• 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 |OT14| Attention NV shoppers, democracy is on sale in aisle 4!

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Joeytj

Banned
Blader said:
Man, the floodgates really opened on these "URGENT: WE NEED MORE MONEY" emails.
Click to expand...

Those were always going to happen in the final week of campaigning.

Man, I'm feeling way to nauseous about everything today. Polls, just one week out. I keep telling myself to calm down, Hillary's got this, but it's still not good to keep talking about this FBI thing.

Josh Earnest just said Obama personally doesn't think Comey is trying to influence the election, but does note that it's not normal to make such public declarations just 11 days before the election.

The White House says they won't criticize or defend Comey's actions.

Yeah, it's the right move. Obama can't pile on Comey. Not just because he hired the guy and is part of his administration, but because he has to maintain some semblance of impartiality too in the process. Loretta Lynch hasn't said anything publicly either because of this.
 
S

sphagnum

Banned
RastaMentality said:
lol people keep saying this but loads of minorities and young people would simply just not vote. I don't think dems would have an issue just not voting for a racist maniac like white voters are this year. Posters keep stating this false equivalency all up and through this thread. Republicans are voting for Trump because a lot of them are simply racist!
Click to expand...

Democrats wouldn't vote for a racist like Trump, no. But let's say there was a Bernie on steroids who preached all about class war and giving the racists the what-for and shaming sexists out of their jobs. Real red meat stuff for a left wing base but sometimes outside of the political norm. But this person also demonstrated some autocratic tendencies in the past that might give a voter pause and has a fan base that openly talks about the need to combat, physically if necessary, the capitalist racist patriarchy.

Let's say this person's GOP contender is a Paul Ryan type, and if the GOP wins then they control the presidency and the Congress and might be able to appoint SCOTUS judges. Goodbye all social and economic progress.

Who do you choose? I think a significant number of Democrats still vote for their candidate.
 
J

Jeels

Member
Joeytj said:
Yeah, it's the right move. Obama can't pile on Comey. Not just because he hired the guy and is part of his administration, but because he has to maintain some semblance of impartiality too in the process. Loretta Lynch hasn't said anything publicly either because of this.
Click to expand...

Good to know Loretta and Barack understand something Comey doesn't. :p
 
D

dramatis

Member
Boke1879 said:
Some of you just need to realize how partisan this country really is. They may not vote for Trump and he won't win the Presidency, but they will vote downballot.

Just the way it is unfortunately. Dems really need to start voting in non Presidential years.
Click to expand...
Thing is, there's a bunch of liberals complaining that they don't want to vote for someone who isn't inspirational. Or who isn't 100% perfect, because somehow, politicians need to be 100% perfect people before you can vote for them.

Whereas conservatives can be convinced to vote for any piece of garbage.
 
J

johnny956

Member
The Lamonster said:
God I hope so. I read somewhere that the governor's race here in MO is tightening. Is that true?
Click to expand...

Last couple of polls have been unfortunately. I think it's because Greitens name is becoming more known. Amazing it's close. Greitens followed Trump and won't release his tax records and not to mention the $2 million his campaign got that skirted Missouri contribution rules (it's a federal super PAC)
 
S

sphagnum

Banned
Finale Fireworker said:
I have to admit that I don't know enough about Huey Long to understand what you're actually asking. I basically know "share the wealth" and he was crazy authoritarian and was assassinated.

Are you asking if I would vote for Huey Long?
Click to expand...

Not you specifically, but Dems in general. They wouldn't vote for a Hitler because of what he stood for. But I do think if push came to shove they'd vote for a person who supported their prerogatives even if they didn't want to because they thought that person was autocratic, so long as they thought it was the lesser evil.

The hypothetical person I made up in the next post isn't Huey Long, but another example of what I'm getting at.
 
Z

Ziltoidia 9

Member
Impartial to the investigation, but come on, Obama is campaigning for Hillary. Comey isn't campaigning for anyone. I just don't think its the right angle to go down. It might help during the run up to the election, but when she wins, that isn't going to be the message to save her as a president elect. Day after she is elected, senate repubs will announce impeachment proceedings. I feel like the next 4 years are shot.

The supreme court angle now is basically "keep it with 8 or allow trump to put who he wants in." No way the senate allows a HRC appointee. Basically the election now comes down to absolutely no change or chaos change via trump.
 
S

Slayven

Member
Ziltoidia 9 said:
Impartial to the investigation, but come on, Obama is campaigning for Hillary. Comey isn't campaigning for anyone. I just don't think its the right angle to go down. It might help during the run up to the election, but when she wins, that isn't going to be the message to save her as a president elect. Day after she is elected, senate repubs will announce impeachment proceedings. I feel like the next 4 years are shot.

The supreme court angle now is basically "keep it with 8 or allow trump to put who he wants in." No way the senate allows a HRC appointee. Basically the election now comes down to absolutely no change or chaos change via trump.
Click to expand...

Would they really stonewall for 4 years?
 
B

banefirelord

Banned
sphagnum said:
Democrats wouldn't vote for a racist like Trump, no. But let's say there was a Bernie on steroids who preached all about class war and giving the racists the what-for and shaming sexists out of their jobs. Real red meat stuff for a left wing base but sometimes outside of the political norm. But this person also demonstrated some autocratic tendencies in the past that might give a voter pause and has a fan base that openly talks about the need to combat, physically if necessary, the capitalist racist patriarchy.

Let's say this person's GOP contender is a Paul Ryan type, and if the GOP wins then they control the presidency and the Congress and might be able to appoint SCOTUS judges. Goodbye all social and economic progress.

Who do you choose? I think a significant number of Democrats still vote for their candidate.
Click to expand...
Speaking as a straight white cis male, this is the scenario where I stay the hell home. I'm never voting for a Paul Ryan type Repub, but my progressive values hit a very hard wall if a left-wing presidential candidate and their base calls for violent revolt against people who fit my socioeconomic description. If that makes me a bad person, so be it...at some point bodily self preservation instinct necessarily trumps ideals.
 
Z

Ziltoidia 9

Member
Slayven said:
Would they really stonewall for 4 years?
Click to expand...

I feel so. At least until the midterms.They have got away with it for 9 months. Now with the investigations seemingly to be going on for a long time now, they will feel vindicated and go into hard headed mode again.

The GOP operates like a business. Their consumers (voters) want to buy their bullshit. It doesn't matter what the people who don't buy their shit think.
 
S

sphagnum

Banned
Debirudog said:
Hillary needs that damn senate to do anything. Fuck.

God fucking damn it.
Click to expand...

Look, all she needs to do is start WWIII as a distraction so that the Senate will vote her emergency powers until she can strip off her false mask and reveal herself to be the Sith lord controlling everything since the 90s.

"I am the Senate" - Sheev "Hillary" Clinton.
 
G

Grym

Member
Boke1879 said:
Some of you just need to realize how partisan this country really is. They may not vote for Trump and he won't win the Presidency, but they will vote downballot.

Just the way it is unfortunately. Dems really need to start voting in non Presidential years.
Click to expand...

yep. I mean this is obviously anecdotal at best, but it is my perception on what is going to happen as well. The religious-right side of my extended family are almost entirely just not voting at all for president but will all still vote downballot. Guaranteed. They vote every election and every primary no matter what but they really do not like Trump at all. A few of them may vote third party or write-in for president and a handful - like 1 or 2 - will hold their noses and vote Trump anyway because abortion and the SCOTUS is the only thing that matters now to them. But a majority of them will just abstain on president, vote for local races, and bide their time until the next election.
 
A

A Human Becoming

More than a Member
What can Hillary expect to get done with a Democratic-controlled Senate versus a Republican-controlled one? Is the main difference appointees like the Supreme Court?
 
T

TestOfTide

Banned
Slayven said:
Would they really stonewall for 4 years?
Click to expand...

I feel like a DC circuit court could easily rule that refusing to give any hearings or votes for SCOTUS nominees just to keep a seat empty is in blatant violation of the constitution.

A Human Becoming said:
What can Hillary expect to get done with a Democratic-controlled Senate versus a Republican-controlled one? Is the main difference appointees like the Supreme Court?
Click to expand...

Look at how little a GOP house and senate has been doing for Obama's last two years.

That's what we can expect of the GOP keeps the Senate.
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
J

johnny956

Member
G

Grief.exe

Member
A Human Becoming said:
What can Hillary expect to get done with a Democratic-controlled Senate versus a Republican-controlled one? Is the main difference appointees like the Supreme Court?
Click to expand...

Supreme doesn't have to go past the House, but normal bills do.

Republicans holding up the House would be continued gridlock, but at least Hillary could get Senate appointments through.
 
V

VendettaRed07

Member
Slayven said:
Would they really stonewall for 4 years?
Click to expand...
They have said they would and considering they've already blocked Obama for a record amount of time, I see no reason to not take those threats seriously.

If doing that didn't backfire on them then it's basically a sign of approval from voters. So why not continue doing it? Only four years of blockage and they might get a conservative court for another 40.
 
D

Debirudog

Member
A Human Becoming said:
What can Hillary expect to get done with a Democratic-controlled Senate versus a Republican-controlled one? Is the main difference appointees like the Supreme Court?
Click to expand...

Executive orders with a liberal supreme court that would side with her. Start abusing it like a Queen because fuck GOP obstruction.
 
C

Cyanity

Banned
I think I'm just gonna stay away from PoliGAF until election day, because this is some hilariously pointless bedwetting going on in here right now. Just picked up DSII:SOTFS for $10 so I think I might just play that for a week.
 
S

studyguy

Member
RustyNails said:
CwDzhRUWIAA7FBr.jpg
Click to expand...

Eh... If I saw them from afar I'd assume they were for Hillary tbh.
 
G

GurgleBot20

Member
Why are we freaking out about the Senate again? May I join?


Cyanity said:
I think I'm just gonna stay away from PoliGAF until election day, because this is some hilariously pointless bedwetting going on in here right now. Just picked up DSII:SOTFS for $10 so I think I might just play that for a week.
Click to expand...

I've been playing a lot of 1 and 3 + Demons's lately (have 2, but have barely played it). Souls is a good way to make time disappear.
 
V

VendettaRed07

Member
Debirudog said:
Executive orders with a liberal supreme court that would side with her. Start abusing it like a Queen because fuck GOP obstruction.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say abuse it, because that is awful..

But I'd argue that the Supreme Court has overstepped in what is admissible as an executive order. Comparing the amount of orders and what they entailed in the first half of the 20th century doesn't really compare with the last 40 years or so.

Basically Hillary with a more liberal court could use existing laws to take action; like environmental regulatory laws etc. there are already tons of laws that have already passed that have since been rendered useless or completely innaffective she could revisit. But I wouldn't consider that abuse, because the potus by definition should have the right to do that, when they haven't in Scalia's America
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom