Support NeoGAF

[whyamihere]

"Trump voters aren't expecting him to keep his campaign pledges"

No quotes, because I can't stomach reading it based on the headline.

For Ripepi and others, “having our back” is not about economic misfortune but rather a perceived loss of strength in the fabric of America. Not in terms of politics and policy, necessarily; he worries that his children and future grandchildren will not be able to experience the same things he did, while living in the same community that his father and his father’s father did. Will his kids be able to find livelihoods near home and enjoy the same traditions he did?

Under Obama, voters like Ripepi told me, people from less mobile, socially conservative places felt they had no voice. Under Trump, they believe they will.

Ah.

 

[Debirudog]

Your government gravitates to the middle.

Seriously, I think the American system of checks and balances is the worse thing ever. Other western democracies don't work this way and manage just fine - France, or the UK, for example. the notion that the winning government gets to pass what it wants, and then gets judged at the ballot box for that, is infinitely preferable to the current system where you can just stonewall for 8 years and not suffer for it.

I think I have to agree... :/

 

[Totakeke]

Are you sure what is meant by an echo chamber, because I am confused by your question. The wikipedia entry on it seems apt at describing it, "An echo chamber is a metaphorical description of a situation in which information, ideas, or beliefs are amplified or reinforced by transmission and repetition inside an "enclosed" system, where different or competing views are censored, disallowed, or otherwise underrepresented." I am stating the thread/community is a bit of an echo chamber.

Context. Most of the claims of echo chamber is that the election was lost because people was in a bubble. Your rationalization of an echo chamber is that a conservative cannot reasonably debate their viewpoints in a community that's heavily liberal.

Let's just call everything an echo chamber and make it a meaningless statement.

 

[MIMIC]

Again, you keep saying narrative if people aren't capable of rational thought. Look, if you think think the world is round but everyone else thought it's flat, the onus is on you to provide actual proof. Yelling it doesn't mean a single thing. So far all you've proven to me is that you're a one man echo chamber because nothing can get into you.

This thread only values positive, non-incriminating news about Hillary. I've shown you how people in this thread discuss every minute, irrelevant, mundane, esoteric detail about anything that could be even construed as positive, but effortlessly ignored something major (that bolstered the argument that the DNC played favorites)....and I was the first to bring it up (and would have done so immediately but I was banned).

I don't know how much clearer I can be. If you don't think that that's indicative of an echo chamber (people hearing one story constantly echoed back to them while rejecting the rest), then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Without wanting to spin echo chamber blah out further, Donna Brazille/emails is mentioned on this page: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=223423239 and the previous page of that thread. It was presumed that everyone knew what he meant, so it wasn't explicitly mentioned what it actually related to.

So, y'know, if you're talking about pushing narratives, maybe check yours better?

The news broke a day after the 2nd debate, IIRC. This thread is a day before the election.

You going to keep fucking this chicken?

How about you once and for all provide some examples of actions the DNC took that was 'playing favorites'.

You don't think giving one side debate questions is playing favorites?

 

[Wilsongt]

I'm screaming at this Obama/Biden meme on Facebook

Oh God fucking Lord. Donna mentioned Flint to thw Clinton campaign during a primary in Flint.

Also, there is some speculation that Trump may have gotten debate questions in advance, also.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

Context. Most of the claims of echo chamber is that the election was lost because people was in a bubble. Your rationalization of an echo chamber is that a conservative cannot reasonably debate their viewpoints in a community that's heavily liberal.

Let's just call everything an echo chamber and make it a meaningless statement.

Certainly there may be some truth to that but the context in which I was talking about echo chambers and to which you responded was not talking about that. So yes, context.

 

[Totakeke]

This thread only values positive, non-incriminating news about Hillary. I've shown you how people in this thread discuss every minute, irrelevant, mundane, esoteric detail about anything that could be even construed as positive, but effortlessly ignored something major (that bolstered the argument that the DNC played favorites)....and I was the first to bring it up (and would have done so immediately but I was banned).

I don't know how much clearer I can be. If you don't think that that's indicative of an echo chamber (people hearing one story constantly echoed back to them while rejecting the rest), then we'll just have to agree to disagree.



The news broke a day after the 2nd debate, IIRC. This thread is a day before the election.

Never in any of my posts did I ever claim that there's no echo chamber. Again, you seem to be in a solitary echo chamber.

You don't think giving one side debate questions is playing favorites?

Hillary Clinton doesn't know that people in Flint Michigan are asking about the Flint Michigan water crisis?


For the sake of the thread I'm just going to stop.

 

[Suikoguy]

You don't think giving one side debate questions is playing favorites?

That's ALL you have? Seriously?

Also, I love the subtle use of the s, it was a debate QUESTION.

 

[Plinko]

That's ALL you have? Seriously?

To be fair, that's pretty incriminating.

 

[Totakeke]

To be fair, that's pretty incriminating.

Incriminating that Donna Brazille is dumb. Otherwise it has the same play as emails and optics.

 

[Debirudog]

I notice Mimic just enjoys pinpointing shit for some reason but never discuss actual stuff he might actually care about.

 

[Wilsongt]

I notice Mimic just enjoys pinpointing shit for some reason but never discuss actual stuff he might actually care about.

He's in a gloat phase because he has been anti-Hillary for ages and was laughed at in the OT everytime he posted a negative thread about her. Now he's trying to stroke his ego becauase she lost.

 

[Plinko]

Incriminating that Donna Brazille is dumb. Otherwise it has the same play as emails and optics.

If it was true, that comes off as "We want you to win."

Like I said, I never was a Bernie guy, but if his opponent was getting fed questions that he didn't, that's pretty unfair.

 

[Suikoguy]

If it was true, that comes off as "We want you to win."

Like I said, I never was a Bernie guy, but if his opponent was getting fed questions that he didn't, that's pretty unfair.

A single question, about Michigan in a debate that was taking place in Michigan that was a big story at the time.

 

[Totakeke]

If it was true, that comes off as "We want you to win."

Like I said, I never was a Bernie guy, but if his opponent was getting fed questions that he didn't, that's pretty unfair.

Right, optics. The question fed was that Donna Brazille told Hillary Clinton was going to be asked about the water crisis in Flint which every single person not living under a rock would have expected. Also Donna Brazille was a CNN analyst when that happened. And there was no proof that DNC or the Clinton campaign solicited her for help. It's a bunch of bullshit and no sane campaign should have to defend themselves against.

Could it have influenced the election? Sure. What do you want anyone to do about it?

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

It's really hard to say which candidates are and are not fed questions after Megyn Kelly admitted that Trump was fed questions by Fox News executives.

You have to assume that allies of a candidate leak questions to their favored candidate if they can, but it's probably true that Hillary had more allies who could leak questions.

 

[Plinko]

A single question, about Michigan in a debate that was taking place in Michigan that was a big story at the time.

Right, optics. The question fed was that Donna Brazille told Hillary Clinton was going to be asked about the water crisis in Flint which every single person not living under a rock would have expected. Also Donna Brazille was a CNN analyst when that happened. And there was no proof that DNC or the Clinton campaign solicited her for help. It's a bunch of bullshit and no sane campaign should have to defend themselves against.

You're brushing it off as "How did he not know it was going to be asked?" when the question you should be asking is, "Why in the world is this happening in the first place?"

If they aren't making the playing field fair for both competitors, I'm not sure how anybody can say it was on the level.

 

[Totakeke]

You're brushing it off as "How did he not know it was going to be asked?" when the question you should be asking is, "Why in the world is this happening in the first place?"

If they aren't making the playing field fair for both competitors, I'm not sure how anybody can say it was on the level.

Let's say you emailed me about insider information on your company's stock.
Next day everyone tells me I should go to jail.
And then everyone "asks questions" about how maybe I have secret connections with you and maybe I bribed you off without any proof.

It's dumb optics and it happened because Donna Brazille is dumb.

 

[Plinko]

Let's say you emailed me about insider information on your company's stock.
Next day everyone tells me I should go to jail.
And then everyone "asks questions" about how maybe I have secret connections with you and maybe I bribed you off without any proof.

It's dumb optics and it happened because Donna Brazille is dumb.

Are you criticizing Donna here or Hillary? Because my problem is with the DNC, not Hillary.

 

[royalan]

Right, optics. The question fed was that Donna Brazille told Hillary Clinton was going to be asked about the water crisis in Flint which every single person not living under a rock would have expected. Also Donna Brazille was a CNN analyst when that happened. And there was no proof that DNC or the Clinton campaign solicited her for help. It's a bunch of bullshit and no sane campaign should have to defend themselves against.

Could it have influenced the election? Sure. What do you want anyone to do about it?

Exactly. It was an embarrassing, stupid, idiotic unforced error that we really didn't need. And it pains me to say that because I fucking love Donna Brazile. I understand her stepping down as chair, but I hope she stays involved in the party. She's a lifetime Democrat who's worked her ass off for this party and a star among Black Dems, and I am not at ALL in favor of doing things that will demoralize reliable Democrat voters just to appease the wishy washy Sanders set.

But anybody who thinks sending the Hillary Campaign a question about the Flint water crises tilted scales is being intentionally dishonest in service of a witch hunt at this point. For heaven's sake, Hillary personally traveled to Flint more than any other candidate this cycle. As if she needed help answering THAT question.

 

[metalslimer]

Er..was Brazille a part of the DNC when she leaked that question? The more the Bernie people ignore how bad he failed with minorities the greater the chance we get demolished in 2020 becomes. And at the same time the Hilary people can realize the mistakes she made. I'm so tired of this

 

[Totakeke]

Are you criticizing Donna here or Hillary? Because my problem is with the DNC, not Hillary.

I'm shaking my head because it's not clear that I'm criticizing Donna. Lol. Donna Brazille was not the head of DNC when this happened, she was a CNN analyst.

 

[Plinko]

I'm shaking my head because it's not clear that I'm criticizing Donna. Lol. Donna Brazille was not the head of DNC when this happened, she was a CNN analyst.

That's fine. I understand.

 

[Debirudog]

We had a good bunch of people saying that the DNC needs to be restructured and play no more favorites and coronoations. Furthermore, no one liked what Donna Brazil did and yes, it was terrible optics, which I think we should definitely wash away the Clinton loyalists (well those, who are willing to play favorites) or those who think we should do everything to win forsaking the perception that is honesty

If Mimic is only here to call us out, fine then do it and move on, but at this point, I see nothing of him what he wants us to do even when I asked of him. Unless he proves otherwise, he is nothing but a parrot to me.

 

[Plinko]

I get MIMIC's point. Maybe he could be bringing it up in a different way, but what he said about people in here reacting negatively when people brought up Hillary's faults is absolutely true.

Either way, it is time to move forward.

 

[Suikoguy]

Er..was Brazille a part of the DNC when she leaked that question?

In an election about feelings, would it not only matter if it feels like she was part of the DNC?

Exactly. It was an embarrassing, stupid, idiotic unforced error that we really didn't need. And it pains me to say that because I fucking love Donna Brazile. I understand her stepping down as chair, but I hope she stays involved in the party. She's a lifetime Democrat who's worked her ass off for this party and a star among black Dems, and I am not at ALL in favor of doing things that will demoralize reliable Democrat voters just to appease the wishy washy Sanders set.

But anybody who thinks sending the Hillary Campaign a question about the Flint water crises tilted scales is being intentionally dishonest in service of a witch hunt at this point. For heaven's sake, Hillary personally traveled to Flint more than any other candidate this cycle. As if she needed help answering THAT question.

The bolded especially, but honestly the whole fucking post.

Speaking of which, you would have thought the handling of Flint's water would have shifted that state more blue this cycle considering who had the power when it happened.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Dumbfuck at Harvard Business Review tries to be the self admonishing elite that is so fucking tired and ends up defending police brutality.

Economic resentment has fueled racial anxiety that, in some Trump supporters (and Trump himself), bleeds into open racism. But to write off WWC anger as nothing more than racism is intellectual comfort food, and it is dangerous.

National debates about policing are fueling class tensions today in precisely the same way they did in the 1970s, when college kids derided policemen as “pigs.” This is a recipe for class conflict. Being in the police is one of the few good jobs open to Americans without a college education. Police get solid wages, great benefits, and a respected place in their communities. For elites to write them off as racists is a telling example of how, although race- and sex-based insults are no longer acceptable in polite society, class-based insults still are.

I do not defend police who kill citizens for selling cigarettes. But the current demonization of the police underestimates the difficulty of ending police violence against communities of color. Police need to make split-second decisions in life-threatening situations. I don’t. If I had to, I might make some poor decisions too.

Saying this is so unpopular that I risk making myself a pariah among my friends on the left coast. But the biggest risk today for me and other Americans is continued class cluelessness. If we don’t take steps to bridge the class culture gap, when Trump proves unable to bring steel back to Youngstown, Ohio, the consequences could turn dangerous.

Yeah, fuck you.

I hope you lose all of your friends.

Police in Europe make split-second decisions without murdering people. Fuck you.

https://hbr.org/2016/11/what-so-many-people-dont-get-about-the-u-s-working-class

 

[dramatis]

‘He Can Build a Wall, but We’ll Just Build a Tunnel’

On the day after the election, I visited a construction site in the Research Triangle area of North Carolina, where a cluster of big tech and science companies have opened offices, making it one of the fastest growing metro areas in the country. About 70 percent of the state’s construction workforce is made up of immigrant laborers—the remaining 30 percent are mostly their American supervisors. Researchers at the University of North Carolina say that a large number of these workers are here illegally, something general contractors get away with by subcontracting with other companies to hire laborers, therefore making someone else liable for the workers who don’t have valid papers.

I spoke to about a dozen workers who are building the roof on a new 1-million-square-foot retail, restaurant, and office building in the area. Most of them were from Mexico and Central America, and most came to the United States illegally. To my surprise, none seemed afraid of Trump moving into the White House or what his victory says about how Americans view them. “Psshh,” says one Mexican worker, whose identity is being withheld because of his immigration status. “We always knew Americans didn’t want us here,” he said in Spanish, loading equipment into a van after an 11-hour shift building ceiling frames. “They use us, but that’s okay because we use them too for the money.”

“He can build a wall, but we’ll just build a tunnel,” said Magdaleno Santos, a Salvadorian man who arrived in the the United States illegally more than two decades ago, but adjusted his immigration status in the late 1990s. “If we leave, the entire country will fall apart. Have you looked around? Who do you think is building everything here? It’s the Latinos. American workers just want to walk around with a clipboard, sipping from their water bottles. They don’t want to do what we do.”

Immigrant laborers in North Carolina hold no illusions about how their employers view them with contempt, while also understanding how necessary they are to a company’s bottom line. At a workers’ center near the construction site, I spoke with undocumented immigrants from Mexico as they waited for pickup trucks to come by and drive them to jobs in landscaping, home remodeling, or house painting. They too were not alarmed by Trump’s victory and his threats to deport them. “If he deports me, I will just leave with my children,” said one man, who declined to give his name because of his immigration status. “But [Trump] can’t get rid of all of us; there are too many of us. This country will starve without us,” he says, pointing out that immigrants harvest most crops grown in the United States.

 

[Plinko]

In an election about feelings, would it not only matter if it feels like she was part of the DNC?



The bolded especially, but honestly the whole fucking post.

Speaking of which, you think the handling of Flint's water would have shifted that state more blue this cycle considering who had the power when it happened.

As I was saying for months, Michigan's electorate is bizarre. Uneducated people are everywhere. I've never met a more selfish group of people.

 

[royalan]

In an election about feelings, would it not only matter if it feels like she was part of the DNC?



The bolded especially, but honestly the whole fucking post.

Speaking of which, you think the handling of Flint's water would have shifted that state more blue this cycle considering who had the power when it happened.

It would have if Flint weren't a majority black town.

But people by and large don't give a fuck about what happens to black people. This election drove that message home loud and clear.

 

[dramatis]

I hope the problem at Flint still gets taken care of though.

 

[Odrion]

Amir0x hasn't tweeted since the election.

Does anybody know if he's alright?

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

"Current police demonization does nothing to help teh problem!!"-Very serious person.

"Many tough on crime DAs in big cities were voted out in 2016"-Reality.

Why do elites have to sniff a bunch of glue before writing these articles about how "the everyday people" (read: non-Jewish white people) have it right in some cases? Doesn't that mean that they obviously don't have it right?

 

[MIMIC]

Never in any of my posts did I ever claim that there's no echo chamber. Again, you seem to be in a solitary echo chamber.



Hillary Clinton doesn't know that people in Flint Michigan are asking about the Flint Michigan water crisis?


For the sake of the thread I'm just going to stop.

1. You were clearly suggesting that there wasn't an echo chamber. No you didn't expliticly come right out and say, "No, MIMIC. There is no echo chamber. WTF are you talking about." But you clearly didn't have to.

2. That's not the point whether she knew the topic. I would hope that Hillary would be well-informed on all the issues going into a debate.

But again, you making that the point -- when it clearly wasn't -- shows me the type of game being played now. But like I stated, I had a very good idea of where this discussion was headed.

That's ALL you have? Seriously?

Also, I love the subtle use of the s, it was a debate QUESTION.

They also gave her questions on the death penalty. QuestionS. With an "S". PLURAL. And like above: that's not the point at all. Not to mention the in-house discussions of wanting to use his religion (or lack of one) to discredit him.

Like. why are you denying that any of this demonstrates favoritism?

But you're moving the goal posts. Like I said, the discussions always jump from "no they didn't" to "who cares."

 

[Debirudog]

Nah, we had a good bunch of former-Bernie supporters and people who were mad at Clinton come in here and speak just yesterday. At least they provided ample discussion and I wish (hope) they come in here and talk again.

 

[CygnusXS]

Your government gravitates to the middle.

Seriously, I think the American system of checks and balances is the worse thing ever. Other western democracies don't work this way and manage just fine - France, or the UK, for example. the notion that the winning government gets to pass what it wants, and then gets judged at the ballot box for that, is infinitely preferable to the current system where you can just stonewall for 8 years and not suffer for it.

Normally you'd be right but with President Trump in place, the system's really going to pay off.

 

[dramatis]

Amir0x hasn't tweeted since the election.

Does anybody know if he's alright?

You could try sending him a tweet message, is he unbanned yet?

PA must have hit him hard.

 

[whyamihere]

Not to mention the in-house discussions of wanting to use his religion (or lack of one) to discredit him.

To be clear, this was one person who suggested this who was then shot down. This was not "in-house discussions", this was one person with a bad idea.

Nah, we had a good bunch of former-Bernie supporters and people who were mad at Clinton come in here and speak just yesterday. At least they provided ample discussion and I wish (hope) they come in here and talk again.

They have, and I appreciate it.

 

[Suikoguy]

They also gave her questions on the death penalty. QuestionS. With an "S". PLURAL. And like above: that's not the point at all. Not to mention the in-house discussions of wanting to use his religion (or lack of one) to discredit him.

Like. why are you denying that any of this demonstrates favoritism?

But you're moving the goal posts. Like I said, the discussions always jump from "no they didn't" to "who cares."

Still waiting on an actual example of the DNC playing favorites. It's clear Donna did.

 

[MIMIC]

Still waiting on an actual example of the DNC playing favorites. It's clear Donna did.

Wait a minute....

Just so I'm clear and not misunderstanding: are you making a distinction between the head of the DNC.....and the DNC?

 

[RastaMentality]

We should be able to pick up the MI governor seat with Snyder's shitty approval ratings? right?

 

[whyamihere]

Wait a minute....

Just so I'm clear and not misunderstanding: are you making a distinction between the head of the DNC.....and the DNC?

Donna Brazille was not the head of the DNC at the time and only stepped in right before the convention? I assume you're talking about the primary?

 

[chadskin]

Some "positive" news from the WSJ:

@WSJ:
Breaking: Leading contender for Donald Trump's chief of staff is RNC chairman Reince Priebus on.wsj.com/2eQXpUr

 

[BronzeWolf]

It will become apparent to the GOP that impeaching Trump does not affect them that much if his approval ratings are in the shit-tank

 

[whyamihere]

We should be able to pick up the MI governor seat with Snyder's shitty approval ratings? right?

Hopefully. The MI Dem party isn't as trash as the WI Dem party.

 

[metalslimer]

Wait a minute....

Just so I'm clear and not misunderstanding: are you making a distinction between the head of the DNC.....and the DNC?

She was not a part of the DNC when she sent the question. I know these things can be hard to follow..

 

[whyamihere]

Thank god it's not Bannon.

 

[StopMakingSense]

Some "positive" news from the WSJ:

@WSJ:
Breaking: Leading contender for Donald Trump's chief of staff is RNC chairman Reince Priebus on.wsj.com/2eQXpUr

thank fucking god

 

[BitStyle]

Some "positive" news from the WSJ:

@WSJ:
Breaking: Leading contender for Donald Trump's chief of staff is RNC chairman Reince Priebus on.wsj.com/2eQXpUr

You know it's sad when Priebus was pretty much the least awful choice of his potential chief of staff list.

 

[dramatis]

Priebus would probably pretty glad to be out of the RNC chair spot (assuming he gets picked), because that primary must have been really stressful.

Now he gets to babysit Trump, so I'm not sure he's actually that happy.