whyamihere
Banned
Happy this Bondi story is (finally) get deserved coverage.
-
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 |OT10| Jill Stein Inflatable Love Doll
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
User 463088
Banned
The kid is awesome as hell. My mom says he's just like me when I was little. And, ya, I see it. Ya, it was some kick as burgers. He also made some with bacon in them. He wants a smoker for his birthday so he can do ribs and stuff.
I know how to cook!
User 463088
Banned
The kid is awesome as hell. My mom says he's just like me when I was little. And, ya, I see it. Ya, it was some kick as burgers. He also made some with bacon in them. He wants a smoker for his birthday so he can do ribs and stuff.
I know how to cook!
If I come over to your house to eat on Election Night and you look anything less than Hillary I'll be disappointed.
Only because I've associated you with that avatar.
Incredibly gay?
User 463088
Banned
Hahaha, well, fine. I'll wear a pantsuit and a wig.
I mean, he's 5...but ya. Totall, 100%.
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
Those dang fragile women-folk and their coughing..
User 85168
Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Is he sewing Swastikas?
I'm not really sure I can tell if someone is very gay at 5 though.
I'm not really sure I can tell if someone is very gay at 5 though.
Then we must not have shared a kindergarten class.
User 85168
Banned
Suing NYmag for that story
I mean clearly I don't know much about law, but the Hogan thing was different because yes he may be a shitlord they still leaks private footage of him.
The thing against Ailes seems like a legit case and I don't think it's something that goes away quickly. Will Fox stand by it's reporters, especially Kelly? or will they try to end this quickly?
Ah nvm seems they are going after nymag.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
What if Hillary is like Robert Durst and she's subconsciously hacking up her sins
User 463088
Banned
You totally can tell. lol. Everyone knew I was gay after I burst through the placenta.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
The Sanders/Clinton stuff is doing my head in as much as the rest of you now. I wish people would drop the names involved and start talking about the policies/principles they represented instead. It'd lead to more constructive discussion, I think - recognizing that the differences between the candidates will continue to be important, just not the candidates themselves.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
I'm taking an OT break for awhile, Christ.
I often wonder what would happen to these people if those sites just crashed. Like, one day 4chan goes down permanently, can these guys even function without checking it?
I often wonder what would happen to these people if those sites just crashed. Like, one day 4chan goes down permanently, can these guys even function without checking it?
Yea. Completely agree because it's just not a good discussion. Neither Hillary nor Bernie are on the level of Trump and hypothetically both should and would win against him. Hillary won the primary so anyone arguing that Bernie should have been nominated for whatever reason doesn't make sense.
Not to mention there are republicans out there right now thinking the same thing about Donald Trump. A more dangerous candidate. Those people actually have a reason to worry about the direction of their party.
But of course democrats and the left always gotta worry about shit and be scared.
Aaron Strife
Banned
"omg Hillary doesn't have any policy positions, she's just running as anti-Trump"
VS
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I mean Sanders should have won because he was a better candidate but let's just agree to disagree and not go down that hole.
It's kind of difficult to see what the other topics are because politics seems relatively inert at the moment. It's always easier to engage in discussion when elections are actually happening and there are reasons to chose either candidate, because then you have the art of persuasion and so on. Clinton vs. Trump is not only an immensely straightforward choice, it's not even really that important a choice (from an individual perspective) because in all likelihood it will be am blowout. If we're not just talking about shitty Garrison strips or commenting on the various endless Trump gaffes that all merge into one big long gaffe by the end, there's not really much to have critical discussion about that is also contemporary.
I guess the variable element in US politics at the moment is whether the Democrats can retake the Senate and (possibly) the House or not. If they are aiming for a Senate retake, I think Clinton is taking the wrong strategy. She's far too quiet, and really not trumpeting (heh) about her policies or not. Like, I think there are much better policy manifestos out there, fine, but in terms of policy manifestos that appeal to me and can also win elections, Clinton's is better than not, and should be so to most people. As it is, I would bet good dollar that say half of millennials (or any American demographic, really) couldn't name more than one or two Clinton policies. Consequently, of course they're not enthused about her, and that's going to hit turnout, which will be the crucial element to retaking the Senate. The later she leaves it, the harder it will be - these things have a tendency to accrue momentum and she's wasting all the good vibes that were floating around from the convention.
People think Clinton is running as anti-Trump because she's acting like that. She's been coasting the last month and I don't think it works. It's all well and good having policies that work, but it doesn't win elections. Sanders had much better policies than Clinton
mwahahaha
I L L U M I N A T I B L O O D
Randolph Freelander
Member
Shut it down, The Donald is the best at everything. Everything.
pourmecoffee ‏@pourmecoffee 4 minutes ago
It's time once again for "Underrated Trump Tweets."
Today's edition: I WAS THE GREATEST BASEBALL PLAYER EVER.
Spiritreaver
Member
Why the hell is #TrumpCantSwim trending?
Aaron Strife
Banned
Clinton has been doing plenty of campaigning, has rolled out a number of new policies and proposals over the past few months, etc. People just aren't paying attention because the Trump shitshow is more entertaining, but if voters simply don't pay attention then whose fault is that?I mean Sanders should have won because he was a better candidate but let's just agree to disagree and not go down that hole.
It's kind of difficult to see what the other topics are because politics seems relatively inert at the moment. It's always easier to engage in discussion when elections are actually happening and there are reasons to chose either candidate, because then you have the art of persuasion and so on. Clinton vs. Trump is not only an immensely straightforward choice, it's not even really that important a choice (from an individual perspective) because in all likelihood it will be am blowout. If we're not just talking about shitty Garrison strips or commenting on the various endless Trump gaffes that all merge into one big long gaffe by the end, there's not really much to have critical discussion about that is also contemporary.
I guess the variable element in US politics at the moment is whether the Democrats can retake the Senate and (possibly) the House or not. If they are aiming for a Senate retake, I think Clinton is taking the wrong strategy. She's far too quiet, and really not trumpeting (heh) about her policies or not. Like, I think there are much better policy manifestos out there, fine, but in terms of policy manifestos that appeal to me and can also win elections, Clinton's is better than not, and should be so to most people. As it is, I would bet good dollar that say half of millennials (or any American demographic, really) couldn't name more than one or two Clinton policies. Consequently, of course they're not enthused about her, and that's going to hit turnout, which will be the crucial element to retaking the Senate. The later she leaves it, the harder it will be - these things have a tendency to accrue momentum and she's wasting all the good vibes that were floating around from the convention.
People think Clinton is running as anti-Trump because she's acting like that. She's been coasting the last month and I don't think it works. It's all well and good having policies that work, but it doesn't win elections. Sanders had much better policies than Clintonand he didn't win his election because he didn't do a good enough job of evangelizing them. Clinton's going to fall into that trap too if she isn't careful (at least, she'll suffer a setback in her Senate ambitions).mwahahaha
Like this election has only convinced me that the average person is a fucking moron.
The ego on this guy knows no bounds. He must have the tiniest dick to overcompensate so much. Of course with his super small hands, it must seem HUGE.
TestOfTide
Banned
Yeah I'm getting very angry at all the idiots that don't want Democrats to actually be competitive in more than just blue and purple states/districts.
OH NO SHE TALKED TO BUSINESSES!!! THAT MEANS SHE'S NOT A TRUE DEMOCRAT!!!
Avon Barksdale
Member
Phyllis Schlafly has died. I don't have anything nice to say about her.
And that the media is 100% complicit on it.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
This is a pretty poor response, IMO. Are we really pretending that Clinton has been doing lots of campaigning lately? A variety of different liberal publications have pointed out she's had a scarcity of campaign events and press conferences over the last few months: here's an NYT article referencing it: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/04/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fundraising.html and an MSNBC video: http://www.msnbc.com/weekends-with-...paign-quiet-on-press-conferences-757936195745 and that's from a random Google rather than me bothering to spend 15 minutes hunting down anything more specific.
Imagine I posted "Sanders has been doing plenty of black outreach, but if they simply don't pay attention then whose fault is that?" (note: I'm not trying to bring this back to Sanders/Clinton, I'm just shifting your argument to a different context). You wouldn't accept it at all in this context and I could probably find posts in your post history calling it out if I wanted to, so why are we excusing Clinton for her rather poor efforts to get the attention of voters?
EDIT: And remember, I'm team Clinton now. I want her to do well; I think it's really important she retakes the Senate and ideally the House. This isn't faux concern, I actually find her lethargic campaign worrying at this point.
Avon Barksdale
Member
Is Crab the Cenk Uygur of PoliGAF? 🤔
TestOfTide
Banned
If the ERA ever gets a chance to be retried, I want it to be named the "Thank God Phyllis Schlafly is Dead" Amendment.
8 X 11 Printer Paper
Member
I have to agree with Crab on this issue, I really don't know what her campaign was thinking with this. While she shouldn't of gone Trump crazy with events during this last month, she should of at least held a few rallies or something during the slow period. There is no reason why the campaign needed to basically disappear from the public eye for a damn whole month, its a beyond idiotic choice that makes me quite anxious about the campaigns potential inability to react. This is not something that is the medias fault (they hold some blame yes, but nowhere near as much as some are trying to push on them), but rather due to the Clinton Campaign and whoever is running the show and okaying such choices.
I'm not sure if i would call Hillary's campaign lethargic when she's been raising a shit ton of money and doing the ground work similar to how Obama was in the 2012 election. She's like...doing the work that the media essentially ignores. Let's be frank here, if the media did there work, Trump would've been disqualified.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
That was today. This is not campaigning? Before the end of the primaries she was having an event like every day. I know, I tried to go to one! After the convention she winded down and geared up for the general by going on a fundraising spree. That spree has just ended and now she's campaigning again.
She's been fundraising for herself and the DNC for down ballot races. She's hasn't disappeared and she laid out a Mental Healthy policy last week that went largely ignored.
I'm not saying her campaign is perfect and she shouldn't have held a few rallies, but her and her campaign are doing what needs to be done.
Trump is everywhere because he has to be. He has no ground game that could help him in swing states. Clinton is dominating in this aspect. With her finally letting the press on her plane, with her actually rallying this month along with her surrogates and the debates coming up. This stuff is largely going to fall in the "it doesn't matter category".
I think it originated from Trumpsters claiming that if he walked on water the MSM would say he couldn't swim. Seems like it's gone off in a different direction.
I saw a thread on r/politics discussing how Bernie would win the election in a landslide and just kind of wondered "why?" I mean, like it or not but Bernie lost, and discussion about how well he would be doing now in comparison is pointless and accomplishes nothing. :/
Hopefully once the debates roll around we'll start to hear more actual policy discussion since they will finally be at the forefront of the news cycle.
I dunno if "doing nothing" and raising almost 150 million dollars for herself and down-ballot candidates can really exist in the same reality. Being less in your face or not holding rallies (and its fine if you personally wanted more rallies, etc. though its unclear to me if that would have been the objective best use of her time as someone not in her campaign and who doesn't have the data she and her team has) is not the same as doing nothing or being "lethargic".
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I don't think local campaign rallies are the most useful thing for her to be doing, though. If they're not headlined as significant in advance, they're usually only covered locally and even then only in passing. That makes their main benefit rallying the people who did attend, which is great and all if we were in the final month and we needed to be able target specific key demographics with an enthusiasm-booster to make sure they vote, but is... underwhelming this far out where you can't guarantee enthusiasm-boosters last all the way until election day, and where you're passing over the chance to get national coverage when doing so.
It's going specific-details at a stage in the campaign where we're big-picture still. Which is... very Clinton, and why I worry.
It's going specific-details at a stage in the campaign where we're big-picture still. Which is... very Clinton, and why I worry.
JesseEwiak
Member
Nah, I'm pretty sure Cenk doesn't believe that students should get higher interest rates on their loans from private individuals who will be funding higher education if they choose a major with a bad ROI. So on that note, Crab's the conservative market reformer! Which is bully for him. Maybe he can work for Mitch Daniels 2020 campaign.
Spiritreaver
Member
Everyone's sleeping on the Commander-in-Chief forum Wednesday. I think it'll be a big deal.
Lol, figures. It and #HackingHillary goes to show how much of a mess this election is.
UGH, that fucking NYTimes article is bullshit. She's been doing plenty of campaign events in the last few months, but yeah, also focusing on fundraising right now so as to not worry about it later. That article makes is sound as if Hillary has been cooped up in fundraisers since the convention without doing a single campaign event, when that's obviously false, when one quick look at her schedule shows she's been doing plenty of small events grabbing local headlines.
But yeah, she does less rallies than Trump, the only campaigning style he is "good" at.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
The local campaign rallies are more important. As you noted earlier, this election is about turnout, and people getting the chance to see her and meet her is way more important than having another big speech. Besides, why should she hold a bunch of national events when she doesn't have anything important to say? I'm not sure what a national event without a big policy rollout or speech would even be like.
Also, you don't even live here! Are you moving because of Brexit?
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
yeah, but this is what I'm talking about. These events don't seem to be very effective - they're too local.
This notion that two weeks in August, 70+ days from the election, where Hillary didn't receive constant headlines and attacks on Trump, even though she was fundraising record numbers, even though she was up in every battleground state, even though half the news cycle was still on Trump immigration waffling, was somehow bad for Hillary and reason to freak out is fucking baffling to me.
All politics are local.
Maybe Clinton (correctly) recognized that democrats would need money to sweep up seats in the senate and house to ensure the government isn't gridlocked again when she takes office? Thus she went on a massive fundraising spree during a quiet time in the general that doesn't really matter as it isn't a debate or a convention?
Getting tired of the constant worrying for the sake of worry or for the sake of inserting Bernies name again to dig at Clinton. She knows what she is doing. She isn't stupid. She is backed up by incredibly intelligent politicians, campaigners, and generational inspiring leaders. Spare me.
Getting tired of the constant worrying for the sake of worry or for the sake of inserting Bernies name again to dig at Clinton. She knows what she is doing. She isn't stupid. She is backed up by incredibly intelligent politicians, campaigners, and generational inspiring leaders. Spare me.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked