Support NeoGAF

[AndyD]

I think the most deplorable part was the moderating team. No hard questions, no followups, no specific rebuttals. They just wanted attacks and fights, not a real debate. Ratings above substance is what I got out of it.

 

[danm999]

Ratings above substance is what I got out of it.

CNN basically.

 

[PhoenixDark]

I think the most deplorable part was the moderating team. No hard questions, no followups, no specific rebuttals. They just wanted attacks and fights, not a real debate. Ratings above substance is what I got out of it.

Literally every question was some version of this:

Governor X, Senator Y recently criticized your Z policy, claiming it was [insert minor to medium complaint]. Tell Senator Y why he's wrong.

For three hours. It was quite asinine, especially after it became clear no one was taking the bait. Made me long for the days of Gingrich, who would have no doubt called out the media for their attempts to make candidates fight.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

This is a fantastic point that I think will be overlooked by the media for the entire next month.

Julie Mason on Sirius XM's POTUS channel said of Iowa "I'm sorry Iowa, I am, but you don't matter."

Iowa has zero impact on the election and never picks winners, why should the media care about Iowa?

 

[RastaMentality]

CNN is praising Graham's performance at the JV debate. Doubt it changes his poll numbers at all since they won't fawn over him like they did Fiorina for weeks after.

Any idea of when the debate stages should actually start to lessen up? 11 people was too fucking much.

 

[RDreamer]

CNN is praising Graham's performance at the JV debate.

"No matter who you are, radical islam is going to kill y'all!"

 

[brainchild]

Then again, on the other hand, I'm also seeing many people say Carson "won" the debate, and I thought he was a complete disaster, so who knows.

If the polls turn out to reflect this then I would need to do some serious homework and overhaul my current analysis of the Republican base.

He has no zeal, he's weak, timid and directionless, he has presented no case for him being the right leader for this country other than him 'being concerned' for our future, and he doesn't even espouse much confidence in his expertise as a neurosurgeon (just look at his little quibble with Trump) let alone being the president of this country.

Entertaining the notion of Carson being president is like entertaining the notion of your average lovable grandpappy whose popped one too many quaaludes being president.

I have a hard time believing a sizeable portion of the Republican base actually wants someone like Carson as president, as opposed to Carson simply being the least offensive choice up to this point. All it would take is for better alternatives to strongly make their case, and he should plummet.

If Carson continues to do well, I won't rule out the possibility of there being, at least partially, some racial motivation for a specific voting bloc to support him.

I am very much interested in seeing what happens to him in the polls.

 

[kess]

Entertaining the notion of Carson being president is like entertaining the notion of your average lovable grandpappy whose popped one too many quaaludes being president.

But ...that makes him like Reagan man

 

[PhoenixDark]

Kasich is getting savaged by conservatives over his Iran deal comments, but I think he was basically previewing the position the eventual GOP nominee will take. Throwing out the deal on day one doesn't make sense, but if Iran cheats then all bets are off.

 

[Plinko]

Julie Mason on Sirius XM's POTUS channel said of Iowa "I'm sorry Iowa, I am, but you don't matter."

Iowa has zero impact on the election and never picks winners, why should the media care about Iowa?

I brought up this idea a few months ago when others were trying to say Iowa was the key. It doesn't really matter any more. Before the internet and the constant deluge of campaign ads? Yes, it mattered a bit and set the tone for voters to fall in line.

Now, though? When soundbites hit the airwaves every day? It doesn't really matter much.

 

[Coriolanus]

Reading Jacobin, accruing my lefty cred, dudes put up a Trump dissection. Pretty fun, but here's where it got really interesting:

This seemingly odd combination of liberal sentiments and authoritarian behaviors in pre-9/11 Trump found literary expression in one of Trump’s biggest fans: Patrick Bateman, the wealthy investment banker from Bret Easton Ellis’s novel American Psycho, set at the end of the 1980s. The parallels between Ellis’s character and the real-life Trump are apparent to some readers, and a closer look at Bateman’s obsession with Trump (or at least pre-9/11 Trump) is telling.

Bateman, for those who haven’t read the novel, is revealed to be possibly a serial killer, and has three personal heroes: Ted Bundy, Ed Gein, and Donald Trump. Indeed, Bateman is positively obsessed with Trump throughout the novel. He takes notes of what Trump’s favorite band (U2), wonders what his favorite pizza in the city might be, and is practically star-struck when someone alerts him to the possible presence of Ivana Trump. Even Bateman’s fiancé is sick and tired of hearing about Trump from him. “Not Donald Trump again,” she moans. “Oh god. Is that why you were acting like such a buffoon? This obsession has GOT to end!”

But when Bateman isn’t indulging in murder and mayhem, he feigns concern for the lower members of society and the downtrodden. In a scene from the film version of American Psycho, as Bateman chides his associate Brice for his lack of political vision:

Bateman: Come on, Bryce. There are a lot more important problems than Sri Lanka to worry about.

Bryce: Like what?

Bateman: Well, we have to end apartheid for one. And slow down the nuclear arms race, stop terrorism, and world hunger. We have to provide food and shelter for the homeless, and oppose racial discrimination and promote civil rights, while also promoting equal rights for women. We have to encourage a return to traditional moral values. Most importantly, we have to promote general social concern and less materialism in young people.

Behind Bateman’s empty calls for more equality and end to hunger lurks his pursuit of “fitting in” to a deeply stratified society. Yet how he fits in is not simply a matter of rising to the top of the economic food-chain; it’s also a matter of unleashing his bestial appetites to brutalize and kill.

What Trump shares with Bateman is an idealized notion of their activity as something aristocratic — as something beyond money. Bateman as a proper Ubermensch is cultured and urbane; he is not obsessed with money as much as status. When he lists copious details of different restaurants, pop-music, or details of his exercise routine, it is not done out of a sense of pure hedonism, but of out his duty to status.

Bateman’s accumulation of wealth and habits of consumption are genteel, not plebeian. Trump too in Art of the Deal disdains the idea that he engages in high-stakes business for the money. He does it because it’s an art form:

I don’t do it for the money. I’ve got enough, much more than I’ll ever need. I do it to do it. Deals are my art form. Other people paint beautifully on canvas or write wonderful poetry. I like making deals, preferably big deals. That’s how I get my kicks.

Indeed, for Trump “money was never a big motivation for me, except as a way to keep score. The real excitement is playing the game.”

I really like this thing they do of getting academia to write political articles. Tends to produce interesting reads.
And y'know, i can see someone trying to have a go at Trump, comparing him to Bateman. Heck, i can even see the sense of dread coming when he owns up to it and gains a couple more % afterwards.

Throwing out the deal on day one doesn't make sense, but if Iran cheats then all bets are off.

It's international politics with a nonstandard actor, all bets are almost always off anyway.

 

[brainchild]

But ...that makes him like Reagan man

Good one.

 

[Basileus777]

And y'know, i can see someone trying to have a go at Trump, comparing him to Bateman. Heck, i can even see the sense of dread coming when he owns up to it and gains a couple more % afterwards.

I find it hard to imagine anyone making that comparison in America politics, it's a strange and difficult to explain literary reference that few would understand. I can just imagine the befuddled response someone would get for saying to Trump "You're like that guy from American Psycho."

 

[Roland_Gunner]

Walker's donors are putting on life vests. If he can't turn things around in a month or so they're going to jump ship:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...rs-anxious-for-change-in-campaign-leadership/

 

[thepotatoman]

Who won the debate:

Basically the same as a Survey Monkey poll, but I don't want to wait for better polls.

 

[Plinko]

Who won the debate:


Basically the same as a Survey Monkey poll, but I don't want to wait for better polls.

You've got to be kidding me about Carson. What the heck? He was terrible--maybe the worst of them all outside of Huckabee's ranting.

The establishment guys have to be absolutely furious now. What in the world can they do? I think nothing.

I still say that out of all the establishment guys, I think Rubio is the one with the highest chance of being the nominee. In previous cycles, he'd probably be winning.

As for Fiorina, if you look at the article, Trump and her were about even with men, but she dominated with women. That's not going to hurt Trump in the least.

 

[brainchild]

Who won the debate:


Basically the same as a Survey Monkey poll, but I don't want to wait for better polls. It does seem to match up with my general feeling on who is getting the most praise.

I don't understand Carson's relatively high performance. I will have to look into what his supporters are saying about him. Clearly I'm missing something.

 

[Wilsongt]

Who won the debate:


Basically the same as a Survey Monkey poll, but I don't want to wait for better polls.

Lol Walker.

What a doofus and now people are realizing.

 

[ivysaur12]

I just don't get the Carson thing. Fiorina was obviously the standout and I thought Trump and even Rubio did well.

Also, I had to check out during parts of the debate -- what gay marriage thing would they get Fiorina on? Is it a Kim Davis thing?

EDIT: Is Walker term limited? Would Google but about to get into a car. If not, he might have seriously boned himself over in 2018.

 

[brainchild]

Maybe one thing about Carson that could be resonating with Republican voters is the illusion of humility that he possesses. Perhaps some of them have grown weary of the egotistical mania that the rest of the candidates exude, and they feel comforted by the idea of having a humble president again.

I don't know. I'm just spit-balling at this point.

 

[FloydtheFathead]

Maybe one thing about Carson that could be resonating with Republican voters is the illusion of humility that he possesses. Perhaps some of them have grown weary of the egotistical mania that the rest of the candidates exude, and they feel comforted by the idea of having a humble president again.

I don't know. I'm just spit-balling at this point.

I agree with you here. My family here are republican leaning (I'm a damn dirty liberal to them) but my family thought he sounds nice and humble and that sort of thing. I'm guessing that he's the antithesis to trump. Carson's quiet and soft spoken whereas Trump is a loud bombastic asshole which is why he is gaining support.

 

[brainchild]

Also, I had to check out during parts of the debate -- what gay marriage thing would they get Fiorina on? Is it a Kim Davis thing?

Definitely her position about the Kim Davis situation. She's pretty much aligned herself with the democrats on that one, which is obviously not a good position for her to be in.

I agree with you here. My family here are republican leaning (I'm a damn dirty liberal to them) but my family thought he sounds nice and humble and that sort of thing. I'm guessing that he's the antithesis to trump. Carson's quiet and soft spoken whereas Trump is a loud bombastic asshole which is why he is gaining support.

Interesting. If this is the case with the republic base in general, it would explain why he's doing so well. I'll wait for the results from the aggregate polls before I can get fully behind this theory.

 

[Black Republican]

Who won the debate:


Basically the same as a Survey Monkey poll, but I don't want to wait for better polls.

i dont get why walker isnt liked by voters, they were creaming over him during the recall elections years ago, he seemed like their guy to a t

 

[Pryce]

I agree with you here. My family here are republican leaning (I'm a damn dirty liberal to them) but my family thought he sounds nice and humble and that sort of thing. I'm guessing that he's the antithesis to trump. Carson's quiet and soft spoken whereas Trump is a loud bombastic asshole which is why he is gaining support.

My grandmother said Carson is a "nice quiet man that america wouldn't stand for anymore".

So, yeah. That thought seems about right.

 

[RDreamer]

Who won the debate:


Basically the same as a Survey Monkey poll, but I don't want to wait for better polls.

I legitimately don't understand the Carson supporters.

 

[dramatis]

It's not too hard to understand why people support Carson. There was a poster in the Carson/Trump poll thread two days ago who stated that Carson had a successful life story, seemed humble, and Carson's career choice—neurosurgeon—meant he was smart. There's a lot of 'outsider' sentiment, in which people feel allergic to 'politicians', which is why the voters are clamoring to support Trump, Carson, and Fiorina, the candidates who are outsiders.

I think for those voters, it's not necessarily a case of reason and logic when it comes to voting, but actually about liking their candidate of choice for non-political qualities. A feeling rather than a reasoning.

 

[Ecotic]

I talked to a few friends who are huge admirers of Carson. It seemed to be his embodiment of the citizen service model, someone who has had success in life and then offers his humble service out of heartfelt concern for the country. He doesn't have any knowledge about any of the issues, but that's okay, because it's not necessary, and his supporters don't believe it's necessary. Common sense is the answer. Self important people with Ivy League degrees are what's causing the problems anyway.

 

[RDreamer]

It's not too hard to understand why people support Carson. There was a poster in the Carson/Trump poll thread two days ago who stated that Carson had a successful life story, seemed humble, and Carson's career choice—neurosurgeon—meant he was smart. There's a lot of 'outsider' sentiment, in which people feel allergic to 'politicians', which is why the voters are clamoring to support Trump, Carson, and Fiorina, the candidates who are outsiders.

I think for those voters, it's not necessarily a case of reason and logic when it comes to voting, but actually about liking their candidate of choice for non-political qualities. A feeling rather than a reasoning.

I guess I should rephrase my post. I sort of get a Carson supporter, but anyone that says he won that debate is off their goddamned rocker. That's what I don't understand.

 

[AndyD]

I guess I should rephrase my post. I sort of get a Carson supporter, but anyone that says he won that debate is off their goddamned rocker. That's what I don't understand.

The thing is that this wasn't really a debate. So as long as the candidate was able to maintain their previous image (to their supporters) and come out without gaffes, they "won". So Trump and Carson stuck to their guns and they were considered successful by their previous supporters. So the 30% that liked Trump best before, like him now, same with Carson and so forth.

 

[dramatis]

I guess I should rephrase my post. I sort of get a Carson supporter, but anyone that says he won that debate is off their goddamned rocker. That's what I don't understand.

He performed poorly in the first debate too, and yet he rose to second place in polling. It's probably a matter of perception.

 

[NihonTiger90]

I just don't get the Carson thing. Fiorina was obviously the standout and I thought Trump and even Rubio did well.

Also, I had to check out during parts of the debate -- what gay marriage thing would they get Fiorina on? Is it a Kim Davis thing?

EDIT: Is Walker term limited? Would Google but about to get into a car. If not, he might have seriously boned himself over in 2018.

Per Wikipedia, Ivy, no term limits for governor in Wisconsin.

I would also keep an eye on Kasich. As an Ohio resident, the dude is incredibly good at maneuvering to make himself seem respectable compared to other people. He'll probably survive longer than anyone expects, especially if he has a strong NH showing.

 

[And_Gignac]

Get that mainstream success and acclaim, Bernie.

 

[brainchild]

It's not too hard to understand why people support Carson. There was a poster in the Carson/Trump poll thread two days ago who stated that Carson had a successful life story, seemed humble, and Carson's career choice—neurosurgeon—meant he was smart. There's a lot of 'outsider' sentiment, in which people feel allergic to 'politicians', which is why the voters are clamoring to support Trump, Carson, and Fiorina, the candidates who are outsiders.

I think for those voters, it's not necessarily a case of reason and logic when it comes to voting, but actually about liking their candidate of choice for non-political qualities. A feeling rather than a reasoning.

I talked to a few friends who are huge admirers of Carson. It seemed to be his embodiment of the citizen service model, someone who has had success in life and then offers his humble service out of heartfelt concern for the country. He doesn't have any knowledge about any of the issues, but that's okay, because it's not necessary, and his supporters don't believe it's necessary. Common sense is the answer. Self important people with Ivy League degrees are what's causing the problems anyway.

These explanations definitely make a lot of sense. The truth is that I had already assumed it was a matter of perception, but I didn't think the voters' interests (personality-wise) were in someone who has such an unassuming demeanor.

But when I look at the positives; that he comes across as humble, amicable, and smart, I suppose many of them would consider him 'virtuous' in a sense, subsequently making him one of the more trustworthy candidates and a safer choice.

If this plays out in the future polls, it will certainly be very valuable data for me to keep in mind.

Get that mainstream success and acclaim, Bernie.

Nice.

 

[ivysaur12]

Per Wikipedia, Ivy, no term limits for governor in Wisconsin.

Then he's absolutely screwed himself over in 2018 if he chooses to run!

 

[RDreamer]

Then he's absolutely screwed himself over in 2018 if he chooses to run!

Doubt it.

If he continues to lose quietly like this, it won't affect him. If he had lost big and loud with some sort of terrible gaffe, that'd be one thing.

The Democrats have to actually put someone likable up against him, though.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Then he's absolutely screwed himself over in 2018 if he chooses to run!

Wisconsin Gaffer: "The Democrats will just put up another uninspiring candidate against him"

 

[NYCmetsfan]

 

[ivysaur12]

Doubt it.

If he continues to lose quietly like this, it won't affect him. If he had lost big and loud with some sort of terrible gaffe, that'd be one thing.

The Democrats have to actually put someone likable up against him, though.

He's poisoned the well. You don't come back from something like this unless you live in a deep red-blue state. If the WI Dems put up a real candidate in 2018, I can't see him winning. His favorables are depressing and he just embarrassed himself on the national stage.

 

[Basileus777]

Then he's absolutely screwed himself over in 2018 if he chooses to run!

Don't worry, Democratic turnout will be in the dumps again and he'll get by.

 

[RDreamer]

He's poisoned the well. You don't come back from something like this unless you live in a deep red-blue state. If the WI Dems put up a real candidate in 2018, I can't see him winning. His favorables are depressing and he just embarrassed himself on the national stage.

But he hasn't done anything. That's the problem. He's not making a big name for himself, so he's not noticed, but he hasn't done anything big to make us upset here. His fans are still tripping over themselves worship him here.

Now, if he embarrassed himself like Perry did with that third thing gaffe, you'd have a point. He hasn't yet, though.

If the WI Dems put up a real candidate in 2018, I can't see him winning.

That's a rather large if. It's gotta be a real good candidate on an off year election.

Jesus lol.

 

[lednerg]

Republican presidential debate on CNN: Trump was so-so, Fiorina and Rubio not bad [YouTube]

Nailed it.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Remember how meta said this was going to change the support for the deal?

Now I'd imagine the only thing they have left is the lawsuit demanding obama walk on water

 

[ivysaur12]

But he hasn't done anything. That's the problem. He's not making a big name for himself, so he's not noticed, but he hasn't done anything big to make us upset here. His fans are still tripping over themselves worship him here.

Now, if he embarrassed himself like Perry did with that third thing gaffe, you'd have a point. He hasn't yet, though.

That's a fair point, I guess.

 

[brainchild]

I can't believe he said this. He has set himself up, in spectacular fashion, to be ridiculed and embarrassed for this. How could he have not known the ramifications?!! It boggles the mind.


EDIT:

Republican presidential debate on CNN: Trump was so-so, Fiorina and Rubio not bad [YouTube]

Nailed it.

Holy shit! That was superb! LMAO

 

[NeoXChaos]

http://time.com/4038080/the-gospel-of-bernie/

Then he paints one of his word pictures. Imagine President Sanders facing a vote in Congress on free college tuition paid for by a tax hike on the wealthy. He’d have to persuade Speaker of the House John Boehner to help him pass the bill. That’s where his army of activists comes in. “How do I convince John? Is my personality that much better than Barack Obama’s?” Sanders says. “The answer is to say, ‘Hey, John, take a look out your window. Because there are a million young people there that are in support of the legislation. They are voting. They know what’s going on. If you refuse to make college affordable, they’re going to vote your people out of office.’ That’s the offer you can’t refuse.”

 

[Coriolanus]

i dont get why walker isnt liked by voters, they were creaming over him during the recall elections years ago, he seemed like their guy to a t

Sorta, but even then, he was The Republican. Here he aint the only option on the menu, and we see what happens.

 

[RustyNails]

So I guess in summary, everyone pretty much performed the way they were expected to. No upsets.

Trump was beseiged, but held his ground. Landed a few jabs, bruised in few others. Nothing that throws him off perch. He needs to start talking specifics very soon otherwise his charade will be over

Fiorina continues to rise due to her swift answers. She is the only one that poses Trump any threat in the "outsider" category.

Carson was medicated as usual, but seemed to be on a slightly shaky ground since last time. I think the Carson voters will start moving to Fiorina tent, who will be the next flavor.

Marco was pretty stable. I however do not see his star rising. My prediction is that his immigration plan will doom him, unless he starts running from it like McCain in 2007. He might be the 3rd flavor.

As for establishment, pathetic performance all around. Jeb seemed like a schoolboy swinging his wooden sword in the cafeteria. Cruz needs to fuck off and Walker is on life support.

 

[brainchild]

http://time.com/4038080/the-gospel-of-bernie/

"Then he paints one of his word pictures. Imagine President Sanders facing a vote in Congress on free college tuition paid for by a tax hike on the wealthy. He’d have to persuade Speaker of the House John Boehner to help him pass the bill. That’s where his army of activists comes in. “How do I convince John? Is my personality that much better than Barack Obama’s?” Sanders says. “The answer is to say, ‘Hey, John, take a look out your window. Because there are a million young people there that are in support of the legislation. They are voting. They know what’s going on. If you refuse to make college affordable, they’re going to vote your people out of office.’ That’s the offer you can’t refuse.”"

This is exactly what I was referring to when people questioned how could Bernie start a political revolution, and why he'd be the best person for the job. His plan is basically a post-election coalition.

Unfortunately, that would require him to actually become POTUS in the first place, which does not seem likely, thus rendering this plan a hailmary more than anything else.

 

[Metaphoreus]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPHt--4UYAA5hPD.png:large

Remember how meta said this was going to change the support for the deal?

Now I'd imagine the only thing they have left is the lawsuit demanding obama walk on water

I didn't say it would change the support for the deal. I contested your claim that there's never any reason to try to shift votes once the number necessary to enact or defeat legislation is apparent. I'll note, however, that whoever it is you're quoting considers it highly significant that the AP article was corrected by the AP and contradicted by confidential briefings. But my challenge to you assumed for the sake of argument that the AP article, as originally written, was true--again, I was criticizing your legislative philosophy of premature surrender.

In any event, the documents have to be provided for the congressional review period to begin. None of what your unidentified interlocutor is saying changes the legal requirements.

You still haven't answered this question: how much of the Iran deal, in your view, could the president have relegated to secret side deals that nevertheless trigger US obligations in an attempt to evade Congressional review?

 

[NYCmetsfan]

This is exactly what I was referring to when people questioned how could Bernie start a political revolution, and why he'd be the best person for the job. His plan is basically a post-election coalition.

Unfortunately, that would require him to actually become POTUS in the first place, which does not seem likely, thus rendering this plan a hailmary more than anything else.

That's not a revolution, that's the way politics works.