• 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.
NYDN endorsement wouldn't normally register for me, but I think that it serves the as an effective capper to what amounts to a narrative arc, tbh.

>Interviews Bernie
>Bernie fucks up
>Interviews Hillary
>Hillary knocks it out of the park
>NYDN endorses Hillary
 
Because of the violence on woman act. He mentioned it was a very tough choice for him but he spoke to the senate about the dangers of it and that incarcerating people was not the solution. I learned it from the Simpsons that you can add bills on top of others and you're stuck with that.

He really knocked it out of the park http://youtu.be/LTn3jUoMdVI

It was a bad decision in hindsight but he made it weighing the choices at least

"In 2006, he campaigned for the Senate saying, 'I’m tough on crime.' What was his evidence? I voted for the '94 crime bill,” Podesta said on ABC’s "This Week With George Stephanopoulos."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-campaign-chair-bernie-sanders-airbrushing-history-crime/story?id=38278036

I really should take offense at a politician pretending they are not a politician. He's a politician.
 

johnsmith

remember me
new pic
tlAUuDv.jpg
 

Paskil

Member
That NYDN endorsement was pretty brutal. Bernie really fucked that one up.

That blond is that English teacher from Boston in the middle school texts over in Japan, no?
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
In this Harry Potter Universe in which we are randomly giving political weight to....

Who is The Dark Lord? Because, it better be someone hot. Cause, Voldemort is my OTP/waifu. And I will NOT have anyone make someone unacceptable into Voldemort.

Hold up for a sec.

This Voldemort?


You must be a fan of Rick Scott then?

 

saltypickles

Neo Member
Don't know if this was already posted but Paul Ryan can't get a budget passed:
April 15 was supposed to be the day when House Republicans, under the leadership of Speaker Paul Ryan, were going to have a budget framework approved. But April 15 is almost upon us. And the House GOP is nowhere near consensus.

Instead, Republicans are fighting the same internal battles they were fighting last October, when a House Freedom Caucus Revolt ousted then-Speaker John Boehner for being just another Washington insider, part of the "pay-to-play culture that permeates Capitol Hill."

While much of the Republican drama this year has focused on the anti-establishment revolt that has left outsiders Donald Trump and Ted Cruz as the party's two leading presidential frontrunners, the same insider-outsider battles are continuing to play out back in Washington. The 2016 budget process is looking more and more like another dysfunctional charade laying bare the internal party conflicts.
The deeper problem for Ryan and the rest of the Republican leadership is that House Freedom Caucus is more and more the anti-establishment wing of the Republican Party. And its reflexes have now been trained to distrust whatever leadership does. Any whiff of compromise smells like the cronyism of politics as usual. Hence that sour "crap sandwich" stench of budget politics under divided government.

Without a House budget framework, the Senate probably isn't going to bother with one either (what would be the point?). Senate Budget Committee Chair Mike Enzi (R-WY) has already announced he's going to postpone any Senate budget resolutions. Instead, the appropriations process will lop along again without any strategic framework, which means that in all likelihood, Congress will once again be faced with the same end-of-the-year up-against-the-deadline crisis it faced last year.

And at that point, the House speaker will face the same impossible choice Boehner faced last time around: Make a deal with the Democrats to get a spending agreement that can actually become law with the signature of a Democratic president and lose your speakership, or shut down the government by demanding cuts and an Obamacare repeal no president named Obama (or Clinton) will ever sign.

It's a no-win choice. Shutting down the government further damages the rapidly sinking Republican brand. Keeping the government running by making a deal with the Democrats further pisses off the anti-establishment renegades just weeks before the next speaker election.
 

noshten

Member
NYDN endorsement wouldn't normally register for me, but I think that it serves the as an effective capper to what amounts to a narrative arc, tbh.

>Interviews Bernie
>Bernie fucks up
>Interviews Hillary
>Hillary knocks it out of the park
>NYDN endorses Hillary

Hillary did give them the better answers in those interviews



Sanders campaign’s new Jewish outreach director is outspoken critic of Israeli occupation

He is not winning AIPAC & Netanyahu endorsement any time soon fuck
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
A Poligaf Exclusive!

A friend of mine looks to have gotten some type of contract with the Sanders campaign for making advertisements. To get one this late indicates he plans to continue fleecing teenagers and young adults to continue running past New York. Not that much of a surprise, but a bit of a confirmation on him not withdrawing after New York.

Of course, if New York goes the way polls say, a 10 point win. That means California now needs a 62/38 margin in favor of Sanders in addition to his pie in the sky wins elsewhere.
 
"In 2006, he campaigned for the Senate saying, 'I’m tough on crime.' What was his evidence? I voted for the '94 crime bill,” Podesta said on ABC’s "This Week With George Stephanopoulos."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/clinton-campaign-chair-bernie-sanders-airbrushing-history-crime/story?id=38278036

I really should take offense at a politician pretending they are not a politician. He's a politician.
Hmm. I didn't actually realise this, but Podesta seems correct. It just didn't get much scrutiny.

https://web.archive.org/web/20061018180921/http:/www.bernie.org/truth/crime.html

Which means ultimately he voted for it for the same reason a lot of other Democrats did. No one wanted to be the soft on crime candidate in the 90s. Or even 2006.
 

Mael

Member

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
This piece is a scathing indictment of Sanders more than a support to Clinton, although it is a full throated support of Clinton.

No kidding, holy shit. I'm no fan of Sanders but even I think that's a bit harsh.
 
This piece is a scathing indictment of Sanders more than a support to Clinton, although it is a full throated support of Clinton.

Well, the interview with her was not a bunch of soft ball questions. They went hard at her, but she never staggered. I actually think she does much better interviews in print or is better able to explain herself in print in a way that does't come as strongly though in video media.

No kidding, holy shit. I'm no fan of Sanders but even I think that's a bit harsh.

I think it's pretty fair. He has been treated extremely softly by the media for almost this entire cycle. He walked into that interview never expecting to be pushed on his answers and completely fell apart when he did. To me, that just shows a lack of knowledge and thought on his central issues that is hard to ignore
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Martin said Clinton has commitments from about 600 superdelegates, a figure well above the roughly 470 listed in most counts kept by the media.

The outcome Saturday in Wyoming is among the motivations for Sanders supporters. He won the state’s Democratic caucuses but split the 14 pledged delegates. The state also has four superdelegates, all supporting Clinton. “He got more votes; she got more delegates,” said a frustrated Scott Weiler, 38, an ironworker’s apprentice who brought his family to Sanders’s rally in Albany, N.Y. “That’s bull----. If there were no superdelegates, I think Bernie would win.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...d97d60-fff4-11e5-9203-7b8670959b88_story.html
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Oh god, a budget crisis? Do they want to give Hillary MORE states?

Bwhaha, it's culminating into a perfect storm.
It's evolving past GOP Dumpster Fire™
Going to have to come up with a new term to fake trademark.
 
Don't know if this was already posted but Paul Ryan can't get a budget passed:

A buddy of mine used to work for Tom Cole, one of Boehner's allies in congress. Congress often sets up seminars or learning events for congressmen and aides to basically go over policy, strategy, etc. He told me that a few years ago some of Cole and Boehner's aides made this big presentation about how repealing Obamacare is impossible, but republicans can essentially cut the funding of the law on a yearly basis to hurt certain aspects of the law (for instance, the delays to the medical device and Cadillac taxes last year), resulting in the law working poorly and thus remaining unpopular.

It's a pretty sensible approach if your goal is to wreck stuff. Yet apparently most congressmen and aides rejected the idea outright and demanded full repeals. My friend noted that time after time GOP congressmen reject basic math and political strategy in order to pursue the most asinine, illogical paths. The concept of progressive goals (progressive as in gradual progress) or strategy is lost on them.

Ryan is about to get bogged down with some truly baffling bullshit. Republicans won't allow a shutdown this year which means there will be some type of compromise, Trump will benefit, etc etc. And I'm not sold on Ryan being the guy who can handle this, especially as he promises not to use Boehner's tactics (punishing disloyalty).
 
Bwhaha, it's culminating into a perfect storm.
It's evolving past GOP Dumpster Fire™
Going to have to come up with a new term to fake trademark.
GOP Tire Fire™? It even includes the trivia "It can be smelled in forty-six states."

Can't rush this to apocalyptic measures yet. Need to pace ourselves as things go further downhill in coming months.
 

Mael

Member
Well, the interview with her was not a bunch of soft ball questions. They went hard at her, but she never staggered. I actually think she does much better interviews in print or is better able to explain herself in print in a way that does't come as strongly though in video media.



I think it's pretty fair. He has been treated extremely softly by the media for almost this entire cycle. He walked into that interview never expecting to be pushed on his answers and completely fell apart when he did. To me, that just shows a lack of knowledge and thought on his central issues that is hard to ignore

I'll be fair, I read Sanders interview and didn't manage to find the time to read Clinton's.
Seriously Sanders's reply were small while Clinton's were little books in comparison!
It's kinda unfair (it really isn't)
 
Two thoughts:

1) I can't wait to see how the Republicans try to blame this on Obama.

2) Clearly, all the GOP has to do is stop Trump from getting the nomination and all their troubles will be behind them.

1) "Obama has made the budget too massive for us to handle, just another example of Washington Insiders making the Government unmanageable, and further proof that we need to decrease the role in Government. That's why it's so important we stop funding Planned Parenthood and divert funds from Social Security to military contracts!"

2) Clearly. Even with a Cruz\Kasich presidency things would still be a fucking mess.
 
Don't know if this was already posted but Paul Ryan can't get a budget passed:
God this is so amazing.

Ryan was supposed to be the boy wonder swooping in and saving the day. Nope.

So you have the House who can't govern, the Senate who can't push through a nominee to the highest court in the country, GOP governors left and right who are driving their states into the ground, and their nominee is either Donald freaking Trump or Ted freaking Cruz.

For all the power they've gained in the midterms, it's shown their true incompetency just ahead of the presidential election. This is so bonkers.

Hell, shut down the government again. Right before a presidential election. Let Cruz be the face of it. Had there been general elections right after the 2013 turnout there would have been consequences.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Conspiracy theory time:

The republicans don't want Cruz (the eventual nominee) to be president, and they shut down the government to purposely cost him the election.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom