• 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.
The interesting thing about Sander's attacking Hillary over things in the 1990s is going to be the appearance that he believes she's not an individual separate from her husband. I'm not saying it's not fair game, but the meme's out there that he's willing to "go sexist" (Although, I don't think he consciously meant it that way at all. I find many faults with him, but I don't think Bernie's sexist).

So, he goes after Clinton based on policies in the 1990s, and in a debate setting, she can say "I'm my own woman, not my husband's puppet." It's a good sound bite, and reinforces a narrative regardless of who started it.

I'm not saying these things aren't fair game, but it's going to be a very fine line to walk. Obama could do it, but I'm not sure that Sanders has the temperament to do it. You need a scalpel not a sledge hammer, and I don't know that Sanders is the person to do it. Obama barely walked the line and a few flub ups (i.e. "You're likable enough.")
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Frankly, Sanders seems kind of surprised by his own success and now doesn't really know what the hell he's doing.

I think he originally ran just to push Hillary to the left, but then he clearly surpassed his own expectations and started buying (at least to some degree) into the hype suddenly surrounding him. Then I think he lost his nerve during the first debate and is now once again trying to figure out where he goes from here.

This is basically how I read it too.

Has that happened before? Even Trump has kept his cool.

Trump is a pure showman, he'll never really lose his cool in a debate.
 
The TPM report and the Politico report differ in vital respects. I'm waiting for another report to hopefully verify the details one way or the other.

The debt ceiling should be raised on it's own without ties to any future legeslation. "Give us concessions or we'll default the US" is a bullshit premise to negotiate from. I'm not sure what details could emerge that would make this better in that regard. Passing a one year ceiling increase and a two year spending plan gives Ryan a big break IMO and helps the GOP figure out their current mess. They'll be back to using the ceiling next year again too.
 
Even among Millenials, 30% oppose gay marriage. I'm pretty sure you could get banned for openly opposing gay marriage on GAF. I don't have a problem with that, but you can see the disparity.
So, I just wanted to say I don't actually think this is the case, although it would probably depend on how you presented the argument and the reasoning behind it.

----

On the idea that you need principled unwavering idealists to continue to push for progress even when it's unpopular, sure. But it's a lot easier to do that either outside of public office or when you're running in the safety of something like Massachusetts, Vermont or Hawaii than on the national stage.

I'm quite certain people like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were for gay marriage long before they were publicly for gay marriage.

As someone who for part of their life hid who I am due to public disapproval, I can actually understand why someone might have to hide what they think due to public disapproval, while I'm simultaneously hugely grateful to those that publicly stood their ground and didn't so that future generations wouldn't have to do the same.

---

Also, for a bit of levity, I don't know if it's been pointed out before but this string of articles by this guy on Huff Post is kind of amazing http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/
Like Maureen Dowd Award amazing.
 

pigeon

Banned
The debt ceiling should be raised on it's own without ties to any future legeslation. "Give us concessions or we'll default the US" is a bullshit premise to negotiate from. I'm not sure what details could emerge that would make this better in that regard. Passing a one year ceiling increase and a two year spending plan gives Ryan a big break IMO and helps the GOP figure out their current mess. They'll be back to using the ceiling next year again too.

I mean, I think at this point they should just use the McConnell solution and make debt ceiling increases automatic unless Congress votes to disapprove of them. Arguably we should do this with everything the government just has to do and then stop worrying about unnecessary bullshit. After all, they just did it with the Iran deal, which isn't mandatory, so why not just do it with all the mandatory stuff too?

But absent that solution, I think the Politico version of the deal seems fine to me. Debt ceiling is increased through March 2017 -- that's plenty of time for the new President and Congress to get settled in. I don't really understand what problem you have with spending through October 2017 if the spending caps are increased and the payfors aren't terrible. If anything, splitting budget negotiation and debt ceiling negotiation to happen at different times just increases the odds of a clean debt ceiling bill.
 

NervousXtian

Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
Anyone else get their open enrollment stuff from work lately? Fucking hell this year is the worst coverage decrease I've seen ever.. and they had the audacity to ask for more out-of-pocket as well.

Course my boss is like "har har har Obamacare"....

I'm all in on Bernie Sanders at this point.. fuck this broken ass system we have.

Sanders is definitely going to explode in anger in one of these debates I bet.

..but yeah.. this.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery

Goddamn it! What the hell is that man's problem? Not only is it a shitty thing to do just in general, but it's especially shitty fucking politics. It neutralizes any complaints Democrats can run on the Republican nominee by allowing them to say, "Hey, if President Obama was willing to support entitlement cuts...". Not to mention, Republicans, will, just like last time, use Obama's own cuts to attack him for cutting entitlements!

I thought after the dumbass sequester he learned his lesson about caving in to Republican demands, but some habits die hard, I guess.
 

noshten

Member
Bernie Sanders said:
“As a senator from a rural state, what I can tell Secretary Clinton, that all the shouting in the world is not going to do what I would hope all of us want, and that is keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have those guns and end this horrible violence that we are seeing.”

Such a sexist comment, it's important for Hillary to highlight this patriarchal subliminal messaging. It's like he thinks only his solution is reasonable and might be running for some government position or something.
 

Snake

Member
Goddamn it! What the hell is that man's problem? Not only is it a shitty thing to do just in general, but it's especially shitty fucking politics. It neutralizes any complaints Democrats can run on the Republican nominee by allowing them to say, "Hey, if President Obama was willing to support entitlement cuts...". Not to mention, Republicans, will, just like last time, use Obama's own cuts to attack him for cutting entitlements!

I thought after the dumbass sequester he learned his lesson about caving in to Republican demands, but some habits die hard, I guess.

What are the specific "entitlement cuts" that you object to in the budget deal?
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
look at this thug:

WhfnHGl.gif
 

teiresias

Member
He's cutting SS, SS disability and medicare benefits. What's there to not object to?

Well to be fair, there are conflicting reports on what's actually in the deal at this point, so I'm going to wait for it to be clarified from the horse's mouth first. I mean, if he managed to get some relief from sequester and not cut entitlements that seems like a win, with apparently the "concession" by those on the GOP being that they get some help reigning in the crazies - not that I think Obama should be in the business of helping out the GOP and its internal problems, but if it takes the debt ceiling off the table for a while that's good for what he's getting I think given the potential horrors that would erupt from not raising it.
 
U.S. media: "lol Guatemala elects a comedian president!"
Real media: "Guatemala elects genocide denying president backed by generals that oversaw genocide of native Mayan people."

... That's kinda weird.
 
I mean, I think at this point they should just use the McConnell solution and make debt ceiling increases automatic unless Congress votes to disapprove of them. Arguably we should do this with everything the government just has to do and then stop worrying about unnecessary bullshit. After all, they just did it with the Iran deal, which isn't mandatory, so why not just do it with all the mandatory stuff too?

But absent that solution, I think the Politico version of the deal seems fine to me. Debt ceiling is increased through March 2017 -- that's plenty of time for the new President and Congress to get settled in. I don't really understand what problem you have with spending through October 2017 if the spending caps are increased and the payfors aren't terrible. If anything, splitting budget negotiation and debt ceiling negotiation to happen at different times just increases the odds of a clean debt ceiling bill.

Well Im waiting before I completely formulate my position, but best case is we negotiated future spending over the threat of default. Worst case is we capitulated during the negotiation and gave into SS and medicare cuts that should have never been on the block.

I guess if cuts aren't bad I'm not really that upset. Im not exactly happy either though.
 

Snake

Member
He's cutting SS, SS disability and medicare benefits. What's there to not object to?

Citation needed.

Everything listed in the reports so far says things like "new spending would be offset by extending existing measures to contain Medicare and hospital costs, the sources said." In other terms, theoretical savings in programs achieved by reductions in fraud and waste AKA things that won't happen.
 

pigeon

Banned
Well Im waiting before I completely formulate my position, but best case is we negotiated future spending over the threat of default. Worst case is we capitulated during the negotiation and gave into SS and medicare cuts that should have never been on the block.

I don't really see it that way, because in the best case scenario we gave up nothing and the GOP capitulated on everything. So, I mean, that's not really negotiating over the threat of default. It actually used to be extremely common to roll the debt ceiling increase into other budgetary bills to make it easier to vote for -- that's part of why it didn't come up as much before Obama's tenure. So this is kind of a return to "regular order."

If there are meaningful cuts to entitlements then I agree we fucked up, but, again, I think that would mainly be a consequence of Obama's intense desire to cut entitlements regardless of the GOP's constant efforts to stymie him doing anything.
 
True. I just question the wisdom of assuming Hillary can't take it. She's taken far worse than Sanders could hope to deliver in her last 26 years.

The issue is I don't really know what Sanders should do here. This is a two person race. He can't hope that someone drops out and he can pick up their support. Hillary is the overwhelming front runner. Attacking her directly is probably not going to work well for him. Running away from Obama is not going to work well for him. On the reverse, if he wants supporters he has to get them from Clinton. There aren't enough undecided voters to make a damn bit of difference. (The curse and blessing of Clinton being so well known). He's making no inroads with people of color, and distancing himself from Obama isn't going to help him at all.

I'm not sure that either makes a huge amount of difference with Biden not getting into the race, but what does he do? Does he go after Clinton, appear negative, tarnish his "Above it all" reputation and still lose? Or, does he take the loss, keep the high ground, and go back to the Senate as a beloved son?

He doesn't really have a choice if he's trying to get elected. If has any hope in stealing away Clinton supporters, he needs to go after her. Hard. Her supporters won't switch sides if Bernie doesn't give them any reason to question their allegiance to her. Who knows, he might even pick up a few non-voters in the process.

Of course, all of this is assuming he's trying to get elected. All signs point to that not being the case. Now you'd think that if he's running just to further his idealistic agenda, and would rather Hillary get elected, he'd do his best to ensure that the Democratic party won. But judging by this latest fiasco, he's shown that he won't be doing that at all costs.

To be honest, I think that Bernie is in way over his head at this point. I'm still voting for him in the primaries though, in hopes that his 0.0000000001% chance of getting the nomination becomes a reality, lol.

Frankly, Sanders seems kind of surprised by his own success and now doesn't really know what the hell he's doing.

I think he originally ran just to push Hillary to the left, but then he clearly surpassed his own expectations and started buying (at least to some degree) into the hype suddenly surrounding him. Then I think he lost his nerve during the first debate and is now once again trying to figure out where he goes from here.

Yeah, he seems completely unprepared to deal with the magnitude of the shit storm he's gotten himself into.

Sanders is definitely going to explode in anger in one of these debates I bet.

I'd pay good money to see this.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Sanders going negative?

Jennifer Epstein ‏@jeneps 16m16 minutes ago
Sanders' wording a bit unclear but sounded like he was saying the neg ads he's never before done could be in offing

Jennifer EpsteinVerified account
‏@jeneps
Sanders says he's hired a pollster in part "to prepare us for some negative ads that may be coming down the road"
 

User1608

Banned
https://twitter.com/tripgabriel/status/658687255599521795'

Hmmmm. I doubt Bernie's new pollster will be happy to hear this.
Disappointing. Not gonna unite the party and voters with that, Bernie.
PD got got.
Yup, saw that. Sad times lol.
U.S. media: "lol Guatemala elects a comedian president!"
Real media: "Guatemala elects genocide denying president backed by generals that oversaw genocide of native Mayan people."

... That's kinda weird.
Yeah, I've read up on how the media portrays things and have heard of him too. What a real piece of work. Ugh. I feel for my country and people.:(
 
https://twitter.com/tripgabriel/status/658687255599521795'

Hmmmm. I doubt Bernie's new pollster will be happy to hear this.

Bernie, what the fuck are you doing?!!! I may be jumping the gun but... is he preparing to run as an Independent in the general?!! Holy Ralph Nader, Batman!

Sanders going negative?

giphy.gif


That is the first legitimately surprising thing I've heard regarding Bernie since... ever. If he does this, all bets are off, I have no clue what the fuck he plans to do this election season.
 

teiresias

Member
It's going to be ugly if Bernie goes negative. It will completely negate the narrative that he wants to see lefitsit progress, but not at the risk of seeing a Republican in the White House. Suddenly he'll be any other politician, willing to do anything to get elected, and seen by what I would consider the majority of the Democratic base and primary electorate to be attacking a party stalwart.

I also have no faith in him to have people around him that know how to nuance a negative attack strategy to not scream "misogyny."

And if he runs as third party, then screw him, I hope those that vote for him enjoy President Trump or Carson, and I better not hear any of them whining about the state of the country afterwards.
 
Jeb Bush advisers call Marco Rubio a 'GOP Obama'
(CNN)Jeb Bush's campaign advisers, who see Marco Rubio as an increasing threat in the GOP presidential primary, devoted special attention to the Florida senator and Bush's former protégé in a presentation to donors on Monday.

In a PowerPoint presentation, delivered at a donor retreat in Houston, Bush advisers sought to calm concerns about his campaign by highlighting his advantages in money, endorsements and data over his GOP rivals.

It highlighted polls making the electability argument for Bush, showing him ahead of Hillary Clinton in a hypothetical match-up, and it gave details on the strength of his ground game in the early states.

But a big goal of the presentation was to compare Bush's campaign to his primary opponents, and it was no happenstance that Rubio specifically was the subject of several bullet points.

RELATED: Gloves begin to come off in battle of Jeb vs. Rubio

Despite the current voter fervor for anti-establishment candidates, Bush's team believes it's important to focus on Bush's record as a two-term governor of Florida, arguing that his tenure shows an aptitude of "fixing" things in government.

In a slide titled "Experience Matters," one bullet point reads:"Marco is a GOP Obama."

Both ran for president as first-term senators, were lawyers and university lecturers, had served part time in state legislatures for eight years, and had "few legislative accomplishments," the slide said.

Another slide is entirely dedicated to pointing out the advantage Bush holds in endorsements over Rubio (Bush has 11 endorsements from Florida's congressional delegation, Rubio has one), while another compares the campaigns' cash-on-hand numbers, with Bush having slightly more in the bank.

RELATED: Eric Cantor endorses Jeb Bush for president

Later Monday, Bush himself took a swipe at Rubio. In an on-stage conversation with his brother, former President George W. Bush, Jeb Bush boasted about how he "vetoed a couple of projects for one of the presidential candidates," referring to when Rubio was in the Florida House of Representatives when Bush was the governor.

Tensions between the two candidates have been escalating for weeks. With reports of Rubio missing nearly one-third of his votes in the Senate this year, Bush has been hammering lawmakers who aren't doing their jobs, and late last month he started comparing Rubio to Obama's lack of experience before becoming president.

In 2012, however, Bush told Charlie Rose that he thought Rubio would be the best running mate pick for Mitt Romney.

"He has more experience than Barack Obama had when he ran," Bush had said.

Pressed on those comments earlier this month in Iowa, Bush stuck by them.

"Yeah, he did (have more experience than Obama). He still does, that's for sure," Bush said. "That's a low bar, though."

For his part, Rubio hasn't been quite as direct in his comments about Bush on the campaign trail, but he regularly calls for a "new generation" of leadership, a subtle dig that many see as an attack against Bush and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton.

Despite the thickening competition, the two candidates publicly maintain that they've stayed friends.

As for the rest of the presentation, which came just days after the campaign announced it was downsizing its staff and slashing salaries, Bush advisers believe that the "press obsession with process" won't determine the outcome of the primary. They're laser-focused on the idea that as long as Bush has the cash, discipline and organization, he can push through.

In single digits, and frustrated by the Trump phenomenon, Bush's campaign is "tearing up the script" and going to "Let Jeb be Jeb." Sources close to the campaign say the campaign has realized they have "nothing to lose" and they are going to take a new tack of letting Bush relax and speak his mind.

In the presentation, they included a breakdown of the number of staffers and offices the campaign has in each early state: South Carolina: seven paid staffers and three offices; Nevada: eight paid staffers and two offices; New Hampshire: 12 paid staffers and one office; Iowa: 10 paid staffers and two offices.
lol
 
It's going to be ugly if Bernie goes negative. It will completely negate the narrative that he wants to see lefitsit progress, but not at the risk of seeing a Republican in the White House. Suddenly he'll be any other politician, willing to do anything to get elected, and seen by what I would consider the majority of the Democratic base and primary electorate to be attacking a party stalwart.

I also have no faith in him to have people around him that know how to nuance a negative attack strategy to not scream "misogyny."

And if he runs as third party, then screw him, I hope those that vote for him enjoy President Trump or Carson, and I better not hear any of them whining about the state of the country afterwards.

If he goes 3rd party, I'm sorry, but I'd have to vote for Hillary. Can't risk the GOP getting into the White House.

His recent behavior is very uncharacteristic of him. I don't know who his counsel is, but it needs a do over.
 

User 406

Banned
In single digits, and frustrated by the Trump phenomenon, Bush's campaign is "tearing up the script" and going to "Let Jeb be Jeb." Sources close to the campaign say the campaign has realized they have "nothing to lose" and they are going to take a new tack of letting Bush relax and speak his mind.

tumblr_lwm1z6lkVK1qef6lgo2_500.png
 
If he goes 3rd party, I'm sorry, but I'd have to vote for Hillary. Can't risk the GOP getting into the White House.

His recent behavior is very uncharacteristic of him. I don't know who his counsel is, but it needs a do over.

I think this is his old counsel finally getting some control over him, somehow. Remember the "everyone's tired of hearing about your damn emails" line from the debate? That was supposed to be an attack, and I suspect that Bernie deliberately turned it around so it wouldn't be used like that. Could just be that whoever wanted to go on offense back then got some influence.
 
So the details on the budget deal on the huff post don't seem bad at all.

It seems like an actual good deal for them dems besides it preventing the GOP from playing chicken which could, I guess, help politically with a lot of people getting hurt in the mean time
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Citation needed.

Everything listed in the reports so far says things like "new spending would be offset by extending existing measures to contain Medicare and hospital costs, the sources said." In other terms, theoretical savings in programs achieved by reductions in fraud and waste AKA things that won't happen.

While congressional aides cautioned that the deal was far from certain, and the White House and Treasury Department declined to comment, officials briefed on the negotiations said the emerging accord would call for cuts in spending on Medicare and Social Security disability benefits.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/27/u...e-near-deal-on-budget.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1


Oh lordy...

Aside from the hilarity of Jeb thinking of himself as the much superior imaginary president from the West Wing, the idea that a goober like him has been failing because he's been holding back is just too much.
 

User 406

Banned
So the details on the budget deal on the huff post don't seem bad at all.

It seems like an actual good deal for them dems besides it preventing the GOP from playing chicken which could, I guess, help politically with a lot of people getting hurt in the mean time

So basically the PD link accompanied by his trademark projected Obama psychoanalysis boilerplate about a week and a half after his link castigating the DNC for "refusing" to register voters at Sanders' rallies was misleading?

Huh.
 
Sounds like his rabid supporters are rubbing off on him.

I think they slipped something in his water.

I think this is his old counsel finally getting some control over him, somehow. Remember the "everyone's tired of hearing about your damn emails" line from the debate? That was supposed to be an attack, and I suspect that Bernie deliberately turned it around so it wouldn't be used like that. Could just be that whoever wanted to go on offense back then got some influence.

I suppose this is possible. He's making a huge mistake, and unlike his vocal supporters, his more rational supporters are not going to stand for this.

The worst thing about this is that, if he doesn't win, a good portion of them are probably not going to vote for anyone. At least, if he supported Hillary in the general, his supporters might have responded in kind. If he runs as a third party, his supporters will take his loss even harder.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom