-
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
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
shinra-bansho
Member
There's an article on a study showing the impact of money in politics
.
but only looks at the local level that nobody seems to care about
Retromelon
Member
What you are doing is trying to pick apart plurals to make me sound incoherent. That isn't an exchange of contesting ideas in good faith. Let's make it simpler to discourage that. I do not dispute her competency; indeed, she is more formidable in some respects than sanders. Do you think it is unreasonable for some voters to feel a degree of unease with electing, out of a nation of 300 million, a woman whose husband has already been president for 8 years? This has been the thrust of my point from the very start. Feel free to dispute it
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Impact is probably very high I take it?
I'm willing to bet there is a point of diminishing returns for each race that varies based on what level of government there is and the importance of the position.
shinra-bansho
Member
I think the premise as a whole is flawed.
There has been one President Clinton, the only Governor Clinton. There's been one Secretary of State Clinton, also the only Senator Clinton. Not an array of Clintons in public office. They're not the Kennedies or Bushes or Roosevelts. So yes, I think it's entirely unreasonable if that was the basis for unease, (but I don't think it is.) The idea that her husband having been a two term President disqualifies her in people's minds is frankly kind of awful.
Hillary Rodham was not born into wealth and opulence. She wasn't born the daughter of a political family - and even if she was frankly, I don't even know how often that's historically resulted in political office. She's built a political career over 40 years leading to her current attempt at a Presidential nomination, including a failed nomination bid.
But further I don't think that's the large reason why people feel animosity towards her if they do.
There's been a thirty year scandal-driven GOP cottage industry around them both. That's the main source of dislike.
Also, this has zero to do with Bernie Sanders.
i_am_ben
running_here_and_there
Republican attack ad: Pigeon praises country that institutionalized slavery and pedophilia.
Retromelon
Member
You don't seem to want to grant a single chip against hillary, or divorce her, metaphorically speaking, from bill. You think it's a flawed premise to feel uncomfortable with two people that are married to constantly accrue tremendously powerful positions in government? I know all the republicans hate her just because she is a democrat that stands between them and the presidency. But, its a very common sentiment amongst ordinary people without much political affiliation that they're tired of bushes and clintons. Though you may not like the word, they feel that these oligarchies dominate our politics, and are they wrong? If you can't see why they feel that way, then there won't be anything more I can say to get through. If I supported clinton I would be able to easily admit that her last name is a reason for concern, but I'd make the case that she means the best and her policy proposals are the most realistic and well adapted to the current political environment, but you don't want to give an inch.
-----
Well then that's where we'll have to part ways. You think it's flawed to feel uneasy about a married couple both miraculously getting to be president and I don't. I do appreciate the exchange with you though, it's been the most engaging poligaf has been for a while instead of reading, like, yaaas queen multiple times every day
------
Even assuming that Hillary made it this far entirely on her own without profiting whatsoever from her successful husband, (which I do not agree with but am granting for the sake of debate) it does nothing to alter my view because it is the association by way of marriage that produces the anxiousness that so many people feel at the subversion of democracy despite her obvious acumen and experience.
shinra-bansho
Member
I can see why they think that way.
I still consider it a flawed line of thinking.
It's also flawed to be tired of Obamas, since there's been one Obama.
If Bernie Sanders became President, and then Jane Sanders decided to do something in public office it would also be flawed.
The last time a Clinton ran for the Presidency, she lost to an Obama, and an Edwards was running. The opponent was a McCain.
I still consider it a flawed line of thinking.
It's also flawed to be tired of Obamas, since there's been one Obama.
If Bernie Sanders became President, and then Jane Sanders decided to do something in public office it would also be flawed.
The last time a Clinton ran for the Presidency, she lost to an Obama, and an Edwards was running. The opponent was a McCain.
It's not "miraculous." Both Bill and Hillary are accomplished people. Again that sort of thinking pretends that the latter didn't really have to do anything to get where she is, and/or that without the former she'd be a nobody.
excelsiorlef
Member
The continued insinuation that Hillary Clinton hasn't earned her way to where she is is frankly disgusting
Retromelon
Member
Thats because you're reading it that way and you have an axe to grind. Hillary has unequivocally earned what she achieved, but to say that she hasn't had somewhat of a boost because of her husband, in addition to her sincere efforts? Let's not be naive.
But it's never used the other way.
I never hear how much does Bill own from his career to Hillary.
How much did the very active, involved and political approach of Hillary helped Bill? She was a very popular first lady and she was very involved in the political process. That was the reason the republicans disliked her from the very beginning.
How much did the approach of Hillary to the scandal helped Bill too? A messy divorce a la Francois Hollande would have made a bigger and severe dent in Bill's popularity. Please see current case of Hollande if you want to measure what cheating and divorcing your wife while being president does to you. That case was messy with back and forth vitriol. He is being a walking dead man since, because you know women vote in bigger numbers than men, and that gap is widening.
When people talk about Bill, it's his career, his own legacy. 100% him.
When people talk about Senator Clinton, SoS Clinton, it's always the 'Clintons' as a couple. She is Bill's legacy.
It seems that successful men are always self made men, and successful women always own their careers to their dad, husband or prominent male in the family.
superdeluxe
Member
This event is all over my FB TL
This event is all over my FB TL
Never before, in the whole of political history, have so many wasted so much money for so little.
User 463088
Banned
I don't think it's a bad idea. I may be the most expensive 'Free' media coverage ever, but people is free to spend money on whatever they want. If all they want is 'Free' media time for their candidate/message they might get it.
And you could talk about 'wasted money' for every primary/election loser ever (including Clinton 08) so I don't think that's fair.
Prodigal Son
Member
Message, yo. These people, for reasons you may not agree with, are not a fan of the democratic establishment. Many supporters I speak with know he has no chance. they support him because they want his message to continue to have the national platform it now does. They want to see it continue to resonate with people and start something that lasts beyond this primary. You may not believe in that cause or share their idealism, but that doesn't matter to very many people.
aspiegamer
Member
I'm going to have to question that statement. Not because I have any specific proof against it, but surely something similar has happened somewhere. Maybe Ron Paul 2012? Dollar for dollar arguably more wasteful, but certainly not as many donors.
That's probably the most wasteful campaign spending of all time (SuperPAC included of course), but mostly taken out of the pockets of gullible wealthy establishment folk.
Of course in no way am I attempting to undersell the burning of millions of dollars of beer/pizza/tuition money that's gone on for months now by Sanders. Given any new funds would probably be going toward air time in CA, that's an even bigger waste of ad cash than usual when he'll need an absolutely impossible 70%+ of the vote there. $0 or $100M spent, it simply will make zero difference. You could literally pile up the money in a gigantic mountain of $27 wads of singles, light it aflame, and accomplish just as much.
shinra-bansho
Member
I'm confused as to whether these people actually think that this would amount to a news story that would flood the airwaves for a day.
No wonder they're occupying CNN.
No wonder they're occupying CNN.
Glad others don't want decent progress to stop or allow the SC to become conservative again. Two evils, such an intellectually lazy statement. Also lol conspiracies. Yes, at this point I want it to be over. After the debate a few nights ago my respect for Bernie has hit an all time low. I went from loving the guy to being eh.
I'd argue this is more wasteful, just because the people donating are not, by and large, hugely wealthy, which differentiates them from the backers of pretty much every other hugely funded political failure ever.
Message, yo. These people, for reasons you may not agree with, are not a fan of the democratic establishment. Many supporters I speak with know he has no chance. they support him because they want his message to continue to have the national platform it now does. They want to see it continue to resonate with people and start something that lasts beyond this primary. You may not believe in that cause or share their idealism, but that doesn't matter to very many people.
Like I get the fact people want his message to persist, this just seems like a ridiculously inefficient method of trying to achieve that.
soundscream
Member
I can't wrap my head around people comparing the Clintons to the Bush's. Just looking how Bill and Hillary grew up vs the long line of blue bloods the Bush's descend from is laughable.
This is how the GOP will control 3 branches of government. Because of stupid people like this.
1. How can people say NEVER BEFORE HAVE PEOPLE WASTED SO MUCH. Um hello? Jeb Bush? This year?
2. So in Quantum Break, did they try to make Shawn Ashmore look so much younger than actual real life Shawn Ashmore? Swapping between the game and the "show" portions I was like eeeee harsh lighting.
3. I can't really complain about people dedicated to things like phonebanking but I really wonder what kind of person it works on. I guess you would have to be registered to vote, going to vote, but forgetful?
2. So in Quantum Break, did they try to make Shawn Ashmore look so much younger than actual real life Shawn Ashmore? Swapping between the game and the "show" portions I was like eeeee harsh lighting.
3. I can't really complain about people dedicated to things like phonebanking but I really wonder what kind of person it works on. I guess you would have to be registered to vote, going to vote, but forgetful?
The woman's efforts to support her husband are not acknowledged, but the power and influence of the husband casts suspicion on the accomplishments of the woman.
Trying to say, "That's just how you're seeing it" is not close to being an excuse for sexism, Retro.
Use line breaks man
Phonebanking is probably not very convincing but it's quite good for collecting data.
It's has 2 objectives, but the main one is DATA, GOLDEN CAMPAIGN DATA.
On one hand It's a tool to reach the sympathiser, the guy leaning to your candidate but not really involved, or not really bothered to vote at all.
If you reach someone voting for your opponent you should say ' Thank you for your time, good bye'.
The reason is, it would take MUCH more time to try to sway or convince someone who's voting for your adversary, than trying to convince someone who likes your guy to get the f*** out and vote.
Anyways the main objective is to give clean data to the campaign, your canvassers and GOTV volunteers, so they know the neighbourhoods, how are they leaning, which houses to go, where to focus, plan campaign events, etc...
It helps them with demo data and internals too.
I don't think it's fair to call her stupid - it's about not wanting to vote for someone who you don't believe shares your values. This continued argument that you should just suck it up and vote for someone you don't agree with is ridiculous. Hell, if among your big issues are campaign finance and the Iraq War you might even be more likely to vote for Trump than Hillary if you weren't sitting it out.
Because maybe your adversary make better sandwiches.
While stupid is perhaps the wrong word, anyone calling Hillary a criminal is clearly not basing their voting decisions entirely on reason.
RustyNails
Member
Didnt hillary already do that with mcdonalds
I think people have already decided who their guy is going to be, hearing the same bullet points 15 jillion times isn't going to change a lot
But why won't Hillary release all the cheese slices? #NotSoBigMac #CorrectTheOrder #ImNotLovinIt #HamburglarHill #RunOverByDriveThruPolitics #UnfitToGrill #SandWhichHillary #DupeSizeMe #RegisterFraud #FriesWithThatShakedown
FloydtheFathead
Member
:jnc
shinra-bansho
Member
Did they #OccupyNYT?
User 463088
Banned
WAIT WAIT WAIT
Shawn Ashmore stars in Quantum BReak?
WHY AM I JUST FINDING THIS OUT.
I wrote him a love letter when I was like 11. He wrote back. XD
OMG. OMG.
FUCK.
Shawn Ashmore stars in Quantum BReak?
WHY AM I JUST FINDING THIS OUT.
I wrote him a love letter when I was like 11. He wrote back. XD
OMG. OMG.
FUCK.
Black Republican
Member
i see you started very young!
User 463088
Banned
I mean, it was just a stupid "OMG you're like the best actor EVER" but his people actually wrote back, and actually returned the picture I sent to him autographed. Soooo....it was something.
RustyNails
Member
Shawn ashmore be corrupting minds of impressionable 11 year olds
User 463088
Banned
There was a good NPR article/interview how internet echo chambers or just being involved with a campaign with very loud supporters has fostered diviseness due to people thinking their candidate has overwhelming support and are incredulous that they lose, ultimately blaming fraud when they can't accept that they just aren't popular with a majority of people.
Romney 2012 is just about a mirror image of Bernie 2016
Romney 2012 is just about a mirror image of Bernie 2016
I don't think that makes a lot of sense. Trump was pro-Iraq War. He has made up his current position that he was against it out of whole cloth. There are tapes out there with him supporting it, including on the Howard Stern show. There's no real evidence he was against it pre-War.
And Trump represents money in politics. I think the idea that he is for campaign finance reform is really odd: A) he is certain to take money in the general (because you need to) and B) any judge he appoints would never overturn Citizens United.
Hillary has said she would appoint a judge to overturn CU and also that the Iraq War vote was a mistake. Progressives that hold this against her in favor of Trump are misguided.
You will discover you were 11 a long time ago. Maybe Johnathan Taylor Thomas is free.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked