• 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.
NYT:
Cx3Xbx6XUAAXico.jpg:large


Amazing.

Lyin' Don!

Mark Berman ‏@markberman 1h1 hour ago
Update:

Days since the election: 14

News conferences: 0

Public complaints about the media: 13
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
If you can't see change in moving from Obama to Trump, something is seriously wrong with you.
 
Good question indeed. Bernie Bros ain't asking it either.

Thank god Bernie never said pure populism was better and the only option to go forward! But let's see where the usual people (talking about pundits) misrepresenting Bernie's words leads now that there's not a political figure (Clinton) they can rally behind (Dean maybe? Lol).

I want Gabbard because she is the best name is have heard and people can finally shut up about her running in 2020

Now Nina Turner can be the presidential candidate

That'd be a good outcome. Gabbard can get politically neutralized (at least from lefty politics) and she can even be coherent with herself and switch up to Trump's Republican Party.
 
Thank god Bernie never said pure populism was better and the only option to go forward! But let's see where the usual people misrepresenting Bernie's words leads now that there's not a political figure (Clinton) they can rally behind (Dean maybe? Lol).
Bernie's entire platform was that populism was the solution to all problems. Just redistributing wealth down would solve everything, whether it made sense or not. Racism, for example. We were super duper racist at the times in our history when we had the most money in the hands of the most people.

From this message, his supporters decided this was the future of the party and the only message that should apply going forward. And so anyone who doesn't agree with them should be cast aside and replaced with someone who says what they want to hear (despite maybe not having a great past)

There's no misrepresenting Bernie's words. There's a hole in power in the DNC and Bernie is making a clear power play to fill that hole with himself and people who support him. He's a politician like the rest of them, looking to make his name and gain more influence and power. And if that means turning the Democrat ship in a losing direction, so be it. Feingold should be a cautionary tale about the future of the party.
 

Wilsongt

Member
From the WaPo

The new norm in American politics. Your future president actually breaks laws, yet nothing happens.

A qualified woman doesn't break a law, but acts irresponsibly and she is dragged on an hourly basis by the entire US.

Ferenthold and WaPo probably has a special place in the internment camp when Trump is sworn in.
 

Wilsongt

Member
David Fahrenthold
David Fahrenthold‏ @Fahrenthold

Also, @realDonaldTrump's charity got $150K frm activist Ukrainian mogul who gave to Clinton Fdn, raising conflict of interest Q's for HRC.

Fuck this country and fuck the people who chose not to vote against this asshole.
 

RDreamer

Member

His video seems to have worked. All the comments on it are people thanking him for bypassing the crooked media.

... we are so fucked.

NYT:
Cx3Xbx6XUAAXico.jpg:large


Amazing.

I think I need to subscribe to NYtimes. Torn because I thought they were shit in the other direction against Clinton and not enough against Trump...
 
I wonder if the Civil Rights Act is in danger.

It's never brought up, but they could very easily start picking away at the laws against segregation, especially if they start shifting the courts to their side.
 
I wonder if the Civil Rights Act is in danger.

It's never brought up, but they could very easily start picking away at the laws against segregation, especially if they start shifting the courts to their side.

I don't think so but any lgbt protections are in danger.

I'd like to think Kennedy would swing our way on those votes but he might be gone by the time it reaches the supreme court.
 
I don't think so but any lgbt protections are in danger

In theory, an interpretation of the CRA would also apply to sexual orientation, since non-discrimination is in the spirit of the law (as it includes race and gender).

The thing with lgbt issues is, imo, attacking those is the biggest hot button to get liberals to vote. Mike Pence being so against gay people has gotten my sister, who normally really doesn't care about politics, to be all ready to go to bat for gay rights. And even for me, if a person has a history of being against gay marriage, they will NEVER get my vote. Ever. You are instantly off my list and I won't even consider your other positions. And neither my sister, nor I, are gay. Nobody in our family is gay.

And we saw in NC, that it brought Democrats out to vote when trans rights were attacked.

It's like the left's version of abortion. Democrats really, really like gay people. It's one of the best examples of a Democrat success story in modern times. In a decade the country went from basically nothing to full marriage rights across the entire country. It's probably the one hot button issue that actually gets Democrats moving in an organized fashion with results.
 

Wilsongt

Member
In theory, an interpretation of the CRA would also apply to sexual orientation, since non-discrimination is in the spirit of the law (as it includes race and gender).

The thing with lgbt issues is, imo, attacking those is the biggest hot button to get liberals to vote. Mike Pence being so against gay people has gotten my sister, who normally really doesn't care about politics, to be all ready to go to bat for gay rights. And even for me, if a person has a history of being against gay marriage, they will NEVER get my vote. Ever. You are instantly off my list and I won't even consider your other positions. And neither my sister, nor I, are gay. Nobody in our family is gay.

And we saw in NC, that it brought Democrats out to vote when trans rights were attacked.

It's like the left's version of abortion. Democrats really, really like gay people. It's one of the best examples of a Democrat success story in modern times. In a decade the country went from basically nothing to full marriage rights across the entire country. It's probably the one hot button issue that actually gets Democrats moving in an organized fashion with results.


Is it, though? If LGBT rights was as big a hot button issue as you think, Cooper would have soundly trounced McCrory and not sitting at a possible fraudlent loss to a transphobe who doesn't know how to take the fucking L.

Lynch publically stated she would protect transgendered individuals, and Obama put several excutive actions into place, but both of those are gone minute 1 when Trump and his Anti-Gay Clown Posse get into office.

LGBT rights is no longer the hot button issue. Hell, issues are no longer the hot button issue. Politics are slowly becoming about who you can get excited to vote for, not who has the better policy to protect the most vulernable americans.
 
LGBT rights are a big enough issue that companies are willing to relocate or pull business from areas that pass bigoted laws.

Not even racism necessarily has that same backing.
 
Even LGBT folk who voted for Trump probably don't think it's an issue anymore. They willingly put into power people who want to take away their rights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom