Support NeoGAF

[Metaphoreus]

He supported Fred fucking Thompson.

You're smart enough to know that smart people can disagree about politics.

 

[brainchild]

Rachel Maddow just did a really solid interview with Bernie.

She brought up a wide range of topics, Bernie offered commentary on the GOP debate, and it would seem that there will be some forthcoming news about the details regarding his grand master plan, which is something I did not expect him to be ready to talk about yet.

https://youtu.be/j2oMcq3dTzM


He's one of the most sincere politicians I've ever seen. Watching him speak, you get a real sense of urgency and conviction. Bernie is the real deal. I SO wish he could win the primaries!


EDIT:


Carly Fiorina may be an evil, lying snake but HOLY SHIT does she have balls of steel! Watch this clip of her shut down Chris Matthews without so much as hitch in her execution.

https://youtu.be/GyxLGc0RDZc

 

[Diablos]

It's a bunch of hot air.

For instance, what is the roughly estimated number of young 'voters' that are currently engaged? How much time are they willing to put in to do extensive grassroots campaigning and work every two years? (Or even every year?) How much money will you need to fund such an operation? What is the infrastructure in place for that purported "political revolution"? How will you sustain it over four years? Over eight years? Over twelve? Are the supposed millions of principled young voters all willing to vote for candidates that may not agree entirely with their views but offer the best chance of winning in moderately conservative districts? Are those millions of young voters willing to devote their time and effort to supporting local candidates all around the nation?

There are no specifics. It is not a concrete plan. It's an idealized vision with very little substance to support it.

This is why I love dramatis.

Indeed, Bernie is all talk. He has the best of intentions but has not convinced me that he knows how to deliver on those intentions. He's not electable in the GE. I am increasingly annoyed by a part of the Democratic voter base that has Bernie fever. He is not another 2008-era Barack Obama. Get over it, or lose big.

 

[Coriolanus]

We gonna start pretending that any democratic nominee will be able to deliver on what they say, now? Or we just singling bernie out on this because reasons?

 

[brainchild]

This is why I love dramatis.

Indeed, Bernie is all talk. He has the best of intentions but has not convinced me that he knows how to deliver on those intentions. He's not electable in the GE. I am increasingly annoyed by a part of the Democratic voter base that has Bernie fever. He is not another 2008-era Barack Obama. Get over it, or lose big.

To be honest, considering what he aims to do, I don't think anyone could convince people with mere argumentation. You are either helping him do it or you're not, and if you're not, it doesn't matter who the leader of the revolution is, considering the state of the political landscape. Nothing short of the evidence in action could make a convincing case.

 

[Chichikov]

You're smart enough to know that smart people can disagree about politics.

There''s different opinion, and there's supporting Fred Thompson for the president of the US.

 

[brainchild]

We gonna start pretending that any democratic nominee will be able to deliver on what they say, now? Or we just singling bernie out on this because reasons?

You're right, but I understand their skepticism. Bernie's talking about a political revolution. People are right to criticize it.

My issue was trying to explain what he intends to do, but now that that's clear, it really boils down to how likely it would be to happen. People aren't too confident in those odds, which is what has lead to the responses you see.

At the same time, people need to understand that it's not a Bernie issue. No politician could make a convincing case to the skeptic that it could work.

What Bernie needs to do is focus on garnering support and properly developing the infrastructure he needs to carry out his plan.

 

[User 406]

We gonna start pretending that any democratic nominee will be able to deliver on what they say, now? Or we just singling bernie out on this because reasons?

That really depends on what's being promised. If Hillary said she'd get us a basic income bill passed by the end of her term, I'd call bullshit, as much as I'd love it. So while I don't fault Bernie for trying to get the youth more involved in midterms, and I appreciate him being blunt about how necessary it is that they follow through on their transient enthusiasm, yeah, that's not happening.

 

[Coriolanus]

That really depends on what's being promised.

Dude. Unless a democrat flat-out promisses to raise taxes on the poor and give tax breaks to the rich, it'll be opposed.

Heck, even then it would most likely be opposed.

Meet nu-politics. All obstructionism, all the time.

As so many have said, the only concrete thing you can vote for is SC noms and whatever the executive can swing solo. That they can reliably give you. Everything else? eeeh...

I mean, to illustrate, and mostly because you mentioned hills. Im sure that if, say, DDJB ran it would be the same thing, this is from the hills on a linkedin article she done wrote

Yes, she's gonna reform immigration AND capital gain taxes. That's totally something that will happen. Impose accountability to WS too, because why not.
Go to the issues section of her site and you'll see plenty more. Even promisses to reform the criminal justice system.
It's nearly all hogwash. As is most of the pie in the sky stuff sanders sells. And what DDJB would sell.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Biden may not decide soon
The VP's inner circle thinks he can bide his time a while longer -- even into the spring -- before deciding whether to run for president.

DETROIT — Joe Biden may have more time to make up his mind about running for president than most people assume. He and the people planning his potential campaign certainly think so.
Running a primary race — particularly against Hillary Clinton — would require raising millions of dollars, hiring campaign staff and getting very quickly into active operational and organizational mode. He can’t do any of that until he gets in.
Various deadlines have been floated: End of summer, Oct. 1, the first Democratic debate on Oct. 13, the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson dinner Oct. 24. But none of these is looking like a hard deadline. Neither are any of the cutoff dates for getting his name on state ballots. People who’ve spoken with the vice president say he doesn’t seem in any rush. Earlier in the process, Biden's staff had been insisting to some reporters that the "end of summer'' isn’t technically until Sept. 23. That’s next Wednesday. No one believes at this point that’ll be the cutoff. Most of Biden’s decision-making is driven largely by his own emotional process. But according to people familiar with the discussions going on in his inner circle, two other factors also loom large: whether Hillary Clinton will implode (and if so, when), and how long he can count on public goodwill toward him lasting. It turns out that instead of simply deciding yes or no on a presidential run, Biden may have a third option — make no announcement at all, wait until December (or longer) and hope Clinton gets out of the race or is pushed to the sidelines without him having to get in. The third option would be harder to mount organizationally and emotionally, but it would save him a bitter nomination fight against a former Senate and Obama administration colleague. In effect, it would mean that he could run for president without having to run against Hillary Clinton. The question that worries his inner circle is how much patience people will have in the meantime for his Hamlet routine.

“They’re testing it,” said one person who’s spoken with the people laying the plans. “They’re feeling it out.” Drawing the decision out to November has risks, they know: It's a gamble between whether she’ll implode (perhaps under indictment over her personal email server), whether he could wait so long that she’d rebound (perhaps fueled by strong performances at the debate or in congressional testimony on Oct. 22).
And November isn’t really a deadline, either. Close observers say they’re not convinced Clinton could survive losing Iowa and New Hampshire in February, given the fall from front-runner grace either would entail.
“Oh, Lord, have mercy, yes,” said Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) when asked recently if the Clinton campaign would collapse if she were not able to carry the first two states. “It’s Katie, bar the door. It’s all over.”
But, Clyburn added, Biden would need to be in the race by then if he would hope to do anything about it. Though Biden falls further behind in the money race each week, the small circle advising him has reached the point in donor outreach when it believes it would have the funds to make the campaign happen

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...tion-announcement-timing-213801#ixzz3m6031Sby

 

[Plinko]

Asked about whether that was a fair reprimand, "I think she was being rude," Christie told CNBC Friday. "Carly is not going to be treated any differently by me on a debate stage because she's a woman And she wouldn't want it."

He pointed out that he spoke the same way to candidate John Kasich, governor of Ohio, but nobody raised any questions. "I treat women the same way that I treat men," he said. "I tell them the truth. And that's what they want to hear."

Christie defending his response to Fiorina, which I actually agree with.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

There''s different opinion, and there's supporting Fred Thompson for the president of the US.

Maybe he just really likes reverse mortgages

 

[benjipwns]

There''s different opinion, and there's supporting Fred Thompson for the president of the US.

Is this because I'm a lesbian?

 

[Diablos]

Biden is playing it smart. It's almost like he has to play a long game because if he announces too early it could totally erase his chances. It's safer to lay back and see if Hillary seriously implodes or not. If she does and it's all but certain that her campaign is doomed, then I think he will jump in. Biden isn't selfish enough to just put himself out there if it's going to drag down the party's chances for what really counts.

 

[RustyNails]

Pollgaf, I want polls

 

[Teggy]

Is this because I'm a lesbian?

Iunderstoodthatreference.gif

 

[NeoXChaos]

Biden is playing it smart. It's almost like he has to play a long game because if he announces too early it could totally erase his chances. It's safer to lay back and see if Hillary seriously implodes or not. If she does and it's all but certain that her campaign is doomed, then I think he will jump in. Biden isn't selfish enough to just put himself out there if it's going to drag down the party's chances for what really counts.

 

[Poodlestrike]

I'm pretty sure that Trump is a furby.

 

[AndyD]

Christie defending his response to Fiorina, which I actually agree with.

Some agree with it, and some won't. It's one of those catch 22 things with the audience. If you are entirely fair, but tough, you will lose some people who will still consider you a bully. "He should be nicer to her" type thing and "he is trying to intimidate her".

 

[User 406]

Meet nu-politics. All obstructionism, all the time.

As so many have said, the only concrete thing you can vote for is SC noms and whatever the executive can swing solo. That they can reliably give you. Everything else? eeeh...

You're right, but at least they're talking about trying to push through policy, even if it's going to get stomped on, and pushing policy is the job. There's an understanding that determination to "do" really means "try", in much the same way candidates get introduced as "your next President of these United States!". It's a very common political conceit. And if we get lucky and the stars align and a workable majority or slim bipartisan coalition on certain issues emerges, they will actually work to push that policy through. After all, we got the ACA after the supermajority was lost. So it's not just for the SC and executive power, although those are certainly most critical.

But asserting that fickle, self-involved fair-weather voters will start being actual voters, something that nobody has even the slightest ability to set in motion, is kinda different. It's a bit closer to when the guys on the right talk about gun owners marching en masse on Washington and then the liberals will cave, and everything will work and shit. It's really just rhetorical fluff.

And again, I'm not at all upset at Bernie for trying. Rallying the troops is important. And he's heavy on policy too, as he should be. He's a good candidate. The issue here is that he has a lot of those fickle, self-involved fair-weather voters, and they really buy into the idea that the rhetorical fluff is some kind of sweeping revolutionary plan. It's not. And they aren't coming back for the midterms.

 

[Iolo]

Biden is playing it smart. It's almost like he has to play a long game because if he announces too early it could totally erase his chances. It's safer to lay back and see if Hillary seriously implodes or not. If she does and it's all but certain that her campaign is doomed, then I think he will jump in. Biden isn't selfish enough to just put himself out there if it's going to drag down the party's chances for what really counts.

With every article that comes out about this, I get more convinced it's all bullshit; a smokescreen, wishful thinking by Biden supporters, or a bored press. It is nearly too late to start organizing a campaign infrastructure now, let alone in three months.

 

[brainchild]

You're right, but at least they're talking about trying to push through policy, even if it's going to get stomped on, and pushing policy is the job. There's an understanding that determination to "do" really means "try", in much the same way candidates get introduced as "your next President of these United States!". It's a very common political conceit. And if we get lucky and the stars align and a workable majority or slim bipartisan coalition on certain issues emerges, they will actually work to push that policy through. After all, we got the ACA after the supermajority was lost. So it's not just for the SC and executive power, although those are certainly most critical.

But asserting that fickle, self-involved fair-weather voters will start being actual voters, something that nobody has even the slightest ability to set in motion, is kinda different. It's a bit closer to when the guys on the right talk about gun owners marching en masse on Washington and then the liberals will cave, and everything will work and shit. It's really just rhetorical fluff.

And again, I'm not at all upset at Bernie for trying. Rallying the troops is important. And he's heavy on policy too, as he should be. He's a good candidate. The issue here is that he has a lot of those fickle, self-involved fair-weather voters, and they really buy into the idea that the rhetorical fluff is some kind of sweeping revolutionary plan. It's not. And they aren't coming back for the midterms.

Question, and I'm just asking you to humor me here...

IF (and it's a big if) Bernie manages to get voters to defeat the Republicans in Congress during the midterms and reverse the majority, would you still consider such an accomplishment to be rhetorical fluff? Would it be a political revolution? Forget about the likelihood, I just want to hear your hypothetical answer.

With every article that comes out about this, I get more convinced it's all bullshit; a smokescreen, wishful thinking by Biden supporters, or a bored press. It is nearly too late to start organizing a campaign infrastructure now, let alone in three months.

These are my thoughts as well. But who knows, maybe he'll surprise us.

 

[pigeon]

Question, and I'm just asking you to humor me here...

IF (and it's a big if) Bernie manages to get voters to defeat the Republicans in Congress during the midterms and reverse the majority, would you still consider such an accomplishment to be rhetorical fluff? Would it be a political revolution? Forget about the likelihood, I just want to hear your hypothetical answer.

Sure, of course it would be. It would've been when Obama tried to do it twice too. What's your point?

 

[benjipwns]

It is nearly too late to start organizing a campaign infrastructure now, let alone in three months.

This assumes that the point is to intentionally compete for the nomination.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Question, and I'm just asking you to humor me here...

IF (and it's a big if) Bernie manages to get voters to defeat the Republicans in Congress during the midterms and reverse the majority, would you still consider such an accomplishment to be rhetorical fluff? Would it be a political revolution? Forget about the likelihood, I just want to hear your hypothetical answer.




These are my thoughts as well. But who knows, maybe he'll surprise us.

That would be great but also unprecedented.

 

[User 406]

Question, and I'm just asking you to humor me here...

IF (and it's a big if) Bernie manages to get voters to defeat the Republicans in Congress during the midterms and reverse the majority, would you still consider such an accomplishment to be rhetorical fluff? Would it be be a political revolution? Forget about the likelihood, I just want to hear your hypothetical answer.

If you mean that Democratic turnout in the midterms would match the turnout in the presidential election years, it would be awesome, and unprecedented, and fuckin' WEIRD, but it wouldn't be a revolution. Getting people to show up to the polls is not a revolution. And honestly, considering just how big the enthusiasm for Obama was, it won't happen due to any kind of rockstar inspiration politicking. I would give more credit to the kids themselves than I would to any one politician.

And really, it's not going to happen. Attempts to drive up youth vote have been done many times before. A much stronger emphasis on political education and civic responsibility might bear fruit, but it would take a generation or two, and would require a lot of socially reinforced pressure to conform to the idea. As it is, political ignorance and naivete will take their toll until experience is gained. There's really no getting around it.

 

[brainchild]

Sure, of course it would be. It would've been when Obama tried to do it twice too. What's your point?

For one, sheer curiosity as to where one might draw the line between where the fluff ends and the action begins. For instance, one might say the line gets drawn way after that; when policies actually get implemented.

Anyway, I just asked because if he considers an obvious approach to a solution to be rhetorical fluff, that would imply some level of pandering from the person who proposed the plan. In other words, Bernie doesn't really intend to do this, he's just telling people what they want to hear.

What I'd like to know is at what stage of the 'fluff' do you say, "hmm, OK they're not just pandering anymore".

I purposefully drew the line at overthrowing congress, because it should be fairly obvious for most people to see the action at that point, but I think the line can be drawn a bit before that. It would require some new strategies, but I don't think we'd have to wait all the way up until midterms in order to notice if there was going to be sufficient post-election support.

That would be great but also unprecedented.

Yes, I'm very much aware.

If you mean that Democratic turnout in the midterms would match the turnout in the presidential election years, it would be awesome, and unprecedented, and fuckin' WEIRD, but it wouldn't be a revolution. Getting people to show up to the polls is not a revolution. And honestly, considering just how big the enthusiasm for Obama was, it won't happen due to any kind of rockstar inspiration politicking. I would give more credit to the kids themselves than I would to any one politician.

And really, it's not going to happen. Attempts to drive up youth vote have been done many times before. A much stronger emphasis on political education and civic responsibility might bear fruit, but it would take a generation or two, and would require a lot of socially reinforced pressure to conform to the idea. As it is, political ignorance and naivete will take their toll until experience is gained. There's really no getting around it.

Interesting. So not a revolution yet, but would you say that the rhetoric now has substance and is no longer fluff?

Also, where does the revolution begin? Democratic Socialism? The dismantling of the Oligarchy? A government ACTUALLY run by its citizens?

I'm interested in how far you think that Bernie would need to go before a true revolutionary change in our political system could take place.

 

[Iolo]

This assumes that the point is to intentionally compete for the nomination.

First, there's no other option; Hillary's not going to drop out and we saw her tenacity in 2008 (despite being a mathematical certainty at a certain point that Obama would win the primary). Second, you need a campaign infrastructure for the general as well.

 

[Coriolanus]

But asserting that fickle, self-involved fair-weather voters will start being actual voters, something that nobody has even the slightest ability to set in motion, is kinda different. It's a bit closer to when the guys on the right talk about gun owners marching en masse on Washington and then the liberals will cave, and everything will work and shit. It's really just rhetorical fluff.

And again, I'm not at all upset at Bernie for trying. Rallying the troops is important. And he's heavy on policy too, as he should be. He's a good candidate. The issue here is that he has a lot of those fickle, self-involved fair-weather voters, and they really buy into the idea that the rhetorical fluff is some kind of sweeping revolutionary plan. It's not. And they aren't coming back for the midterms.

Yeah, sure. I just dont see the difference between the kinda rethoric he's pushing and... yknow, Hope & Change. That they arent coming back for the future is a problem for the future. What matters to him right now (in theory) is getting a new house for free. Worrying about 2018 midterm turnout in 2015 when you don't even have your party`s nom is a bit absurd.

If those voters are only good for presidentials, exploit the shit outta them for presidentials. Obviously if you tell them "yeah guys, but you shitbags hamstrung me for at least two years with alladat 2014 stuff" youll meet disastrous results, which is why aint no one gon do that. Pragmatism, ho.

Either way that factor only comes into play if he wins, which aint likely to happen anyway. To criticize him for this strikes me as incoherent.

 

[RastaMentality]

There's been two articles I've seen today from Vox and Bloomberg both saying that we shouldn't read too much into Fiorina's HP record because she actually was a victim of the economic times.

Her defense of her record was pretty well-delivered at the debates though. Trump & co. should go for HP's actions in Iran and how they curbed sanctions.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Lol at rubios staff punching Rand's

 

[brainchild]

Yeah, sure. I just dont see the difference between the kinda rethoric he's pushing and... yknow, Hope & Change. That they arent coming back for the future is a problem for the future. What matters to him right now (in theory) is getting a new house for free. Worrying about 2018 midterm turnout in 2015 when you don't even have your party`s nom is a bit absurd.

If those voters are only good for presidentials, exploit the shit outta them for presidentials. Obviously if you tell them "yeah guys, but you shitbags hamstrung me for at least two years with alladat 2014 stuff" youll meet disastrous results, which is why aint no one gon do that. Pragmatism, ho.

Either way that factor only comes into play if he wins, which aint likely to happen anyway. To criticize him for this strikes me as incoherent.

This doesn't consider the whole picture. His plan hinges ENTIRELY on post-election support. It's imperative that his supporters know what they're supporting, and that's a movement that involves them voting in the midterms. He cannot implement his ideologies without a congress to work with and he can't get a congress to work with without post-election support, and he won't get post-election support without voters who understand the need to do so.

So he very much has to consider the future, even before he gets the nomination. It's what his campaign is about.

So yeah, people will cry rhetoric fluff, hot air, empty promises, etc. because his vision is extremely ambitious.

I understand your point that all Democrats are deserving of such skepticism, but in Bernie's case, it really is warranted.

 

[benjipwns]

First, there's no other option; Hillary's not going to drop out

Right. Which is why one shouldn't assume Biden entering the race is a deliberate attempt at actually winning the nomination.

See: Clark, Wesley.

 

[Diablos]

Lol at rubios staff punching Rand's

Wait, what?

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

There's been two articles I've seen today from Vox and Bloomberg both saying that we shouldn't read too much into Fiorina's HP record because she actually was a victim of the economic times.



Her defense of her record was pretty well-delivered at the debates though. Trump & co. should go for HP's actions in Iran and how they curbed sanctions.

That's a terrible graph-- Sun's failure throws off the whole scale.

 

[benjipwns]

Wait, what?

http://westmipolitics.blogspot.com/2015/09/breaking-mackinac-drama-top-rubio.html

http://www.mlive.com/lansing-news/index.ssf/2015/09/john_yob_aide_to_rand_paul_cla.html
http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/...h-thrown-gop-mackinac-confab-begins/72386222/

 

[RastaMentality]

That's a terrible graph-- Sun's failure throws off the whole scale.

Yeah, they made it seem like there was this dramatic downturn in the tech sector. I hope SOMEBODY brings it up significantly though. Everyone's walking on egg shells besides trump it seems.

 

[benjipwns]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppin...rs-are-circulating-rumor-about-cam#.yjYDjbEG2

As Scott Walker’s presidential bid founders, some in the candidate’s orbit are participating in a whisper campaign against his top strategist and campaign manager, Rick Wiley.

A number of Walker’s donors and supporters have been circulating a rumor about Wiley in recent days, apparently aimed at discrediting him and bringing about a shakeup in the organization, according to two Republican sources. The sources, neither of whom is affiliated with a presidential campaign, said they heard the rumor from people in Walker’s camp. They also said an anonymous letter about Wiley is circulating in political and donor circles, though it is unclear where it originated.

BuzzFeed News could not confirm the details of the rumor, and will not publish it.

Asked about the whisper campaign, Walker spokesperson Kirsten Kukowski acknowledged the rumors but said they were false, and that the candidate wouldn’t be distracted by “the sideshow.”

“Governor Walker routinely says we need to talk about the issues instead of the sideshow because our country deserves it,” Kukowski said in a statement to BuzzFeed News. “We have a plan to share Governor Walker’s WI record of reform and results and his vision with the American people, and will continue to execute on it. This isn’t a reality show, the whisper campaign isn’t based in reality and has no place in the process to elect the next president of the United States.”

The influential conservative talk radio host and blogger Erick Erickson appeared to allude to the whisper campaign Thursday on Twitter: “Lots of different people all sending me the same rumor about a particular campaign manager caught indecently at the Ohio debate.”

 

[NYCmetsfan]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppin...rs-are-circulating-rumor-about-cam#.yjYDjbEG2

Just post the rummor if your going to run a story like that

 

[RDreamer]

There's been two articles I've seen today from Vox and Bloomberg both saying that we shouldn't read too much into Fiorina's HP record because she actually was a victim of the economic times.

Her defense of her record was pretty well-delivered at the debates though. Trump & co. should go for HP's actions in Iran and how they curbed sanctions.

So let's pretend she was a victim of the economic times. Well then what the fuck is she running on? If her record gets thrown out as neutral at best because of the economy she has no reason to run still. If the only real record she has should be hand waved, she's done for.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppin...rs-are-circulating-rumor-about-cam#.yjYDjbEG2

Good, keep talking about that Wisconsin record. I hope Trump keeps throwing it back in your face.

If there's nothing else I want this election cycle it's for someone to just wreck Walker.

 

[User 406]

Anyway, I just asked because if he considers an obvious approach to a solution to be rhetorical fluff, that would imply some level of pandering from the person who proposed the plan. In other words, Bernie doesn't really intend to do this, he's just telling people what they want to hear.

"If more of our voters show up, we win" is not an "approach to a solution". It's a tautology. Why are you ignoring the fact that Obama said the same things? Why was his identical "approach to a solution" not successful? Why would you expect Bernie's version to be? Has there ever even been a candidate that didn't emphasize turnout, and didn't endorse downticket allies? Why do you want something so obvious to somehow be new and unique? Are you even reading other peoples' responses?

Interesting. So not a revolution yet, but would you say that the rhetoric now has substance and is no longer fluff?

Also, where does the revolution begin? Democratic Socialism? The dismantling of the Oligarchy? A government ACTUALLY run by its citizens?

I'm interested in how far you think that Bernie would need to go before a true revolutionary change in our political system could take place.

The last political revolution in this country was when the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was signed, and the Dixiecrats abandoned the Democratic party, causing a complete realignment of the political axis.

You seem to be conflating political success with revolution. Furthermore, you just can't seem to let go of the desire for Bernie to somehow be doing something special, new, and untried, when he really, really isn't. He's a good candidate. I'm voting for him in the primary. But he is in no way unique in history. You are getting caught up in a cult of personality driven by those very same intransigent voters who have more idealism than political knowledge or experience, who don't vote downticket, who don't vote in midterms, who complain that both sides are the same and vote third party unless some rockstar candidate shows up, who they are inevitably disappointed in and criticize when they don't get all their idealistic fantasies fulfilled. These people are there to make themselves feel good for joining in with a perceived righteous cause where everyone cheers at the end of the movie, instead of really examining and undergoing the work of governing their country. They are entertaining themselves. Governance is work.

If you want to continue trying to assert the existence of some nebulous "revolution" with further semantic quibbling, please don't.

 

[Diablos]

http://westmipolitics.blogspot.com/2015/09/breaking-mackinac-drama-top-rubio.html

http://www.mlive.com/lansing-news/index.ssf/2015/09/john_yob_aide_to_rand_paul_cla.html
http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/...h-thrown-gop-mackinac-confab-begins/72386222/

Can't say I'm really surprised. Manchild hits another manchild.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppin...rs-are-circulating-rumor-about-cam#.yjYDjbEG2

The best campaign manager in the world could not make up for the fact that Scott Walker is an ignorant and inarticulate fool.

 

[ivysaur12]

Spoiler

I am significantly better looking, however.

Not difficult.

Also, uh, I don't think Biden can wait that much longer, and definitely not until spring. FEC filing deadlines are approaching for the early states if he wants to be on the ballot in Iowa or New Hampshire. Or maybe he wants to pull a Giuliani and only focus on Florida. Remember that? Remember?

All my poor father wanted was for Giuliani to be president.

 

[User 406]

Yeah, sure. I just dont see the difference between the kinda rethoric he's pushing and... yknow, Hope & Change. That they arent coming back for the future is a problem for the future. What matters to him right now (in theory) is getting a new house for free. Worrying about 2018 midterm turnout in 2015 when you don't even have your party`s nom is a bit absurd.

Either way that factor only comes into play if he wins, which aint likely to happen anyway. To criticize him for this strikes me as incoherent.

Hope n' Change is the same thing. Every politician does the, "it's really all of YOU" thing. And I'm totally not criticizing Bernie for it, just the people who are conflating it with actual policy. Coz exhorting turnout and political engagement is really not policy.

If those voters are only good for presidentials, exploit the shit outta them for presidentials. Obviously if you tell them "yeah guys, but you shitbags hamstrung me for at least two years with alladat 2014 stuff" youll meet disastrous results, which is why aint no one gon do that. Pragmatism, ho.

The sad truth is once these voters have their savior picked out, he could throw rocks at them and they'd still show up. It's all made up fantasies in their heads anyway. It's why they're always upset and disillusioned at the end.

 

[Plinko]

There's been two articles I've seen today from Vox and Bloomberg both saying that we shouldn't read too much into Fiorina's HP record because she actually was a victim of the economic times.



Her defense of her record was pretty well-delivered at the debates though. Trump & co. should go for HP's actions in Iran and how they curbed sanctions.

This is guaranteed at the next debate. "Oh, tough on Iran, eh? How about what happened when you were CEO?"

 

[PhoenixDark]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN5Lj_74u38

 

[Diablos]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN5Lj_74u38

I really hate the Internet. Of course, my generation is a big reason why it's so important.

We created a monster.

 

[Teggy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN5Lj_74u38

That kid watches too much fox news.

 

[User 406]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN5Lj_74u38

You are so much younger looking than I expected.

 

[NeoXChaos]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN5Lj_74u38

He reminds me of this kid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOUbkdwpZ2o

You are a great kid, I suspect your mother and father are proud of you. Thank you for speaking up and stating the truth about the illegal alien muslim puppet in the White House.

Barry Soetoro deserves no respect as he was installed to oversee the destruction of our nation by design and he is doing a pretty good job of it. Hopefully we can stop him before its too late.

lol.