User 463088
Banned
You didn't mangle the metaphor at all...but as a Cleveland fan, what is this "kicking the ball through the uprights" thing? Is that one of those new fangled ways to score points that I read about online?
-
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 |OT3| You know what they say about big Michigans - big Florida
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
You didn't mangle the metaphor at all...but as a Cleveland fan, what is this "kicking the ball through the uprights" thing? Is that one of those new fangled ways to score points that I read about online?
Its ideology is liberalism and will always be liberalism unless socialists (not social democrats) somehow come to the fore.
Hillary is an ideological liberal, for example, and "pragmatism" within the Democratic Party is ideologically liberal.
Big Baybee
Member
Gets shit on constantly for daring to support Hillary. Always civil, though.
People keep talking about third parties, but if we had a system that allowed for them, a parliamentary system, and the Dems were split into various parties, I still think they'd all come together to form a coalition government. What I mean is, the various wings of the party may not agree with everything 100%, but they agree on the basics and that counts for something. As a result progress may not be fast, but it is happening.
Yes, it is. Here in NY we used to have someone who was quite good at it.
One thing that keeps coming up in this discussions is what the purpose of presidential primaries is at all.
For example, the concept of superdelegates seems weird and antidemocratic if your theory is that primaries are supposed to serve as elimination-style elections before the main election.
But if your model is that political parties are semi-closed entities who nominate members of their own group and want to identify the best option for winning the general election, they make a lot more sense.
Similarly, the argument over whether primaries are spread out over lengthy time periods is really an argument about what primaries are supposed to be testing.
I'm actually not sure that there's great theory on this question -- the modern primary is called that because it isn't that old and there hasn't been much understanding of it. Historically conventions were famous for backroom dealing and the "party control" model was pretty clearly ascendant. Is that still true? Obviously there's an antidemocratic element to that structure, but, I mean, America was designed specifically to not be purely democratic, so that should probably be not too surprising.
I tend towards the "party control" theory, which is probably clear from my posts -- I think the party establishment has a lot of control over primaries by controlling the rules process, and they just generally don't use it too much for fear of backlash. I tend to think that democracy exerts itself through the movement of the parties to capture unfulfilled voters. This is a pretty slow and tedious process, admittedly, and probably not satisfying to people who feel unrepresented. But I'm unconvinced that a more directly democratic system would have better outcomes. I live in California and I have a pretty clear view of the disadvantages of direct democracy!
For example, the concept of superdelegates seems weird and antidemocratic if your theory is that primaries are supposed to serve as elimination-style elections before the main election.
But if your model is that political parties are semi-closed entities who nominate members of their own group and want to identify the best option for winning the general election, they make a lot more sense.
Similarly, the argument over whether primaries are spread out over lengthy time periods is really an argument about what primaries are supposed to be testing.
I'm actually not sure that there's great theory on this question -- the modern primary is called that because it isn't that old and there hasn't been much understanding of it. Historically conventions were famous for backroom dealing and the "party control" model was pretty clearly ascendant. Is that still true? Obviously there's an antidemocratic element to that structure, but, I mean, America was designed specifically to not be purely democratic, so that should probably be not too surprising.
I tend towards the "party control" theory, which is probably clear from my posts -- I think the party establishment has a lot of control over primaries by controlling the rules process, and they just generally don't use it too much for fear of backlash. I tend to think that democracy exerts itself through the movement of the parties to capture unfulfilled voters. This is a pretty slow and tedious process, admittedly, and probably not satisfying to people who feel unrepresented. But I'm unconvinced that a more directly democratic system would have better outcomes. I live in California and I have a pretty clear view of the disadvantages of direct democracy!
RustyNails
Member
No way. Tesseract's posts were something coming out of a brain inside a jar. Just words vaguely interconnected using cringebad memes with no real meaning.
Ehhhh sometimes. I sort of had the opposite direction of most people. I went from Clinton to Sanders-ish because of some of the folks on here.
(I also don't use FB often, which is why sanders fans have not fully annoyed me yet)Amen.
Cerium is the guy I was thinking about who was pretty much a bad poster on the Hillary side of the fence. Lots of shit slinging, victory dancing, coming to PoliGAF to talk about how well his trolling of OT was going, earnestly asserting that all Bernie supporters were racists.
I have to agree with this. Was fairly frustrated by many of those posts.
neoliberal corporatists...feel the bern! oligrachs, sad!
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
The National Enquirer thread is embarrassing.
User 463088
Banned
And the source material is so well respected.
I think this is my biggest takeaway from these primaries so far. Could one argue that through the internet and social media, people become "educated" (I use the word loosely) enough about the candidates and who they want to support that last minute campaigning and what not has lost its appeal? Even TV ads seem to be near worthless this cycle. Is this just all the power of the internet?
Kind of frustrating that those threads get locked. People are genuinely asking about how things like Superdelegates work and getting answers. I think a lot of the stuff that fuels some of this is a lack of familiarity with how the systems work.
I disagree.
Granted, the thread is locked now, but I thought the topic was thread worthy not because it would rile people up (lets face it, that's every political thread in OT right now. If I wanted to go toe-to-toe with some Bernie supporters, all I have to do is close my eyes and click), but because you don't see a lot of people coming out against what a lot of Bernie's supporters are doing, and when you do, it gets brushed off as "LOL HillaryGAF/PoliGAF!" I think it's easy to call out these behaviors when they happen on the right, especially because GAF is largely a left-leaning board, but I think it's important to remember that a lot of those behaviors are occurring on the Left as well. It's something I've been aware of since SC, and a lot of condescension I've had to deal with as a black voter who's not supporting Bernie, both online and in real life. But lately its been spreading, and it has a lot to do with Bernie's rhetoric.
Honestly, I would have made that thread even if it was Hillary supporters that were the guilty party, because that kind of online behavior is a huge part of the reason I've stopped posting frequently in PopGAF and other Pop Music communities. That stan-speak faux obsession that arose about 5 years ago, and was really fun for a while, was starting to progress to the point that celebrities were getting blatantly harrassed in the name of stanning for your fave. It's a bad look.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Putin is going to end up dead and hung in a Moscow street within five years and pundits will still be talking about why Obama won't confront the Russian threat:
http://www.vox.com/2016/3/25/11305676/russia-putin-oil-tax
http://www.vox.com/2016/3/25/11305676/russia-putin-oil-tax
I think there's a difference between direct democracy and referendums based on turnout.
I went from "meh, she has my vote" to "what would you ask of me, my Queen?"
I think I attribute that to the fifteen thousandth Bernie thread in OT. I had dismissed it all as a gigantic circlejerk before, but once I saw old right-wing talking points and Fox News drivel being thrown at Hillary firsthand, I dug in my heels.
It was really strange to me. One day we were all expecting a Hillary candidacy and were excited for what looked to be a guaranteed third Democrat term, the next, she was public enemy number one because she actually decided to run.
I think I attribute that to the fifteen thousandth Bernie thread in OT. I had dismissed it all as a gigantic circlejerk before, but once I saw old right-wing talking points and Fox News drivel being thrown at Hillary firsthand, I dug in my heels.
It was really strange to me. One day we were all expecting a Hillary candidacy and were excited for what looked to be a guaranteed third Democrat term, the next, she was public enemy number one because she actually decided to run.
Like I said even if that were true, which I don't accept it's still better than spending time concern trolling about reddit warriors. In Tesseract's defense most of his posts are probably "psychedelic." That he happens to support Birdie Sanders is just a bonus.
I am shocked no one has got him yet, especially him arresting people and snatching their shit when the mood strikes him.
Amusingly enough, it looks like we both went in completely opposite directions
(I really like the /r/hillaryclinton subreddit for Clinton supporters, btw. It's actually, in some ways, a bit more pleasant than here
You'll always be my AAPI brother no matter how we vote doe <333333
Lol, always. <3.
Plus, it's a really nice problem to have to be choosing between one of the most qualified people I have ever met to be president (Clinton) and a dreamer who worries for the long term effects of our current path (Sanders). There aren't many people who make feel incredibly inadequate when it comes to raw intelligence and understanding how things work. Clinton definitely did that to me. (Which is a feeling I loved, being challenged and wrecked that hardcore). She is unbelievably smart and brilliant, and I deal with insanely smart people on a daily basis. (NASA / SpaceX / Boeing R&D will do that to you). She may be many things, but that woman is fucking sharp. Period.
(Watching her and Obama talk issues near the end of the 08 campaign was unbelievable. I had boners from that much intelligence being flung around casually).
aside: gamergate is the gaming / GAF equivalent of Godwin's law, lol. Every thread eventually gets there. (Looking at now closed Bernie thread)
Aaron Strife
Banned
All of Obama's political opponents end up destroying themselves while he calmly observes. Conservatives and the media will never catch on.
He could never change Congress but for all the bullshit over the past five years, Obama's smelling like roses and Boehner no longer has a job.
User 463088
Banned
And his approval rating is +9. Please hold until November. Please hold until November.
If you polled US GAF it would be 3/4 Bernie. Hillary supporters here are the minority. We are the 18% of the people in exit polls supporting the Queen.
Say hello to a massive turn towards fascism in Russia! Considering the way Putin's been manipulating things, I don't think it's very likely that a collapse of his regime would lead to a more liberal society but a more reactionary one, and even their communist party is not very communist these days.
User 463088
Banned
I doubt there's been a poll.
I think PoliGaf is mostly made up of Hillary supporters. I think a lot of that comes from most of us following politics for a while, so we have...and I don't mean to sound elitist or like I'm being an ass....a better understanding of the system in place. So, like when HillaryGAF is accused of something it's not because we support Hillary that we think something's going to go the way it does, it's just because this ain't our first rodeo.
VendettaRed07
Member
I don't get why people are saying super delegates should vote with their state.
They should vote for whoever wins the most pledged delegates at the convention. Who they are saying they support now shouldn't make any difference.
They should vote for whoever wins the most pledged delegates at the convention. Who they are saying they support now shouldn't make any difference.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I'd like it to be higher tbh
I'm hoping he hits 60 approval by the end.
There's also the issue that the more outspoken Bernie supporters wind up banned a lot. I swear, we lose them by the day. Still praying for poor Melkr to be spared.
Super delegates are allowed to vote for whomever they like. They are not bound to any pole position or particular candidate. There is also nothing wrong with lobbying them, although, of course, harassment and slurs are wildly unacceptable.
Also, I'll cut anyone who's mean to Donna Brazile.
metalslimer
Member
Considering the shit he has had to go through and how nothing has gone through congress for what seems like an eternity it would be incredible for him to leave on such a positive note.
Part of me thinks his numbers have been going up due to the Trump effect and the GOP shitshow. I'd like to think people see the shitshow, look at Obama and realize how good we've had it these last eight years.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
Are you telling me Tesseract was not just being annoyingly ironic with his posts?
The GOP being a dumpster fire right now must be playing a big role in it.
**Beaten like Sanders beat Clinton yesterday
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
The GOP being a dumpster fire right now must be playing a big role in it.
**Beaten like Sanders beat Clinton yesterday
It's GOP Dumpster Fire
(alt + 0153)
It makes it seem more official
In my dreams he leaves office with Numbers higher than Bill.
OrangeGrayBlue
Member
I think it will, but sadly I think it'll mostly be because the country at large isn't thrilled with his potential successors and are realizing Obama wasn't that bad comparatively.
Part of the reason I want this primary to wrap up soon. So that that the Obamas can get out there and stump before the GOP has had a chance to "unify" under whoever gets their nomination.
The more time Dems have to snipe at the GOP while they're a bunch of angry bees warring with each other, the better.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
The country is at a precipice.
Oil could come back in the next year quite a bit, but it could also stay around where it is now. It's tough to gauge since the price drop in the first place was virtually unexpected by anyone. Most analysts see it recovering over the next 2 years.
shinra-bansho
Member
The Democratic Party is nowhere in the foreseeable future going to be a socialist party.
It's basically a technocratic party.
There seems a weird fantasy occasionally propagated on here that capitalist economies around the world are on the cusp of flipping or something. It's not happening any time soon. At best certain specific functions best controlled by the state will be.
While places like Norway, which has relied heavily on their state capitalist controlled oil production and the industries that support it, are probably going to need to undergo major reform.
Most of the outspoken Bernie supporters get banned for being terrible posters (except for Crab who got banned for having Australian table manners, God rest his soul).
Melkr is a pretty good poster except for his tendency to run away from ha problems*.
* No, I do not plan to come up with new material any time soon. Why do you ask?
FlowersisBritish
fleurs n'est pas britannique
I really don't think we should be counting Super delegates in general. Not saying they shouldn't exist, but whenever anyone mentions Hilary's delegate count they count in these 'unpledged' super delegates, and it's only ever to mention the broad gap in delegates between Sanders and her. Suddenly a 200 delegate difference becomes 600. I'd be more fine with them if we didn't start counting their votes ahead of time. Hard not to feel frustrated when you see one candidate with what appears to be a 400 delegate handicap.
How about 'GOP Trumpster Fire'?It's GOP Dumpster Fire
(alt + 0153)
It makes it seem more official
ugaboga232
Member
I wish it was technocratic, maybe we would see some real drug scheduling, research, or general STEM focus/reform/whatever (other than science which is always a weird thing I do agree but automation may be the start of something).
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked