• 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 |OT4| Tyler New Chief Exit Pollster at CNN

Status
Not open for further replies.
Are Canadians dropping by to shit on the US a regular election time occurrence or does Sanders really inspire this lovely behavior?
Regular occurrence but normally directed at the Republicans. Sanders has given enough contrast for people to associate Hillary with Bush (who really awakens the superioirty complex) and the 2008 primary (we're still starstruck by Obama).
 

Drek

Member
Are Canadians dropping by to shit on the US a regular election time occurrence or does Sanders really inspire this lovely behavior?

It's pretty common for foreign nationals of all the free rider nations (Canada and western Europe) to routinely shitpost come election time about how they're superior to the U.S. because of their social programs and, prior to this cycle, their alleged racial harmony.

Europeans have been a bit more quiet this cycle, likely because some brown people finally found their way into the western Europe walled garden and now they see all the disgusting bigots in their own country crawling out of the woodwork.
 

TheFatOne

Member
Neat little tactic Bernie is now using on quoting the headline of the article now instead of saying Hillary said this direct quote. Nice little touch there.
Just like Obama isn't change.

My fault for not being more specific. He was the beginning and laid the foundation for it. I'm talking about 20+ years of consistent changes having a left leaning supreme court. Realized real change is probably the worst words I could have used in that scenario for what I meant so apologies for that. Was writing that post while frustrated. Should have taken a step back before writing that.
 
It's pretty common for foreign nationals of all the free rider nations (Canada and western Europe) to routinely shitpost come election time about how they're superior to the U.S. because of their social programs and, prior to this cycle, their alleged racial harmony.

Europeans have been a bit more quiet this cycle, likely because some brown people finally found their way into the western Europe walled garden and now they see all the disgusting bigots in their own country crawling out of the woodwork.
I don't think it's that they see them crawling out. They are the bigots in many cases.

Have you been in the immigration threads? Holy crap.
 
Personally I want to know why

uwiTPwX.jpg


this makes any sense

Had to take a look at it a second time ... and it's one poll ... but Sanders supporters are less inclined than Hillary supporters on govt. health care?

Granted, with MoE, the difference is negligible, but I thought it would have been other way around given the make up of Sanders' coalition.

On the GOP side, makes sense, though.
 
Dodd-Frank and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau weren't incremental change. That is dramatic change in how banks are allowed to operate and the firewalls between them and any kind of public bailouts in the future.

I'm pretty sure 17 million people would disagree that the ACA was just incremental change.

A nuclear de-escalation deal with Iran despite active Israeli campaigning for further conflict is not incremental change.

An economy that rebounded from the second worst economic calamity in U.S. history to now be one of the few growing economic powers on the world stage is not incremental change.

Gay marriage nationwide is not incremental change.

Staging the Supreme Court to reverse about two decades of conservative control with the next nominee is not incremental change.

But sure, it's all incremental change. Right...

Gay marriage was not obama, iran deal was big, scalia's death was probably not obama, im glad the largest economy in the world didnt self destruct but a lot of the bailout was signed before obama was in office, ACA is decent but leaves a lot to be desired and hasnt really solved any of the structural problems of healthcare and the 30 million ++ that are underinsured or uninsured arent that happy, and I don't know about the dodd frank reforms to comment on their success or lack thereof.
 
Gay marriage was not obama, iran deal was big, scalia's death was probably not obama, im glad the largest economy in the world didnt self destruct but a lot of the bailout was signed before obama was in office, ACA is decent but leaves a lot to be desired and hasnt really solved any of the structural problems of healthcare and the 30 million ++ that are underinsured or uninsured arent that happy, and I don't know about the dodd frank reforms to comment on their success or lack thereof.
"I'm just going to ignore everything or pretend it's not important because reasons, oh and I don't really know about one of the major accomplishments."
 

Emarv

Member
Ah yes, the good republican rhetoric of "its paid for in taxes, so its not really free". Love it. Clinton is not trying t take it away, but she has no interest in implementing it so that guy with 30 million can have 31 million, because that difference is oh-so-important.

"Every step along the way I have stood up, and fought, and have the scars to prove it." - Clinton

Most Dems have interest in implementing universal health care. They just also are adults who understand the political capital and fighting they spent just to pass the ACA and recognize the battle they'd have with both the GOP and health care industry to go through another fight and system reform again this soon, especially when there's other huge reforms that still haven't gotten any attention yet (like immigration, the foundation of this election cycle). Instead, they wait for the country to keep moving in favor of it and improve on what we do have rather just being idiots and fighting it out again.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Had to take a look at it a second time ... and it's one poll ... but Sanders supporters are less inclined than Hillary supporters on govt. health care?

Granted, with MoE, the difference is negligible, but I thought it would have been other way around given the make up of Sanders' coalition.

On the GOP side, makes sense, though.

There is some other factor effecting Sanders support other than his policies.
It's either CDS (Clinton Derangement Syndrome). Sander's Anti-Trade policies, Anti-Women people, or something else. But it's not his core policies. That's not the first time a poll has been taken where his supporters are to the right of Hillary's supporters.
 

kess

Member
The Bush era superiority complex never went away up here, some people have managed to convince themselves that Trudeau is closer to Sanders then Clinton despite appointing a former CEO to minister of Finance.

On the other hand, I lived under eight years of Dubya and I always considered Harper to be worse than Bush in many ways, because he was trying to take a system that more or less worked and compromise it with ideology. I fully expect climate change denial from Republicans here, but I didn't expect the gutting of Statistics Canada.
 
"I'm just going to ignore everything or pretend it's not important because reasons, oh and I don't really know about one of the major accomplishments."

Ok feel free to actually respond to my points instead of putting words in my mouth and generally I use reasons to argue instead of blind faith or talking about things I don't know.
 

Hindl

Member
Gay marriage was not obama, iran deal was big, scalia's death was probably not obama, im glad the largest economy in the world didnt self destruct but a lot of the bailout was signed before obama was in office, ACA is decent but leaves a lot to be desired and hasnt really solved any of the structural problems of healthcare and the 30 million ++ that are underinsured or uninsured arent that happy, and I don't know about the dodd frank reforms to comment on their success or lack thereof.

So Iran, Dodd-Frank, and the bailout I'll skip. In regards to gay marriage/Supreme Court, Obama absolutely had a role in that. It's the President's job to nominate Justices, and Obama's two nominees were crucial in getting that ruling down. No, Obama didn't specifically push through gay marriage legislation, but he played a vital role in it. As for the ACA, like I said it's a start that isn't perfect. But there's plenty of people in this very thread that would either be dead or buried in debt without the ACA. There's tons of room for improvement, but to get there we had to start somewhere else first. It is much easier to go from ACA to a full public option/multi-payer system than starting with what we had and getting there. Incremental change is going to get us there, because trying to do it all at once is simply unfeasible.
 
On the other hand, I lived under eight years of Dubya and I always considered Harper to be worse than Bush in many ways, because he was trying to take a system that more or less worked and compromise it with ideology. I fully expect climate change denial from Republicans here, but I didn't expect the gutting of Statistics Canada.

Fucking preach.

At least the dems managed to put a congressional majority together when the wheels had really fallen off the bus.
 

Drek

Member
Gay marriage was not obama,
So did Kagan and Sotomayor just sneak into the SCOTUS an no one asked them to leave?

iran deal was big,
Sure, and only achieved by Obama playing next level games via fossil fuels to weaken all sides (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel) economically to the point where Iran needed to capitulate and the disenters could only bitch so much for fear of further marginalization. It, along with the handicapping of Russia economically to prevent further expansionism, should go down as the masterstrokes of Obama's foreign policy resulting in substantial disentanglement of the U.S. from foreign affairs.

scalia's death was probably not obama,
But his loading of the lower benches with progressive judges, stacking the decks for all future nominations, while also appointing two young, progressive judges himself was. He's set the table for all of this and someone was going to die eventually. He's stacked the future deck of nominees so well that even finding another Scalia who has the credentials will be increasing tough for any future GOP POTUS. Back him up with 4-8 years of Clinton and there might not be a high ranking federal judge in the nation who still clings to the conservative side of constitutional interpretation.

im glad the largest economy in the world didnt self destruct but a lot of the bailout was signed before obama was in office,
And building the economy back took a hell of a lot more than the bailout, which was basically just the fall arrest harness for someone falling off a roof.

ACA is decent but leaves a lot to be desired and hasnt really solved any of the structural problems of healthcare and the 30 million ++ that are underinsured or uninsured arent that happy,
It isn't perfect, but 17 million people who had literally no coverage now have something. That is a huge first step. Also, depending on who you ask the ACA is either the gateway to a more robust marketplace based system that will eventually get everyone covered or the poison pill that will expose the structural problems in the healthcare system and escalate the need for, if nothing else, a single payer option.

It isn't perfect, but it's damn good and perfect wasn't on the menu.

and I don't know about the dodd frank reforms to comment on their success or lack thereof.
Then you should go read up on it and the CFPB, both are huge wins for the general citizenry and financial regulation without resorting to extreme and likely unnecessary actions like blanket anti-trust breakups for every major bank.
 

Armaros

Member
Gay marriage was not obama, iran deal was big, scalia's death was probably not obama, im glad the largest economy in the world didnt self destruct but a lot of the bailout was signed before obama was in office, ACA is decent but leaves a lot to be desired and hasnt really solved any of the structural problems of healthcare and the 30 million ++ that are underinsured or uninsured arent that happy, and I don't know about the dodd frank reforms to comment on their success or lack thereof.

What Justices voted for Gay Marriage? Whats that? two of Obama's SC picks?
 

Hindl

Member
Sure, and only achieved by Obama playing next level games via fossil fuels to weaken all sides (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel) economically to the point where Iran needed to capitulate and the disenters could only bitch so much for fear of further marginalization. It, along with the handicapping of Russia economically to prevent further expansionism, should go down as the masterstrokes of Obama's foreign policy resulting in substantial disentanglement of the U.S. from foreign affairs.

Do you have any literature on this? I'm only marginally aware of the work that went in to bringing Iran to the negotiation table and crippling Russia, and I'm trying to learn more about it but I don't know where to start.
 
So Iran, Dodd-Frank, and the bailout I'll skip. In regards to gay marriage/Supreme Court, Obama absolutely had a role in that. It's the President's job to nominate Justices, and Obama's two nominees were crucial in getting that ruling down. No, Obama didn't specifically push through gay marriage legislation, but he played a vital role in it. As for the ACA, like I said it's a start that isn't perfect. But there's plenty of people in this very thread that would either be dead or buried in debt without the ACA. There's tons of room for improvement, but to get there we had to start somewhere else first. It is much easier to go from ACA to a full public option/multi-payer system than starting with what we had and getting there. Incremental change is going to get us there, because trying to do it all at once is simply unfeasible.

I never said we needed to jump to a decent system right away, but obamacare has a decent bit of flaws unless you live in a state like california which could have been improved. Ask a doctor what they think about ACA and (other than the greediest) most are tepidly positive but do not think it was a huge change of the healthcare landscape. Yes the nominees were crucial but was he going to put moderates or conservatives on the court?

Thank you for at least commenting on my reasons, I still think obama was pretty good all things considered but there is no need to fluff him up as some divine figure, he was a decent liberal politician with some successes and some failures.
 

East Lake

Member
Do you have any literature on this? I'm only marginally aware of the work that went in to bringing Iran to the negotiation table and crippling Russia, and I'm trying to learn more about it but I don't know where to start.
First start with that it's not all that clear it was Obama's 11th dimensional chess, unless you think along with being president he's also able to reliably forecast the oil markets.
 

ivysaur12

Banned
Tessa Gould liked
Seung Min Kim @seungminkim
Heitkamp to Garland re: press chasing her when she got here: "I was like what the hell? Don't they have something real to do?" #DoingOurJob

Tessa Gould is Heidi's chief of staff -- I don't quite understand why she liked this?

Also yes I follow Heidi's chief of staff
 

Tubie

Member
Ah yes, the good republican rhetoric of "its paid for in taxes, so its not really free". Love it.

What the? How is this Republican rhetoric?

Where does the money for healthcare (or anything the government does) come from if not from taxes?

I don't even

My head hurts.
 

Brinbe

Member
As a Canadian who's lived in the US and still happily has a home in PA as a PR, I think most Canadians (and foreigners in general, to be honest) just don't have a clue how politics actually works in the states (not a big surprise) and how incremental change is a unfortunate necessity to be when you have an opposition party set out to not only block all and any progress, but to also destroy and dismantle government itself.

We had a little taste of that with Harper but the circumstances to his rise was different and that was a case of two left-leaning parties getting in each other's way for years. They were never the majority of the electorate, unlike the United States, which is a more conservative country in many ways and frankly, major change is hard. When you have to drag 45% of the country kicking and screaming into the present and future. That's why Obama isn't anywhere close to a disappointment. Anyone thinking that is delusional considering the obstruction Obama has faced over the past seven years. He got a shit-ton accomplished.

And I think most people who consider Clinton/Sanders and have paid close attention to politics for the past decade and more, recognizes who has the more realistic path to actually getting shit done. Just look at the past administration for evidence of of this. And just look at that NYDN transcript for evidence (among many other things) that Bernie, aside from his core message, doesn't know what the fuck he's really doing and would be an atrocious and dangerous President.

Just my two cents based on living in the United States and actually suffering under the full awfulness of the Bush II administration and seeing and supporting Obama's rise to the Presidency. I still remember watching in awe at his 04 DNC speech and knowing he was gonna be POTUS one day.
 
What Justices voted for Gay Marriage? Whats that? two of Obama's SC picks?

So why not say that Obama made some good SC picks, I think its a bit intellectually dishonest to give him credit for the good SC rulings and not the bad ones or the crazy stuff happening with encryption, etc. etc.

So did Kagan and Sotomayor just sneak into the SCOTUS an no one asked them to leave?


Sure, and only achieved by Obama playing next level games via fossil fuels to weaken all sides (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel) economically to the point where Iran needed to capitulate and the disenters could only bitch so much for fear of further marginalization. It, along with the handicapping of Russia economically to prevent further expansionism, should go down as the masterstrokes of Obama's foreign policy resulting in substantial disentanglement of the U.S. from foreign affairs.


But his loading of the lower benches with progressive judges, stacking the decks for all future nominations, while also appointing two young, progressive judges himself was. He's set the table for all of this and someone was going to die eventually. He's stacked the future deck of nominees so well that even finding another Scalia who has the credentials will be increasing tough for any future GOP POTUS. Back him up with 4-8 years of Clinton and there might not be a high ranking federal judge in the nation who still clings to the conservative side of constitutional interpretation.


And building the economy back took a hell of a lot more than the bailout, which was basically just the fall arrest harness for someone falling off a roof.


It isn't perfect, but 17 million people who had literally no coverage now have something. That is a huge first step. Also, depending on who you ask the ACA is either the gateway to a more robust marketplace based system that will eventually get everyone covered or the poison pill that will expose the structural problems in the healthcare system and escalate the need for, if nothing else, a single payer option.

It isn't perfect, but it's damn good and perfect wasn't on the menu.


Then you should go read up on it and the CFPB, both are huge wins for the general citizenry and financial regulation without resorting to extreme and likely unnecessary actions like blanket anti-trust breakups for every major bank.

I'm glad obama did all of this on his own and controls all three branches of congress as well as the fed!

I ask doctors and healthcare professionals that have come talk to us and already gave what they said.

Iran deal was good negotiating but all of those countries were doing a good job screwing themselves.

I don't get why its an accomplishment for a liberal president to not appoint conservatives, seems pretty silly to me.

And yes I should read up about CFPB.
 

Armaros

Member
So why not say that Obama made some good SC picks, I think its a bit intellectually dishonest to give him credit for the good SC rulings and not the bad ones or the crazy stuff happening with encryption, etc. etc.



I'm glad obama did all of this on his own and controls all three branches of congress as well as the fed!

I ask doctors and healthcare professionals that have come talk to us and already gave what they said.

Iran deal was good negotiating but all of those countries were doing a good job screwing themselves.

I don't get why its an accomplishment for a liberal president to not appoint conservatives, seems pretty silly to me.

And yes I should read up about CFPB.

"Obama's accomplishments dont count anymore because he literally didn't do it himself and it wasn't perfect"
 

Drek

Member
Do you have any literature on this? I'm only marginally aware of the work that went in to bringing Iran to the negotiation table and crippling Russia, and I'm trying to learn more about it but I don't know where to start.

I'd be surprised if it existed, just my read on the situation. The policies regarding fossil fuel development in the U.S. do not jive with who Obama is as a person, yet the economic advantages of those policies dovetail almost perfectly with the foreign policy moves Obama's administration has orchestrated.

I'm pretty sure he rope a doped Putin into Syria to be honest with you. I'm sure he'd have preferred them actually bombing ISIS instead of the rebels, but he clearly knew Putin's assistance of Assad had a very limited shelf life and while many were screaming about his capitulations he just sat back and let Putin empty the wallet.
 

jaekeem

Member
To the people calling Obama a failure/disappointment

what on earth is your standard expectation for a president that had to deal with a particularly obstructionist republican congress? I'm really lost
 
"Obama's accomplishments dont count anymore because he literally didn't do it himself and it wasn't perfect"

You are doing the same thing as nymetsfan, if you want to debate healthcare and what could have been done in the nitty gritty that isnt public option/single payer I would be happy to. I assumed we were talking about obama himself as he isn't the entire government (a point echoed here by many when talking about sanders).

I still think obama did a good job but there is no need to fluff him up.

Edit: did not know about the doma thing, that is smart and will give to Obama.
 

Armaros

Member
You are doing the same thing as nymetsfan, if you want to debate healthcare and what could have been done in the nitty gritty that isnt public option/single payer I would be happy to. I assumed we were talking about obama himself as he isn't the entire government (a point echoed here by many when talking about sanders).

I still think obama did a good job but there is no need to fluff him up.

Edit: did not know about the doma thing, that is smart and will give to Obama.

Obama used what the limits of the Presidency and what influence he had in Congress to get stuff passed.

Bernie has not stated what he would do that is within the limits of the Presidency, and talks only about Revolution and getting people to march onto DC.

Comparing them is folly and only makes Bernie look worse and makes Obama's stand out even more with the extreme amount of obstructionism that has occurred from the GOP. Do you think Bernie would be even 10% as good as navigating that level of obstructionism?

You think Obama would be as unprepared for an interview like the one Bernie bombed at?
 

HylianTom

Banned
Of course, I'll add to the court discussion:

it's been decades since the court tilted in a progressive direction, and because of this we've been treated to some decidedly non-progressive 5-4 rulings every October and June.

Another Democratic term - either Hillary or Bernie would work - would shift the judicial landscape monumentally. Those 5-4 decisions would then be vulnerable to overturning.

Conversely, let's say that the GOP wins and they get to stock the court so that it tilts right for a decade or two. The court proceeds to gut environmental laws. Labor laws. Civil rights laws.

When the Dems finally get back into power after the court is stocked, they're going to need supermajorities in order to get back to where we are today. It's not like the GOP would roll over and go, "oh, you want to restore the federal law that our five guys knocked down? Come up with 60 votes without us, lol." It's not like Congressional supermajorities come along very often in this era.

Name your pet issue. Name the level of government.. the court has either ruled on it, or it will do so someday.

A loss would set us back decades, and I don't think a lot of progressives have thought through on how pervasive it would be.
 

T'Zariah

Banned
Just called up some of the family in PA.

That "unqualified" comment reaaaaally just rubbed my female cousins and aunts the wrong way. Granted, they were for Hillldawg before, but Sanders never really pissed them off until now.
 
Obama used what the limits of the Presidency and what influence he had in Congress to get stuff passed.

Bernie has not stated what he would do that is within the limits of the Presidency, and talks only about Revolution and getting people to march onto DC.

Comparing them is folly and only makes Bernie look worse.

You think Obama would be as unprepared for an interview like the one Bernie bombed at?

When did I mention bernie? I thought we were talking about obama...

If you want to compare the two, I think obama is a far better politician with everyone meaning of the word whereas bernie may be a bit more principled/willing to push more radical ideas.

But if you think that bernie would just flop at the presidency once he got there and not use the enormous behind the scenes team (whether he picks a good team you could argue) that would be forced on him I think thats a bit naive.


Edit: and how much credit do the other branches which actually enacted the changes deserve then?

He is an atrocious candidate though and makes supporting him pretty hard but if anything hes giving clinton flak from the left and helps her be a better candidate.
 

Bowdz

Member
Just called up some of the family in PA.

That "unqualified" comment reaaaaally just rubbed my female cousins and aunts the wrong way. Granted, they were for Hillldawg before, but Sanders never really pissed them off until now.

Yeah, I'm really happy that the upcoming contests are all closed primaries. Bernie's comment will be received much worse among party Democrats than independents that are breaking Sanders' way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom