I think it could still happen to Trump, not that I'm betting on it.
-
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
Back in the day apparently the Republicans called FDR Hitler when he moved Thanksgiving to an earlier Thursday [Vox].
Not much has changed.
Basileus777
Member
I don't think they're celebrating when his support is going to Trump and Cruz. Consolidating support behind stronger anti-establishment candidates is more dangerous for them if anything.
Coriolanus
Banned
I do love how the man writes statements.
"at the financially failing and totally biased" just used so casually. gods. more of this sort of thing.
"at the financially failing and totally biased" just used so casually. gods. more of this sort of thing.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
"one of the all-time great memories" jesus fucking christ, give me Hitler. At least Hitler wasn't as self congratulatory.
Also, it's 2 nuts left to take down, not 1 (McConnell will drink anti-freeze before promoting Cruz)
Also, it's 2 nuts left to take down, not 1 (McConnell will drink anti-freeze before promoting Cruz)
Trump is bullet-proof because his supporters want him exactly as he is. The only question is, does his support have a ceiling?
I agree that any support that goes Trump's way is bad for the GOP establishment. More and more it's clear they really don't know how to deal with him. Cruz is less interesting. He's just another career politician pretending to be a tell-it-like-it-is outsider. Same as Chris Christie, and all the other nobodies running in the GOP primary. I think Cruz would be easier for the GOP establishment to take down if they needed to.
I agree that any support that goes Trump's way is bad for the GOP establishment. More and more it's clear they really don't know how to deal with him. Cruz is less interesting. He's just another career politician pretending to be a tell-it-like-it-is outsider. Same as Chris Christie, and all the other nobodies running in the GOP primary. I think Cruz would be easier for the GOP establishment to take down if they needed to.
Retromelon
Member
happy thanksgiving poligaf
Coriolanus
Banned
are those bald old men triplets?
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Even if 38% is his absolute ceiling, that's still possibly enough to win the popular vote nationwide in this election with so many candidates running.
Though that'd leave a lot of room for delegate shenanigans if the establishment will do anything to make him not be the nominee.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-shares-his-views-on-immigrants-and-refugees/
Spoilers: Trump supporters REALLY hate brown people.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
This scares this shit out of me because not only is that what leads to attacks on minorities its what leads to extremism and people turning towards terrorism and violence.
How soon til Isis cites trump.
RustyNails
Member
Chomsky is an accomplished social scientist. He has a little more understanding of how societies work and function. I would definitely listen to someone like him over a warmongering, pro-racial profiling dipshit like Sam Harris or a completely clueless, headless chicken like Ben Carson when it comes to ideas and policies.
Why what? Why is "mandatory education" about "western liberal values" and "fair integration" is a good idea?
First, we give them a dose of "western liberal values" through bombs dropped on their heads, and then we try to brainwash them about how good apple pie and freedom is. Hell, let's piss on their holy book while we're at it to show how western liberal values work. It's time we stopped treating people as a monolithic block of savage people and let them choose to integrate. America is not a nice, non-multicultural society. America is made up of vibrant ethnic cultures and these communities contribute not because of mandatory education about "western liberal values", but because we leave them the fuck alone. You still have communities that think electricity is the devil and they drive around in horse carts.
The threat of terrorism by lone wolf attackers is real. Problem is, almost all of them are carried out by people who were fully integrated into the western society with both good and bad, or recent converts that were living in the west all their lives. None of the attackers in Paris for example, were devout conservative, un-integrated Muslims speaking their own languages. Mohammad Atta visited strip clubs. The woman who blew herself up was a total party girl. The Abdesalam dude never attended a mosque in his life. It's only when they "wake up", they suddenly become radicalized. How many just-arrived immigrants can you count as terrorists in the west? You should read Sayyid Qutb's autobiography, "the america I have seen". He encounters "western liberal values" to be completely antithetical to his worldview, eventually making him abandon Egypt's revolution of 1919 which was secular in favor of an offensive, anti-government movement dubbed Qutbism. Many of the lonewolf terrorists are actually Qutbists, but they know not.
Of course Qutb was also a vehement racist and had strange views about society. But his "awakening" is the same thing these lone wolfs go through. Most of the time it's a rejection of the western society with guilt over inability to do anything about the suffering in the muslim world. Like, these white people are dancing with their dicks out in clubs while my Iraqi brothers and sisters are being bombed to shit by their government, and I'm doing nothing. These questions and a crisis of identity can easily lead people to dangerous roads. Faisal Shahzad, the times square bomber was a pretty average dude. His marriage fell apart, he started defaulting on his mortgage, starts becoming extremist and he started lashing out. Sorry for going off on a tangent, but I wanted to draw a comparison between Qutb's turn to radicalism with the lone wolf attackers. They go through the same "awakening" route.
Therefore, the program shouldn't be forced education or integration. The program should focus on raising awareness. The mainstream Islamic communities in all the western countries are accepting and progressive. We should utilize this as a tool against radicalism. In fact, one of the counter-radicalism studies said that more, deeper knowledge of Islam can act as deterrence against extremism, not force feeding liberal values.
From the immortal words of Robby the Robot (from the awesome Forbidden Planet), "Stuff?".
But to answer your question (no SO etc), I only recently mentioned my devotion to Obi-Wan, I mean Bernie
, in a recent email to my sister, who remains a lifelong UK resident, along with my parents, but following my post on Bernie's great Thanksgiving parade supporter turnout, I did forward a link to the post, together with a £10/£20 betting tip, for Bernie to snag the Presidency, as based on recent progress, I obviously think he has a great chance, and the bookies appear to be drinking the very same Kool-Aid some of you guys are selling .I haven't heard from my sister since (Tuesday), which I sincerely hope isn't because she's heard Bernie is Jeremy Corbyn's evil "socialist" twin, which is some distance from the truth, as Bernie is far closer to Liberal Democrat MP's (Members of Parliament), in the UK, who, when I was over there (prior to 08), usually made a lot of sense, unlike (New) Labour and the Tory MPs, however, unlike Bernie, they never could gain any traction with the electorate...
I've only seen a little of Jeremy Corbyn, and I must say, I'm not a fan, as he reminded me too much of the Arthur Scargill (former National Union of Mineworkers president) era of Labour politics, i.e. way too left.
My Mom moved over to the UK in the sixties (I was born in 70) and as far as I can remember, the Thanksgiving celebration never made the journey with her, perhaps, in part, because she married a dashing English Met police detective (sadly, but understandably, they separated in the early eighties). I haven't as yet started taking part myself, apart from regularly checking the Black Friday Deals thread (mainly for curiosity's sake)
.Well, that's pretty depressing/frightening albeit not terribly surprising. The only silver lining is that immigration will continue to be used by Trump to tamp down any potential spoiler (Marco) and if Rubio actually managed to pass Trump, he will hopefully been pulled far enough to the right on immigration to make him toxic in the general.
shinra-bansho
Member
I'm not entirely sure what "mandatory education" would entail, but models of acculturation generally entail requiring a positive or desirable view of wider host society culture for there to be more favourable outcomes. Although on the latter I guess it depends on whether one views the development of separated ethnic enclaves as a necessarily good or bad thing.
I don't really know to what degree I'd consider western Islamic communities as progressive. I guess in relative terms definitely. But then this applies to a whole bunch of subcultures and I don't really think that western society as a whole is necessarily that accepting and progressive, despite what we like to tell ourselves.
I don't really know to what degree I'd consider western Islamic communities as progressive. I guess in relative terms definitely. But then this applies to a whole bunch of subcultures and I don't really think that western society as a whole is necessarily that accepting and progressive, despite what we like to tell ourselves.
Coriolanus
Banned
Daniel B·;186900590 said:
You saying your sister votes tory?
Not surprising but still pretty fascinating if also morbid. Racists will be racists. I love their delusions of Trump being electable though.
Retromelon
Member
Any republican that wins the nomination is only an economic crash or terrorist attack on american soil away from getting elected, even trump. Nothing is certain, certainly not hillary.
Unlike me, I don't think she's ever followed politics particularly closely, but how she voted this time round, assuming she voted, might have been whomever was most in line with her current job, which I believe is with a company that provides logistical support for GP (doctor) practices. In the past, she probably voted Labour, but, this time round, I don't know.
Yeah, we're really close
. No, we're good (I stayed at hers back in May), but we are content with not emailing too often. She's also super busy with work, but, in connection with moving house, her company offered her telecommuting option for a few days each week. That could well be why I haven't heard anything, if she's in the middle of moving and has her hands full.shinra-bansho
Member
I thought there was recent polling that showed Clinton beating the opposition on ability to handle terrorism/national security.
I can't see how an attack or attempt would benefit someone like Carson. And Trump is going to need to reduce the foreign policy gaffes too.
The Paris attacks made things "real" again. You don't want a clueless political neophyte as your commander-in-chief.
I can't see how an attack or attempt would benefit someone like Carson. And Trump is going to need to reduce the foreign policy gaffes too.
The Paris attacks made things "real" again. You don't want a clueless political neophyte as your commander-in-chief.
I did also say "unlike Bernie" and the Lib Dems could only dream of the popular support Bernie is gathering (they only ever managed Jeb Bush levels of support
).Bernie is a niche candidate with very small support. You are in complete denial, I kind of feel bad you don't realize this yet. his loss is going to devastate you isn't it?Daniel B·;186912518 said:I did also say "unlike Bernie" and the Lib Dems could only dream of the popular support Bernie is gathering (they only ever managed Jeb Bush levels of support
Retromelon
Member
It will become a talking point for the opposition. "The administration failed to keep us safe!" what will hillary say then.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Cheebs, when you're saying things like 'very small support' you make yourself look almost as bad as Daniel B. Sanders is taking a third of the vote. That's not very small; it's not niche. It is a very significant amount for someone who has no establishment support and identifies with a political tradition almost alien to American history. He probably won't win, no, but he is an important candidate who has clearly affected the political conversation.
Frank the Great
Banned
Sanders is only taking a third of the vote because nobody else is running.
Let's be real, in a full field of legitimate candidates (ie. not fucking Chafee and O'Malley) he would be at Kucinich levels.
Let's be real, in a full field of legitimate candidates (ie. not fucking Chafee and O'Malley) he would be at Kucinich levels.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Yes, which is why he was consistently ahead of Vice President Biden.
Why're you and Cheebs so salty? Work for Wall Street or something?
shinra-bansho
Member
It's already a talking point for the opposition.
She appears to have distanced herself enough from the Obama administration such that while a majority disapprove of his handling of terrorism and Islamic State, she still has pluralities and leads.
I sometimes have trouble working out whom your repling to; by any chance, has your computer contracted a potentially fatal virus, that makes the GAF quote link launch Justin Bieber's Facebook page, so you daren't risk it?
Chomsky is not a social scientist by education, nor is it is primary professional trade. You implied that it is warranted to dismiss other people's opinion on a topic based on their educational background ("neuro-scientist", "biologist"). Which is a silly thing to say, especially because somebody like Chomsky is a prime example of somebody who does not have a background in the social sciences and still has written an immense amount of respectable stuff on that topic. I am not defending the individuals in question. I am just pointing out that your general statement was silly and particularly ironic in a context that involves Chomsky.
This is cynical nonsense. First, let's acknowledge that Western countries have an appreciation for certain values in their constitutions and their laws that not every other country in the world has. Like freedom of self expression, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion. No matter how many bombs we drop on other people and no matter how much collateral damage we cause in the process, it does not change the fact that our societies are based on these values.
Let's further realize that the acceptance of these values is necessary—and necessary in a good way—to live peacefully in our societies. They are obviously the fundament on which diversity is built. Believe it or not, this acceptance is not a given fact for many people coming from certain Muslim-majority countries. On the contrary, there are many people living in these countries that suffer from this fact as a result, and many of them have to fear for their societal and physical well-beeing if they dare to fight to change this situation. Multiculturalism—as opposed to diversity and taken in its most consequent form—is the proposition that all cultures should be preserved and can live with each other. This is evidently wrong. At the very least, people have to accept the values I mentioned, even if they are not compatible with their culture. Because somebody who adheres to a cultural background that denies freedom of expression, speech, and religion is not capable of living in a diverse culture. Yet we have people who actually support the idea that sub-cultures in a multicultural society should be allowed to apply their own laws in their own sub-culture, including laws that go against these values. Furthermore, lack of integration and exchange has led to certain isolated sub-cultures in many parts of Europe, which is why some years ago multiculturalism has been declared a failure by most European leaders, including Merkel, who (rightfully and admirably) is a staunch defender of migration and support for refugees.
You are obviously confused by the difference between diversity and multiculturalism.
(The woman didn't blow itself up, by the way, it was discovered that another guy in her proximity blew himself up.)
Of course. When confronted with liberal values that are inconsistent with Jihadism your either abandon Jihadism or those values. Obviously, those terrorists found meaning in their lives by subscribing to Jihadism and doubled down on it. Being aware of liberal values does not mean that you are immune to Jihadism.
But how many potential Jihadists actually have been turned around by having been confronted with these values? You commit an obvious fallacy of selection bias by not realizing that this number is hidden from us. Because these people who have been made immune to Jihadism obviously do not blow themselves up.
There are plenty of examples for Muslims who went the complete other way and are now working to promote secular and liberal values in the Muslim world. Read, for instance, Maajid Nawaz' autobiography "Radical".
Going back to the issue of immigration and refugees. Let's acknowledge that not all of them have been confronted with secular liberal values. As I said, this is, as far as I know, less of an issue with Syria, but I made a general point about immigration from conservative Muslim-majority countries. Who do you think is more likely to become a Jihadist? Somebody who has grown up in an environment that taught the absolute authority of the Qur'an in all areas of life, or somebody who has grown up in an environment that promoted religious diversity, free speech and the critical thinking that comes with it, and the freedom to express yourself individually, as opposed to conforming to a religious norm?
Are you seriously telling me that this will not play a huge role? If yes, then you are probably just not familiar with people who grew up in oppressive religious environments.
My best friend's family fled in 1979 from Iran and migrated to Germany. He and all members of his family have since become valuable members of German society and contributed well above average. You would have to incredibly blind and confused to not see that migrants like them have not been thoroughly infused with Western values by moving into our societies.
Sure. I support the activism of liberal Muslims who promote a version of Islam that is compatible with a secular societies. I am personally not really convinced by their arguments for that compatibility. But that doesn't change that this endeavor is crucial and unavoidable.
But then let's acknowledge that this endeavor also based on the very liberal values that you have dismissed so naively. The "deeper knowledge of Islam" is likely in fact the deeper knowledge of an interpretation of Islam seen through the lens of a-priori accepted liberal values. Because I am sure that Wahhabists have a pretty deep knowledge of Islamic doctrine too...
shinra-bansho
Member
I don't think it's at all unclear who that post was in response to. Nor is it unclear in this one.
If this post is a response to me then I don't understand what you want to convey.
shinra-bansho
Member
It wasn't your post just happened to coincide simultaneously with mine.
Given it ends up something of a wall of text in between, I would normally quote the person I'm responding to. But I guess I can quote more in general, even when I don't think it's necessary like in this post.
Frank the Great
Banned
You comparing Bernie to a guy who was never a candidate? Telling.
I find Bernie supporters insufferable lately.
There are Bernie supporters I don't even recognize who are holding grudges against me from the last debate thread lmao.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Definitely working for Wall Street. All that salt over the #falsequeen's coronation having a little morality injected. ¯\_(ツ
_/¯Coriolanus
Banned
Lets be real, in a full field of legitimate candidates, all of them would be pulling from the same pool as hillary, not from bernie. His electorate appears to be the "radical", more volatile wing of the party, which is often left ignored. Only thing that could split his base is a warren-like candidate, and those are in very short supply in the democratic party. The same cannot be said of center-left candidates.
Bernie, in this aspect, is similar to Trump.
Didn't I mention that I'm color blind
.I actually have an uncle that is, which made playing snooker, one Christmas, a tad tricky.
That's a very scary thought, that Sarah Palin could have been only one step away from the nuclear launch codes (if, in 08, we knew exactly how Obama would actually govern (with TPP etc) and as a result, he lost the race).
Since it's relevant again and nobody answered last time:
Manmademan
Member
A brokered convention is only possible if Trump doesn't win an outright majority of delegates on his own.
As of right now there's no reason to think he won't. He's well positioned to win or tie closely every state he chooses to compete in, and leads among most demographic groups and most issues republicans care about.
on top of that, a brokered convention could easily be seen as the establishment trying to overturn the "will of the people" via popular vote, split the party and cause trump to run as an independent.
it's a lose/lose situation for the GOP.
Frank the Great
Banned
Totally disagree. Bernie is getting the left wing part of the party plus all the anti-Hillary folks. All the anti-Hillary folks could easily be divided among legitimate candidates if they existed and Bernie's support would dissipate.
Biden, who is probably more right wing than Hillary, would be a clear second if he ever jumped in the race and started actually campaigning. That blows up your theory.
PS. Aside from their insufferable insistence on pretending that he actually has support and could win a general election, the most annoying thing about Bernie and his supporters is how pie-in-the-sky and plain naive they are. Bernie is not the Democrat's Trump, he is their Ron Paul. And he will be about as successful.
Daniel B·;186918590 said:
In what universe would ANYONE switch from Obama to McCain because he ended up being more moderate than they assumed at the time? That makes no sense.
Also you make it seem like liberals/dems turned on Obama. Again, what universe is this? His approval ratings amongst Democrats is sky-high.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked