• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I actually don't think this race would be much different now had it been Kasich/Rubio. They were bad candidates, there's a reason they barely made a blip during the primaries.

Her entire strategy for August would have been different, as well.

The race would be very different. Trump is a historically bad candidate who is under-performing with groups that usually go strongly for the GOP, from suburban white women to various other white demos. If you replace him with a regular republican with general election appeal it becomes a closer race, possibly a lean-GOP one with a Kasich-Rubio ticket. That dynamic would entirely change the type of campaign Hillary ran, Obama's involvement, etc.

Yea Kasich lost, but that says more about the GOP electorate than him as a candidate. In terms of Rubio yea, he ran a terrible campaign and would be running a bad general election campaign right now if he were the nominee.

We're witnessing something we've never seen before. A candidate making blatantly racist/bigoted/misogynist/etc comments, white supremacist ties, possible ties to an antagonistic foreign government...all packaged in a candidate who displays no basic knowledge on any topic and has anger issues. Yes I'd say Ted Cruz for instance would be doing pretty bad right now if he were the nom, but even he wouldn't be as knee deep in shit as Trump is.
 

studyguy

Member
Heidi Heitkamp dragging Senate Republicans for holding Garland hostage based on the so-called "Biden Rule" and other federal judicial appointees.

https://twitter.com/SenatorHeitkamp/status/773627217557487617

One of these nominees is from North Dakota and Heidi is not having it.

(This is why we like having Democrats from red states even though they don't always vote as progressive as we want)

Eh, not much to be done. We had a Republican objecting to it what? Last week one day then someone decided to stomp his toes as he walked it back. All signs point to McConnell and crew digging their heads in as deep as humanly possible. If nothing else going back on the promise before the new president is sworn in just proves that they had no real footing to stand on. Clinton will likely just reconfirm Garland formally anyway, the real bummer is he likely won't see anything happen as far as moving forward with his confirmation till like mid next year.
 

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
The race would be very different. Trump is a historically bad candidate who is under-performing with groups that usually go strongly for the GOP, from suburban white women to various other white demos. If you replace him with a regular republican with general election appeal it becomes a closer race, possibly a lean-GOP one with a Kasich-Rubio ticket. That dynamic would entirely change the type of campaign Hillary ran, Obama's involvement, etc.

Yea Kasich lost, but that says more about the GOP electorate than him as a candidate. In terms of Rubio yea, he ran a terrible campaign and would be running a bad general election campaign right now if he were the nominee.

We're witnessing something we've never seen before. A candidate making blatantly racist/bigoted/misogynist/etc comments, white supremacist ties, possible ties to an antagonistic foreign government...all packaged in a candidate who displays no basic knowledge on any topic and has anger issues. Yes I'd say Ted Cruz for instance would be doing pretty bad right now if he were the nom, but even he wouldn't be as knee deep in shit as Trump is.

Bingo.

I shudder to think of a Kasich / Haley ticket.

I think there's some reticence to admit how bad of a candidate Trump is here because it potentially reflects poorly on Clinton for not having completely crushed him yet (even though it's more of a symptom of the massive polarization the country has undergone than any other individual contributor). But, yeah, Trump is a historically terrible candidate, and Clinton might be the luckiest presidential candidate in a while to get an opponent like Trump.
 

Crayons

Banned
sgelmYn.jpg


Bought this arizona brand watermelon fruit juice today and it was surprisingly good.

Pros
- Tastes sweet but not too sweet
- 75% daily intake of vitamin c
- No preservatives
- Only costs $1
- 24 fl. oz per can

Cons
- mixture of mango, kiwi, pineapple and watermelon concentrate, deceptive advertising
- 300 calories. Its a big drink though

In summary, its a large, cheap and great tasting watermelon drink that I do not hesitate to recommend.

The struggle

i am a new yorker and you're appropriating my culture right now. not cool
 
I actually don't think this race would be much different now had it been Kasich/Rubio. They were bad candidates, there's a reason they barely made a blip during the primaries.

Her entire strategy for August would have been different, as well.

The main difference is that a GOP that would nominate Kasich or Rubio would be a dramatically different beast than the one that exists today.

Bingo.

I shudder to think of a Kasich / Haley ticket.

I think there's some reticence to admit how bad of a candidate Trump is here because it potentially reflects poorly on Clinton for not having completely crushed him yet (even though it's more of a symptom of the massive polarization the country has undergone than any other individual contributor). But, yeah, Trump is a historically terrible candidate, and Clinton might be the luckiest presidential candidate in a while to get an opponent like Trump.

Trump is a historically bad candidate because the GOP is a historically broken party.
 
The main difference is that a GOP that would nominate Kasich or Rubio would be a dramatically different beast than the one that exists today.
I think even the Democrat primary would have been different. We may not have even ended up with Hillary, who really knows. If the Democrats saw the GOP would be an actual threat, they might have tried to pull in some stronger competition for Hillary than a random dude from Vermont.
 

Stuff like this is complete nonsense. Was the charity good at what it did? Did the majority of funds raised go towards the mission? Posting that someone earned "nearly $150,000 PER YEAR" running a business that they started would get you laughed out of a room if it was a for-profit; because it's a non-profit, people are expected to work for free? What a ridiculous notion. Now if the charity was only putting a fraction of donor money towards the mission while the bulk of it lined the pockets of executives, yeah, that's a problem. But literally just posting someone's salary as if it's objectively crazy that people earn money for doing work? That's bullshit. I work in non-profits, and stuff like this completely devalues the work that we do, to the point where it's getting impossible to find and retain good employees because if you dare to pay anyone a living wage, you're accused of not being charitable enough.
 

Crayons

Banned
Retro is also from New York

Self-drag

you're not a true new yorker until poverty and unemployment has resulted in you getting obese from choosing unhealthier options due to the lower cost as you shake your fist at the bourgeoisie people of westchester county and long island as they sip on their flavor enhanced organic GMO free mineral sparkling water with antioxidants bottled in san francisco and shipped across the country at a huge environmental cost just so they can feel superior over you and your one dollar sugar filled arizona drinks that you got at the bodega for a dollar
 
Bingo.

I shudder to think of a Kasich / Haley ticket.

I think there's some reticence to admit how bad of a candidate Trump is here because it potentially reflects poorly on Clinton for not having completely crushed him yet (even though it's more of a symptom of the massive polarization the country has undergone than any other individual contributor). But, yeah, Trump is a historically terrible candidate, and Clinton might be the luckiest presidential candidate in a while to get an opponent like Trump.

We already had that ticket though; it was Romney/Ryan and lost by over 100 EVs.

We're thinking of Kasich and Rubio without their flaws. I agree that these fictional versions of them would do well, but that's not what you'd get. You'd get anti-abortion driving away women, you'd get inexperience, you'd get the same 47% dog whistles, etc...

The GOP simply doesn't have the electoral spread to win the Presidency. Idon't doubt that Obama would be doing slightly better than Clinton, but we're approaching a point in the near future where the Dems have like 275ish EVs in the bag no matter the candidate.

Romney was moderate as hell (you will never find a Republican, Kasich/Ryan/Rubio included, who has something even a tenth as liberal as Romneycare in their past) and he lost to a Muslim commie black guy. The electorate has changed.
 

Holmes

Member
you're not a true new yorker until poverty and unemployment has resulted in you getting obese from choosing unhealthier options due to the lower cost as you shake your fist at the bourgeoisie people of westchester county and long island as they sip on their flavor enhanced organic GMO free mineral sparkling water with antioxidants bottled in san francisco and shipped across the country at a huge environmental cost just so they can feel superior over you and your one dollar sugar filled arizona drinks that you got at the bodega for a dollar
Have you seen income inequality in the Bay Area
 

Kusagari

Member
We already had that ticket though; it was Romney/Ryan and lost by over 100 EVs.

We're thinking of Kasich and Rubio without their flaws. I agree that these fictional versions of them would do well, but that's not what you'd get. You'd get anti-abortion driving away women, you'd get inexperience, you'd get the same 47% dog whistles, etc...

The GOP simply doesn't have the electoral spread to win the Presidency. Idon't doubt that Obama would be doing slightly better than Clinton, but we're approaching a point in the near future where the Dems have like 275ish EVs in the bag no matter the candidate.

Romney was moderate as hell (you will never find a Republican, Kasich/Ryan/Rubio included, who has something even a tenth as liberal as Romneycare in their past) and he lost to a Muslim commie black guy. The electorate has changed.

Put this hated version of Hillary we have right now against 2012 Romney and we have our first Mormon president.

Some people underrate how bad Hillary's favorables are. Polls show even majorities of Dems not seeing her as trustworthy.

Cruz and Carson probably lose too but I could see Jeb, Rubio and Kasich all winning.
 
Clinton is also historically disliked. I feel like it's worthless to compare what the election could have been because you could just as easily say a genteric Democrat could easily defeat whatever the GOP put out. I mean the Romney Ryan ticket was as close to perfect as the GOP could come.
 

Crayons

Banned
Honestly people who drink water bottled in California are the worst. We're in a drought!

Do you know how much I get triggered by people who drink their fancy artesan waters? God, I get unreasonably upset. You're paying how much for water because it's from Fiji? You're wasting all those greenhouse gases, water, and oil getting that water ten thousand miles away for what reason? So you can feel special and drink your special water which actually has MORE arsenic and heavy metals than the water you can get for basically nothing from your sink? When I see people who drink fancy artesan waters like Fiji, I think the following things about them:

1) They don't care about the environment
2) They are stupid
3) They have a superiority complex
4) They're wasteful
5) They're shallow

God, I get so heated on this topic. If you are someone who says "I only drink voss" or "I only drink fiji", you cannot be my friend. Fuck you and your water superiority.
 
Again, I don't deny at all that she's disliked. But I'm saying we're at the point where any Democrat can beat any Republican nationally thanks to the EC. The GOP (thanks to dog whistles and emigration from red states) haveabaked in regional floor, but they have no game outside of that. The country is moving around like Virginia (where the blue counties are growing in population while the red ones drop).

As the poster above mentioned, the best ticket you can think of for the GOP was Romney/Ryan. That race had me scared. But since their best ticket lost by 100+ EVs, I'm not worried.

And yes, stop fictionalising Kasich and Rubio. They aren't moderate at all since they're both further right than Romney.
 

royalan

Member
Hillary's favorables jumping up shortly after the convention for a brief time (even more than people were expecting from the convention bump) tells me that, for a lot of people, disliking Hillary is the default. Which isn't a bad thing, exactly. It means people are more inclined to warming up to Hillary if you give them a reason to.

All the more reason Hillary needs to pivot away from Trump at this stage.
 
Brooklyyyyyn
you're not a true new yorker until poverty and unemployment has resulted in you getting obese from choosing unhealthier options due to the lower cost as you shake your fist at the bourgeoisie people of westchester county and long island as they sip on their flavor enhanced organic GMO free mineral sparkling water with antioxidants bottled in san francisco and shipped across the country at a huge environmental cost just so they can feel superior over you and your one dollar sugar filled arizona drinks that you got at the bodega for a dollar
Long island is lame like hillary
 
Andrea Mitchell is the fucking WORST. Also, NBC acting like their forum is why candidates are talking about foreign policy. Because, you know, the people running for President never talked about foreign policy.

And, somehow, Andrea managed to make this entire thing about emails. I have to give her credit, she's damn consistent.
 
Per NBC News, Trump just has to not vomit on himself.

Hillary has to reinvent American foreign policy while answering questions about her emails, the Clinton Foundation and taking ownership of every military decision the US has made for the last 24 years.
 
Per NBC News, Trump just has to not vomit on himself.

Hillary has to reinvent American foreign policy while answering questions about her emails, the Clinton Foundation and taking ownership of every military decision the US has made for the last 24 years.

Sadly, I'm not sure if this is a thing because Trump or a thing because it's man vs woman.

Probably a mix of both. It's pathetic how a woman has to be better than a man to be seen equal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom