• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I looked at the Ohio school system website. There are 135,707 12th graders. Assume turnout is in line with averages and say 40% vote and half are democrats. That means there could be 30k more votes in the democratic primary.

Expecially since it just happened and everyone will be like "yay I can go vote!"

Tho its teens we are talking about. They might forget about the election by 6pm.
 
That's my take on it. People have a right to be angry because the Reagans' record on it was just that awful. Praising them for it is the shits.

I'm a supporter of Clinton and sick to death of the negative buzz lately, made up exaggerations and distortions.

But this one was straight up awful.

I'm glad she apologized right away, but wow, what a bad thing to say in the first place. It's a 100% valid thing to criticize her for.
 
But all these 20year olds pretending they are experts in 80s or 90s AIDS politics is something else. Oftentimes seems to me as a type of social positioning (which I think has a net positive effect because minorities can pressure majorities but can in the heat of things can outcast allies especially when forgiveness is denied)

It is kind of weird because I think some young people don't understand that your positions really can change as you get older. I was a lot more conservative at a young age. Looking back on it, I didn't know anything, and now I think I have a lot more experience to drive my views. I think it's absolutely fair to call someone out on something they said 20 years ago but if they've truly changed their view, I'm willing to let them prove it.
 
I looked at the Ohio school system website. There are 135,707 12th graders. Assume turnout is in line with averages and say 40% vote and half are democrats. That means there could be 30k more votes in the democratic primary.

40% turnout seems high for a primary.
 

tmarg

Member
I wanted to type something similar. What she said was pretty stupid, but I think the average mainstream voter might agree with the sentiment. That's why I don't think it was a mistake. She meant it. Unfortunately for her, the democratic base is attuned to this kind of comment.

That would be a massive risk with almost no upside. People who would actually agree with how Reagan ignored the aids crisis probably wouldn't even catch on to what she was saying.
 
I think your similar to most Americans.

Hell I didn't until that buzzfeed article about the press conference Laughing at AIDS jokes.

But all these 20year olds pretending they are experts in 80s or 90s AIDS politics is something else. Oftentimes seems to me as a type of social positioning (which I think has a net positive effect because minorities can pressure majorities but can in the heat of things can outcast allies especially when forgiveness is denied)
I think it's fine. She fucked up. The pressure will force her to react positively in positioning.

Although, reading threads on stuff like this leaves me thinking half the time that some people are just furiously Googling.
 

User 406

Banned
And im not dismissive of the criticisms of the quote but the tone of many who likely aren't LGBT or been super longtime alies and instead seem to often just want to position themselves ahead of controversy rather than really being passionate.

I've done it myself on many issues so it's why I'm criticising it.

Point being, a large number of the angry posts you were replying to were actually from LGBTQ people. You're barking up the wrong tree here.
 
...Well, on the flip side, maybe....juust maybe---this will be the final time anybody feels the need on the occasion to puff up anything on the Reagan mythological legacy that isn't already an explicit devotee of such.

I cringed whenever Obama made any favorable allusions to such, despite whatever good intentions he might've had in mind, and this is even worse on margin than the whole lot of them because it is literally one of the worst areas you could've focused on---arguably worse than the damned Drug War and on par with the Foreign Adventures for a lot of people and their families.

What an insane situation to crop up...just wow.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
That would be a massive risk with almost no upside. People who would actually agree with how Reagan ignored the aids crisis probably wouldn't even catch on to what she was saying.
It wasn't calculated. It's not a gamble. She actually probably does feel that way.
 
It is kind of weird because I think some young people don't understand that your positions really can change as you get older. I was a lot more conservative at a young age. Looking back on it, I didn't know anything, and now I think I have a lot more experience to drive my views. I think it's absolutely fair to call someone out on something they said 20 years ago but if they've truly changed their view, I'm willing to let them prove it.
I mean this is the essence of it. It's the lack of forgiveness and ability to let people change.

The left had made lots of progress by welcoming people who used to hold different views. They're going to run into a wall with things like racial justice and other justice projects if people can't change or misspeak if they ask for forgiveness or change

Point being, a large number of the angry posts you were replying to were actually from LGBTQ people. You're barking up the wrong tree here.
I'm not always responding to purely this thread but Twitter and Bernie people on my Facebook
 
Fwiw i knew about the grotesque reagan track record on aids due to some discussion, like, 8 years ago on f13.net. Ahh...

The left had made lots of progress by welcoming people who used to hold different views. They're going to run into a wall with things like racial justice and other justice projects if people can't change or misspeak if they ask for forgiveness or change

This is not a problem limited to the left (and i'd hesitate to call it a prob). Is just the way things are and will most likely continue to be, wot with easier propagation and access to information.

Purity is, and has been, on the rise, y'all.
 

royalan

Member
That's the quote.

YIKES.

I had to quickly remind myself of my mother and grandmother who, while completely loving and supporting of me, still occasionally say/do ignorant things that I have to kindly correct them on.

But praising the Reagan response to AIDS? That's a whopper of a mistake.

And this highlights a core problem with Hillary on the campaign trail: too often she goes for the slam dunk when a simple layup would have sufficed. And sometimes it works (hitting Sanders hard for his Cuba remarks was a slam dunk that worked), but when it doesn't... She falls on her ass hard.

In an attempt to appear extra tough on crime in the 90s, she used a racially charged term that still hounds her to this day.

When asked a simple question about whether or not and lie to the American public, she stumbled into a sloppy "I promise to try my hardest to try" response that only compounded her trust issues with the public.

And now this. Ugh. I'm pretty sure it was a gaffe. I can imagine Hillary formulating those remarks and thinking, "Alzheimer's? Pfft! Everyone's praising her for Alzheimer's advocacy. I'm going to be the SPECIAL snowflake!"

Ugh.

For crying out loud Hillary. Just take the easy road for once.

I don't see this effecting her too much, because there's sadly a lot of people don't know their history when it comes to the early years of the AIDS crisis, and the inaction of the Reagan Administration that bordered on condemnation. As a Hillary supporter, I should be relieved by that. But I don't think I am.
 

VanMardigan

has calmed down a bit.
Here's some exclusive US Virgin Islands scuttlebutt for you guys: The establishment is realizing the importance of every single delegate, so there are some really shady things going on. For example, there was a party operative from Michigan, one who literally wrote a book on brokered conventions and served on prior campaigns for Republican nominees. He "moved" down to the Virgin Islands recently with 3 friends and ended up as delegates to represent the Virgin Islands in our tiny republican party caucus. They are officially uncommitted, giving them more leverage come convention time given that there will very likely be a brokered convention. Right now there is a court case here arguing that they haven't even met the residency requirements to serve as delegates.
 

Effect

Member
Thanks. Thought today was going to be a a slow and quiet day then I see the thread in OT. Ugh. At least it was a Friday so maybe it might not get as much play and she has apoligized. So here's hoping.
 

Iolo

Member
Thanks. Thought today was going to be a a slow and quiet day then I see the thread in OT. Ugh. At least it was a Friday so maybe it might not get as much play and she has apoligized. So here's hoping.

I'm sure there will be ads up momentarily.
 

darkside31337

Tomodachi wa Mahou
When does Kasich's status on the PA ballot get decided? Think the Rubio / Kasich tit-for-tat stuff is hilarious. At least lose with some dignity guys.
 

royalan

Member
Electorally? It's not significant unless she botches her answer when she is asked about it. And even then it's not an issue most people will care about.

Fucking this. Don't try to rationalize, clarify, or contextualize. Apologize, admit you fucked up, and move on.

Please Hillary, don't Hillary Clinton this.
 

Cat

Member
Here's some exclusive US Virgin Islands scuttlebutt for you guys: The establishment is realizing the importance of every single delegate, so there are some really shady things going on. For example, there was a party operative from Michigan, one who literally wrote a book on brokered conventions and served on prior campaigns for Republican nominees. He "moved" down to the Virgin Islands recently with 3 friends and ended up as delegates to represent the Virgin Islands in our tiny republican party caucus. They are officially uncommitted, giving them more leverage come convention time given that there will very likely be a brokered convention. Right now there is a court case here arguing that they haven't even met the residency requirements to serve as delegates.

Ah, thank you. We talked a little about the results briefly last night, but this info adds a little more context to it.
 
I don't think her old lady gaffe matters electorally. I don't think any of the old people moments they've had, have done much. The BLM protester "superpredator" incident happened days before SC which she won in a landslide for example.
 

Cerium

Member
So how big of a deal is this situation really? Anyone?
It's... well it's not good. I read, I think in Game Change 2012, that a full third of Obama's bundlers in 2012 were gay, and so they were a huge and disproportionate part of his reelection.

Hillary has spent her career fighting for gay rights, her emails prove that her public positions are earnest, and her campaign has invested a lot in building trust and enthusiasm with the gay community. Robbie Mook is the first openly gay Presidential campaign manager. For these reasons I think Hillary will be forgiven in the end, but this kind of unforced error is very unhelpful when it specifically irritates one of your most loyal constituencies. You want and need those people energized.

I think it could be more of a problem if she went up against Trump, who unlike your typical Republican is clearly apathetic and even tolerant of homosexuality. On the other hand, if the GOP nominates Ted "Kill the Gays" Cruz then this probably becomes a nonissue.
 
While we're on the subject of reagan policies that not many people were aware of...did you know that researchers at the national academy of sciences and the school of public health in berkeley found in a study in 1992 that the deaths of 1470 children from Reye's syndrome could have been prevented if regulations mandating the labelling of aspirin medication that was linked to the illness was not obstructed by the reagan administration? And that by 1986, when the labelling was finally enacted, reported cases of reye's syndrome dropped from 556 in 1985 to 32?
The disregard for the aids epidemic was not ronald reagan's only domestic medical legacy
 
While we're on the subject of reagan policies that not many people were aware of...did you know that researchers at the national academy of sciences and the school of public health in berkeley found in a study in 1992 that the deaths of 1470 children from Reye's syndrome could have been prevented if regulations mandating the labelling of aspirin medication that was linked to the illness was not obstructed by the reagan administration? And that by 1986, when the labelling was finally enacted, reported cases of reye's syndrome dropped from 556 in 1985 to 32?
The disregard for the aids epidemic was not ronald reagan's only domestic medical legacy

Thank yhwh for Ralph Nader.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom