• 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 |OT2| we love the poorly educated

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JesseEwiak

Member
Basileus777 said:
You're really overselling the appeal of libertarian policies. Paul's extremist economics views are unpalatable in a national election. Even within the Republican base libertarians are a niche. You're not going to make inroads with minorities with libertarianism. You're essentially asking for Republicans to scrap their main draw (social policies) to focus on their most unappealing economic ones. It's not enough to support a national party.
Click to expand...

Yup, everyone likes "fiscal conservatism" until it's actually put into practice. There's a reason why the shine off Dubya's armor began with his failure of a SS privatization scheme. Vast swathes of the public think the budget is all welfare, foreign aid, and "waste, fraud, and abuse" so when an actual fiscal conservative comes out with cuts to programs that people like, they react badly.
 
Tarkus

Tarkus

Member
Cerium said:
If you can get out of the last one, get out now. I think Trump is going to dominate across the board and it's going to be ugly.

Be patient and hold on to the first two. I think you'll come out ahead in the end.

There's nothing there that you should be beating yourself up over. If you want to play the PredictIt game you need to take emotion out of it and be clearheaded at all times.
Click to expand...
Oddaregood.png
Click to expand...
There is hope
 
B

Basileus777

Member
This thing that Louise Mensch is talking about is not some damning quote.
QUESTION: You've talked about compromise. There was a time you said there's nothing wrong with compromise — you just ask for about three times what you want, and then you get what you want. So I look at deporting all illegal immigrants. I look at a temporary ban of Muslims coming to the United States. They get a lot of attention. Are they opening positions in a negotiation?

TRUMP: I'm not saying there can't be some give and take, but at some point we have to look at these things. You look at the radical Islamic terrorism and you look at what's going on, we have to take a serious look. There's tremendous hatred. You look at illegal immigration and all that's taking place with respect to illegal immigration, whether it's the crime or the economy, I mean, it affects many different elements. It doesn't mean I'm hard and fast 100 percent, but we have to get a lot of what I'm asking for, or we're not going to have a country any more.

QUESTION: So they are opening positions?

TRUMP: They are very strong positions. It doesn't mean you're not going to negotiate a little bit, but I guess there will always be some negotiation. But they are very strong positions, and I would adhere to those positions very strongly. That doesn't mean that at some point we won't talk a little bit about some negotiation. Who wouldn't do that?
Click to expand...
He basically said he wants to get most of what he's said, but he's a negotiator who is willing to talk.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Roland_Gunner said:
Man if this stuff had come out two weeks ago, Trump could have been in real trouble:

#Trump on secret @NYTimes tape "I can't deport 11 million immigrants, [my promise] is just a first step in a negotiation"
#SuperTuesday

Edit: That's from Louise Mensch's twitter: https://twitter.com/LouiseMensch
Click to expand...

That's a report on the rumor of another report. Pointless.
 
C

Cesare Borgia

Banned
It's very hard to win the democrat nomination without the black vote. The fact that Sanders had no plan or interest in winning the black vote tells me a few things - namely that he's politically naive and never truly had a plan for how to win a majority of delegates. To be fair, it's been suggested that he had no idea his campaign would get this big, and that he only wanted to push the eventual nominee to the left. Yet even that's not a good excuse for not doing basic homework on how this thing works.

I genuinely think that a good candidate could have defeated Clinton this year. But you can't do that without forming a coalition of young voters (who dislike Clinton) and minority voters. Clinton's atrocious record on criminal justice could have been a goldmine for a talented politician to defeat her.
 
H

hawk2025

Member
lol

The whole point of playing the cheap talk game with some probability of insanity when coming to the bargaining table is to not come out and say that you are not the insane type and are willing to compromise.

What's left after that answer is just that: Cheap talk. And cheap talk does not buy bargaining power.

I'm not surprised that Trump doesn't even understand his own bargaining strategy.
 
B

Basileus777

Member
hawk2025 said:
lol

The whole point of playing the cheap talk game with some probability of insanity when coming to the bargaining table is to not come out and say that you are not the insane type and are willing to compromise.

What's left after that answer is just that: Cheap talk. And cheap talk does not buy bargaining power.

I'm not surprised that Trump doesn't even understand his own bargaining strategy.
Click to expand...

This....is not how negotiation works in politics. Hardline stances and unwillingness to make deals doesn't get you shit, ask the Tea Party. Not that Trump has any prayer of getting these things implemented anyway.
 
B

Basileus777

Member
Macho Madness said:
Where the Clintons plan to hit Trump, and they recognize he is a real threat: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/01/u...rump-general-election.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0
Click to expand...

In January, Clinton advisers were startled after Senator Ted Cruz of Texas released an ad that alleged that Mr. Trump had used eminent domain to try to bulldoze an elderly widow’s home in Atlantic City, making way for a parking lot to accompany one of his namesake casinos.

The woman won the legal battle and remained in her home, but the ad, which Mr. Trump disputed, did not dent his support.
Click to expand...
The eminent domain issue hurt him badly in Iowa, so that's a strange thing to take away.
 
R

Roland_Gunner

Member
Macho Madness said:
Where the Clintons plan to hit Trump, and they recognize he is a real threat: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/01/u...rump-general-election.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0
Click to expand...

Very good article. Nothing earth shattering, it seems like the Clinton team is going with the obvious approach, which is probably best. Two things did stand out to me:

1. Whoever thought Trump would be easy to beat should never be allowed to attend a strategy call again. Even if Clinton wins by a substantial margin, which I think is likely, Trump has shown that you can't overlook him. That's how he got the GOP nomination in the first place!

2. We should again thank Sanders for running a vigorous campaign that highlighted Clinton's weakness with younger women. Without that her team may not have been aware of this. Now they can plan around it and it certainly helps that the Republicans are running everyone's dirty old uncle as their candidate.
 
B

BanGy.nz

Banned
Macho Madness said:
Where the Clintons plan to hit Trump, and they recognize he is a real threat: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/01/u...rump-general-election.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0
Click to expand...
A staff member for an affiliated group, Correct the Record, which coordinates with Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, has collected footage of comments that have not hurt Mr. Trump’s standing among Republican primary voters, but that could be stitched together in what the group’s founder, David Brock, described as a montage of hateful speech that would appall a general electorate.
Click to expand...
Isn't that illegal?
 
U

User 406

Banned
The idea that the GOP can just retool their message by sanitizing out the racism is nuts. The problem isn't the party, the problem is the voters. A very, very large segment of the American people is racist to one degree or another, from just ingrained colorblindness to outright white supremacy. This racism is what sustains systemic inequities. Combating this will require policies directly targeted towards redressing these inequities. You can't just sell socialism or libertarianism only now with less dogwhistles, because that just avoids the fundamental problem. All the economic advancements we've had to date have still somehow managed to be applied unfairly in practice, so why should minorities trust in bold new plans that continue to disregard those systemic disparities?

I've said before that if you want class unity, we need to unite our class first. If you're too impatient to secure that unity by at the very least listening to the problems of your fellow citizens without presuming your plan is a one-size-fits-all solution to them, you'll never get it. Or to put it another way, why isn't their revolutionary approach as valid as yours? They're your peers, not your tools. Maybe they're not the ones who need convincing.


Jarmel said:
The alternatives are worse than electing a "tameable" Hitler?
Click to expand...

Why, they could end up with an extra point or two on their capital gains taxes! >monocle pop<
 
J

johnsmith

remember me
BanGy.nz said:
Isn't that illegal?
Click to expand...
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/252493-pacs-creative-rule-bending
Loopholes. Colbert did some amazing stuff demonstrating how shitty and useless the laws are. http://www.cc.com/video-collections/8iug7x/the-colbert-report-colbert-super-pac/epwg6t

One of the more innovative examples of a super-PAC navigating the Federal Election Commission (FEC) coordination rules is the pro-Clinton rapid response and opposition research group Correct the Record. The New York Times broke a story in May that Correct the Record, which was started by Clinton ally David Brock, was refashioning itself as a &#8220;stand-alone super-PAC that has the ability to coordinate with [Clinton&#8217;s] campaign.&#8221;

Correct the Record publishes opposition research and strategy on the Internet to defend Clinton and attack her opponents.

It was initially reported that Correct the Record was using an &#8220;Internet exemption&#8221; in campaign law that allowed that &#8220;free&#8221; content posted online would not be counted as coordinated campaign expenditures. But The Washington Post later reported that Correct the Record officials said they were not relying on the individual Internet exemption but instead &#8220;a related exemption in the definition of coordinated communications.&#8221;

Asked to clarify the competing versions in the Times and the Post, the communications director for Correct the Record, Adrienne Watson, told The Hill &#8220;The FEC&#8217;s Office of General Counsel has repeatedly concluded that Internet activity that does not fit the FEC definition of a &#8216;public communication&#8217; may be coordinated with a campaign &#8212; including activity paid for by a super-PAC.&#8221;

Campaign Legal Center lawyer Noble remains unconvinced. &#8220;The Internet is not a magic wand so that as long as you touch it to your spending in coordination with the campaign, the spending is exempt from the law.&#8221;
Click to expand...
 
V

vicissitudes

Banned
Bernie's entire campaign is about wealth distribution: taking from the rich/corporations and giving to the poor/middle class.

Bernie's actual campaign is doing the opposite: taking from the poor/middle class and giving it to the corporations (media conglomerates via ads).
 
C

Cerium

Member
SourShoes said:
There is hope
Click to expand...

I have never lost money on any bet I placed on PredictIt.

That's not because I think I'm invincible; it's actually a keen awareness of risk which has allowed me to avoid losses.

vicissitudes said:
Bernie's entire campaign is about wealth distribution: taking from the rich/corporations and giving to the poor/middle class.

Bernie's actual campaign is doing the opposite: taking from the poor/middle class and giving it to the corporations (media conglomerates via ads).
Click to expand...

Yup.
 
H

hawk2025

Member
vicissitudes said:
Bernie's entire campaign is about wealth distribution: taking from the rich/corporations and giving to the poor/middle class.

Bernie's actual campaign is doing the opposite: taking from the poor/middle class and giving it to the corporations (media conglomerates via ads).
Click to expand...

I mentioned this earlier this morning -- I wonder if the money could even be directly traced to campaign donations in the generals to someone else :O
 
A

ApharmdX

Banned
vicissitudes said:
Bernie's entire campaign is about wealth distribution: taking from the rich/corporations and giving to the poor/middle class.

Bernie's actual campaign is doing the opposite: taking from the poor/middle class and giving it to the corporations (media conglomerates via ads).
Click to expand...

This is a little silly and is an indictment of our political system rather than of Sanders in particular . And I consider my donation to Bernie as an investment in a better Democratic Party. He has changed the dialogue, and perhaps in 4 or 8 years we'll have a younger progressive candidate who is more viable with minorities in the party.
 
C

Cerium

Member
I decided to show a little solidarity with FiggyCal.

sxPJO2k.png


I'm all in for Super Tuesday. Let the chips fall where they may.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
I'm probably in the minority in that I kind of don't really pay much heed to Elizabeth Warren's endorsement, and don't really know why she's held up on some huge pedestal.

The people she would sway if she endorsed Sanders are already voting for Sanders.
She'll be thrown under the bus by those people if she endorses Clinton.

Furthermore, Clinton doesn't need her endorsement, and I don't know what the thinking is behind the idea that she'll be able to hold out against a presumptive presidential nominee after Clinton has an insurmountable lead.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
shinra-bansho said:
I'm probably in the minority in that I kind of don't really pay much heed to Elizabeth Warren's endorsement, and don't really know why she's held up on some huge pedestal.

The people she would sway if she endorsed Sanders are already voting for Sanders.
She'll be thrown under the bus by those people if she endorses Clinton.
Click to expand...

This is true, and it bums me out.

I kind of want to follow r/bernie just during the period where he endorses Hillary to see what happens. But I'm a little afraid I would find out.
 
D

danm999

Member
shinra-bansho said:
I'm probably in the minority in that I kind of don't really pay much heed to Elizabeth Warren's endorsement, and don't really know why she's held up on some huge pedestal.

The people she would sway if she endorsed Sanders are already voting for Sanders.
She'll be thrown under the bus by those people if she endorses Clinton.
Click to expand...

Fringe supporters are going to be throw her under the bus anyway if Bernie loses Mass tomorrow.
 
C

Cerium

Member
pigeon said:
This is true, and it bums me out.

I kind of want to follow r/bernie just during the period where he endorses Hillary to see what happens. But I'm a little afraid I would find out.
Click to expand...
There probably won't be much going on there. They'll all move to /r/The_Donald
 
H

Holmes

Member
vicissitudes said:
Bernie's entire campaign is about wealth distribution: taking from the rich/corporations and giving to the poor/middle class.

Bernie's actual campaign is doing the opposite: taking from the poor/middle class and giving it to the corporations (media conglomerates via ads).
Click to expand...
shit
 
C

Cesare Borgia

Banned
GutsOfThor said:
Excellent article. I'm very pleased the Clinton's campaign is not underestimating Trump. In no way shape or form is this going to be an easy win as many people here believe. I think this will be the most challenging fight of her career.
Click to expand...
Clinton is going to destroy him and it won't be close.
 
H

Holmes

Member
brainchild said:
Apparently she's also unleashed it on herself, as her voice sounds like it's about to give up the ghost :p
Click to expand...
Both candidates have been working overtime this past week, starting with Nevada, then South Carolina, and now with Super Tuesday that they're running themselves ragged. Trump looks a little tired too but not so much because he doesn't work as hard as they do. Rubio looks the same because he's a robot. I haven't seen Cruz since the debate because looking at his face makes me want to die.
 
B

brainchild

Banned
vicissitudes said:
Bernie's entire campaign is about wealth distribution: taking from the rich/corporations and giving to the poor/middle class.

Bernie's actual campaign is doing the opposite: taking from the poor/middle class and giving it to the corporations (media conglomerates via ads).
Click to expand...

And yet, in the end, Bernie is still beholden to the interests of the donors from which he TAKES money, NOT to the corporations of which he gives money. Big difference :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5
235
42K
OverHeat replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
59K
DGrayson replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
Top Bottom