• 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 |OT12| The last days of the Republic

Status
Not open for further replies.

Holmes

Member
Sounds like "There is a pro-Clinton super PAC that did pro-Clinton things and we think it should be investigated."

Lock her up I guess.
 

Slayven

Member
Actually so long as any coordinating is done out in the open, like on TV, it's fine. If you go back to when Colbert had a SuperPAC it was shocking to see the shit he could do while not breaking the rules.

I don't understand what PACs can and can't do, like they can't even talk to the candidate they representing?
 
Hubert Humphrey is an interesting comparison to Hillary Clinton in being a really progressive neocon.

I think Hillary is a lot less hawkish than Humphrey presented himself as though.
 

Bowdz

Member
I don't understand what PACs can and can't do, like they can't even talk to the candidate they representing?

SuperPACS can't officially coordinate or commmunicate with the campaign, but they can circumvent that by just spamming public material (ala Ted Cruz dumping 20+ hours of amazing stock Cruz footage to YouTube so that SuperPACS could use it).
 

Holmes

Member
Yeah, honestly it's a big nothing. Accusations of colluding with SuperPACs happens every election year for almost every campaign. Not only that, this is just a group suing both campaigns, and that's all. It's probably going nowhere considering how loose the laws on this are and how easy they are to skirt around. On top of that, Matthew is getting a lot of coverage and not much is going on in the campaign right now so there's not much to talk about on that end. So... this is just a whole big nothing.
 
Gmail of a Clinton Insider got hacked and dumped.

Begin Diablosing

ap13041912523.jpg
pls link
 

johnsmith

remember me
Gmail of a Clinton Insider got hacked and dumped.

Begin Diablosing

I'm only seeing it on daily caller and info wars and other shit sites, and it supposedly happened Wednesday. If even poolitico isn't reporting on it seems like it's nothing, or as fake as the "pay to play" folder in the clinton foundation "leak"
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
I'm only seeing it on daily caller and info wars and other shit sites, and it supposedly happened Wednesday. If even poolitico isn't reporting on it seems like it's nothing, or as fake as the "pay to play" folder in the clinton foundation "leak"

Ah, just saw it on the Twitter's. So, it's another Wednesday story.
 
This thread is becoming such a joke. It's almost as though you guys are pinballing around the internet to find anything to lose your damn minds over.

You guys? One person brought it up and then was met with a wave of dismissals. Save the shitty generalizations for when people are actually bedwetting. (Sunday might be a good time to check in)
 
I love how in 1916, Woodrow Wilson only won the presidency because his opponent was too lazy to meet with the Republican governor of California and the governor of California got pissed off and refused to endorse him.

The Republican lost by only 3800 votes in California and would have won the presidency if he won California.

1916 was probably the worst election in the last 100 years between two terrible candidates.
 
I love how in 1916, Woodrow Wilson only won the presidency because his opponent was too lazy to meet with the Republican governor of California and the governor of California got pissed off and refused to endorse him.

The Republican lost by only 3800 votes in California and would have won the presidency if he won California.

1916 was probably the worst election in the last 100 years between two terrible candidates.
wouldn't they both have been under 270 if California went red? I'm just reading wikipedia.
 

Slayven

Member
I love how in 1916, Woodrow Wilson only won the presidency because his opponent was too lazy to meet with the Republican governor of California and the governor of California got pissed off and refused to endorse him.

The Republican lost by only 3800 votes in California and would have won the presidency if he won California.

1916 was probably the worst election in the last 100 years between two terrible candidates.

Elections had to be crazy back in the day when news took days to spread
 

Man God

Non-Canon Member
Elections had to be crazy back in the day when news took days to spread

By the time telegraphs were invented it wasn't too bad, and that was way before this one. Radio made it pretty much as instant as today, which was right around the next election cycle after this one.
 

Slayven

Member
By the time telegraphs were invented it wasn't too bad, and that was way before this one. Radio made it pretty much as instant as today, which was right around the next election cycle after this one.

I imagine Newspaper endorsements really had weight back then
 

Man God

Non-Canon Member
I imagine Newspaper endorsements really had weight back then

Yes but remember that even small cities had at least a few different newspapers. The market was competitive as hell in the big cities. A lot of them naturally were divided among political ideology just like the surviving rival newspapers of today.
 
Adams did it in retaliation to Jefferson calling him a hermaphrodite. Which do you think Trump is more likely to do?

I mean, I guess nothing is stopping him from doing both...

But Adams couldn't even get Hamilton or someone to find that Jefferson recommended the south taking up armed resistance against the federal government. Sad!
 

CCS

Banned
Work is fun this morning. Whichever idiot is responsible for last night's Sterling flash crash is a pain in the neck.

On the plus side, not long until another debate. God I'm excited :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom