• 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 2016 |OT| Ask us about our performance with Latinos in Nevada

Status
Not open for further replies.
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
There has to be basically no one betting on these things if Rubio coming in third in Iowa tripled his chances and "Barack Obama knows EXACTLY what he's doing." is sending him into a massive tailspin.

http://predictwise.com/

He'll probably be at like 15% if he finishes 4th in NH.
 
G

GnawtyDog

Banned
The potential for Rubio smear based on last night....starting to grasp it now in terms of a general election.

GOP and donors feeding the robot.....the narrative that keeps on giving - on practically everything.
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
You know though, I saw it with Palin and now with Rubio and Carson. Did Clinton ever lie to the Ben Ghazi families or something?
 
G

GnawtyDog

Banned
Y2Kev said:
You know though, I saw it with Palin and now with Rubio and Carson. Did Clinton ever lie to the Ben Ghazi families or something?
Click to expand...

She did depending on who you ask. All about terrorist act vs. spontaneous violent protest. Those that can think past black and white would certainly side with Clinton or at the least, not hold that against her.
 
T

Teggy

Member
Y2Kev said:
You know though, I saw it with Palin and now with Rubio and Carson. Did Clinton ever lie to the Ben Ghazi families or something?
Click to expand...

I've posted about this before, it's the one thing my mom always harps on when she says she can't vote for Hillary.

Basically there was an email from Hillary to Chelsea the night of Benghazi saying the attacks were done by Al Queda. She says this is before they even knew about the video.

Later when she talked to the Benghazi families she supposedly told them that the video was the cause. One family member claims to have written this down.

When asked who was telling the truth, Hillary said something like "well I'm not lying," which sort of implies the families are.

In the end she says it was a complex time and she told them what she knew at the time. It's not great looking answer given the evidence but it is what it is.

Rubio is the one who has latched on to it the most, repeating over and over that it "disqualifies her from being president" (along with using a private email server lol)
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
kingkitty said:
https://twitter.com/AlexConant/status/696491305195601920

some good super bowl analysis by team marco
Click to expand...

Rubio's team is as good at thinking ahead as Rubio himself is:

Cap59C8WcAA-9yj.jpg


They just walk into the most obvious of traps.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
LOL that is a brilliant response to that tweet.
 
S

Sianos

Member
Teggy said:
I've posted about this before, it's the one thing my mom always harps on when she says she can't vote for Hillary.

Basically there was an email from Hillary to Chelsea the night of Benghazi saying the attacks were done by Al Queda. She says this is before they even knew about the video.

Later when she talked to the Benghazi families she supposedly told them that the video was the cause. One family member claims to have written this down.

When asked who was telling the truth, Hillary said something like "well I'm not lying," which sort of implies the families are.

In the end she says it was a complex time and she told them what she knew at the time. It's not great looking answer given the evidence but it is what it is.

Rubio is the one who has latched on to it the most, repeating over and over that it "disqualifies her from being president" (along with using a private email server lol)
Click to expand...

This is what I mean when I say some people don't "deserve" brevity.

The people who say "Hillary thinks that Benghazi was caused by a video, not terrorists!" are either being willfully dense or are just, to put it nicely, not quite at the level of cognitive development to handle abstract thought yet.

Part of it is the erosion of the prototypic image of the word "terrorist" to now mean by default "radical Islamic terrorists who are members of an organized terrorist group". When you say "terrorist" the first image in most people's mind is a member of Al Queda. Yet anyone can be a terrorist by just engaging in terrorism - that's categorization words (not getting into label stickiness in this post since it isn't relevant to the point being made).

Terrorists are still human beings in a physiological sense - which means they respond to stimuli and have motivations behind their actions. What was postulated was that the people who committed these acts of terror did so in response to the videos that were critical of Islam rather than by order of a terrorist group - or if they were part of a smaller terrorist organization, the reason why the leaders decided to order that attack was out of anger towards the videos and in retribution. Note that stating a person or group's motivation is not endorsing it - it's important to understand your enemy. The confusion comes out of the fact that the word "terrorist" was not used so as to make circumstances more clear and not obfuscated by the prototypic image evoked by the word "terrorist". Well, confusion is a strong word, since it was apparent to me what was meant.

However, idiots took it as either "videos did Benghazi!" or "These attackers aren't [prototypical] terrorists because videos, and are therefore she's saying they are not bad!" And here we are today.

Of course, if you try to explain this you're "being politically correct" and if you respond by calling them out on their poor language skills they get offended because you weren't politically correct call you mean, which is different from being "not politically correct" because of reasons.
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Rapid Response is a great name for "smart people who need to twitter feud with losers"

Trump is also RR director.

Where is the Bush Ad?
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
cartoon_soldier said:
I just realized Obama should have cut a Superbowl ad endorsing Hillary.
Click to expand...

That would have been a very short-sighted move. Like it or not, hills has been managing bernie just fine, and his run inside the party has benefitted her immensely. The sitting prez endorsing her before she took the nom would just set up the scenario where any future bernie-likes choose to run independently and then take away from the dem share of the popular vote instead of joining the democrats to compete in the primary because "why the fuck not, the game is rigged anyway so fuck them".

Which they can still do, evidently. is just an odds game. No clear benefit to doing it now versus potentially disastrous long term consequences.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2025 Edition
2
79
5K
Skifi28 replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5 6
263
52K
Topher replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
60K
DGrayson replied
GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2022 Edition
3 4 5 6 7
333
78K
zephiross replied
Top Bottom