• 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 |OT16| Unpresidented

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
I hope we can keep some Dems in the Deep State...
Click to expand...

That's the biggest problem, Trump has showed you can directly appeal to the Racist and Xenophobes.

How can a Democrat run against that in deep red states?
 
C

Chumley

Banned
Nelo Ice said:
Yeah fuck that shit. When they go low we need to go lower. I don't care what it takes, we just need to win and stop this madness.
Click to expand...

I was fucking saying this during the election.

The motherfucking liberal bubble is real. We need to look at the world as it is, not how we want it to be. In the perfect world people would be inspired to go out to vote after hearing Michelle speak, but in the real world they're just suppressed after an endless negative barrage from Trump and the FBI.

Suppressing voter turnout is far easier than hoping you get lucky with a once in a lifetime candidate like Barack. The problem is that Republicans don't care who their candidate is, they'll turn out no matter what. Dems may be well and truly fucked if their voters refuse to turnout for anyone not up to the Obama standard.

The laziness of liberals really does make me hate this country. No matter what is done to reach out to them, they don't vote. They protest on the streets but they don't vote. Nothing can be done if Trump wasn't enough to motivate them.
 
S

Sirpopopop

Member
Suikoguy said:
I find the endless Sanders arguments and insufferable supporters doing victory laps to be worse. Oh, and we really need to move further to the left on everything!
Click to expand...

I personally think someone should just create a Sanders OT. That would be fine.

Talking to each other is rather useless. Both sides of the Democratic coalition aren't going to agree on anything for a very long time.
 
C

CygnusXS

will gain confidence one day
If we're talking ideological bubbles and attachment to reality... like, the liberals aren't the problem here. Liberals are very aware of what people outside of their bubble think and feel.
 
F

Frozenprince

Banned
CygnusXS said:
If we're talking ideological bubbles and attachment to reality... like, the liberals aren't the problem here. Liberals are very aware of what people outside of their bubble think and feel.
Click to expand...
I heard two old ladies talk about how great is gonna be getting all the darkies out on the fucking checkout line the other day.
 
G

Good Job Bob

Member
Sirpopopop said:
I personally think someone should just create a Sanders OT. That would be fine.

Talking to each other is rather useless. Both sides of the Democratic coalition aren't going to agree on anything for a very long time.
Click to expand...

This isn't at all true, for instance prominent people on both sides of the party have endorsed Keith Ellison for DNC chair.
 
P

Pixieking

Banned
Suikoguy said:
I find the endless Sanders arguments and insufferable supporters doing victory laps to be worse. Oh, and we really need to move further to the left on everything!
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'll admit these two things are what's made me drift away from PoliGAF the past few days. I don't see how anyone can look at the news and think a) "Sanders would've won" arguments are the most productive use of your time and b) that moving left on everything is a political astute idea. There's a lot of raw political naivety inherent in that that absolutely ignores how the world is. See also:

Chumley said:
I was fucking saying this during the election.

The motherfucking liberal bubble is real. We need to look at the world as it is, not how we want it to be. In the perfect world people would be inspired to go out to vote after hearing Michelle speak, but in the real world they're just suppressed after an endless negative barrage from Trump and the FBI.

Suppressing voter turnout is far easier than hoping you get lucky with a once in a lifetime candidate like Barack. The problem is that Republicans don't care who their candidate is, they'll turn out no matter what. Dems may be well and truly fucked if their voters refuse to turnout for anyone not up to the Obama standard.

The laziness of liberals really does make me hate this country. No matter what is done to reach out to them, they don't vote. They protest on the streets but they don't vote. Nothing can be done if Trump wasn't enough to motivate them.
Click to expand...

I've been scoping-out GOTV and voter rights organisations, and they're the most weak-ass things ever. Due to non-profit 501(c) rules, voter rights groups can't use partisan language or ideas when pushing what's happening. Think about that, and then think about how bad NC or MN is for voting rights.

Straight-up, if anyone has any ideas for seed money for a GOTV/voting rights group, tell me, please.

As for your last paragraph, I'm hoping that 4 straight years of America being a laughing stock whilst rights are infringed/removed left, right and centre will change the Democrat base's ideas of voting responsibility. But I'm not holding out much hope, especially if Sander's supporters naivety becomes widespread.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
One thing that will be interesting to look at in Political Science:

Trump had like 400 field offices in Wisconsin for some reason and yet turnout for the GOP in Wisconsin sucked (Trump only won because Dem turnout collapsed).

In Florida, Trump had almost no field offices IIRC and yet the GOP had their greatest ever turnout in the state.

Not sure what this suggests.
 
C

cartoon_soldier

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
One thing that will be interesting to look at in Political Science:

Trump had like 400 field offices in Wisconsin for some reason and yet turnout for the GOP in Wisconsin sucked (Trump only won because Dem turnout collapsed).

In Florida, Trump had almost no field offices IIRC and yet the GOP had their greatest ever turnout in the state.

Not sure what this suggests.
Click to expand...

There is no substitute for enthusiasm.

Clinton campaigned fucked up not going to battle in Wisconsin and Michigan.

TV ads are over rated unless they are really effective (Obama 2012 firms and outsourcing ads)

Don't appoint Republicans to lead the FBI.
 
F

Frozenprince

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
One thing that will be interesting to look at in Political Science:

Trump had like 400 field offices in Wisconsin for some reason and yet turnout for the GOP in Wisconsin sucked (Trump only won because Dem turnout collapsed).

In Florida, Trump had almost no field offices IIRC and yet the GOP had their greatest ever turnout in the state.

Not sure what this suggests.
Click to expand...

The panhandle is pretty racist.

Tbh.
 
C

cartoon_soldier

Member
Another thing that also probably hurt Dems in rust belt was Obama pushing for TPP. And nobody really believed Clinton was against it.

ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
It was the same as 2012, but that's pretty bad when the candidate performs 2 points better in the national average than in 2012.
Click to expand...

We won't ever know for sure, but Enthusiasm for GOP in 2012 in WI was pretty decent with Ryan on ticket. So, Trump performing on par makes sense.

For 2016 comparing to National average just makes no sense because Clinton is going to win that by a pretty big margin.
 
C

cartoon_soldier

Member
Pixieking said:
I think this, too. "Enthusiasm" when it comes to a certain subset of Trump supporters is just a euphemism for "Racist/Sexist".
Click to expand...

Yes, agreed.

But we also have to keep in mind that Obama voters did vote for Trump.

Trump co-opting some democratic rhetoric worked.

In Hindsight, Sherrod Brown might have been a better VP choice.
 
P

Pixieking

Banned
cartoon_soldier said:
Yes, agreed.

But we also have to keep in mind that Obama voters did vote for Trump.

Trump co-opting some democratic rhetoric worked.

In Hindsight, Sherrod Brown might have been a better VP choice.
Click to expand...

*nods* It's why the naivety of Sanders supporters/move to the left people is annoying as hell. There's no easy answer for a loss this widespread - a little bit of column A (Racists) a little bit of Column B (Rust Belt voters worried about economy), a little bit of Column C (Dems needing a perfect fluffy Unicorn to fall in love with)... It goes on and on, to the point where it's probably near double-digits in terms of reasons why the loss was so bad, even if it's a smaller number of reasons why a couple of Dem firewall States voted Trump and cost Hillary the election.
 
B

Brawndo Addict

Banned
Did somebody say Wisconsin without mentioning voter ID? It impacts republican voters too, just not as dramatically as democratic voters. That's where the 'missing' votes went in my opinion.
 
S

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Chumley said:
I was fucking saying this during the election.

The motherfucking liberal bubble is real. We need to look at the world as it is, not how we want it to be. In the perfect world people would be inspired to go out to vote after hearing Michelle speak, but in the real world they're just suppressed after an endless negative barrage from Trump and the FBI.

Suppressing voter turnout is far easier than hoping you get lucky with a once in a lifetime candidate like Barack. The problem is that Republicans don't care who their candidate is, they'll turn out no matter what. Dems may be well and truly fucked if their voters refuse to turnout for anyone not up to the Obama standard.

The laziness of liberals really does make me hate this country. No matter what is done to reach out to them, they don't vote. They protest on the streets but they don't vote. Nothing can be done if Trump wasn't enough to motivate them.
Click to expand...

I wish I knew how we could combat Special Flower syndrome.

Here is how the US political system is SUPPOSED to work:

2 parties each hold a primary. During this primary, a canidate is chosen for the GE, and coalitions are both formed and policy priorities are decided. Now here is where the Dem side is breaking down. At the end of the primary, you fucking show up to vote in the GE regardless if your canidate lost in the primary. Is it impossible for a primary canidate to appeal to 100% of the voters of a party due to the coalition being formed before the election. There will be differing views within a party, and in this primary election on the Dem side, more than any other in modern history, compromises were made to try to make everyone happy.

This is not even talking about the Dem midterm problem!
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Pixieking said:
Yeah, I'll admit these two things are what's made me drift away from PoliGAF the past few days. I don't see how anyone can look at the news and think a) "Sanders would've won" arguments are the most productive use of your time and b) that moving left on everything is a political astute idea. There's a lot of raw political naivety inherent in that that absolutely ignores how the world is. See also:



I've been scoping-out GOTV and voter rights organisations, and they're the most weak-ass things ever. Due to non-profit 501(c) rules, voter rights groups can't use partisan language or ideas when pushing what's happening. Think about that, and then think about how bad NC or MN is for voting rights.

Straight-up, if anyone has any ideas for seed money for a GOTV/voting rights group, tell me, please.

As for your last paragraph, I'm hoping that 4 straight years of America being a laughing stock whilst rights are infringed/removed left, right and centre will change the Democrat base's ideas of voting responsibility. But I'm not holding out much hope, especially if Sander's supporters naivety becomes widespread.
Click to expand...
MN is great for voting rights, I'm assuming you mean our shitty fucking packer cheesehead walker neighbors to the east.
 
T

Totakeke

Member
According to this op-ed, we should dispel the notion that even Trump's infrastructure plan does any good. It's a trap and Democrats started calling it a jobs plan which Trump himself doesn't say.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...8e493f06fcd_story.html?utm_term=.b131bffa948b

So with that gone, what's left for Democrat senators to cooperate on?

Edit: Paul Krugman wrote another article which pretty much says the same thing. http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/kru...mtyp=cur&_r=0&referer=https://t.co/2dFLlSm7Nh
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Pixieking said:
Ah, yes, apologies. :)
Click to expand...
The unfortunate thing is WI used to have pretty similar voting laws as MN (and political culture in general) and this stops right after the 2010 election. Feingold gets the boot for a Romney mini-me and Walker gets an unchecked trifecta, except for a brief few months when Democrats won enough recall elections to win the state senate (which they lost immediately in the general election).

2012 with Baldwin holding the Senate seat and Obama winning handily is the last bright spot to come from WI elections for progressives while Walker and his minions have continued to turn the state into Kansas Jr. Shit's fucking garbage.

You know isn't it weird how you have all these centrist, even liberal voters who split their tickets for Dem at the top and GOP in Congress because they want to feel like there's some checks and balances (read: the president isn't gonna do shit!) but have no problem with the state Republicans rigging and gerrymandering the shit out of ever living fuck out of everything? Republican base voters, for better or worse are simply that much better at playing the game than we are.
 
N

nature boy

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
One thing that will be interesting to look at in Political Science:

Trump had like 400 field offices in Wisconsin for some reason and yet turnout for the GOP in Wisconsin sucked (Trump only won because Dem turnout collapsed).

In Florida, Trump had almost no field offices IIRC and yet the GOP had their greatest ever turnout in the state.

Not sure what this suggests.
Click to expand...

Clinton lost the election in PA, to be honest
 
E

Elaugaufein

Member
Totakeke said:
According to this op-ed, we should dispel the notion that even Trump's infrastructure plan does any good. It's a trap and Democrats started calling it a jobs plan which Trump himself doesn't say.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...8e493f06fcd_story.html?utm_term=.b131bffa948b

So with that gone, what's left for Democrat senators to cooperate on?

Edit: Paul Krugman wrote another article whiny pretty much says the same thing. http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/kru...mtyp=cur&_r=0&referer=https://t.co/2dFLlSm7Nh
Click to expand...

I'm actually sort of impressed, screwing up an infrastructure plan in America at the moment should be impossible if the legislature isn't blocking funding but they are managing it anyway.

Suikoguy said:
I wish I knew how we could combat Special Flower syndrome.

Here is how the US political system is SUPPOSED to work:

2 parties each hold a primary. During this primary, a canidate is chosen for the GE, and coalitions are both formed and policy priorities are decided. Now here is where the Dem side is breaking down. At the end of the primary, you fucking show up to vote in the GE regardless if your canidate lost in the primary. Is it impossible for a primary canidate to appeal to 100% of the voters of a party due to the coalition being formed before the election. There will be differing views within a party, and in this primary election on the Dem side, more than any other in modern history, compromises were made to try to make everyone happy.

This is not even talking about the Dem midterm problem!
Click to expand...

That's not how coalition works. People leave if they aren't getting something they want. That includes if they feel the parties final position/candidate is unacceptable. The entire primary is a negotiation on position and what the coalition should be (certain GAFer's habits of telling White liberals to get lost at any given opportunity is merely a more overt form). One of the reasons given for not picking Sanders was that he'd remove moderates from the coalition after the primary so it was obvious that post primary realignment happens.
 
D

dramatis

Member
Good Job Bob said:
This isn't at all true, for instance prominent people on both sides of the party have endorsed Keith Ellison for DNC chair.
Click to expand...
Lol that position is basically just a fundraising position, that's why letting Ellison have it isn't even a big deal.

People seem to think DNC chair is some sort of mighty vote rigging position, when most people probably couldn't name what the DNC or the chair actually does actually does.
 
C

cartoon_soldier

Member
dramatis said:
Lol that position is basically just a fundraising position, that's why letting Ellison have it isn't even a big deal.

People seem to think DNC chair is some sort of mighty vote rigging position, when most people probably couldn't name what the DNC or the chair actually does actually does.
Click to expand...

It's because the DNC didn't do anything under Obama. Look at eye RNC built out in data, DNC should be doing the same.

RNC has Michigan going red first time on November 4th.
 
D

dramatis

Member
Well, I don't think we can expect Republicans to do anything about corruption in the office once Trump gets there.

Reince Priebus calls questions about Trump’s conflicts of interest “ridiculous”
Tapper: During the campaign, you put out a statement saying that the Clinton Foundation represents a, quote, “pay to play culture that would be on full display should Hillary Clinton be elected president.” Are you at all concerned that Mr. Trump now could be depicted at somebody engaged in pay-to-play politics?

Priebus: No, not at all, Jake. I mean, we’ve been at this for a few days. I mean, this is ridiculous. Let’s just kind of a take a deep breath. Let’s look at what’s going on. He made the call to bring all Americans together. He then met with many, many people from all walks of life -- Safra Catz, General Mattis, Ted Cruz, Mitt Romney. The list goes on and on. The point is, what Americans should see from President-Elect Trump is someone who, by deed and action, from the moment he was declared the winner, he was on a mission to bring everyone together.
Click to expand...
Hillary "pay to play" is obscene, but Trump "pay to play" is a ridiculous notion.
 
K

kirblar

Member
dramatis said:
Lol that position is basically just a fundraising position, that's why letting Ellison have it isn't even a big deal.

People seem to think DNC chair is some sort of mighty vote rigging position, when most people probably couldn't name what the DNC or the chair actually does actually does.
Click to expand...
Because under Obama he outsourced a lot of that to OFA.

It worked out terribly.
 
D

dramatis

Member
cartoon_soldier said:
It's because the DNC didn't do anything under Obama. Look at eye RNC built out in data, DNC should be doing the same.

RNC has Michigan going red first time on November 4th.
Click to expand...
kirblar said:
Because under Obama he outsourced a lot of that to OFA.

It worked out terribly.
Click to expand...
Sure, but that kind of tells you that under DWS the DNC wasn't powerful or significant at all, which begs the question of why people thought it could rig elections.

However, I think the Obama-Clinton campaign apparatus—the data machine, the grassroots organization, etc.—could be moved to the DNC, but there's the sense that the Sanders side wants to destroy everything and build anew. Which is just wasteful and time and resource-eating.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
“I certainly don’t want them to do what Mitch McConnell did when I was elected,” POTUS said. “Meet the day of and say our sole objective is to not cooperate with him on anything even if the country is about to go into a depression so that we can gain seats in the mid-terms and defeat him.”

Obama was referring to reports that McConnell and other Republicans met on Obama’s inauguration night to devise a strategy of not working or cooperating with the new president on anything.
Click to expand...

Oh, Obama. Obama, sweaty, no. There's a difference. Your ideologies were not dangerous to the country. Republicans were cunts to be cunts. Trump and the GOP's ideas are dangerous for a lot of people. Dems being obstructionists would be a good thing.
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
Wilsongt said:
Oh, Obama. Obama, sweaty, no. There's a difference. Your ideologies were not dangerous to the country. Republicans were cunts to be cunts. Trump and the GOP's ideas are dangerous for a lot of people. Dems being obstructionists would be a good thing.
Click to expand...

*sweety

This is one misspelling I will NOT accept.

But OT, hopefully it's just plausible deniability. They know that we'd be punished by our base for being mindlessly obstructionist, so this is their cover.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
Poodlestrike said:
*sweety

This is one misspelling I will NOT accept.

But OT, hopefully it's just plausible deniability. They know that we'd be punished by our base for being mindlessly obstructionist, so this is their cover.
Click to expand...

Sweaty. I do it intentionally. A joke that started out from a youtuber/streamer I watch.
 
E

Eidan

Member
Wilsongt said:
Oh, Obama. Obama, sweaty, no. There's a difference. Your ideologies were not dangerous to the country. Republicans were cunts to be cunts. Trump and the GOP's ideas are dangerous for a lot of people. Dems being obstructionists would be a good thing.
Click to expand...
Why is the article referring to "reports of" Republicans' plans. Why not cite McConnell's own public declaration that his main objective was to make Obama a one term president and the years of unprecedented obstructionism from Republicans?
 
D

dramatis

Member
I didn't know this until I caught a clip of The View on Youtube, but Hillary is the first candidate to ever say "I'm sorry" in a concession speech.

As usual, it is a female politician who has the guts to say it.

And as usual, it is a female who says it.
 
B

Blader

Member
Wilsongt said:
Oh, Obama. Obama, sweaty, no. There's a difference. Your ideologies were not dangerous to the country. Republicans were cunts to be cunts. Trump and the GOP's ideas are dangerous for a lot of people. Dems being obstructionists would be a good thing.
Click to expand...

The problem is Democrats are much less receptive to obstruction for the sake of obstruction than Republican voters are. Consider the different governing philosophies. Republicans don't give a shit if Congress doesn't function for 4-6 years and programs go unfunded, because that's what they want anyway. Democrats want a functioning government, they want social programs funded and kept afloat, none of which is served by years of gridlock.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Bringing Dune Awakening to the Xbox Series S will be a "challenge", according to Funcom chief product officer
News 2 3
100
4K
mdkirby replied
Modern Game Devs Suck at Community Support
2
60
2K
Reizo Ryuu replied
Dragon Age: Veilguard is first Bioware game to feature full nudity
News 2 3
120
9K
BehemothBlade replied
Shinobi602 on the "lack" of First Party reveals by PlayStation: "I think some still haven't really grasped just how long big games take to make now"
Opinion News Drama 5 6 7 8 9
449
23K
ArtHands replied
Borderlands CEO Randy Pitchford says his hopes on Epic Store were 'overly optimistic or misplaced'
Platform 2
80
3K
DGrayson replied
Top Bottom