Support NeoGAF

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Don't look now, but Hillary's favorables haven't been this high since June 15th, 2015. Her unfavorables haven't been this low since February 15th, 2016.

(She's at 45.5/53.3)

Still pretty garbage though.

 

[eBay Huckster]

Don't look now, but Hillary's favorables haven't been this high since June 15th, 2015. Her unfavorables haven't been this low since February 15th, 2016.

(She's at 45.5/53.3)

so basically, right at obama 2014 levels

 

[royalan]

This is a failing of left, I feel.

Like...the GOP has done and said heinous shit. Despite that, it's always the Dems giving quarter when it comes to partisanship, it's always the Dems who have had to be Center-left more than the opposition being Center-right.

It's like...there's an air of 'We must treat everyone equally' when it comes to the left side. This includes the racist, backwards, GOP base. The only reason why it seems Democrats have gotten their teeth back, is because Trump is an easy target. But it's only been what, this last month that they've started really calling the GOPs shit out? And even then, their attacks are 'Well you support Trump so this and that...well your party elected Trump, this and that...'. After this year it's going to revert back to what, 'we must treat everyone equally and we're going to help everyone?' while the GOP takes their quarter and keeps attacking?

It annoys me, as well. The place burnt down, oh well, they should stop peddling hate. Who gives a fuck about there poor building. Oh, someone called them Nazis? Good, that's what they basically want to be at this point: 'Deport all the minorities! Fuck black people and their troubles! We shall make America White again!' .

Honestly, if more GOP buildings burnt down, I wouldn't blink. They are an institution of hate; Their main trade has become the festering of this hate; They've never extended an olive branch, only burnt them down themselves.

Now, I'm sure there are Republicans who are fiscal conservatives. The truth is though, the modern GOP is not for you. Find something else that doesn't have decades of hate sewn into it. What you say is 'Government putting their tentacles all over our lives', is what we call 'The government trying to make things fair and equal for everyone no matter their race, creed, or religion.'

And I'm sure there are Republicans on this site. I'm sure you're the fiscal conservative type. I'm sure you don't want the big bad government mingling into your affairs. But the reality is, your party isn't about that. They want to impose more control upon their citizens. They want to control society. What restrooms people can use. Whether you can marry a person or not of the same sex. Whether you can move to America and live here. Whether you can freely practice your religion without being punished in an institution for choosing to not say 'Under god'. Whether you can protest the treatment of minorities without being lambasted by mainly white folk. That is the Republican way. That is the party you support.

Sorry for the rant, but yeah the GOP just fucking sucks.

I agree with every word of this. But at the same time I do think we're approaching a line of basic civility here.

I'm a black gay male from a poor family. There is no part of my identity that the GOP as an institution has not been antagonistic toward. Even the part of me that was literally raised in the church and was staunchly religious for most of my life almost despises the GOP for the way they've twisted the Christian faith to justify their hate and bigotry. Part of me, a huge part of me, wants to see the whole damn party burned to the ground. Our government needs two healthy major parties, liberal and conservative, to function. But in that role the modern GOP has ceased to function. It's a worthless institution. A cesspool of hate and a drain on our resources. The GOP must go. I don't take any word I just typed back and I'd use stronger language if I could.

That said, both parties need to do work to not give into the impulses of our fringe bases. The edges of our parties that don't believe in compromise, or learning, or empathy. We can disagree on policy and ideology, but I think all of us have a duty to protect the basic tenants of our Democracy, and civil disagreement is one of them.

I'm all of shunning the GOP when it comes to policy, and definitely agree that Dems need to stop wasting so much fucking time extending olive branches to the right when they're in a position of power. But acts of political violence need to be universally condemned.

 

[whyamihere]

Still pretty garbage though.

Jeb dropped out with -21.6. Rand with -15.3. Christie with -14.7. Rubio with -4. Huckabee with -13.7. Carson with -4.2. Cruz with -25.1. Perry with -18.1. Jindal with -11.6. Santorum with -18.

So what are you talking about?

so basically, right at obama 2014 levels

He was like -5/6 for most of 2014 and early 2015.

 

[sphagnum]

A spectre is haunting NeoGAF all of a sudden...

 

[sazzy]

I hope Chris Wallace has prepared a bunch of extremely specific policy questions for Donald.

No one has baited him into a real 'what is aleppo' moment.

I think the closest was when Donald said, 'Russia isn't going to go into Crimea on my watch' or something similar.

And had he not been corrected, and instead followed up by a question like, 'so how are you going to prevent Russia from invading Crimea?', that would've been awesome.

 

[CygnusXS]

I'm pretty sure that people who commit political violence are more interested in the violence than the politics and only really want to encourage more of it.

 

[Bowdz]

I agree with every word of this. But at the same time I do think we're approaching a line of basic civility here.

I'm a black gay male from a poor family. There is no part of my identity that the GOP as an institution has not been antagonistic toward. Even the part of me that was literally raised in the church and was staunchly religious for most of my life almost despises the GOP for the way they've twisted the Christian faith to justify their hate and bigotry. Part of me, a huge part of me, wants to see the whole damn party burned to the ground. Our government needs two healthy major parties, liberal and conservative, to function. But in that role the modern GOP has ceased to function. It's a worthless institution. A cesspool of hate and a drain on our resources. The GOP must go. I don't take any word I just typed back and I'd use stronger language if I could.

That said, both parties need to do work to not give into the impulses of our fringe bases. The edges of our parties that don't believe in compromise, or learning, or empathy. We can disagree on policy and ideology, but I think all of us have a duty to protect the basic tenants of our Democracy, and civil disagreement is one of them.

I'm all of shunning the GOP when it comes to policy, and definitely agree that Dems need to stop wasting so much fucking time extending olive branches to the right when they're in a position of power. But acts of political violence need to be universally condemned.

Awesome post.

Sums my feelings up perfectly.

 

[Aaron]

Now, I'm sure there are Republicans who are fiscal conservatives. The truth is though, the modern GOP is not for you. Find something else that doesn't have decades of hate sewn into it. What you say is 'Government putting their tentacles all over our lives', is what we call 'The government trying to make things fair and equal for everyone no matter their race, creed, or religion.'

Maybe, but they'd have to be real old or delusional because Reagan wasn't a fiscal conservative, and neither were the two Bushes that came after him. This is more giving ground to the GOP that they haven't once earned. Giving them one more thing to hide their truly terrible economic policies behind.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I can appreciate the defense of donating money to rebuild the facility, but one thing I don't like is "equal treatment." We have been very careful about not treating the GOP and its voters as the scum of the Earth for the longest time, and the end result is that they nominated a white supremacist, racist, misogynist. Why should we do something that ultimately did not make Republicans better people? The Republican voters responded to the distribution of equal rights by deciding that they are the true oppressed ones, while they express their hatred and poor disposition for everyone different than them.

And the double-talking on the Republican party always frustrates me. They're fiscally conservative? Nothing I've seen has suggested this. They're small government? Up until 13 years ago, it was okay for states to criminalize gay sex, and the GOP was the one who fought for that right to interfere into private consensual encounters like that. And more specifically, how people call Hillary an elitist and somehow a billionaire who throws his weight around and talks shit about people all the time and has had a history of taking advantage of people's work and does everything he can to avoid paying taxes (but also criticizes those who don't pay taxes and criticizes the government's infrastructures that are hurting due to people like Trump not paying taxes).

 

[metalslimer]

I agree with every word of this. But at the same time I do think we're approaching a line of basic civility here.

I'm a black gay male from a poor family. There is no part of my identity that the GOP as an institution has not been antagonistic toward. Even the part of me that was literally raised in the church and was staunchly religious for most of my life almost despises the GOP for the way they've twisted the Christian faith to justify their hate and bigotry. Part of me, a huge part of me, wants to see the whole damn party burned to the ground. Our government needs two healthy major parties, liberal and conservative, to function. But in that role the modern GOP has ceased to function. It's a worthless institution. A cesspool of hate and a drain on our resources. The GOP must go. I don't take any word I just typed back and I'd use stronger language if I could.

That said, both parties need to do work to not give into the impulses of our fringe bases. The edges of our parties that don't believe in compromise, or learning, or empathy. We can disagree on policy and ideology, but I think all of us have a duty to protect the basic tenants of our Democracy, and civil disagreement is one of them.

I'm all of shunning the GOP when it comes to policy, and definitely agree that Dems need to stop wasting so much fucking time extending olive branches to the right when they're in a position of power. But acts of political violence need to be universally condemned.

I completely agree. Trump is trying his best to undermine the principles of our democracy and we need to do our best to prevent that from taking place and condemn any actions that further that. The GOP doesn't need to be treated with respect in my mind, but they are apart of our democracy and that deserves our respect.

Also, I wonder if Wikileaks will do a massive dump before the election, or will they try and undermine Clinton's early days in office by continuing the slow drip.

 

[Carpe Carnim]

I don't know if only voting is the answer.

The GOP has answered with voter suppression and a general racist institution. They've done shit. I don't condone the violence that may befall people, but I'm not going to cry for a burnt building.

I get your righteous anger. You're not wtong.

My argument isn't that "we should be better."

My argument is that the tactic energizes the other sides' base, while depressing marginal, procrastinating voters who might be inclined to give you their vote. It's tactical, not philosophical.

You're right, the GOP is a festering boil on American politics. But we're also talking about a state that just weeks ago had violent protests. Voters are already a bit shaken. Why give McCrory an opportunity to look competent and resolute a month before an election he looks to be losing?

 

[Roland_Gunner]

He was like -5/6 for most of 2014 and early 2015.

Obama was -8/9 for the second half of 2014 per Huffpo's agregator:

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/obama-job-approval

 

[whyamihere]

Also, Hillary's net favorables haven't been this "good" since Jan 10th, 2016. This also didn't start at the debate -- her favorables started going up on September 16th and have had a slow-yet-steady trajectory upwards.

Obama was -8/9 for the second half of 2014 per Huffpo's agregator:

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/obama-job-approval

That's job approval, not favorables.

 

[jtb]

Is it even possible for a candidate to go through the scrutiny of a national election and not come out significantly underwater in favorables in this day and age? Would have been interesting to see on the Dem side if there was a non-incumbent like figure to test that against.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Thread moves so fast that I'm sure this has been discussed, none the less...


http://midnightsunak.com/2016/10/16/midnight-sun-exclusive-new-poll-shows-trump-clinton-tied-alaska/


New ALASKA poll....




Two months ago...





I would love to hear about Clinton making a stop in Alaska one day.

Is it a fair assumption that Johnson and Stein aren't done dropping in the polls? If so, that could be enough to make Hillary take Alaska, especially if Trump's bad days keep a-comin'.

 

[sphagnum]

I agree with every word of this. But at the same time I do think we're approaching a line of basic civility here.

I'm a black gay male from a poor family. There is no part of my identity that the GOP as an institution has not been antagonistic toward. Even the part of me that was literally raised in the church and was staunchly religious for most of my life almost despises the GOP for the way they've twisted the Christian faith to justify their hate and bigotry. Part of me, a huge part of me, wants to see the whole damn party burned to the ground. Our government needs two healthy major parties, liberal and conservative, to function. But in that role the modern GOP has ceased to function. It's a worthless institution. A cesspool of hate and a drain on our resources. The GOP must go. I don't take any word I just typed back and I'd use stronger language if I could.

That said, both parties need to do work to not give into the impulses of our fringe bases. The edges of our parties that don't believe in compromise, or learning, or empathy. We can disagree on policy and ideology, but I think all of us have a duty to protect the basic tenants of our Democracy, and civil disagreement is one of them.

I'm all of shunning the GOP when it comes to policy, and definitely agree that Dems need to stop wasting so much fucking time extending olive branches to the right when they're in a position of power. But acts of political violence need to be universally condemned.

