-
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
- Thread starter ivysaur12
- Start date
- Status
They literally do as much or as little as the President lets them.
When Hillary goes to jail for killing Vince Foster, the VP is next in line. And that person should not be some green, political noob. A noob who doesn't even help bring in swing state votes.
We don't need to coddle Julian like a baby. He's a big boy, and if he wants to be president, he can go out and win a congressional seat, like his brother. And then maybe, just maybe, he can think about the next step.
Picking Castro is one of the worst moves Hillary could possibly do, besides picking Joe Lieberman.
Maybe not VP, but what about secretary of state? Imagine the amazing things he could do!
Manmademan
Member
I should really be better than I am at spotting the joke posters
Republic of Ezo
Member
My mom works for Cuomo and his entire staff is shady as fuck. I don't want him anywhere near the presidency.
That part is a joke, the rest is serious. The real joke would be a Julian Castro VP pick.
Cuomo deserves to be thrown away in the phantom zone.
Ignorance is strength.
Manmademan
Member
from the same dude that brought you
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/ben-carson-is-done-answering-questions-about-his-055931339.html
:jnc
I agree. Let's not bring anyone from Albany into this.
It's not autofellatio now because I already swallowed. :X
RustyNails
Member
Uhh i'm not even sure I understand what he's saying
Is that what that emoticon means?
#BELieve
neurosisxeno
Member
Fox News will probably jump on it sooner or later. They'll label it a Christian Killing Simulator and get the IT guy with no experience on there to debate Harvard grads with extensive prep. It's the their general strategy--here's Dick Cheney to debate Steve the Intern.
I think he'll win. Vitter is probably one of the most reprehensible people in politics (Paul Lepage takes #1 in my mind) and people are really not happy with Jindal, so all JBE has to do is run as not Bobby and not Obama, and point out Vitter can't get out of the brothels long enough to do anything impactful. I love that he is running an aggressive campaign, because the Democrats really need to get their heads out of their asses on the state level and start hitting back.
Gangster as fuck. Jeb! is a badass.
Tarkus
Member
Just watched the debate. Cruz was the clear winner here, followed by Rubio and then Paul. Cruz should gain a lot of momentum and move up in the polls. The Donald is starting to look tired and uninterested. He'll still retain the lead though.
Also, Fox Business did a great job with the debate. Finally a proper debate and not a verbal brawl.
Also, Fox Business did a great job with the debate. Finally a proper debate and not a verbal brawl.
FloydtheFathead
Member
Erasure won't be mad at you now Ivy.
no doubt. Jindal cruised to two unnecessary easy wins.
neurosisxeno
Member
Didn't they essentially lob the easiest questions imaginable and stick to the candidates strengths at all times? While not pointing out they were flat out lying about many issues.
Tarkus
Member
They essentially questioned their prior statements and asked how it they would fix the economy. There were quite a few times that the moderators called them out for not answering the questions. It was hands down the best (R) debate. I know most of poliGAF wants blood though
90% of politicians flat out lie. Dems and Republicans.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I gave $5. Would give more but I'm currently unemployed (last semester what up)
Raptor2155
Member
It's almost like he doesn't understand what an autobiography is.
neurosisxeno
Member
I wouldn't say that the questions were the easiest imaginable. They weren't hostile, but that's probably a good thing. Like, the first round of questions was about stuff that Republicans usually don't want to talk about too much. A minimum wage increase is popular. Right off the bat Trump was asked if he was sympathetic to an increase. There was a follow-up to make him explicitly say that he was against raising the minimum wage. Same for Carson. Rubio's first question started by detailing nice things Democrats have promised and asked him what he would "take back". He dodged. Kasich was asked what he'd do to balance the budget and was then pressed for specifics.
That's just reading the beginning of the transcript.
I think the moderators didn't do much to call candidates out on bullshit, and they also didn't do a great job setting up other candidates to do that, but the thrust of the questions seemed pretty reasonable to me.
Edit: Hell, Fiorina's first question just lays out that Clinton and Obama had way higher job growth than Bush and asks "what's up with that?"
neurosisxeno
Member
RustyNails
Member
Was listening to Thom Hartmann and he had the brad blog guy on. Was wondering why this didn't make any news.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
Compared to the horrible mess of debate we had last time, this one was cordial. We still have the problem of candidates loudly interrupting and refusing to stop talking until the moderators concede defeat. They need to more strictly enforce who is allowed to speak and for how long, start cutting off their mics aggressively for pete's sake. Plus the candidates have basically decided that answering the actual questions is optional, but I'm not sure how to fix that without interrupting the candidates (which just plays into the media bias trap). I think you just have to hope that voters judge them for avoiding the question, but the moderators could do a much better job of following up.
They also need to move away from abstract questions and actually anticipate the answers. If you just ask them what they would do about 'X', then of course it's no surprise to see canned responses full of noncommittal generalities. Rather than letting someone say, "Well I've put out a plan that solves X, and if you want the details you can look it up, but my plan really solves X," actually ask them about a particular granular proposal in their plan. Why are the journalists apparently ignorant of all the candidates' published policies and proposals beyond one sentence summaries? They should already know the ins and outs so they can call out candidates when they make grandiose claims about a 'plan' without providing any details.
They also need to move away from abstract questions and actually anticipate the answers. If you just ask them what they would do about 'X', then of course it's no surprise to see canned responses full of noncommittal generalities. Rather than letting someone say, "Well I've put out a plan that solves X, and if you want the details you can look it up, but my plan really solves X," actually ask them about a particular granular proposal in their plan. Why are the journalists apparently ignorant of all the candidates' published policies and proposals beyond one sentence summaries? They should already know the ins and outs so they can call out candidates when they make grandiose claims about a 'plan' without providing any details.
That happened a few days ago, but didn't see it posted (and somehow missed it) -
Seattle's Experiment With Campaign Funding.
Basically every resident get four $25 vouchers that they can donate to campaign (you get them for free).
Really interesting approach to campaign finance reform, I hope it works well.
Stay winning Seattle.
Seattle's Experiment With Campaign Funding.
Basically every resident get four $25 vouchers that they can donate to campaign (you get them for free).
Really interesting approach to campaign finance reform, I hope it works well.
Stay winning Seattle.
neurosisxeno
Member
He's the Establishment Moderate, and other than being rude as fuck, he is the most electable candidate I must say.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
It's a really clever solution to the problem of how to treat everyone's campaign fairly. Rather than the government having to pick who gets funding and who doesn't given limited resources, you just give citizens the pot of money and let them pick and choose. Very interested to see how it works in practice and whether people just opt out in favor of traditional fundraising. And whether it does anything to boost alternative/outsider candidates or if it just reinforces the established politicians/groups.
GAF is truly making a dent in JBE's pockets!!
He came out for communism. Fatality.
RustyNails
Member
Grill them on the spot like kebabs like AC did in the democratic debate. I want to see how Rubio squirms out of one of those. He gets shaken very easily when someone bumps him off script. Carson will flop too. Trump, Jeb and Cruz might make it out alive.
Christie would do better than all, I think.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Better get a shout-out at the
concession
get out.
neurosisxeno
Member
"Yes, problems have gotten much worse under Democrats." - Carly Fiorina
Have they? I can't remember Democrats having anything as bad as the 2007-2008 Economic Collapse or The Great Depression happen under their watch.
"We must take our Government back!" - Carly Fiorina
That slogan didn't work so well in Vermont.
Have they? I can't remember Democrats having anything as bad as the 2007-2008 Economic Collapse or The Great Depression happen under their watch.
"We must take our Government back!" - Carly Fiorina
That slogan didn't work so well in Vermont.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked