• 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.
U

User 463088

Banned
Coriolanus said:
Shitting on VA's is something that anyone that held political office does so wouldnt be particularly worried. Especially when it seems somewhat incredulous that anyone would support the alternative to government providing healthcare for them.

Either way, if VA track record is your concern, sadly you wont be voting, yes? After all...


While sorta true, horrendously incompetent in regards to optics, and as such, walked back.
Can democrats afford nominating someone with suh a clear capacity to shove her foot in her mouth? Join me next time as i Concern Troll some more!
Click to expand...

Hillary made a stupid statement, although what she was trying to say I think I understand.

Bernie refused to hold hearings. If you remember, in 2008. the GOP was moderately successful at holding Obama's voting present over his head. I can see them doing the same thing with this. Again, though, Bernie is the one who wants a government take over of healthcare, not Hillary. Here we have a government run healthcare program that was under (in part) Bernie's oversight. He didn't hold hearings and had to be dragged into making the changes necessary. This is more of an issue for his ideas regarding healthcare than anything else. It reinforces the idea that Bernie is an ideologue.


Crab, can you let me know what it would take to get a 13-11 delegate advantage to Bernie in NH? If I'm reading it correctly, something like 55/45 would net in a 12-12 tie, depending on congressional district. I'm too lazy to look up how NH allocates, and I know you posted it a few days ago. If you have time, if not it's totally cool.
 
C

CCS

Banned
adam387 said:
Hillary made a stupid statement, although what she was trying to say I think I understand.

Bernie refused to hold hearings. If you remember, in 2008. the GOP was moderately successful at holding Obama's voting present over his head. I can see them doing the same thing with this. Again, though, Bernie is the one who wants a government take over of healthcare, not Hillary. Here we have a government run healthcare program that was under (in part) Bernie's oversight. He didn't hold hearings and had to be dragged into making the changes necessary. This is more of an issue for his ideas regarding healthcare than anything else. It reinforces the idea that Bernie is an ideologue.


Crab, can you let me know what it would take to get a 13-11 delegate advantage to Bernie in NH? If I'm reading it correctly, something like 55/45 would net in a 12-12 tie, depending on congressional district. I'm too lazy to look up how NH allocates, and I know you posted it a few days ago. If you have time, if not it's totally cool.
Click to expand...

I believe Crab said that Bernie needs roughly a 12% margin for 13-11, i.e. 56/44.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
There was a similar article in the NYT the other day. I don't know if it's just that since his campaign has gained steam, the press are digging deeper into his history. It was something of an insight into his approach and worldview.

From what I surmised;
- Sanders' faith in government institutions led him to initially decry reports of problems as the likes of the Koch brothers [i.e. the GOP establishment] trying to undermine a public welfare body. He did eventually come around and recognise there was a real problem.
- While his task was technically oversight of the department, he was more prone to defense of it from scrutiny.
- He was well liked by veterans groups as he gave them voice and was willing to advocate for various wish list items, but this led to an omnibus bill with all of that wish list at a price tag that was ultimately too much.
- He ultimately did have to concede to the inclusion of GOP proposals allowing veterans to choose providers in order to pass the reform. McCain praised him, although I don't know if the GOP is still playing nth dimensional chess with the Democratic nomination.

I think the salience of any potential attack on this portion of his career is that his is the only leadership position he held and essentially the VA reform bill is the only legislative achievement of any significance he's made over a 25 year career in Congress.

(I guess I should also point out I don't think that Clinton really had any significant legislative achievements over her tenure as junior Senator for New York. From a look at GovTrack it seems like Senators spend most of their time naming post offices.)
 
D

disastermouse

Banned
adam387 said:
Hillary made a stupid statement, although what she was trying to say I think I understand.

Bernie refused to hold hearings. If you remember, in 2008. the GOP was moderately successful at holding Obama's voting present over his head. I can see them doing the same thing with this. Again, though, Bernie is the one who wants a government take over of healthcare, not Hillary. Here we have a government run healthcare program that was under (in part) Bernie's oversight. He didn't hold hearings and had to be dragged into making the changes necessary. This is more of an issue for his ideas regarding healthcare than anything else. It reinforces the idea that Bernie is an ideologue.


Crab, can you let me know what it would take to get a 13-11 delegate advantage to Bernie in NH? If I'm reading it correctly, something like 55/45 would net in a 12-12 tie, depending on congressional district. I'm too lazy to look up how NH allocates, and I know you posted it a few days ago. If you have time, if not it's totally cool.
Click to expand...
Adam, I know you're not stupid, so I also know that you know the difference between single-payer and the VA.

Right?

Single-payer is closer to Medicare than the VA system.
 
E

Elaugaufein

Member
shinra-bansho said:
There was a similar article in the NYT the other day. I don't know if it's just that since his campaign has gained steam, the press are digging deeper into his history. It was something of an insight into his approach and worldview.

From what I surmised;
- Sanders' faith in government institutions led him to initially decry reports of problems as the likes of the Koch brothers [i.e. the GOP establishment] trying to undermine a public welfare body. He did eventually come around and recognise there was a real problem.
- While his task was technically oversight of the department, he was more prone to defense of it from scrutiny.
- He was well liked by veterans groups as he gave them voice and was willing to advocate for various wish list items, but this led to an omnibus bill with all of that wish list at a price tag that was ultimately too much.
- He ultimately did have to concede to the inclusion of GOP proposals allowing veterans to choose providers in order to pass the reform. McCain praised him, although I don't know if the GOP is still playing nth dimensional chess with the Democratic nomination.

I think the salience of any potential attack on this portion of his career is that his is the only leadership position he held and essentially the VA reform bill is the only legislative achievement of any significance he's made over a 25 year career in Congress.

(I guess I should also point out I don't think that Clinton really had any significant legislative achievements over her tenure as junior Senator for New York. From a look at GovTrack it seems like Senators spend most of their time naming post offices.)
Click to expand...

Senates generally aren't supposed to be active bodies (which is why they have restrictions on what they can propose). They are supposed to be a check on the House / Executive. Since they represent States rather than districts they tend to have informal control over Fed / State interaction too but largely in the negative sense. That makes it harder to judge individuals since most Senate actions are communal. You'd have to look at Committees, Vetos and voting record.

The US Senate is actually more active than most since procedural dickery like shell bills wouldn't go over well in most countries with Senates.
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I read Bill's "stinging attack" and thought that was rather demure. It was mostly complaining about Berniebros. Though you have to wonder if the Clintons learned much from 2008. The tone of their "attacks" has softened but it just seems like primary voters don't really like it on the left.
 
P

PBY

Banned
Plinko said:
Most of that was before the debate. I expect a Rubio drop 1 or 2 points.
Click to expand...

ARG just dropped, 2/6-7

1) 2016 New Hampshire Republican Presidential Primary
Asked of 427 likely voters - republican
Jeb Bush (R) 9%
Ben Carson (R) 1%
Chris Christie (R) 6%
Ted Cruz (R) 10%
Carly Fiorina (R) 3%
John Kasich (R) 16%
Marco Rubio (R) 16%
Donald Trump (R) 30%
Other 0%
Undecided 9%
 
D

Diablos

Member
adam387 said:
Here's what I don't get: why did Christie go so damn hard for Rubio this time? I mean, he's too far back to make a damn bit of difference in NH, really. Did he just want to watch the world burn? Does he really hate Rubio as much as we all do? I just....I can't imagine he wants Cruz or Trump to be the nominee. Did he try to copy some files using one of Rubio's USB ports and the whole thing got corrupted?
Click to expand...
I think Christie has real concerns about Rubio as President. He probably thinks that Trump is bad for the country and did it for the good of the other candidates too. Not to mention he made it pretty clear that he thinks it's a dumb idea to nominate a Senator as he basically slammed the entire chamber as being completely ineffective.
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I think Christie thinks he still has a chance. Otherwise he'd go home to further destroy New Jersey.
 
Tarkus

Tarkus

Member
Diablos said:
I think Christie has real concerns about Rubio as President. He probably thinks that Trump is bad for the country and did it for the good of the other candidates too. Not to mention he made it pretty clear that he thinks it's a dumb idea to nominate a Senator as he basically slammed the entire chamber as being completely ineffective.
Click to expand...
His concern is staying in a political office. He wants to be VP badly. He's got nothing left in NJ with his garbage record.

Fuck that loud mouth bully.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Again I have to say--even if Rubio finished second in NH, if he is lockstep with other candidates in votes, it isn't a big deal.
 
C

Cheebo

Banned
lol at thinking Chritie is well-intended and trying to look out for the country stopping Rubio.

He is a crazy blowhard, and likely corrupt (see: bridge-gate). Just because he has the same "enemy" as us doesn't make him hero.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
PBY said:
So Trump has noticed Rubio

Dat sideswipe
www.politico.com/story/2016/02/trump-marco-rubio-debate-218930
Click to expand...

I can't be the only one who is noticing Trump is trying to sound more statesman like, can I? I mean, he's still insane, but he's taken it down a peg or two. I thought may be he was pissed he lost Iowa and was ready to throw in the towel, but, now, I think it's more likely that he's just trying to look not so batshit insane.

Truly, these are mad times.
 
C

Cheebo

Banned
adam387 said:
I can't be the only one who is noticing Trump is trying to sound more statesman like, can I? I mean, he's still insane, but he's taken it down a peg or two. I thought may be he was pissed he lost Iowa and was ready to throw in the towel, but, now, I think it's more likely that he's just trying to look not so batshit insane.

Truly, these are mad times.
Click to expand...

I have noticed it too. He seems to really have toned down his non-PC rants in NH so far this past week. I mean it makes sense to have some adjustment after the disappointment in Iowa.
 
P

PBY

Banned
Trump doesn't give a fuck about anything, I truly believe.

I think he sees NH as more moderate and he changes his message slightly.

Bet he ramps up a bit for SC.
 
C

Cesare Borgia

Banned
Cheebo said:
lol at thinking Chritie is well-intended and trying to look out for the country stopping Rubio.

He is a crazy blowhard, and likely corrupt (see: bridge-gate). Just because he has the same "enemy" as us doesn't make him hero.
Click to expand...

People here sure sound scared of Rubio.
 
D

Diablos

Member
Cheebo said:
lol at thinking Chritie is well-intended and trying to look out for the country stopping Rubio.

He is a crazy blowhard, and likely corrupt (see: bridge-gate). Just because he has the same "enemy" as us doesn't make him hero.
Click to expand...
It goes without saying that Christie is trying to make himself look good. But in his egotistical brain I do believe he thinks his responses were well-intended as he feels nominating a Senator with a nonexistent resume and Quayle fever is a bad idea.

He can't win shit, so he's a hero since he damaged Rubio at least.
 
P

PBY

Banned
Diablos said:
It goes without saying that Christie is trying to make himself look good. But in his egotistical brain I do believe he thinks his responses were well-intended as he feels nominating a Senator with a nonexistent resume and Quayle fever is a bad idea.

He can't win shit, so he's a hero since he damaged Rubio at least.
Click to expand...
In a world where Trump is our hero, Chrisie can be one too.
 
R

Roland_Gunner

Member
Y2Kev said:
I read Bill's "stinging attack" and thought that was rather demure. It was mostly complaining about Berniebros. Though you have to wonder if the Clintons learned much from 2008. The tone of their "attacks" has softened but it just seems like primary voters don't really like it on the left.
Click to expand...

Yeah, at first I was having flashbacks to '08 but this really wasn't bad at all. Very much a non-story, IMO
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Yeah, Bill doesn't really need to attack Bernie too stridently. After Tuesday night, Bernie leaves his home field; he'll be as subpar as the Saints were a few years ago whenever they'd have to leave the comfort of their SuperDome.

(actually, I'm still puzzled that Hillary agreed to more debates after this week.)
 
M

Macho Madness

Member
New York Primary Poll / Sienna College

Clinton: 55 percent
Sanders: 34 percent

Trump; 34 percent
Rubio:16 percent
Cruz: 16 percent
Christie: 11 percent
Bush: 7 percent
Kasich: 4 percent

48% of New York voters (Rep + Dem) believe Hillary will win the presidency.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
HylianTom said:
Yeah, Bill doesn't really need to attack Bernie too stridently. After Tuesday night, Bernie leaves his home field; he'll be as subpar as the Saints were a few years ago whenever they'd have to leave the comfort of their SuperDome.

(actually, I'm still puzzled that Hillary agreed to more debates after this week.)
Click to expand...

She always wins them, what's to not get?
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
B-Dubs said:
She always wins them, what's to not get?
Click to expand...

I get that, but participating in a debate, no matter how good a candidate is, always leaves one open to risk of a bad moment.

I'm probably being a bit too cautious, but probably because I still think she has this in the bag once Tuesday is over.
 
F

Four_Chamber

Member
shinra-bansho said:
It just occurred to me that were Sanders to win the nomination and not succumb to the GOP attack machine, you'd get Jeff Weaver and Tad Devine in the White House.
Click to expand...

Wow I just read about Tad Devine...this guy is a perpetual presidential loser. He was the chief strategist for both Gore and Kerry. Honestly, I'm even more confident that Hillary will do well given the genius who let AL Gore lose TN and let GWB cruise to a second term is in charge.
 
J

Joe Shlabotnik

Banned
The debates are good for Clinton, even if Sanders is getting better in them (which he is). She is fantastic in policy discussions. She is bad at stump speeches and it hurts when she's quiet as narratives build.
 
R

Roland_Gunner

Member
HylianTom said:
I get that, but participating in a debate, no matter how good a candidate is, always leaves one open to risk of a bad moment.

I'm probably being a bit too cautious, but probably because I still think she has this in the bag once Tuesday is over.
Click to expand...

Clinton is such a composed debater I think the benefits substantially outweigh the risks. Look back at the last debate thread. Many Sanders supporters were worried about his foreign policy responses and acknowledged that Clinton did much better there. Getting folks like that to see her strengths as a candidate is a real benefit.
 
R

Rafa=FedKilla

Banned
Macho Madness said:
New York Primary Poll / Sienna College

Clinton: 55 percent
Sanders: 34 percent

Trump; 34 percent
Rubio:16 percent
Cruz: 16 percent
Christie: 11 percent
Bush: 7 percent
Kasich: 4 percent

48% of New York voters (Rep + Dem) believe Hillary will win the presidency.
Click to expand...
Guess sixteen percent of Republican voters are ashamed of their New York Values.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
If Hillary can manage a 13/11 split in NH, then she will be tied with Bernie in pledged delegates. That's two of his best states down, and he wouldn't have netted a single pledged delegate more than she did. If she can do it, that's a huge victory for her.

There are a hell of a lot of Hillary by 15-20% states than there are Bernie ahead by 1 states. I'm feeling slightly better about this this week.
 
J

Joe Shlabotnik

Banned
Eidan said:
I think that's a result of a lot of people looking at Marco Rubio on paper instead of paying attention to the actual man. From debate 1 it was clear that he was awful when he went beyond his stilted talking points.
Click to expand...

He'd probably get steamrolled in the debates by either of them. But the debates aren't EVERYTHING. I don't even think they count for a lot. Bush was fucking awful in them. And Rubio would likely get better as a candidate over the course of the campaign.

I mean, I feel pretty good about all of the clowns on the Republican side. But I think you "worry" most about the wild-card factor in Trump, or Rubio really polishing up his act.
 
C

Cesare Borgia

Banned
Armaros said:
Sander's campaign leadership choices and their actions make me question how well the Bernie White house would run the various Executive branch departments.

He cant put together a foreign policy team so he can brush up on foreign policy, what is he going to do about a State Department?
Click to expand...

That's not how it works though. Campaigning and governing are separate entities. Bush ran an amazing campaign in 2004 yet it had no bearing on the competence of his administration; in fact he had a terrible second term. Obama ran the greatest political campaign in US history in 2008 yet his administration/departments were not well run during the first couple years.

Sanders would likely have the growing pains most presidents have as they're dropped into a job that nothing truly prepares them for. You could argue Hillary has the most experience in this regard, having lived this for 8 years...but I'd expect her to have issues as well. Remember, Bill Clinton's first two years were disastrous in many regards and very inefficient; he wanted to do everything and attend everything at the same time. I'd imagine a Hillary administration will end up with a lot of unnecessary bureaucracy and competing staffs for Hillary and Bill.

To use an ASOIAF (book) analogy like one of the former debate threads, it'll be like Stannis and his wife's issues - King's Men and Queen's Men. One "administration" with differing agendas, contradicting each other.
 
T

Tom_Cody

Member
QuiteWhittle said:
Still kinda expecting Rubio to overperform.
Click to expand...

Y2Kev said:
Agreed. I think people are a little embarrassed to say they are voting for him now. But will.
Click to expand...
I'm not.

The talk of the last month has been that he doesn't actually have much of a ground operation in NH (or anywhere else). I don't see any reason to think that he will over-perform above his poll numbers.

That said, I have no idea where he'll end up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2025 Edition
2
82
5K
Celcius 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