I like most of this post but there two things that I'd have to comment on:

1. I don't think we need a liberal and conservative dichotomy. I'd much rather have a leftist and liberal dichotomy.

2. Do you think political violence ought to be condemned because it's immoral or because it is bad strategy? To be honest, if this turned out to be a bombing done by, say, a trans person, I wouldn't be able to say in good conscience that it was morally wrong because I believe the oppressed always has the right to fight their oppressor, who struck first. I don't think all violence is equal.just because it's violence. I think intention matters. But I think it may be terrible strategy when other more peaceful options are still available.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I like most of this post but there two things that I'd have to comment on:

1. I don't think we need a liberal and conservative dichotomy. I'd much rather have a leftist and liberal dichotomy.

2. Do you think political violence ought to be condemned because it's immoral or because it is bad strategy? To be honest, if this turned out to be a bombing done by, say, a trans person, I wouldn't be able to say in good conscience that it was morally wrong because I believe the oppressed always has the right to fight their oppressor, who struck first. I don't think all violence is equal.just because it's violence. I think intention matters. But I think it may be terrible strategy when other more peaceful options are still available.

That's where I come in. I'd much rather see the GOP tank and the Democrats fracture into liberal and leftist, like you said.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Jeb dropped out with -21.6. Rand with -15.3. Christie with -14.7. Rubio with -4. Huckabee with -13.7. Carson with -4.2. Cruz with -25.1. Perry with -18.1. Jindal with -11.6. Santorum with -18.

So what are you talking about?

6 points worse than Marco Rubio and Ben Carson is supposed to be a good thing? Mitt Romney was a point or two in the positive at this time in 2012. The guy that lost and was made of fun of for being an out of touch rich guy who was caught on tape talking about half the country being moochers.

 

[Roland_Gunner]

Maybe, but they'd have to be real old or delusional because Reagan wasn't a fiscal conservative, and neither were the two Bushes that came after him. This is more giving ground to the GOP that they haven't once earned. Giving them one more thing to hide their truly terrible economic policies behind.

George HW Bush raised taxes including rates on the top bracket, supported the commission to consolidate military bases after the cold war ended, and his regulators implemented the S&L bailout, which was far more punitive than what happened after the 2008 crash. What more do you want from the guy?

 

[whyamihere]

6 points worse than Marco Rubio and Ben Carson is supposed to be a good thing? Mitt Romney was a point or two in the positive at this time in 2012. The guy that lost and was made of fun of for being an out of touch rich guy who was caught on tape talking about half the country being moochers.

I'm almost impressed that you were able to cherry pick this for your own narrative.

 

[Spoiled Milk]

To be honest, if this turned out to be a bombing done by, say, a trans person, I wouldn't be able to say in good conscience that it was morally wrong because I believe the oppressed always has the right to fight their oppressor, who struck first. I don't think all violence is equal.just because it's violence. I think intention matters. But I think it may be terrible strategy when other more peaceful options are still available.

Wow. What? All violence has the same intention: to do harm. No, trans people are not under so much threat that they have to firebomb the GOP headquarters. The threat to them is comfortable bathroom usage, not extermination. Read what you are writing.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

That's where I come in. I'd much rather see the GOP tank and the Democrats fracture into liberal and leftist, like you said.

If it was guaranteed that the right would never rise again, I could agree with the needle moving to a liberal/left split.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Wow. What? All violence has the same intention: to do harm. No, trans people are not under so much threat that they have to firebomb the GOP headquarters. The threat to them is comfortable bathroom usage, not extermination. Read what you are writing.

I'm not a big fan of violence as a form of protest (and just to clarify, violence against property is not proportionate to violence against trans people), but the notion that you think that trans people aren't facing serious threats, especially in our political climate and from the GOP, is silly. It's not just comfortable bathroom usage, it's being made a target of assault, rape, and murder if you're caught in the "wrong" bathroom (and even if you use the "right" bathroom).

 

[royalan]

I like most of this post but there two things that I'd have to comment on:

1. I don't think we need a liberal and conservative dichotomy. I'd much rather have a leftist and liberal dichotomy.

2. Do you think political violence ought to be condemned because it's immoral or because it is bad strategy? To be honest, if this turned out to be a bombing done by, say, a trans person, I wouldn't be able to say in good conscience that it was morally wrong because I believe the oppressed always has the right to fight their oppressor, who struck first. I don't think all violence is equal.just because it's violence. I think intention matters. But I think it may be terrible strategy when other more peaceful options are still available.

1) I'm not a conservative, but I do believe that fiscal conservatism, true fiscal conservatism and not the bullshit the GOP has been using to shield their hate, is something worth considering. Maybe this is my father rubbing off on me; he's a conservative democrat (who would vote Republican if they were actually the party of their purported ideals, but alas...racism). I think my grander point is that our country's politics do require two healthy parties. How that shakes out I'm not too concerned about for the sake of the argument I was making. lol

2) I'm morally against political violence. I believe in violence as a means of defense. Destroying buildings and potentially endangering innocent lives so very rarely helps reach a political end that it's not worth going there, in my opinion. So yeah, in your example I would condemn that transperson.

 

[sphagnum]

Wow. What? All violence has the same intention: to do harm. No, trans people are not under so much threat that they have to firebomb the GOP headquarters. The threat to them is comfortable bathroom usage, not extermination. Read what you are writing.

Nobody was killed. I don't think very much of property. You should know that by now!

But saying "all violence is meant to do harm" is simplistic. Violence that is meant to oppress people is, to me, fundamentally more indefensible than violence on the part of oppressed people lashing out. I fully believe in the right to rebel. Like, you know, the founding fathers.

 

[rjinaz]

All this hubbub and watch, the Republicans will probably not accept the money.

 

[A Link to the Past]

1) I'm not a conservative, but I do believe that fiscal conservatism, true fiscal conservatism and not the bullshit the GOP has been using to shield their hate, is something worth considering. Maybe this is my father rubbing off on me; he's a conservative democrat (who would vote Republican if they were actually the party of their purported ideals, but alas...racism). I think my grander point is that our country's politics do require two healthy parties. How that shakes out I'm not too concerned about for the sake of the argument I was making. lol

2) I'm morally against political violence. I believe in violence as a means of defense. Destroying buildings and potentially endangering innocent lives so very rarely helps reach a political end that it's not worth going there, in my opinion. So yeah, in your example I would condemn that transperson.

Well I guess what I would ask is, would you be able to understand why that trans person resorted to violence?

 

[eBay Huckster]

He was like -5/6 for most of 2014 and early 2015.

-6, -8, both are right on the same level of "y'all really gonna act like this is comparable to trump's unfavorables?"

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Communists on Twitter trying to justify bombing.

... They do know that encouraging political violence would not be good for them, right? These people have never held a gun before. There are 10-15 million Trump fans with an entire arsenal.

 

[whyamihere]

-6, -8, both are right on the same level of "y'all really gonna act like this is comparable to trump's unfavorables?"

Apparently we are!

 

[ryutaro's mama]

Dem House or we have failed

House ain't flipping, playa.

 

[Spoiled Milk]

I'm not a big fan of violence as a form of protest (and just to clarify, violence against property is not proportionate to violence against trans people), but the notion that you think that trans people aren't facing serious threats, especially in our political climate and from the GOP, is silly. It's not just comfortable bathroom usage, it's being made a target of assault, rape, and murder if you're caught in the "wrong" bathroom (and even if you use the "right" bathroom).

Life's not pretty for them but they don't need to BOMB A BUILDING.

Nobody was killed. I don't think very much of property. You should know that by now!

But saying "all violence is meant to do harm" is simplistic. Violence that is meant to oppress people is, to me, fundamentally more indefensible than violence on the part of oppressed people lashing out. I fully believe in the right to rebel. Like, you know, the founding fathers.

Dude. Context. They firebombed a building. That fire could have spread to other places. Holy shit. Why are you comparing this to revolution?

 

[Joeytj]

Ugh, good lord.

This "friend" of mine on Facebook, a but hurt former Bernie supporter, switched to Gary Johnson after the primaries despite him being the opposite of what Bernie stood for, on policies as fundamental as Wall Street reform and Citizens United.

Well, the dumbass shared a Nation article about Amy Goodman being arrested in North Dakota during a pipeline protest. Bla bla bla, it is unjust and all, she was arrested by the local (Republican) authorities, and my friend, of course, blames the "unjust system created by the Republican and Democratic parties. Vote Libertarian!"

I just lost it. I simply responded that the Libertarian Party supporters both the pipeline, big oil and Citizens United, al three of which are key to creating the current "system" he hates so much. And I told them that the local Republican party is in power there.

And, of course, Amy Goodman is no Libertarian either.

He hasn't answered, but let's see what he comments back.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

You're probably going to win a Darwin award if you try to encourage political violence when your side does not have the guns on their side.

I know Communists support the idea that political power comes out of the barrel of a gun... But you guys don't have any guns.

 

[pigeon]

Wow. What? All violence has the same intention: to do harm. No, trans people are not under so much threat that they have to firebomb the GOP headquarters. The threat to them is comfortable bathroom usage, not extermination. Read what you are writing.

This is pretty dumb about transgender civil rights in America.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Ugh, good lord.

This "friend" of mine on Facebook, a but hurt former Bernie supporter, switch to Gary Johnson after the primaries despite him being the opposite of what Bernie stood for, on policies as fundamental as Wall Street reform and Citizens United.

Well, the dumbass shared a Nation article about Amy Goodman being arrested in North Dakota during a pipeline protest. Bla bla bla, it is unjust and all, she was arrested by the local (Republican) authorities, and my friend, of course, blames the "unjust system created by the Republican and Democratic parties. Vote Libertarian!"

I just lost it. I simply responded that the Libertarian Party supporters both the pipeline, big oil and Citizens United, al three of which are key to creating the current "system" he hates so much. And I told them that the local Republican party is in power there.

And, of course, Amy Goodman is no Libertarian either.

He hasn't answered, but let's see what he comments back.

The Libertarian Party is just a bunch of failed Republicans.

 

[GutsOfThor]

I'm so glad I deactivated my Facebook account. I was seeing stupid shit daily. I might reactivate sometime next year maybe...

 

[Ecotic]

Most all of my deep ruby-red hometown friends have stopped posting pics or statuses in support of Trump. I don't know if it's due to them realizing the futility of the situation or hoping to avoid further social stigma. It's kind of frustrating in a way, victory over an opponent who gave up is never as good.

 

[royalan]

Well I guess what I would ask is, would you be able to understand why that trans person resorted to violence?

Oh of course!

It's a tricky position to hold, I admit. Like, I was upset at the rioters during the Baltimore protests over the death of Freddie Gray last year who set that damn CVS on fire...while at the same time understanding and sympathizing with the anger that would cause something like that to happen, and at the same time being somewhat grateful because torching that CVS was the only thing that brought the national attention the death of Freddie Gray (and unarmed black people across our country) deserved.

I know I'm contradicting myself. But through it all I think that we have to be careful about descending into becoming a society that believes violence is the only way to get a point across.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Most all of my deep ruby-red hometown friends have stopped posting pics or statuses in support of Trump. I don't know if it's due to them realizing the futility of the situation or hoping to avoid further social stigma. It's kind of frustrating in a way, victory over an opponent who gave up is never as good.

It may be less satisfying, but if they give up and don't vote, that is the best case scenario politically.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Life's not pretty for them but they don't need to BOMB A BUILDING.

Dude. Context. They firebombed a building. That fire could have spread to other places. Holy shit. Why are you comparing this to revolution?

I'm not responding to your criticism of firebombing, I'm responding to you downplaying what happens to trans people in our society. That you consider it a matter of "comfortable bathroom usage" speaks volumes on how much you need to read up on these issues.

Oh of course!

It's a tricky position to hold, I admit. Like, I was upset at the rioters during the Baltimore protests over the death of Freddie Gray last year who set that damn CVS on fire...while at the same time understanding and sympathizing with the anger that would cause something like that to happen, and at the same time being somewhat grateful because torching that CVS was the only thing that brought the national attention the death of Freddie Gray (and unarmed black people across our country) deserved.

I know I'm contradicting myself. But through it all I think that we have to be careful about descending into becoming a society that believe violence is the only way to get a point across.

As I note, I definitely frown upon violence, even against property, as it can create some shitty rippling, but at the same time if we ignore why the property violence/rioting occurred, it won't fix the problem (not lecturing you or telling you things you don't know ofc, just kinda expounding myself).

 

[sphagnum]

Communists on Twitter trying to justify bombing.

... They do know that encouraging political violence would not be good for them, right? These people have never held a gun before. There are 10-15 million Trump fans with an entire arsenal.

Not every communist agrees with liberals on gun control you know.

Spoiler

I have no idea how to use a gun, I'm just a flabby intellectual, just for the record

2) I'm morally against political violence. I believe in violence as a means of defense. Destroying buildings and potentially endangering innocent lives so very rarely helps reach a political end that it's not worth going there, in my opinion. So yeah, in your example I would condemn that transperson.

Reading that though almost sounds like it's a disagreement strategically rather than morally. Perhaps I have a broader view of what entails defense. I don't think someone has to be physically hit before they have a right to defense.

Dude. Context. They firebombed a building. That fire could have spread to other places. Holy shit. Why are you comparing this to revolution?

I'm just telling you why I don't think all violence is morally indefensible.

For the record, being that we don't know the purpose behind the bombing, I'm not in favor of it morally, and whatever the purpose, I condemn it as incredibly stupid strategically.

 

[Maengun1]

As far as the debate about Team Clinton shoring up the swing states vs. expanding the map, I say play it safe for the most part but the states they need to make a play for are

1. Arizona
2. Georgia
~and maybe~
3. South Carolina

I really think Arizona is winnable this year, Georgia probably not until 2020. South Carolina is more out of reach butttt it is on the same eventual path and the fact that it's surrounded by North Carolina and Georgia makes it a logical place to dump some money on TV ads or make an appearance or two. I would love to see Hillary host a rally in Phoenix or Atlanta in the next 3 weeks.

Any effort made in these states in the next month will only make 2020 and beyond that much more favorable for the dems. This makes more sense to me than people suggesting she should go try to make something happen in Utah or Alaska or something. Less upside, especially because when Trump is gone those states will likely go back to +30 R

 

[A Link to the Past]

As far as the debate about Team Clinton shoring up the swing states vs. expanding the map, I say play it safe for the most part but the states they need to make a play for are

1. Arizona
2. Georgia
3. South Carolina

I really think Arizona is winnable this year, Georgia probably not until 2020. South Carolina is more out of reach butttt it is on the same eventual path and the fact that it's surrounded by North Carolina and Georgia makes it a logical place to dump some money on TV ads or make an appearance or two. I would love to see Hillary host a rally in Phoenix or Atlanta in the next 3 weeks.

Any effort made in these states in the next month will only make 2020 and beyond that much more favorable for the dems. This makes more sense to me than people suggesting she should go try to make something happen in Utah or Alaska or something. Less upside, especially because when Trump is gone those states will likely go back to +30 R

Is South Carolina doable anymore? I remember that it was really close (if not blue in the Now-cast), but it seems like SC fell way back into the red and never came back.

 

[StopMakingSense]

Man DrudgeReport is hilarious these days.

 

[sphagnum]

So it looks like Assange's internet access was cut. Extradition time?

 

[VendettaRed07]

Is South Carolina doable anymore? I remember that it was really close (if not blue in the Now-cast), but it seems like SC fell way back into the red and never came back.

It's going to be hard to predict because we've never had a nominee with so little ground game as Trump. So we don't really know. I still think any states within 5% could be in play

 

[A Link to the Past]

It's going to be hard to predict because we've never had a nominee with so little ground game as Trump. So we don't really know. I still think any states within 5% could be in play

Oh, I forgot that SC was polling somewhat close, and that was before the leaks

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

So it looks like Assange's internet access was cut. Extradition time?

It's probably just a technical issue and he's trying to make it seem grander.