• 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.
H

hawk2025

Member
Bernie's growing on me, y'all.

Opening up a bit to expert advisors and allowing people to help him would go such a long way. C'mon Bernie. You just need to listen a little and sharpen the general message. You are an incredible stand-up guy.
 
V

vicissitudes

Banned
pigeon said:
Again, this is basically just admitting that you don't support Trump, you support a fantasy candidate that is not currently running, but you've decided to pretend that Trump is that fantasy candidate and that once you've been together for a while you'll work off that rough exterior and reveal the dream politician you've always wanted.
Click to expand...

It's funny, when Trump says "we need to build a wall and keep illegal immigrants out" everyone said "what he REALLY means is he hates all Mexicans! Read between the lines! Of course that's what he means! So racist!"

But when Trump says "we will take care of those who can't afford health care; we won't let them die in the streets" and I extrapolate from that, I get "why aren't you taking him EXACTLY at his word?" (hint: the answer is he's currently trying to win a Republican primary)
 
R

royalan

Member
PsychoWARD23 said:
I know that Hillary/Bernie Healthcare thread turned to shit but I was just curious about one thing. I do prefer Bernie but I thought it wasn't far fetched that Hillary's point was that she was asking Bernie if she forgot all the work she did for Healthcare Reform in 93 and 94, and not instead asking what he was doing for Healthcare. Instead of clarifying on that point though her communications manager admits that it was a flub and apologizes. What?


In my mind there are two scenarios here.

Scenario 1: Hillary actually was questioning what Bernie did for Healthcare, and both his physical support of literally being there and congressional support proves her wrong. Campaign staffer admits mistake and that they weren't aware of Bernie's actions.

Scenario 2: Hillary meant that it doesn't make sense for Bernie to attack her record on health care, asks if he was absent when she was trying to push her reform. Campaign staffer admits mistake instead of clarifying what she actually meant.


Both are odd, Scenario 1 hurts Hillary more and Scenario 2 hurts her staff more but even if HilLary meant Scenario 1 why wouldn't her staff just re-address their attack and reformat what she said? Doesn't make sense to me.
Click to expand...

I would say Scenario 2 is more likely, except I also think it's also likely that her staffer rushed to do damage control without consulting Hillary on what she meant.

Then again, I think the whole was a blow-up over nothing. "I don't know where the fuck you were when I was doing __________" is such a common line people use, it was surprising to me that so many people wanted to take it as Hillary not knowing he was there.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
vicissitudes said:
It's funny, when Trump says "we need to build a wall and keep illegal immigrants out" everyone said "what he REALLY means is he hates all Mexicans! Read between the lines! Of course that's what he means! So racist!"
Click to expand...

No, dude, when he says "Mexican immigrants are murderers and rapists," it means he hates Mexicans. When he says he wants to illegally deport all Muslims from America it means he hates Muslims. I don't think you have to read between the lines on that. You just have to read the line.

As I think I've posted before in response to your posts, the big lesson here for the GOP is that all this careful implicit racism wasn't really necessary, because your core supporters are perfectly happy to spend time explaining why even the most explicitly racist statements you made aren't actually racist. Whether it's reinterpreting, semantic parsing, or, as in this case, just outright selective memory, if a voter wants to support a candidate, the fact that they are explicitly a bigot and fascist will simply not deter them.
 
S

Snowman Prophet of Doom

Member
pigeon said:
No, dude, when he says "Mexican immigrants are murderers and rapists," it means he hates Mexicans. When he says he wants to illegally deport all Muslims from America it means he hates Muslims. I don't think you have to read between the lines on that. You just have to read the line.

As I think I've posted before in response to your posts, the big lesson here for the GOP is that all this careful implicit racism wasn't really necessary, because your core supporters are perfectly happy to spend time explaining why even the most explicitly racist statements you made aren't actually racist. Whether it's reinterpreting, semantic parsing, or, as in this case, just outright selective memory, if a voter wants to support a candidate, the fact that they are explicitly a bigot and fascist will simply not deter them.
Click to expand...

Well, considering Trump has a history of espousing opinions very different from the ones he's offering now, on a variety of subjects, I'd say he leaves room for people to think maybe his policy proposals are just window dressing to be competitive in the primary, which he actually is probably banking on as a campaign strategy, since his actual words re: basically every aspect of governance is that almost everything is negotiable.

The racism shit is blatant, though, and 100% inexcusable.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
Nate Cohn ‏@Nate_Cohn 3m3 minutes ago Manhattan, NY
Clinton's 72 delegate margin of victory in Texas basically canceled out all of Bernie's wins (net 86)

Nate Cohn ‏@Nate_Cohn 5m5 minutes ago Manhattan, NY
Sanders has netted 86 delegates from wins in 9 states. Clinton will probably net more than that in North Carolina and Florida on Tuesday
Click to expand...

hold me.
 
H

Holmes

Member
NeoXChaos said:
hold me.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's obvious at this point. But there's still a little under 3 months in the process and it's going to be a bit of a slow drip in terms of states/delegates after Tuesday with the illusion of it still being competitive/Sanders still having a chance.

tumblr_inline_o403qmC8VO1s5xoo7_500.gif
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
There was this liberal fantasy that Trump would pivot into a palatable Presidential candidate. But it ignores the extent to which his success has been driven by xenophobia, racism and bigotry. Pivoting loses that support base.

Unless the idea is that people continue to project whatever myth they want onto Trump if he were to pivot because of his loose association with things like reality and the truth.

He has a personal history of racism that's ignored though in this as well.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
Regarding polling and Tuesday; I think pollsters have been trying to correct for what they missed in Michigan for the Midwestern states. Namely a larger sample of independents. YouGov has ~20% and Marist has it at ~25% for Illinois, 2008 was 16%. Michigan '16 was 27%.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
shinra-bansho said:
There was this liberal fantasy that Trump would pivot into a palatable Presidential candidate. But it ignores the extent to which his success has been driven by xenophobia, racism and bigotry. Pivoting loses that support base.

Unless the idea is that people continue to project whatever myth they want onto Trump if he were to pivot because of his loose association with things like reality and the truth.

He has a personal history of racism that's ignored though in this as well.
Click to expand...

He is going to pivot in the general though.

To extreme misogyny, but still a pivot.
 
S

Snowman Prophet of Doom

Member
shinra-bansho said:
There was this liberal fantasy that Trump would pivot into a palatable Presidential candidate. But it ignores the extent to which his success has been driven by xenophobia, racism and bigotry. Pivoting loses that support base.

Unless the idea is that people continue to project whatever myth they want onto Trump if he were to pivot because of his loose association with things like reality and the truth.

He has a personal history of racism that's ignored though in this as well.
Click to expand...

His personal history of racism is more petty and personal than suggesting that illegal immigrants are predominantly violent criminals and suggesting that Muslims need to be preferentially discriminated against for the good of the country.

And your second sentence is, I think, basically what people were thinking. Trump's entire strategy has been binding his supporters to him, personally, by building a brand and weaving a narrative within that brand for people to identify with, the idea being that he could eventually pivot to the center while still keeping people with him, because what they ultimately become committed to is Trump, himself, and not the racism, specifically. He can only go SO far with it, but it gives him more room to wiggle around the issues than the average politician.
 
M

Makai

Member
shinra-bansho said:
There was this liberal fantasy that Drumpf would pivot into a palatable Presidential candidate. But it ignores the extent to which his success has been driven by xenophobia, racism and bigotry. Pivoting loses that support base.

Unless the idea is that people continue to project whatever myth they want onto Drumpf if he were to pivot because of his loose association with things like reality and the truth.

He has a personal history of racism that's ignored though in this as well.
Click to expand...
I still think Trump is going to calm down after the primary, but yeah it's way too late to take back a lot of this stuff.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
At this point I would not be surprised if he goes on a tirade of select words when she clinches the nomination.

Some guy on CNN with Mayor Nutter was like "Yeah she did win the South but he can win swing states like OH and MI" "Because of that the superdelegates can change their mind"
 
Z

zou

Member
Using google trends for anything serious is hilarious. Not only are the numbers heavily scrubbed by google, but it's not even based on search volume. Instead it's relative to the top search term. So a search term going from 10 to 20 searches would show the same as 500 to 1000.

https://www.google.com/trends/explo...ather&geo=US&date=now 7-d&cmpt=q&tz=Etc/GMT-1

Compared to same popular search terms, sanders and clinton are at 1 and 2. Takes someone special to incorporate that into your prediction.
 
J

johnsmith

remember me
Makai said:
I still think Trump is going to calm down after the primary, but yeah it's way too late to take back a lot of this stuff.
Click to expand...

His racist followers and the protestors are going to make sure it stays a shitshow through November. you can't pivot back from this.
 
B

brainchild

Banned
zou said:
Using google trends for anything serious is hilarious. Not only are the numbers heavily scrubbed by google, but it's not even based on search volume. Instead it's relative to the top search term. So a search term going from 10 to 20 searches would show the same as 500 to 1000.

https://www.google.com/trends/explo...ather&geo=US&date=now 7-d&cmpt=q&tz=Etc/GMT-1

Compared to same popular search terms, sanders and clinton are at 1 and 2. Takes someone special to incorporate that into your prediction.
Click to expand...

Tyler doesn't use Google trends in a vacuum. His model builds upon itself. The data from Google trends are constantly being compared against the actual results from the primaries, and the weight of the data is refined from there.

Y2Kev said:
tCvIOFd.gif
tCvIOFd.gif
tCvIOFd.gif
Click to expand...


LOL
 
B

brainchild

Banned
Poodlestrike said:
I think that the point Ivy was making is that anybody capable of being swayed by GOP attacks on Hillary would have been swayed at some point in the last ~24 years.
Click to expand...

We can't possible know this with any meaningful degree of certainty. She still hasn't been tested in a presidential general election and the focus in such an election is entirely different than anything that Hillary has had to deal with thus far.
 
O

Officerrob

Banned
NeoXChaos said:
At this point I would not be surprised if he goes on a tirade of select words when she clinches the nomination.

Some guy on CNN with Mayor Nutter was like "Yeah she did win the South but he can win swing states like OH and MI" "Because of that the superdelegates can change their mind"
Click to expand...
Virginia is always left out of those conversations
 
I

Iolo

Member
NeoXChaos said:
At this point I would not be surprised if he goes on a tirade of select words when she clinches the nomination.

Some guy on CNN with Mayor Nutter was like "Yeah she did win the South but he can win swing states like OH and MI" "Because of that the superdelegates can change their mind"
Click to expand...

change their mind and what, vote against the pledged delegates and popular vote totals?
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
brainchild said:
We can't possible know this with any meaningful degree of certainty. She still hasn't been tested in a presidential general election and the focus in such an election is entirely different than anything that Hillary has had to deal with thus far.
Click to expand...

eh... even if one wants to indulge in that line of thinking, it is hard not to concede that the degree to which she has been attacked so far is considerably higher than that of... any other candidate in this cycle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom