Support NeoGAF

[BanGy.nz]

Is anyone else shocked how little a role Roe v. Wade has played in the election so far, outside of Carly Fiorina scaring children and a couple of questions during debates it's been quiet. Maybe I've just missed it in between the penis jokes or something.

 

[Dan]

Even as someone who only got invested into politics recently (shortly after Obama's election), the "revolution" rhetoric I'm seeing from some of the Bernie supporters is kind of irritating.

Asked a friend how Bernie plans to get his single-payer healthcare bill through a Republican Congress. "That's the revolution, bro" was his answer. Oh, well I guess that clears that up.

People like Obama, the Clintons, Ted Kennedy etc. spent decades trying to push healthcare reform through Congress, came out with a watered down bill that does a lot of good but tries not to step on too many toes and is nowhere near universal, and you think Bernie is going to waltz in on day 1, wave his magic wand and bend Congress to his will to totally upend the system? It's a mockery of all the hard work UHC advocates have put in for years to try and achieve some meaningful legislation, even if it's not the perfect solution. Revolution my dick. All his revolution so far has done is produced small wins in a few states and gotten him absolutely crushed in all the other ones.

"But Bernie is the better candidate because he wins blue states!" Oh, you mean the states that were already going to vote Democrat? Because those aren't the states that need convincing. Not saying Hillary is going to win states like SC, AL, MS etc. anytime soon but she's at least demonstrated that she can build pretty strong coalitions. Like even taking that argument at face value (which is incredibly stupid and untruthful anyway) that would actually build a stronger case for Hillary as it would indicate a broader appeal, but thank God all the Southern states have already voted. All of them. Now it's just blue states, baby. Blue states like Missouri and North Carolina. Liberal paragons, those are.

Man fuck these guys who are just like "Yeah the GOP will probably have the House but it's okay, there's a revolution." Paul Ryan and the rest of the GOP leadership insulated from backlash in their R+20 districts laugh at your slacktivist revolution. It's not a revolution unless you fucking win, assholes.

You underestimate how legit shook the Republican leadership in Congress are going to be when they peer out their windows and sees a million young people staring back at them.

 

[johnsmith]

Apparently Trump decided to get involved in politics after Obama wrecked him at the correspondents dinner as a way to nurse his shattered ego.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/03/13/us/politics/donald-trump-campaign.html

So I guess republicans are right in blaming Trump on Obama.

 

[Cerium]

Apparently Trump decided to get involved in politics after Obama wrecked him at the correspondents dinner as a way to nurse his shattered ego.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/03/13/us/politics/donald-trump-campaign.html

In the future, time travelers will go back to that moment at the dinner to try to convince Obama not to make fun of Trump, thereby averting World War III.

 

[samn]

Even as someone who only got invested into politics recently (shortly after Obama's election), the "revolution" rhetoric I'm seeing from some of the Bernie supporters is kind of irritating.

Asked a friend how Bernie plans to get his single-payer healthcare bill through a Republican Congress. "That's the revolution, bro" was his answer. Oh, well I guess that clears that up.

People like Obama, the Clintons, Ted Kennedy etc. spent decades trying to push healthcare reform through Congress, came out with a watered down bill that does a lot of good but tries not to step on too many toes and is nowhere near universal,

Hillary Clinton actually managed to make healthcare worse with her screwups in the 90s. That she waves this around as giving her experience that would qualify her to be president is astounding to me.

 

[royalan]

Hillary Clinton actually managed to make healthcare worse with her screwups in the 90s. That she waves this around as giving her experience that would qualify her to be president is astounding to me.

How?

 

[shinra-bansho]

By helping to get children health coverage. Duh.

Is anyone else shocked how little a role Roe v. Wade has played in the election so far, outside of Carly Fiorina scaring children and a couple of questions during debates it's been quiet. Maybe I've just missed it in between the penis jokes or something.

Well, Roe v. Wade is completely secure and never challenged. So, really the only ruling that really matters this election is rightfully Citizens United v. FEC.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Hillary Clinton actually managed to make healthcare worse with her screwups in the 90s. That she waves this around as giving her experience that would qualify her to be president is astounding to me.

Ooh that's fucking bull shit. Obamacare wouldn't exist without Hillarycare.

 

[Tubie]

Hillary Clinton actually managed to make healthcare worse with her screwups in the 90s. That she waves this around as giving her experience that would qualify her to be president is astounding to me.

That's amazing.

Please proceed, governor.

 

[aspiegamer]

Is anyone else shocked how little a role Roe v. Wade has played in the election so far, outside of Carly Fiorina scaring children and a couple of questions during debates it's been quiet. Maybe I've just missed it in between the penis jokes or something.

There's not been much cause for it to come up. It'd be a wasted question at a Democratic debate and devolve into culture wars bullshit for the GOP. With answers to ridiculously expected there's not much fun in it.

There were a few times were candidates singled out another for opposing some technicality or adding whatever provisions. Cruz repeatedly talked about investigating Planned Parenthood (which apparently no one told him has already happened) as a catch-all of "abortion BAD", and there may have been a time or two it was mentioned in regards to a SCOTUS question. I cannot recall any specific abortion question or the words "Roe vs Wade" coming out of a moderator's mouth at any point in the Republican debates.

Similar to marriage equality, it's more something for the GE when the two parties will have very differing opinions with little room for confusion. It won't be a huge issue, but it will at least come up.

On that note of stuff the primaries have ignored and we'll see for the general GE, we had our first and only question of the entire primary season for either party about global warming at the final Democrat debate. Republicans had a question about rising ocean levels in Florida which they took as an excuse to deny the existence of climate change, but again no moderator ever said the term to them.

The term "Citizens United" was used sparingly at the GOP debates (maybe in relation to Trump's financing or Trump mocking Jeb!) since basically all of them are afloat thanks to soft money. So, yeah, that's another GE issue.

All of this ties back to SCOTUS, though, and should be the thing both parties focus on. Even bullshit like the clean air act provisions getting overturned is something that can go back to SCOTUS, regardless of existing or theoretical new climate legislation. Senators should be running hard on it, too, with easy promises of "I'll vote to confirm a person who x, y, and z!"

 

[Plinko]

Is anyone else shocked how little a role Roe v. Wade has played in the election so far, outside of Carly Fiorina scaring children and a couple of questions during debates it's been quiet. Maybe I've just missed it in between the penis jokes or something.

Not shocked at all.

I have argued for years that abortion is something most republicans don't want changed because they can easily use it to scare the far right, one-issue voters.

Since republicans would have complete control of Washington with a presidential win, they'd be making promises they never intended to keep, so that's why you won't hear about it this cycle.

 

[Diablos]

Hillary Clinton actually managed to make healthcare worse with her screwups in the 90s. That she waves this around as giving her experience that would qualify her to be president is astounding to me.

She and the party learned from that though. Big part of the reason why they were able to get the ACA passed.

 

[neurosisxeno]

She and the party learned from that though. Big part of the reason why they were able to get the ACA passed.

People clamor about Party Unity and forget they had a super majority and still struggled to get the ACA through...

 

[dramatis]

I guess learning from failure is considered a negative, as well as having a big tent.

 

[Plinko]

Trump just threatened Sanders on Twitter by saying that he needs to be careful or his supporters will go to Sanders' rallies.

This election is a national nightmare.

 

[Clefargle]

I guess learning from failure is considered a negative, as well as having a big tent.

Well the big push from Sanders' supporters is all about ideological purity, so I'm not surprised. It shows in their demographic makeup too.

 

[HK-47]

Hillary Clinton actually managed to make healthcare worse with her screwups in the 90s. That she waves this around as giving her experience that would qualify her to be president is astounding to me.

You done said too much and now you look the fool.

 

[kess]

Trump just threatened Sanders on Twitter by saying that he needs to be careful or his supporters will go to Sanders' rallies.

This election is a national nightmare.

Trump is like one of the malevolent dreams from the Sandman who escaped into reality

 

[Frank the Great]

Trump just threatened Sanders on Twitter by saying that he needs to be careful or his supporters will go to Sanders' rallies.

This election is a national nightmare.

Trump is an idiot. He should be courting these voters.

Picking fights with Sanders will only help the Democrats unite against him.

 

[aspiegamer]

Trump is an idiot. He should be courting these voters..

Not sure about being able to court them... with some further discussion needed-- There's been talk of some overlap on ideological issues. The political spectrum isn't just Left and Right on a line. It's more of a ring. If you move infinitely far to the Left, you end up agreeing with things you'd hear out of someone infinitely Right. Those persons on the very fringes are the overlap. Not that there are any specific qualifiers, but it gets grey once you get to hyper-nationalism on either side, or perhaps wanting to protect and help citizens on either side. Loss of religion in society, too.

Disclaimer: These are entirely my own theories and many people think it's bonkers. But the expansion of Reddit/chan/MRA/racist culture has grown dramatically only in the past decade and has largely supported my ideas. There's some magical point on imageboards where a meme might be posted unironically by persons of multiple affiliations and get universal praise from all users. That's the sweet spot. It's impossible to know how many people fit into that gap.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Thomas Edsall had a column on The Trump-Sanders Fantasy:http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/02/2...y.html?rref=collection/column/thomas-b-edsall
About the crossover. Or lack thereof.

 

[RustyNails]

Here's the problem for Bernie.

Let's say Hillary leaves Tuesday with a 275 pledged delegate advantage.

Let's also say he wins everything from March 22 to April 9th (There are 298 delegates available.) And let's say he wins each contest by 20 points. He'll end up with 179 delegates to Hillary's 119). He'll have cut her lead down to where it is right now--215. We then have states that are advantageous to her, especially delegate rich states like Maryland (where she'd probably net 20 delegates over him, and NY. She, more than likely, would negate his comeback with wins in those two states.

The fact of democratic primary is that you need landslides to fight landslides. Her lopsided wins in the south will need to be countered by Bernie with equally lopsided wins elsewhere, not squeek-by wins like Michigan. He needs to win all of the states on Tuesday by 20 points or more to remain competitive.

 

[Big Baybee]

Hillary Clinton actually managed to make healthcare worse with her screwups in the 90s. That she waves this around as giving her experience that would qualify her to be president is astounding to me.

I can't wait for the dem primary to be fucking over.....

 

[NeoXChaos]

Mark Murray ‏@mmurraypolitics 8m8 minutes ago
New NBC/WSJ/Marist polls on Dem side:

FL: Clinton 61%, Sanders 34%
IL: Clinton 51%, Sanders 45%
OH: Clinton 58%, Sanders 38%

Mark Murray ‏@mmurraypolitics 13m13 minutes ago
New NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of Florida:
Trump 43
Rubio 22
Cruz 21
Kasich 9

Mark Murray ‏@mmurraypolitics 13m13 minutes ago
New NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of IL:
Trump 34
Cruz 25
Kasich 21
Rubio 16

Mark Murray ‏@mmurraypolitics 12m12 minutes ago
New NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of Ohio:
Kasich 39
Trump 33
Cruz 19
Rubio 6

The size of Clinton's lead in all three states directly correlates to her advantage with African-American Democratic voters - 57 points in Florida (77 percent to 20 percent), 48 points in Ohio (72 percent to 24 percent) and 39 points in Illinois (67 percent to 28 percent).

Among Latinos, Clinton holds just a five-point edge over Sanders in Florida, 51 percent to 46 percent, while Sanders leads Clinton among Latinos in Illinois, 64 percent to 30 percent.

.

 

[dramatis]

I forgot, but yesterday I read a thing from NY Times that very briefly made the case for how Obama created Donald Trump in the beginning (lol):

Donald Trump’s Presidential Run Began in an Effort to Gain Stature

Donald J. Trump arrived at the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner in April 2011, reveling in the moment as he mingled with the political luminaries who gathered at the Washington Hilton. He made his way to his seat beside his host, Lally Weymouth, the journalist and socialite daughter of Katharine Graham, longtime publisher of The Washington Post.

A short while later, the humiliation started.

The annual dinner features a lighthearted speech from the president; that year, President Obama chose Mr. Trump, then flirting with his own presidential bid, as a punch line.

He lampooned Mr. Trump’s gaudy taste in décor. He ridiculed his fixation on false rumors that the president had been born in Kenya. He belittled his reality show, “The Celebrity Apprentice.”

Mr. Trump at first offered a drawn smile, then a game wave of the hand. But as the president’s mocking of him continued and people at other tables craned their necks to gauge his reaction, Mr. Trump hunched forward with a frozen grimace.

After the dinner ended, Mr. Trump quickly left, appearing bruised. He was “incredibly gracious and engaged on the way in,” recalled Marcus Brauchli, then the executive editor of The Washington Post, but departed “with maximum efficiency.”

Repeatedly underestimated as a court jester or silly showman, Mr. Trump muscled his way into the Republican elite by force of will. He badgered a skittish Mitt Romney into accepting his endorsement on national television, and became a celebrity fixture at conservative gatherings. He abandoned his tightfisted inclinations and cut five- and six-figure checks in a bid for clout as a political donor. He courted conservative media leaders as deftly as he had the New York tabloids.

At every stage, members of the Republican establishment wagered that they could go along with Mr. Trump just enough to keep him quiet or make him go away. But what party leaders viewed as generous ceremonial gestures or ego stroking of Mr. Trump — speaking spots at gatherings, meetings with prospective candidates and appearances alongside Republican heavyweights — he used to elevate his position and, eventually, to establish himself as a formidable figure for 2016.

So this was a plot for revenge all along...

 

[RustyNails]

while Sanders leads Clinton among Latinos in Illinois, 64 percent to 30 percent.

Woah, how and why did this happen? Pretty sure Luis Guitterez endorsed Hillary.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Woah, how and why did this happen? Pretty sure Luis Guitterez endorsed Hillary.

the numbers in Florida with Latinos are also suspect. She won TX Latino's by 38 pts. He's not competing there. IL seems too close. Replace IL with OH and vice versa and it makes sense.

 

[noshten]

Among Latinos, Clinton holds just a five-point edge over Sanders in Florida, 51 percent to 46 percent, while Sanders leads Clinton among Latinos in Illinois, 64 percent to 30 percent.

Bernmentum

 

[Bronx-Man]

Not sure when this happened, but I just woke up to see Rubio outright condemning Trump on CNN. Said "he's turned the most important election of a generation into a circus, a fiasco". "We can't have presidential candidates sounding like the commenters on these political blogs, acting like Twitter trolls."

 

[Y2Kev]

Bernmentum

Typo in the meme

.

Weird on the spread with Latinos, but can't complain about the overall result.

 

[NeoXChaos]

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

I'm really surprised that IL is more competitive than OH according to those polls.

 

[Coriolanus]

The sentiment is wrong. You have to dismiss it, because it is wrong. Protectionist trade policies benefit neither us nor our trade partners.

There is a reason you see both Sanders and Trump going full-on populist/protectionist in their rhetoric- no mainstream politician would actually go for that because we know it actively harms us to do it.

There definitely needs to be more done to address our shifting economy - the pain is real - but you don't address it by trying to subsidize something that's dying off due to factors outside of anyone's control.

Right or wrong matters not if those votes go to your opposition, which is why you don't dismiss it, you find a way to adress it to the best of your abilities. To pick a more radical example, this is why, while democrats are relatively fierce defendants of abortion, they'll extol all the other services that PP provides, presenting alternatives and all. Sure, some part will simply never come your way, but you do try to limit the damage as much as possible.

Mainstream politicians go for shit that harms you all the time, fwiw. Just look at bams voting against raising the debt limit, or hills defending tuff on crime, or nearly everything related to the war on drugs.

I also didn't suggest what should be done, but merely stated that a way to get those votes from the guys flat-out opposed to free trade should be found. Providing free courses for affected industries, expanding welfare, i dunno, whatever works. What way will resonate remains to be seen

People in here haven't been dismissing that the sentiment exists. They've been bemoaning the level of discourse in the campaign about trade that only serves to exacerbate said sentiment.

No one is saying a candidate going out there and saying "Free trade is awesome" is going to fix anything, no one is even doing this anyway, so I don't even know where that's coming from.

But there is no room in a political campaign for nuance.
There seems to barely be room for policy. Let alone prescriptions that would actually help as opposed to protectionist gobbledygook..

Jeb! did.

I do feel that there was never significant room for nuance in political campaigns, tho.

I'm really surprised that IL is more competitive than OH according to those polls.

The rahm effect, most likely.

 

[noshten]

The rahm effect, most likely.

I think he simply does a lot better with minorities in IL than elsewhere at the moment, would not put it down to Rahm entirely.

 

[i_am_ben]

Illinois is open isn't it? Looks like Bernie could win there.

 

[Y2Kev]

Illinois is open isn't it? Looks like Bernie could win there.

They all are except for Florida. Looks like either a lot of late movement or people are adjusting their models because of Michigan.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Kyle Kondik ‏@kkondik 7m7 minutes ago
Polling that shows IL closer than OH on Dem side doesn't seem right to me given IL's bigger nonwhite pop. but we'll see

Geoffrey Skelley ‏@geoffreyvs 2m2 minutes ago Washington, DC
Geoffrey Skelley Retweeted Kyle Kondik
Agreed, this seems off. Have to think Sanders has better shot in OH than IL.

 

[Gotchaye]

Right or wrong matters not if those votes go to your opposition, which is why you don't dismiss it, you find a way to adress it to the best of your abilities. To pick a more radical example, this is why, while democrats are relatively fierce defendants of abortion, they'll extol all the other services that PP provides, presenting alternatives and all. Sure, some part will simply never come your way, but you do try to limit the damage as much as possible.

Mainstream politicians go for shit that harms you all the time, fwiw. Just look at bams voting against raising the debt limit, or hills defending tuff on crime, or nearly everything related to the war on drugs.

I also didn't suggest what should be done, but merely stated that a way to get those votes from the guys flat-out opposed to free trade should be found. Providing free courses for affected industries, expanding welfare, i dunno, whatever works. What way will resonate remains to be seen

This is what's really irritating about Sanders' position on this, to me. Like, the whole point of Sanders is to push Democrats to be better for the 99%. This is exactly the sort of case Sanders should be making, and it fits in with his solution to virtually everything else - free trade is a good thing but the gains from trade have been captured by millionaires and billionaires, so redistribute after the fact. He could be very useful pushing back against the assumption that market outcomes are just by pointing out how trade policy affects wealth distribution and arguing not that we should adopt protectionism but that we have a serious obligation to help the people made worse off.

I'm much less positive on Sanders than I was at the start of the campaign, for this and related reasons. He's only mostly a good ideological influence at this point, and I think often his specific policy proposals and his reaction to criticism of them makes clear that he or whoever's advising him on this stuff is not that good at actually evaluating whether something will help achieve his goals.

I get why politicians have an incentive to just go straight for protectionist rhetoric. I get why Trump is doing it. I just thought Bernie was either more competent or less interested in just winning (which I think is still very unlikely and so not a very productive thing to try to do) than in changing the political conversation for the better.

 

[RustyNails]

I dont think its rahm effect. Need crosstabs on those polls stat.

 

[Plinko]

Winning Florida and Illinois will be huge for Trump. If he can pull off Missouri (which to me seems like a prime Cruz state) it would be all over. I think Cruz is delusional thinking that if Rubio dropped out, he'd be competitive with Trump. My guess is more Rubio voters would head to Kasich than Cruz.

I also found it funny how Cruz finished lower than Trump in DC. Nobody likes that guy.

 

[NeoXChaos]

I dont think its rahm effect. Need crosstabs on those polls stat.

chuck said the campaign n thinks rahm may cost them votes in Chicago they would have.

here's IL by Yougov

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/1ofeah3mtc/IL_ForRelease_20160313.pdf

She's winning HIspanics by only 5 in this. Losing whites by 20. Winning AA's by 74-21. NBC had her losing Hispanics here by 34 pts

Their FL poll has her winning Hispanics by 36 pts. Nbc had it at +5

 

[Y2Kev]

chuck said the campaign n thinks rahm may cost them votes in Chicago they would have.

wat

 

[Officerrob]

If Bernie wins Illinois but loses Ohio, I'm going to be shocked

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Kyle Kondik ‏@kkondik 7m7 minutes ago
Polling that shows IL closer than OH on Dem side doesn't seem right to me given IL's bigger nonwhite pop. but we'll see

Geoffrey Skelley ‏@geoffreyvs 2m2 minutes ago Washington, DC
Geoffrey Skelley Retweeted Kyle Kondik
Agreed, this seems off. Have to think Sanders has better shot in OH than IL.

I think it could also be that IL is overall more liberal than OH?

 

[Macho Madness]

Should be noted YouGov has tended to be more favorable to Sanders than other polls, so again that makes sense. Still good for Sanders.

https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/709018302991958016

So the verdict is most likely it's a very tight race in IL. Tossup.

 

[thefro]

I think it could also be that IL is overall more liberal than OH?

That's a big part of it... if you throw away the racial demographics Sanders should run much more strongly in Illinois since Chicago is full of liberal activists as Drumpf found out.

I would also guess African-Americans in Illinois are more skeptical of Hillary than your average African-American in the south. Add Rahm on top of that.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

How has NBC polls been this cycle?

 

[Loudninja]

That's a big part of it... if you throw away the racial demographics Sanders should run much more strongly in Illinois since Chicago is full of liberal activists as Drumpf found out.

I would also guess African-Americans in Illinois are more skeptical of Hillary than your average African-American in the south. Add Rahm on top of that.

What?

 

[Coriolanus]

This is what's really irritating about Sanders' position on this, to me. Like, the whole point of Sanders is to push Democrats to be better for the 99%. This is exactly the sort of case Sanders should be making, and it fits in with his solution to virtually everything else - free trade is a good thing but the gains from trade have been captured by millionaires and billionaires, so redistribute after the fact. He could be very useful pushing back against the assumption that market outcomes are just by pointing out how trade policy affects wealth distribution and arguing not that we should adopt protectionism but that we have a serious obligation to help the people made worse off.

Yeah, this is one of the simply... utterly baffling approaches he takes, much like how, when presenting his tax plan, he also proposed to raise taxes on the lower strata. That's some legit "...but why?" shit, and yet there it is.

The only consistent explanation i can find for some of his rhetorical positions is legit "because he truly, in his heart of hearts, believes in everything that he's selling" and that... well, that's a dangerous characteristic to have.

I forgot, but yesterday I read a thing from NY Times that very briefly made the case for how Obama created Donald Trump in the beginning (lol):
Donald Trump’s Presidential Run Began in an Effort to Gain Stature
So this was a plot for revenge all along...

That was a fascinating article, and probably the scariest thing i've read about Big Poppa this whole cycle. Thanks for linking it.
Fml, we say the dude doesn't prepare and he's been doing his homework for 5 freaking years.

 

[RustyNails]

chuck said the campaign n thinks rahm may cost them votes in Chicago they would have.

here's IL by Yougov

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/1ofeah3mtc/IL_ForRelease_20160313.pdf

She's winning HIspanics by only 5 in this. Losing whites by 20. Winning AA's by 74-21. NBC had her losing Hispanics here by 34 pts

Their FL poll has her winning Hispanics by 36 pts. Nbc had it at +5

Just a quick check, but the poll has whites at 74%, AA at just 13% of the total vote.. This to me is strange. We have much, much stronger AA numbers than that. For example, 2008 primary exit polling had whites at 57% and AA at 24%. That sounds more like it tbh.

Again not sure, but that number struck me immediately.