• 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.
J

Jack Remington

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
I'm a bit of a realistic/compassionate libertarian so it's a bit sad to see that libertarians basically don't exist in the Republican Party.

The people leading the polls are anti-immigrant and or anti-gay rights, the "moderates" are all neocons obsessed with war and surveillance, and the mildly libertarian (though ridiculously bigoted) Rand Paul has 1% of the vote.
Click to expand...

You're one of a whole bunch of GAF members who turned against the Republican Party since 2008. I remember lurking back then and seeing a lot more Republican representation.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
I'm a bit of a realistic/compassionate libertarian so it's a bit sad to see that libertarians basically don't exist in the Republican Party.

The people leading the polls are anti-immigrant and or anti-gay rights, the "moderates" are all neocons obsessed with war and surveillance, and the mildly libertarian (though ridiculously bigoted) Rand Paul has 1% of the vote.
Click to expand...

It also really hurts when they don't stick to their fiscal policies.

If I don't like their social positions or their science positions, but I think their stated fiscal positions are appealing, what's the point if they blow-up the deficit when they get into office? What's the point if government stays the same size and the red tape that they so claim to hate remains largely in place? (and note: I'm also not naive enough to think that the Democrats are really going to come after my gun collection.)

At that point, I wouldn't be willing to sell others' humanity up the river for a bevy of broken financial promises.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
HylianTom said:
It also really hurts when they don't stick to their fiscal policies.

If I don't like their social positions or their science positions, but I think their stated fiscal positions are appealing, what's the point if they blow-up the deficit when they get into office? What's the point if government stays the same size and the red tape that they so claim to hate remains largely in place?

At that point, I wouldn't be willing to sell others' humanity up the river for a bevy of broken financial promises.
Click to expand...

Umm, I don't like the Republican Party either. It's just that the libertarian path is a better path than the neocon nonsense, the isolation nonsense, and the religious nonsense so I would have preferred their voters supported the libertarian path over the others.

They obviously don't though.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Umm, I don't like the Republican Party either. It's just that the libertarian path is a better path than the neocon nonsense, the isolation nonsense, and the religious nonsense so I would have preferred their voters supported the libertarian path over the others.

They obviously don't though.
Click to expand...

Ahh - I hope you didn't construe that as an attack directed at you. Just a general comment on the party's hypocrisy on those headliner issues.

I'd love to see a two-party situation where the theoretical GOP you paint is the opposition. That'd be amazing. And I wouldn't be terrified of them winning.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
BertramCooper said:
Who else is going?

UJnZLRL.jpg
Click to expand...

That's the pastor at the end who threatened gun violence against people, right?

What a carnival of fucking twats and ignorance.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
HylianTom said:
Ahh - I hope you didn't construe that as an attack directed at you. Just a general comment on the party's hypocrisy on those headliner issues.

I'd love to see a two-party situation where the theoretical GOP you paint is the opposition. That'd be amazing. And I wouldn't be terrified of them winning.
Click to expand...

I'd be more horrified. Then they can hide behind the idea of compassion to push things that are IMO much more consequential. Pushing for even more elimination of the social safety net, environmental regulations, labor rights, a foreign policy that is dangerous and deadly to the rest of the world, the worship of the corporate side, open bribary in the electoral system.

We've won the culture wars. Why stories like that kim women still become national issues is frustrating because its forgets what is the major difference at least ideologically between the two parties. This kim lady is a nobody, she means nothing. Marriage rights aren't being revoked, we won. But the GOP if they were to abandon that would better be able to attack any semblance of fighting economic imbalance
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
NYCmetsfan said:
I'd be more horrified. Then they can hide behind the idea of compassion to push things that are IMO much more consequential. Pushing for even more elimination of the social safety net, environmental regulations, labor rights, a foreign policy that is dangerous and deadly to the rest of the world, the worship of the corporate side, open bribary in the electoral system.

We've won the culture wars. Why stories like that kim women still become national issues is frustrating because its forgets what is the major difference at least ideologically between the two parties. This kim lady is a nobody, she means nothing. Marriage rights aren't being revoked, we won. But the GOP if they were to abandon that would better be able to attack any semblance of fighting economic imbalance
Click to expand...

... I'm not sure an America with less intervention and more immigration would be more dangerous to the world? Our history with foreign policy post-WW2 is, umm, pretty terrible.

And the culture wars obviously aren't won since hideous racism and sexism and hatred towards Muslims and hatred towards LGBTQIA+ is still pretty prominent.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
RastaMentality said:
How does Trump react when his poll obsession fucks him over when some bad ones come out?
Click to expand...

Shrug emote and an insult.

Also, those idiots act like Kim is some political God that has been thrown to the lions.

I don't see them rushing to "free kim" when some other person is thrown in jail when they stand for their dumb beliefs.

The persecution complex needs to be loboized from the Christian right if they ever want to be treated fairly and taken seriously.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
NYCmetsfan said:
I'd be more horrified. Then they can hide behind the idea of compassion to push things that are IMO much more consequential. Pushing for even more elimination of the social safety net, environmental regulations, labor rights, a foreign policy that is dangerous and deadly to the rest of the world, the worship of the corporate side, open bribary in the electoral system.

We've won the culture wars. Why stories like that kim women still become national issues is frustrating because its forgets what is the major difference at least ideologically between the two parties. This kim lady is a nobody, she means nothing. Marriage rights aren't being revoked, we won. But the GOP if they were to abandon that would better be able to attack any semblance of fighting economic imbalance
Click to expand...

Now you have me wondering what a "moderate" Republican Party would look like. And how the Democrats would react.

(And maybe I'm skittish, but I still don't trust the GOP yet to abandon the culture war. We've won the major battles, but I have no doubt that their candidates would appoint judges who'll happily and creatively undermine many of the bases for our victories.)
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
... I'm not sure an America with less intervention and more immigration would be more dangerous to the world? Our history with foreign policy post-WW2 is, umm, pretty terrible.

And the culture wars obviously aren't won since hideous racism and sexism and hatred towards Muslims and hatred towards LGBTQIA+ is still pretty prominent.
Click to expand...

That's not what a GOP free from culture war baggage would be.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
I'm seeing scattered bits of #NRORevolt in my twitter feed.. anyone know what it is? It seems to be Trumpeteers vs non-Trumpeteers, but I can't figure out precisely what set it off.
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
... I'm not sure an America with less intervention and more immigration would be more dangerous to the world? Our history with foreign policy post-WW2 is, umm, pretty terrible.

And the culture wars obviously aren't won since hideous racism and sexism and hatred towards Muslims and hatred towards LGBTQIA+ is still pretty prominent.
Click to expand...

Eh, parts of the Marshall plan were pretty fucking baller.

Sadly there was also a whole lotta disgusting stuff in there too.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
HylianTom said:
I'm seeing scattered bits of #NRORevolt in my twitter feed.. anyone know what it is? It seems to be Trumpeteers vs non-Trumpeteers, but I can't figure out precisely what set it off.
Click to expand...

This GamerGate asshole was mad that the National Review thought Trump was a clown:

https://twitter.com/Ricky_Vaughn99

And floor shitter Chuck Johnson was apparently black-balled by the National Review or something.

The extreme right has had problems with the far right for a while since the far right is obsessed with protecting Israel to fulfill the Christian apocalypse prophecy, whereas the extreme right are Nazis who still want to kill all the Jews. It seems like these two forces' disagreements have been boiling over for nearly a year now.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Holy hell, you guys aren't kidding. I have a few nits with the article, but Goldberg still raises a number of points we here in PoliGAF have been wondering about as we've watched this summer unfold.

I've been wondering how the party would really react to a Trump nomination once it sunk in. There are a few facets to his campaign that have produced divisions within the right and its various segments.

The first angle is through a prism of race: on one side, you have folks who are comfortable or maybe even cheering-on the racial undercurrents to his campaign. On the other side: people who decidedly aren't.

Then there's a whole other angle. Every day it seems, he'll be on TV taking a position that makes me yell, "holy hell, that's actually kinda moderate {or liberal}!" We here on PoliGAF have pointed this out and giggled about it, wondering how long Trump would defy gravity. And yet, we see that there are voters who are apparently willing to overlook these deviations or even cheer them on.. while there are other hardliners who are at the very least given pause.

Then there's yet another angle, regarding culture wars (specifically lately: the Kim Davis issue). You have the folks who think Christians are truly being persecuted, while the other side of the divide on this angle take more of a "rule of law" approach, regardless of how they may personally feel on the issue.

So. Many. Pitfalls!

And who knows how each group on each side of each angle will react when/if Trump attempts to do any sort of pivot for a general election? Will his campaign be able to hold-together a voting coalition?
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
BertramCooper said:
Nope.
Click to expand...

I'm imagining a debate scenario where the Democrat and Trump are agreeing with each other waaaay too often to not notice, and conservatives everywhere (TV/print/online/voters) begin asking themselves, "what the hell have we done? He's Hillary with a Fancy Wall!"
 
R

RDreamer

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
The extreme right has had problems with the far right for a while since the far right is obsessed with protecting Israel to fulfill the Christian apocalypse prophecy, whereas the extreme right are Nazis who still want to kill all the Jews. It seems like these two forces' disagreements have been boiling over for nearly a year now.
Click to expand...

lmao this is the first time I really realized those two opposing views were in the same party coalition.
 
B

Bam Bam Baklava

Member
This episode is more true today than it was back then.

tumblr_nau47kPtzb1somw7ho1_500.png

tumblr_nau47kPtzb1somw7ho5_r1_500.png


Can't believe Trump has made what Palin says actually relevant again. In 2012 she was completely ignored during the election. Now here we are talking about her again for 2016.
 
K

kess

Member
HylianTom said:
Holy hell, you guys aren't kidding. I have a few nits with the article, but Goldberg still raises a number of points we here in PoliGAF have been wondering about as we've watched this summer unfold.

Then there's a whole other angle. Every day it seems, he'll be on TV taking a position that makes me yell, "holy hell, that's actually kinda moderate {or liberal}!" We here on PoliGAF have pointed this out and giggled about it, wondering how long Trump would defy gravity. And yet, we see that there are voters who are apparently willing to overlook these deviations or even cheer them on.. while there are other hardliners who are at the very least given pause.

Then there's yet another angle, regarding culture wars (specifically lately: the Kim Davis issue). You have the folks who think Christians are truly being persecuted, while the other side of the divide on this angle take more of a "rule of law" approach, regardless of how they may personally feel on the issue.

So. Many. Pitfalls!

And who knows how each group on each side of each angle will react when/if Trump attempts to do any sort of pivot for a general election? Will his campaign be able to hold-together a voting coalition?
Click to expand...

Trump is already running against "movement" conservatism as espoused by Jeb! and others, allowing him to define conservatism on his own terms. I think the average primary voter is more moved by Trump's belligerence than Goldberg's various conservative shibboleths. I don't know if The Donald even knows who Lena Dunham is... or cares.

The culture war issues that Trump is maneuvering around are policy positions that are already considered unelectable outside of single issue constituencies, and I don't think abortion, health care per se are quite the animating principles of the party as are ideas of image and identity -- which are easier to sell than particularly meeting any of the usual culture war issues head on. An ambiguous view on abortion isn't going to hurt Trump as much, because being pro-life doesn't define the American identity as much as immigration does -- an issue that can be abstracted down to employment, language, and ethnicity.

It doesn't help that Bush has negative charisma, and unlike Bush, Trump doesn't have to represent anything other than "Make America Great Again."
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina on Sunday argued against the United States allowing in more Syrian refugees -- amid increasing calls for a greater international response to the crisis.

The former Hewlett Packard chief executive argued, like other Republicans have throughout the growing crisis in Europe, that agents from the Islamic State and other Middle East terror groups could slip through security efforts.

“I think the United States, honestly, sadly, cannot relax our entrance criteria," Fiorina said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “We are having to be very careful about who we let enter this country from these war-torn regions to ensure that terrorists are not coming here.”
Click to expand...

Fuck you. You were a failure as a CEO and you're a failure as a person as well.
 
K

kess

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Fuck you. You were a failure as a CEO and you're a failure as a person as well.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of a story I saw regarding the Syrian community in Allentown, Pennsylvania -- people went apeshit over an annual Syrian flag raising even though the community has been in the area for over a hundred years.
 
C

Chichikov

Member
B

Bam Bam Baklava

Member
Chichikov said:
He's a network security guy, I'm pretty sure he always cared about network security.
And surely you can see the difference between actively choosing the divulge some classified information to the public and running an insecure system, right?
Click to expand...

The point is he's spreading the same misinformation we've been seeing for a while now. That she should have known better with classified material, well she did know better given that nothing was labeled classified at the time.

Just seems odd that the State Department knew about it and allowed it but she's being criticized for everything in this e-mail issue after the fact.

We have yet to see one rule or law broken that was in place at the time and that's why the entire matter is confusing as hell and getting a proper account of what was and wasn't done is nearly impossible. My question is what happens when there's no e-mails left to come out and there's no grand indictment if what she's been saying turns out to be right.
 
C

Chichikov

Member
Bam Bam Baklava said:
The point is he's spreading the same misinformation we've been seeing for a while now. That she should have known better with classified material, well she did know better given that it nothing was labeled classified at the time.

Just seems odd that the State Department knew about it and allowed it but she's being criticized for everything in this e-mail issue after the fact.

We have yet to see one rule or law broken that was in place at the time and that's why the entire matter is confusing as hell and getting a proper account of what was and wasn't done is nearly impossible. My question is what happens when there's no e-mails left to come out and there's no grand indictment if what she's been saying turns out to be right.
Click to expand...
Whether or not he's right is a different question (my gut feeling is that at most is a minor incompetence/oversight, but I have not studied this carefully).
I just find the idea that because Snowden divulged classified information to the public he's now unqualified to comment on network security to be silly.
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
The very selective main quote from the article is:

Edward Snowden argues in an interview scheduled to air Friday that Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while serving as secretary of state jeopardized national security secrets, and calls Clinton’s claims to the contrary “completely ridiculous.”

“When the unclassified systems of the United States government, which has a full-time information security staff, regularly gets hacked, the idea that someone keeping a private server in the renovated bathroom of a server farm in Colorado is more secure is completely ridiculous,” the National Security Agency whistleblower told Mehdi Hasan in an interview that will air Friday on the debut episode of UpFront, Hasan’s new weekly talk show on Al Jazeera English.
Click to expand...

If she ever claimed that what she did was indeed more secure, that was indeed completely ridiculous. Undeniably so.

Did she?
---
That's all ignoring that we discussing choice quotes from a huffpost article without observing the source to check for context. Dear god are some here always ready to try to bash Snowden.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Did you guys see Chris Wallace's interview with Dick Cheney? One segment in particular was pretty great:

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/chr...ld-up-happened-on-your-watch/comments/#disqus

Wallace pointed out how Iran went from 0 to over 5,000 centrifuges under his watch and asked if it was fair to say that he left a pretty big mess for Obama. Cheney tries to defend himself by bragging about the success he had in preventing nuclear weapons from other countries in the Middle East aside from Iran. Then Wallace tries to ask him again about his failure to stop Iran from creating thousands of centrifuges. Cheney hilariously tries to claim that sure it was bad that that happened, but it wasn't under his watch, it was Obama's. Wallace then politely pointed out for a third time that this was under his watch, not Obama's. To which he pretty much shrugged and said he still did a good job preventing the rise of arms in the Middle East.

This dude's fucking unbelievable. Good on Wallace for not letting him get away with it.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Oblivion said:
Did you guys see Chris Wallace's interview with Dick Cheney? One segment in particular was pretty great:

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/chr...ld-up-happened-on-your-watch/comments/#disqus

Wallace pointed out how Iran went from 0 to over 5,000 centrifuges under his watch and asked if it was fair to say that he left a pretty big mess for Obama. Cheney tries to defend himself by bragging about the success he had in preventing nuclear weapons from other countries in the Middle East aside from Iran. Then Wallace tries to ask him again about his failure to stop Iran from creating thousands of centrifuges. Cheney hilariously tries to claim that sure it was bad that that happened, but it wasn't under his watch, it was Obama's. Wallace then politely pointed out for a third time that this was under his watch, not Obama's. To which he pretty much shrugged and said he still did a good job preventing the rise of arms in the Middle East.

This dude's fucking unbelievable. Good on Wallace for not letting him get away with it.
Click to expand...
Compare that to CNN's fluff interview with Cheney a week ago. Holy shit.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
Oblivion said:
Did you guys see Chris Wallace's interview with Dick Cheney? One segment in particular was pretty great:

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/chr...ld-up-happened-on-your-watch/comments/#disqus

Wallace pointed out how Iran went from 0 to over 5,000 centrifuges under his watch and asked if it was fair to say that he left a pretty big mess for Obama. Cheney tries to defend himself by bragging about the success he had in preventing nuclear weapons from other countries in the Middle East aside from Iran. Then Wallace tries to ask him again about his failure to stop Iran from creating thousands of centrifuges. Cheney hilariously tries to claim that sure it was bad that that happened, but it wasn't under his watch, it was Obama's. Wallace then politely pointed out for a third time that this was under his watch, not Obama's. To which he pretty much shrugged and said he still did a good job preventing the rise of arms in the Middle East.

This dude's fucking unbelievable. Good on Wallace for not letting him get away with it.
Click to expand...

We all know Cheney didn't have a heart until his recent transplant and he's an evil cunt who was only interested in feathering his own nest. Why would he care about something that happened when he was president when he can just retroactively blame everything on the half-black man and his followers will eat it all up?
 
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