PoliGAF 2016 |OT2| we love the poorly educated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Valhelm said:
No. You. Don't.

Trump will be a more difficult candidate to defeat in the general election than any establishment politician, because many independents hate politicians on principle. He's perceived as more honest than she is, which is more important than the issues for most voters.
Click to expand...

I see this all the time on the internet but there's nothing actually supporting it.
 
I still don't know what the best option is between a Donald Trump win and a brokered convention. Either is disastrous for the GOP. Because they seem to want the latter, I tend to want the former. The way they navigate a brokered convention is the real story. If they actually give it to Rubio that would be hilarious.
 
adam387 said:
I still don't know what the best option is between a Donald Trump win and a brokered convention. Either is disastrous for the GOP. Because they seem to want the latter, I tend to want the former. The way they navigate a brokered convention is the real story. If they actually give it to Rubio that would be hilarious.
Click to expand...

I don't want a brokered convention. It will be a guaranteed shitshow yes, but American's have a short memory. If somehow fucking Paul Ryan emerges as the candidate, I'd be worried.
 
John Oliver said:
That's right, Donald Trump just talked about his dick during a presidential debate—a dick which I presume looks like a Cheeto with the cheese dust rubbed off.
Click to expand...

Oliver, playing the "I wonder how badly I can insult Donald Trump before he explodes" game lol.
 
Bernie on Facebook
There was one vote in the United States Senate to support the automobile industry and, of course, I voted for it. To say otherwise is simply not telling the truth. I understand that Secretary Clinton wants to deflect attention away from her record supporting trade agreements like NAFTA and normal trade relations with China but she shouldn’t do that by mischaracterizing my record. What I did not vote for is the bailout of the crooks on Wall Street whose illegal behavior and greed brought this economy into the worst downturn since the 1930s.
Click to expand...
 
Something sounds really off about those Rubio absentee numbers. I can't look up polls right now but off the top of my head I don't remember a period of the race where Rubio had much momentum in Florida, even in mid to late 2015.

I'm not saying the numbers are fake or overstated, just that they're pointing to a different level of success. Senior citizen center absentee farming isn't unrealistic...but Rubio hasn't really shown any knack for conventional campaigning principles so I doubt his campaign has a knack for conventional shady campaigning principles either.
 
adam387 said:
I'm not sure I'm watching the Fox News debacle tonight. I probably will end up watching it but the whole concept pisses me off.

That MSU thing is adorable. It's not a poll. There's no weighting of anything. It's just an opinion thing. Not a poll. I'm pretty sure Michigan is going to be around a 15 point Hillary win. I heard she's running ads saying Bernie opposed the bailout. Good.
Click to expand...


Not good

Not only did he NOT oppose the auto bailout, he actually voted FOR it. If Hillary continues to push this false narrative, it may end up backfiring.
 
Cesare Borgia said:
Something sounds really off about those Rubio absentee numbers. I can't look up polls right now but off the top of my head I don't remember a period of the race where Rubio had much momentum in Florida, even in mid to late 2015.

I'm not saying the numbers are fake or overstated, just that they're pointing to a different level of success. Senior citizen center absentee farming isn't unrealistic...but Rubio hasn't really shown any knack for conventional campaigning principles so I doubt his campaign has a knack for conventional shady campaigning principles either.
Click to expand...

It's one poll with a sample of 75 for early voting, considering how much it goes against established trends I'm not willing to freak out over it until we get something that corroborates it.
 
Basileus777 said:
It's one poll with a sample of 75 for early voting, considering how much it goes against established trends I'm not willing to freak out over it until we get something that corroborates it.
Click to expand...

I agree, not gonna freak out.

That said, I always have had lingering doubts about Trump in FL.
 
brainchild said:
Not good

Not only did he NOT oppose the auto bailout, he actually voted FOR it. If Hillary continues to push this false narrative, it may end up backfiring.
Click to expand...

So "I vote to give the auto industry money"

and then when it comes time to give them the money "No, I don't want to give them the money because banks will also get money."

Look, I'm unhappy with what happened with the banks. It was shit, and they should be punished. But If I'm John T. Autoworker and I lost my job because "banks would also get money", I'd have been less than thrilled.
 
brainchild said:
Not good

Not only did he NOT oppose the auto bailout, he actually voted FOR it. If Hillary continues to push this false narrative, it may end up backfiring.
Click to expand...

It is technically correct that Bernie voted against releasing the money for the auto bailout because it was tied to Wall Street. Apparently, this wasn't one of those bills in which it was okay to vote for the bad stuff because you wanted the good stuff. Like the 1994 Crime Bill. Or the PLCAA.

Bernie's desperately pushing back on this because it will hurt him in Michigan and Ohio. It's a smart line of attack that is technically correct. If Hillary is going to get hit on NAFTA and the 94 Crime Bill that she didn't vote for, this is a more than fair line of attack against Bernie.
 
C'mon Rubio and Kasich! I'm operating under the belief that the Republicans will not be able to get away with not giving the nomination to the candidate who comes into the convention with the most delegates or votes. Drag the fight out into the summer and then have the non-Trump Republicans pissed off that the party didn't steal the nomination from him. Or if I'm wrong, steal the nomination from Trump and have him run third-party. Democrats can't lose and as a bonus there will be no early general election pivot from the nominee.
 
Basileus777 said:
It's one poll with a sample of 75 for early voting, considering how much it goes against established trends I'm not willing to freak out over it until we get something that corroborates it.
Click to expand...

If it is only one poll, than it is an outlier and should not be considered relevant until there are more backing it up.
 
brainchild said:
Not good

Not only did he NOT oppose the auto bailout, he actually voted FOR it. If Hillary continues to push this false narrative, it may end up backfiring.
Click to expand...
It's an interesting spin.

I think the point was to most likely show she supported helping the auto industry, something that part of the country benefited from. Her wording was on purpose. Even if Sanders replies that he voted for it as well (assuming the idea that suggesting he didn't doesn't stick) you'll never get him saying he supported the money for the auto industry. He'll never say he supports a bailout of any kind being so anti-Wall Street, big business, etc. As a result he didn't support it. Regardless of voting for it. The vote itself ultimately isn't the key point of the argument. Actually saying you supported it to the people that benefited from it is. It's actually a trap and I think he fell right into it.
 
Bumped up my shares on PredictIt - I'm now in for 1700 shares of Trump not getting the Rep Nomination. I'll get $1700 if he doesn't get the nom - with total investment of about $400
 
Shiiiiiiit @ that FL poll. Too much movement for comfort. Rubio will win FL and Gondor will fall. FUCKING DONNY CANT CLOSE SHIT.
 
lmao

Cc5xxqeUkAEEZ46.jpg
 
RustyNails said:
Panhandle will save us.
Click to expand...

The poll actually has Rubio close in the North and Trump dominating in central Florida.

Rubio leads Trump 41% to 30% in the southern part of the state. Trump has a significant 44% to 22% advantage in Florida’s central region. The race is closer in the northern tier of the state, with Trump at 36% and Rubio at 32%. Nearly one-fifth of the likely electorate is non-white, mostly Cuban or other Hispanic. This group appears to prefer Rubio over Trump, but the sample size is too small to report exact percentages.
Click to expand...
 
Macho Madness said:
So "I vote to give the auto industry money"

and then when it comes time to give them the money "No, I don't want to give them the money because banks will also get money."

Look, I'm unhappy with what happened with the banks. It was shit, and they should be punished. But If I'm John T. Autoworker and I lost my job because "banks would also get money", I'd have been less than thrilled.
Click to expand...

adam387 said:
It is technically correct that Bernie voted against releasing the money for the auto bailout because it was tied to Wall Street. Apparently, this wasn't one of those bills in which it was okay to vote for the bad stuff because you wanted the good stuff. Like the 1994 Crime Bill. Or the PLCAA.

Bernie's desperately pushing back on this because it will hurt him in Michigan and Ohio. It's a smart line of attack that is technically correct. If Hillary is going to get hit on NAFTA and the 94 Crime Bill that she didn't vote for, this is a more than fair line of attack against Bernie.
Click to expand...


Effect said:
It's an interesting spin.

I think the point was to most likely show she supported helping the auto industry, something that part of the country benefited from. Her wording was on purpose. Even if Sanders replies that he voted for it as well (assuming the idea that suggesting he didn't doesn't stick) you'll never get him saying he supported the money for the auto industry. He'll never say he supports a bailout of any kind being so anti-Wall Street, big business, etc. As a result he didn't support it. Regardless of voting for it. The vote itself ultimately isn't the key point of the argument. Actually saying you supported it to the people that benefited from it is. It's actually a trap and I think he fell right into it.
Click to expand...


Then she can argue the point of indirect obstructionism. But if she is going to continue to claim that Bernie opposed to bailout, she is going to be painted as a liar and untrustworthy. Furthermore, the technicality only serves to underscore Bernie's point about her ties to Wallstreet. This won't end well.

But, of course, $hillGAF, is going to spin this dubious line of attack as a plus for Clinton. OF COURSE they will.
 
There were two bailouts. One for the banks, it was in the fall of 2008 and then one in the spring of 2009 (During Obamas term) for the auto companies.
 
brainchild said:
Then she can argue the point of indirect obstructionism. But if she is going to continue to claim that Bernie opposed to bailout, she is going to be painted as a liar and untrustworthy. Furthermore, the technicality only serves to underscore Bernie's point about her ties to Wallstreet. This won't end well.
.
Click to expand...

Just not for the person you think!
 
I think the problem with being ideologically pure and consistent regardless of context is sort of exposed on this issue. Specifics are important but he wants to govern on principal rather than detail. You can't make the argument of being the revolutionary job creator when you plan to kill jobs out of spite.

He should have learned when to take an L on an issue. He refuses to ever say he voted the wrong way, misread or made a mistake on something. Being right 100% of the time since 1972 is his brand and leaves no room for mistakes, concessions or apologies.
 
BoboBrazil said:
Lol goodbye Rubio. Glad they support a guy who campaigns with someone who thinks gays should get the death penalty. That's obviously better than Trump.
Click to expand...

I think GOP is getting to the point where they know they'll lose the presidency and they're just trying to salvage the senate. Cruz will become *loathed* by November 8
 
Came into this primary season solidly in Bernie's camp, going so far as donating a little cash (Obama is only other politician I've given money to).

I am now voting for Hillary (FL) because I think she is more qualified and would simply be a better president. Bernie can continue to do good work in the Senate along with Warren.

Bernie promises lots of awesome things I've always wanted for this country, but he doesn't seem capable of paying for any of it, even with his insane tax plan.

Another thing I haven't liked is his increasingly negative tone towards not only Clinton, but the Democratic party as whole. He is creating a pretty toxic environment among his followers. I hope he can heal it up for the general, we'll need every vote we can get.
 
brainchild said:
Then she can argue the point of indirect obstructionism. But if she is going to continue to claim that Bernie opposed to bailout, she is going to be painted as a liar and untrustworthy. Furthermore, the technicality only serves to underscore Bernie's point about her ties to Wallstreet. This won't end well.

But, of course, $hillGAF, is going to spin this dubious line of attack as a plus for Clinton. OF COURSE they will.
Click to expand...

Come on, mate, with that last line.

It's just like how the voters totally understood John Kerry being for the war before he was against it. Americans have never been good at understanding why people strategically vote for specific things. It's a nuanced position that you can't make in a 30 second ad or debate response. Literally, minutes before, Bernie admitted to voting for bills he didn't like because there were good things in them. Unless it has anything whatsoever to do with Wall Street.

My BIL was a GM worker until they closed down in Ohio. He, somehow, heard about this and decided to vote for Hillary in the primary since he's a registered Democrat. He wasn't going to vote before. Anecdotes are anecdotal, but if we see Bernie's campaign pushing back hard against this we know it was a good (politically) attack.

I do not believe it will come back to hurt her. His finger wagging, "Let me finish" stuff also came across terrible last night. Not just my opinion either on that one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT2| Well, maybe McMaster isn't a traitor.
397 398 399 400 401
20K
2M
ShadowSwordmaster replied
Football Thread 2016/17 & Offseason |OT2| Wenger In Fam! Wenger Out Blud!
107 108 109 110 111
6K
348K
Jimrpg replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT16| Unpresidented
395 396 397 398 399
20K
1M
PKrockin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT10| Jill Stein Inflatable Love Doll
392 393 394 395 396
20K
1M
Y2Kev replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
Top Bottom