• 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 honesly feel sick.

I was walking through Sproul on campus at Berkeley, and I saw the Berkeley Republicans had a stand set up with Trump's signs. I don't remember which it was, but one of Yale and Harvard rejected trump, and the other didn't, and I naively believed that at Berkeley, a public institution, they'd reject him too.

Well fuck them too then. I thought our Republicans would at least be decent enough to do that.

I shouldn't be surprised. They were the ones who had that affirmative action bake sale where they charged whites more to make a point, a fucking disgusting facile point at that because Berkeley, tragically, doesn't practice affirmative action.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
WHAT???!!!


Jonathan Martin ‏@jmartNYT 5m5 minutes ago
Conservative Republicans making the case for why an autocrat is a stronger leader than a sitting American president #2016

Jonathan Martin ‏@jmartNYT 5m5 minutes ago
The wages of Trump'ism: Mike Pence, once a conventional R, tells @DanaBashCNN it's "inarguable" Putin has been a stronger leader than Obama
 
Hamilton has only been going on for years, so obviously I should post about Hamilton because it's so hot right now and not dying down and hasn't been analyzed to death.

But really, Hurricane is such a brilliant song. Hamilton's journey is so impossible and insane that he had to view himself as basically a demigod when it came to writing and persuasion. The song really demonstrates how he (or anyone in his position) could convince themselves that they could write their way out of this affair. He wrote the Federalist Papers and wrote his way into New York, he's going to have an impossibly high opinion of himself at that point.

And, of course, the turnaround that happens right after that song is incredible also.

Great song.

Lin-Manuel Miranda described it as a guy in crisis, reviewing his entire life, and coming to exactly the wrong conclusion. And the chorus in the background telling him "wait for it" which he ignores is perfect.

As far as actual history, I think it's likely that the Reynolds Pamphlet was actually cover for actual embezzling. I can't believe he'd publish it if it were the whole/accurate story.
 
I mean, like, if history gives us any indication, I don't think most people who say those types of things could forget what happened in the 90s, because they probably weren't born yet.

Not a read. I got the same stuff thrown at me from Hillary's position on marriage equality. But, like, I grew up a 90s gay. I remember shit. Elephants never forget.

Off topic: Never let a 5 year old run free in a Bath and Body Works. He smells like ALL THE THINGS.

Sometimes it's hard to tell when it's someone who's just young and doesn't know but wants so badly to feel confident that they're right, and someone who should know but for whatever reason chooses to believe in their own version of events.
 

Gruco

Banned
The company that owns my local ABC affiliate actually did this! I guess there was a non-required form the Clinton Foundation filled out that didn't itemize every contribution (which. again, wasn't a requirement). But, when they did itemize something else it didn't match up 100%, but it was because it was different types of donations or something. It was the most difficult thing to follow, and they aired it for a few minutes and then cut to commercial. Haven't heard about it since.

FUCK! IT'S OVER! PRESIDENT RUBIO

He asked what he would do as president about Aleppo. I mean still this is pretty lame that his campaign is getting trashed over this when Trump is a full blown racist.

I mean, yes. Johnson had a gaffe but not really in the top 100 worst of this cycle. And he basically had a grown-up follow statement. If he was being graded on the Trump curve, Johnson would have just been preemptively awarded 50 electoral votes.

Or you can go Clinton vs Stein.

Hillary: All lives matter
The left: You mean black lives matter!
few months later
Hillary: Black lives matter
The left: Hillary will solve our criminal justice issues. She gets it. Her husband was the first black President even though he did nothing for blacks but make their lives worse but she's not Trump so she really does care about POC because instead of Trump's warp 9 to another civil war, Hillary will keep the broken status quo.

Jill: Black lives matter.
Everyone: VACCINES
few months later
Jill. Black lives matter and here's my plan to reform our criminal justice system.
Everyone: VACCINES!

I've been wondering though, how can Jill Stein be real if our eyes aren't real?
 

royalan

Member
I honesly feel sick.

I was walking through Sproul on campus at Berkeley, and I saw the Berkeley Republicans had a stand set up with Trump's signs. I don't remember which it was, but one of Yale and Harvard rejected trump, and the other didn't, and I naively believed that at Berkeley, a public institution, they'd reject him too.

Well fuck them too then. I thought our Republicans would at least be decent enough to do that.

I shouldn't be surprised. They were the ones who had that affirmative action bake sale where they charged whites more to make a point, a fucking disgusting facile point at that because Berkeley, tragically, doesn't practice affirmative action.

Berkeley is at the heart of the Northern California's who are always trying to split from Southern Cali for...reasons.

So I'm not surprised.
 
Or you can go Clinton vs Stein.

Clinton literally spent her entire first campaign speech discussing the need for criminal justice reform and outlining a plan toward that end

Meanwhile we have Jill Stein talking about how nuclear power plants are WMDs, wifi causes autism, Holocaust denier VPs are great when they're Green, and "forgive student debt via QE" (which is the dumbest idea in an election that features Donald fucking Trump), and there's crickets from you except if it lets you act smugly superior to everyone supporting actual serious candidates (like Sanders, or Clinton)

Maybe stick to farting around in Minnesota and leave the posting to the people with two brain cells to rub together
 
Sometimes it's hard to tell when it's someone who's just young and doesn't know but wants so badly to feel confident that they're right, and someone who should know but for whatever reason chooses to believe in their own version of events.

I've met Jill Stein voters on Twitter who think that Obama can overturn congressional laws by issuing executive orders.
 

pigeon

Banned
Clinton literally spent her entire first campaign speech discussing the need for criminal justice reform and outlining a plan toward that end

Meanwhile we have Jill Stein talking about how nuclear power plants are WMDs, wifi causes autism, Holocaust denier VPs are great when they're Green, and "forgive student debt via QE" (which is the dumbest idea in an election that features Donald fucking Trump), and there's crickets from you

Maybe stick to farting around in Minnesota and leave the posting to the people with two brain cells to rub together

So in fairness to ErasureAcer, and I hate you for putting me in this position, wasn't he banned for almost all of those events?
 
Or you can go Clinton vs Stein.

Hillary: All lives matter
The left: You mean black lives matter!
few months later
Hillary: Black lives matter
The left: Hillary will solve our criminal justice issues. She gets it. Her husband was the first black President even though he did nothing for blacks but make their lives worse but she's not Trump so she really does care about POC because instead of Trump's warp 9 to another civil war, Hillary will keep the broken status quo.

Jill: Black lives matter.
Everyone: VACCINES
few months later
Jill. Black lives matter and here's my plan to reform our criminal justice system.
Everyone: VACCINES!
Hey, guess who I just got a job working for?

I will see to it that you are personally spammed with Angie Craig lit and emails.
 
Our country sux

And perceptions of Clinton's use of a private email server while secretary of state, which came up frequently in Wednesday night's forum, has shifted over the last year and a half from an issue that voters deemed mostly irrelevant to her character or ability to serve as president to one which almost two-thirds judge as an indicator of her fitness for the job.

Just over 6 in 10, 62%, say the way Clinton handled her email while serving as secretary of state is an important indicator of her character and ability to serve as president, just 36% say it has no bearing on her character or abilities. In March 2015, when news of the server first broke, 52% said it was not indicative of her character.
Most voters see Clinton's family foundation, which has come under sharp criticism from Trump over how donors to the foundation interacted with Clinton while she was secretary of state, as an organization that should be shuttered if Clinton is elected to avoid possible conflict of interest, with a sizable share saying it should be closed down now. Overall, 38% say it should be shut down now to do so, another 22% say it should be shut down if Clinton wins the presidency, and 34% say it does too much good to be shut down completely.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/08/politics/hillary-clinton-poll-debate-expectations/index.html
 
Berkeley is at the heart of the Northern California's who are always trying to split from Southern Cali for...reasons.

So I'm not surprised.

Nah man. The club is like 20 people out of 20,000. I'm not disappointed in Berkeley. I'm disappointed in Berkeley's republicans, even though I'm a Democrat, cuz I stupidly expected them to be better.

Also, it's just like one guy in Palo alto that's always trying to split up the state, and no one gives a fuck.
 

pigeon

Banned
Nah man. The club is like 20 people out of 20,000. I'm not disappointed in Berkeley. I'm disappointed in Berkeley's republicans, even though I'm a Democrat, cuz I stupidly expected them to be better.

Also, it's just like one guy in Palo alto that's always trying to split up the state, and no one gives a fuck.

NorCal republicans are actually more extreme, not less, because it's not like there's electoral pressure to encourage them to moderate and find appealing messages.
 
The left: Hillary will solve our criminal justice issues. She gets it. Her husband was the first black President even though he did nothing for blacks but make their lives worse but she's not Trump so she really does care about POC because instead of Trump's warp 9 to another civil war, Hillary will keep the broken status quo.

This is such a horrible misrepresentation of the Clinton Administration to start with. Nobody expected the attempts to rein in crime in the 90s (which was indeed bad) to have the effects that it did.
 
This is such a horrible misrepresentation of the Clinton Administration to start with. Nobody expected the attempts to rein in crime in the 90s (which was indeed bad) to have the effects that it did.
Don't tell him how Bernie voted on the crime bill.

I mean, he probably already has an excuse. And I'm sure a very valid reason for why Bernie is allowed to have a genuine change of heart on issues while Hillary is not.
 
NorCal republicans are actually more extreme, not less, because it's not like there's electoral pressure to encourage them to moderate and find appealing messages.

Yo, I totally get that, I've met republicans in silicon valley, and they ain't moderates. I'm not talking about republicans in the city of Berkeley (which like are there actually any at all) but the students admitted to Berkeley that make up the club (which again is like twenty people)

It's really an intelligence thing. Paul Ryan worship, I'd expect. Trumpism? Nah, unless the overwhelmingly liberal environment pushes them to be fucking crazy.
 

I'll point out that this line of thinking is one of the pillars of the Alt-Right.

The Alt-Right Explained

Vox said:
The purpose of government, in the view of neoreactionaries, isn't to represent the will of the people. It's to govern well, full stop. "From the perspective of its subjects, what counts is not who runs the government but what the government does," Moldbug explains. "Good government is effective, lawful government. Bad government is ineffective, lawless government. How anyone reasonable could disagree with these statements is quite beyond me. And yet clearly almost everyone does."

And democratic government, the neoreactionaries insist, is not effective, lawful government. Because the will of the people is arbitrary and varying, it cannot have the consistency of real, durable law, and it creates incentives for wasteful and, worse still, left-wing government.
 

Debirudog

Member
Most voters see Clinton's family foundation, which has come under sharp criticism from Trump over how donors to the foundation interacted with Clinton while she was secretary of state, as an organization that should be shuttered if Clinton is elected to avoid possible conflict of interest, with a sizable share saying it should be closed down now. Overall, 38% say it should be shut down now to do so, another 22% say it should be shut down if Clinton wins the presidency, and 34% say it does too much good to be shut down completely.
These opinions of shutting down the foundation over nothing, would forever be seen as incredibly selfish to me.

This is still something I'm gravely unhappy about with the media.
 

Like, this poll is bad and CNN should feel bad for doing it.

Like, why would you ask if one candidate's policies would put us at more or less risk BUT then not ask the same question of his/her opponent? That's just stupid. Also, I'm glad to see that people think Trump has been more unfair than Hillary...which since this came from their national poll makes NO sense at all. But whatever.
 

Owzers

Member
Putin...."he calls the shots, he gets things done"

Yep, Rep Chris Collins, Team Dictators.

Chuck Todd, don't take this.
 
I didn't realize that ErasureAcer is a dude who regularly posts shitty opinions.

Will remember for next time.

Bernie or Buster

I tried to warn people, but its just how it goes.

I was tempted myself. I've been banned enough fighting with BoBs though.

So in fairness to ErasureAcer, and I hate you for putting me in this position, wasn't he banned for almost all of those events?

You're saying we missed out or we can look forward to more?
 
Real question:

What involvement do the Clintons have with the Foundation? I assume other people do the work and they primarily fundraise.

Are they on the board or something? Couldn't it just be renamed?
 
Real question:

What involvement do the Clintons have with the Foundation? I assume other people do the work and they primarily fundraise.

Are they on the board or something? Couldn't it just be renamed?
Its as much of an involvement Carter has with Carter Foundation. This "scandal" is the epitome of correlation = causation. Some rich folk contributed money to CF. One of them, Muhammad Yunus, got face time with Hillary. But guess what, Yunus is a nobel laureate and has done incredible things to turn poverty on its face in Bangladesh, so much so that his microloan program is being replicated in parts of Africa and elsewhere. But sure, such an important figure only got face time with Hillary BECAUSE he donated to Clinton foundation!
 
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...ald-trump-s-body-language-claim-doesn-n644856

Meanwhile, four people with knowledge of the matter told NBC News that one of the advisers Trump brought to the briefing, retired general Mike Flynn, repeatedly interrupted the briefing with pointed questions.

Two sources said Christie, the New Jersey governor and Trump adviser, verbally restrained Flynn -- one saying Christie said, "Shut up," the other reporting he said, "Calm down." Two other sources said Christie touched Flynn's arm in an effort get him to calm down and let the officials continue. Requests for comment from Flynn and Christie were not immediately returned.

what the hell

Current and former U.S. intelligence officials who asked that their names not be disclosed told NBC News that many members of the current intelligence community -- leadership rank and file -- were angered by Trump's comments Wednesday night, and the possibility that he may have disclosed details of his intelligence briefing or attempted to politicize it.

Former CIA and NSA director Mike Hayden, who opposes Trump, told NBC News that in almost four decades in intelligence "I have never seen anything like this before."

"A political candidate has used professional intelligence officers briefing him in a totally non-political setting as props to buttress an argument for his political campaign," said Hayden. "And his political point was actually imputed to them, not even something they allegedly said. The `I can read body language' line was quite remarkable. ... I am confident Director Clapper sent senior professionals to this meeting and so I am equally confident that no such body language ever existed. It's simply not what we do."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom