramer/...sweat?utm_term=.xwRmvPoor&bftw=pol#.dw9EWGllV

Hillary actually sounds.........human! I'm really liking this side of Hillary

 

[PhoenixDark]

Normally I agree that public policy shouldn't be determined by what most people think. Most people want troops on the ground in Syria. Most people are easily swayed by media bullshit. But with climate change we're largely talking about a political issue more so than specific policies. And as such climate change is very low on most people's concerns list. Which is why I'm baffled liberals are talking about it so much. It's somewhat similar to Planned Parenthood with conservatives: only the hardcore base is obsessed with the issue so why focus on it so much? The vast majority of people have more important issues to worry about than PP.

Honestly I'd say the same of gun control. Nothing is going to be done, and Americans make it quite clear every 2-4 years that it is not a major concern. I think democrats are once again over reacting on this issue, which only fires up conservatives.

In general it seems like the WH's victory lap during these final years seems to focus on highlighting everything except what people are worried about. Jobs and wages. I understand Obama can't do much but he still sounds tone deaf when he brags about economic accomplishments people can't feel. Most people are dissatisfied with him and the economy. I'd hope that democrats start focusing on issues people care about instead of changing the subject. Republicans are making a similar mistake with abortion and Hillary emails.

 

[User 406]

I, for one, welcome our new robot Wal-Mart corporatist hair-trigger temper overlords.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Obama would cruise to a third term against any one in the Republican field and have a very good chance to picking up NC as well. Hopefully he fully supports HRC (or Sanders) next year.

He's been running under the assumption (privately) that Hillary will be replacing him in conversations with aides and such. (Meeting with educators about universal pre-K - "Maybe Hillary can get that")

The fix is in

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Just a general response that isn't directed at PD, the Clean Power Plan is overwhelmingly liked by the general public (whereas shutting down the government over PP is universally disliked of an idea), climate change will cause mass migration that will break up families and lead to migration crises and lead to many deaths, climate change will lead to many more problems similar to California 2015, climate change will kill most animal species on earth, and climate change will make the summers fucking garbage to try to go through.

Climate change warming the earth by a few degrees isn't the issue, it's how people will have to react to the issue that will cause people similar to the California drought and Syrian refugee crisis. And those are massive political problems.

 

[The Technomancer]

He's been running under the assumption (privately) that Hillary will be replacing him in conversations with aides and such. (Meeting with educators about universal pre-K - "Maybe Hillary can get that")

The fix is in

I'm more convinced Bernie has a shot than I was a month ago, but my money is still on Hillary

 

[Indicate]

Anyone here making an OT for the Democratic Presidential Debate for tomorrow night? I've been thinking about doing it for awhile now, but I've been very busy lately. Plus I'm not as informed about the other candidates compared to Bernie, Hillary, and perhaps O'Malley to be able to provide a good backgrounder.

 

[kingkitty]

I thought about making one, but I assume somebody already had dibs.

 

[thepotatoman]

Dude come on, you get called out for having no substance on the issue and you go "buh-buh-buh Iraq." You just proved his point.

Is it not fair to say that her vote on Iraq disqualifies her in his opinion? It's not like that was just some random vote, but was a pivotal moment in American and world history, and she was clearly on the wrong side of it.

 

[benjipwns]

But they knew that election was unwinnable so they just let it happen.

No, no they didn't. The Stop Goldwater movement was pretty significant. It just was split among six candidates, two of whom weren't even candidates.

The problem was Nelson Rockefeller was always a terrible candidate who didn't have the support of more than 20% of the party and was constantly demanding Goldwater debate him. (And spent most of 1963 attacking Kennedy.) Henry Cabot Lodge (Eisenhower's choice) and Nixon both refused to run...and still won or finished second in a bundle of primaries. The establishment tried to setup favorite sons to deny Goldwater the delegates but the Goldwaterites pulled an Obama/Paul and made sure not to bypass the real delegate selections while setting up on the ground operations.

They tried a last ditch unification around William Scranton (with Eisenhower and Rockefeller's backing) leading up to the convention who led Goldwater in polls by 20+ points among Republicans, especially since Goldwater didn't have enough delegates, (Only 16 states held primaries) but Scranton kept demanding Goldwater debate him on TV rather than campaigning and then bought his own time to whine about Goldwater supporters attacking him which killed his bid and THEN the establishment said fuck it, let em have Goldwater.

Nixon pointedly refused to work with the moderate/liberal establishment's efforts (despite being from that wing) because he saw the huge popularity of Goldwater within the party and wanted to not alienate them in 1968 so he could focus his efforts on Rockefeller, Romney, Reagan, etc. (lol at all the R's...what) Nixon's speech introducing Goldwater* at the 1964 convention earned him Goldwater's early endorsement in 1968 and warded off any real stampede to Reagan during the Stop Nixon phase late in the primaries..

*

Before this convention, we were Goldwater Republicans, Rockefeller Republicans, Scranton Republicans, Lodge Republicans, but now that this convention has met and made its decision, we are Republicans, period, working for Barry Goldwater for President of the United States.

 

[BertramCooper]

Ok. Still does not change the fact that most people don't care. Nor am I sold that anything we do is going to magically change things. We're probably fucked long term given that there's no guarantee other countries agree to lower their own emissions long term.

I've seen Daily Kos and other liberal sites saying dems should focus a lot on this in the debate. The delusion is baffling.

Most people probably don't care about things like coal mine safety or endangered species, either.

So I guess government officials, politicians and regulators shouldn't give a fuck about those sorts of things, either.

Public apathy isn't an excuse for government inaction.

 

[NeoXChaos]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/12/politics/poll-south-carolina-nevada-hillary-clinton/index.html

Nevada

Hillary 51
Sanders 34
Biden 12

Clinton 58
Sanders 36

South Carolina

Hillary 49
Sanders 24
Biden 18

Hillary 70
Sanders 20

 

[Cheebo]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/12/politics/poll-south-carolina-nevada-hillary-clinton/index.html

Nevada

Hillary 51
Sanders 34
Biden 12

Clinton 58
Sanders 36

South Carolina

Hillary 49
Sanders 24
Biden 18

Hillary 70
Sanders 20

lol Sanders.

 

[Future PhaZe]

U.S. military cargo planes gave 50 tons of ammunition to rebel groups overnight in northern Syria, using an air drop of 112 pallets as the first step in the Obama Administration's urgent effort to find new ways to support those groups.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/12/politics/syria-rebel-groups-ammunition-50-tons/index.html



ugh

fucking stop it

 

[BertramCooper]

I'm getting really annoyed with the pervasive assumption that Democrats can nominate virtually anyone and win the presidency.

 

[NeoXChaos]

I'm getting really annoyed with the pervasive assumption that Democrats can nominate virtually anyone and win the presidency.

I'm getting really annoyed with the pervasive assumption that Republicans can nominate virtually anyone and lose the presidency.

^Arguments among some Democrats.

 

[dramatis]

This has become the weird universe in which we Diablos-lite the optimism of others instead of cheering up Diablos

 

[BertramCooper]

^Arguments among some Democrats.

One of the things that really annoys me is that people act like the margin of victory doesn't matter.

Depending on the matchup, Sanders could win in the general election. But any potential Sanders victory would inevitably be by a far narrower margin than a potential Hillary victory. And the margin matters. A lot.

The wider the margin of victory, the more empowered the winning president will be. If Obama had just barely won in 2008, what are the chances that he would have seriously tackled health care reform?

It's not just about winning. It's about winning by as big of a margin as possible.

 

[Diablos]

Sounds like Obama got owned on 60 Minutes. It's stunning seeing liberals so focused on climate change, an issue no one gives a fuck about (outside of liberals). I guess it's the only area he can have any impact on today, so he wants to run the score up on his list of "accomplishments." But still, with the world burning, pointing to climate change as your leadership example seems laughable.

Did you forget about the part where he talked about Iran

President Barack Obama: Well Steve, I got to tell you, if you think that running your economy into the ground and having to send troops in in order to prop up your only ally is leadership, then we've got a different definition of leadership. My definition of leadership would be leading on climate change, an international accord that potentially we'll get in Paris. My definition of leadership is mobilizing the entire world community to make sure that Iran doesn't get a nuclear weapon. And with respect to the Middle East, we've got a 60-country coalition that isn't suddenly lining up around Russia's strategy. To the contrary, they are arguing that, in fact, that strategy will not work.

 

[teiresias]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/12/politics/poll-south-carolina-nevada-hillary-clinton/index.html

Nevada

Hillary 51
Sanders 34
Biden 12

Clinton 58
Sanders 36

South Carolina

Hillary 49
Sanders 24
Biden 18

Hillary 70
Sanders 20

I don't see an OT thread for this poll yet, I call shenanigans!

One of the things that really annoys me is that people act like the margin of victory doesn't matter.

Depending on the matchup, Sanders could win in the general election. But any potential Sanders victory would inevitably be by a far narrower margin than a potential Hillary victory. And the margin matters. A lot.

The wider the margin of victory, the more empowered the winning president will be. If Obama had just barely won in 2008, what are the chances that he would have seriously tackled health care reform?

It's not just about winning. It's about winning by as big of a margin as possible.

Republicans in congress, the Freedom Caucus, and the right-wing media in this country don't give a damn about margins or any mandates regardless of size when it comes to a Democratic President. I mean, is this not clear enough yet? I'm not tooting a Sanders horn here, but Hillary could win with 500+ electoral votes and there would still be teeth gnashing about whether she has the political capital to govern.

 

[BertramCooper]

Republicans in congress, the Freedom Caucus, and the right-wing media in this country don't give a damn about margins or any mandates regardless of size when it comes to a Democratic President. I mean, is this not clear enough yet? I'm not tooting a Sanders horn here, but Hillary could win with 500+ electoral votes and there would still be teeth gnashing about whether she has the political capital to govern.

Which is why utterly destroying them in a presidential election is extremely important.

I'm not just talking about policy enacted through cooperation with Congress. I'm talking about how Clinton will use the regulatory powers at her disposal. Two large victories by Obama have given him enough political capital to take some fairly sweeping unilateral actions in his second term.

 

[teiresias]

Which is why utterly destroying them in a presidential election is extremely important.

I'm not just talking about policy enacted through cooperation with Congress. I'm talking about how Clinton will use the regulatory powers at her disposal. Two large victories by Obama have given him enough political capital to take some fairly sweeping unilateral actions in his second term.

I'm not sure you need an absolutely huge electoral victory to, as President, make the convincing argument that the Republican Congress is utterly dysfunctional and so you have to work around it. Hell, the Republicans are doing enough to convince the public themselves.

 

[Retromelon]

These polls will be amusing in retrospect after Col Sanders bodies Scandillary in the debate

This is definitely wishful thinking.

It's wishful thinking on an unprecedented scale, almost the ErasureAcer level

So it is precedented then

 

[Makai]

Thanks for the history lesson, Benji.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Margin of victory also probably translates into bigger coattails, which means more help in Congress.

 

[Daniel B·]

One of the things that really annoys me is that people act like the margin of victory doesn't matter.

Depending on the matchup, Sanders could win in the general election. But any potential Sanders victory would inevitably be by a far narrower margin than a potential Hillary victory. And the margin matters. A lot.

The wider the margin of victory, the more empowered the winning president will be. If Obama had just barely won in 2008, what are the chances that he would have seriously tackled health care reform?

It's not just about winning. It's about winning by as big of a margin as possible.

I think you might be underestimating the possibility of an unprecedented landslide, in Bernie's favor, when more and more people discover that Bernie Sanders is a very rare bird, a politician who is not part of the "political class" and who would actually fight for politicies that are in the best interests of everyday Americans, not Corporations and the super rich, that would make America a great nation again, for current and future generations.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

So I just found out Rubio was involved with organized labor when he was younger. Even called his dad a scab for crossing a picket line.

Of course now he's anti-worker but I'd hope that make him less radical than say a walker administration would have been.

 

[dramatis]

I think you might be underestimating the possibility of an unprecedented landslide, in Bernie's favor, when more and more people discover that Bernie Sanders is a very rare bird, a politician who is not part of the "political class" and who would actually fight for politicies that are in the best interests of everyday Americans, not Corporations and the super rich, that will make America a great nation again, for current and future generations.

This is definitely wishful thinking.

It's wishful thinking on an unprecedented scale, almost the ErasureAcer level