• 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.

Tubie

Member
Much of what he's saying isn't 'pure fantasy' for an astonishingly large percentage of the modern world. Maybe we should do less dismissing and more wondering why the fuck we can afford war but not education or health care.

Are you really wondering this when 47-49% of the country is ready to vote for whatever lunatic the republicans will nominate.

We live in an extremely divided country when it comes to social and economic philosophies, this is why change never comes fast and any step to the left should be celebrated.

People protesting republican obstruction to Sanders plans outside of capitol would only actually help those republicans stay in power and even gain more seats. Can you imagine how those images would rile up the right and even far right?

The Sanders revolution would actually need to come to arms and start a second civil war in order for him to accomplish all he promises within 8 years.
 

Clefargle

Member
I've been paying attention, but when you have people rising up in disgust over this system, you're seeing a vehicle for changing the status quo. That makes the 'fantasy' not as fanciful, IMHO. Are you asleep? Do you not think that another four years of neoliberal political fuckery will mean MORE outrage next cycle? Because HRC isn't going to even try to address the issues that are causing this anger. Sanders didn't invent it, he's just found himself at the head of it. I think that even he's been surprised at the effectiveness of his message.

Even if Hillary wins, she loses. She won't address the unrest, she can't disarm it.

Drop the pretentiousness, people here aren't "asleep" while you are "awakened". Many GAF members here support Bernie and his ideas but also don't see how he achieves his plans. It's not because they're ignorant, it's because more often than not, Bernie doesn't have a plan. Other than breaking up the banks, he doesn't go into detail on his plans often meaning that these fears keep surmounting. By many metrics the US is better off than when Obama took office. His "neoliberal fuckery" as you call it has reduced unemployment, the deficit, and the uninsured. These aren't intangible changes, they affect people's lives. Clinton has laid out plans to tackle many of the issues Bernie champions. But most of her plans are detailed as hell with caveats and potential plan B. This is the more realistic approach considering how obstructionist the GOP was with Obama. Nice way to move the goalpost btw, if Clinton wins, she wins. And she will undoubtedly strive to court the Sanders supporters for her next election 4 years later. You're talking past reality man.
 
Bernie is simply talk about issues that mainly concern the younger voters, and he seems exciting and fresh. That is probably something that younger voters care more about, than some older voters whom probably value more someone with more experience and connections. I doubt during the primary that Hillary will gain more support from younger voters, and she doesn't really need to. During general she should gain more because simply the nature of the presidential primary; still most people don't vote during the primaries or follow it heavily that goes the same with plenty of younger voters. I think Bernie's support from young voters is impressive, but seems overblown to an extent. It really shouldn't be a surprise that he is getting massive support from that demographic, simply like I stated younger voters probably value different things in a candidate then other demographics and considering that how liberal young voters are it makes sense.

Although, it still seems like turnout is still way down from 2008 and the I don't know if voter participation in terms of percentage is close to that of 2008 or 2004, but if it is not I say that his support is mostly exaggerated by the media, social media, the internet in general, and how vocal some of his supporters are. If I had to guess his support largely comes from 30-45 year old white Americans, but this people don't send a lot of their time of internet, in places like Facebook and Reddit. Hillary won't have a huge issue with uniting the party because I believe that there wasn't a fracture to begin with and a chunk of Bernie supporters are independent young voters that typically don't vote, and probably wouldn't have even if he wasn't in the picture.
 
Barnie Frank having a meltdown on MSNBC:
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/are-sanders-attacks-on-clinton-taking-a-toll-668818499802

Ends the segment with "Why would you bring that up when I can't answer it". I lol'd. Such a simple line of questioning met with so much panic and frustration from Barnie Frank. Nina effin killed it here.

Also, over 1400 people have been arrested in Democracy protests so far. Shame it gets no coverage. They even arrested Cenk Uygur, Rosario Dawson and Lady Liberty:

SWQR41Z.jpg
 
It's a dumb line of questioning. Bill Clinton as a private citizen doesn't need to abide by the rules of Bill Clinton as a sitting President. Harry Reid as a private citizen after he retires doesn't need to abide by the rules of Congress when he retires this year. Barney Frank having left Congress doesn't need to abide by its rules.

It's a nonsensical mentality that requires people be lifetime public servants and/or never engage with industry prior to or after public office.
 
Barnie Frank having a meltdown on MSNBC:
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/are-sanders-attacks-on-clinton-taking-a-toll-668818499802

Ends the segment with "Why would you bring that up when I can't answer it". I lol'd. Such a simple line of questioning met with so much panic and frustration from Barnie Frank. Nina effin killed it here.

Also, over 1400 people have been arrested in Democracy protests so far. Shame it gets no coverage. They even arrested Cenk Uygur, Rosario Dawson and Lady Liberty:

SWQR41Z.jpg

That's not a meltdown, that's annoyance at facile arguments and ridiculous lines of questioning.

I started to tune out as soon as she ran with Sanders has always been honest and consistent. This is fundamentally not true. We've already seen that he used his vote on the 94 Crime Bill to present himself as tough on crime in the past but is now pointing fingers at Clinton and blaming her for it.

Also Nina just kept saying he got things done, but didn't provide anything. She completely side stepped

Also what kind of question is why can't sitting congressmen or Senator get speaking fees if Clinton was able to when she was a private citizen?


That's self evident and Frank knows that Lawrence knows that.

Lawrence talked as if the paid talks that Clinton did while a private citizen were themselves evidence of corruption, that's horseshit.

You're definition of killed it is bizarre. Frank talked respectfully of supporting the nominee regardless and Nina did a quick Bernie stump, constantly interrupted Frank and threatened the Democrats to elect Sanders or else.

There's no panic there, just incredulity at such a stupid question. Also is it just me or was there a time cut at the end?
 
It's a dumb line of questioning. Bill Clinton as a private citizen doesn't need to abide by the rules of Bill Clinton as a sitting President. Harry Reid as a private citizen after he retires doesn't need to abide by the rules of Congress when he retires this year. Barney Frank having left Congress doesn't need to abide by its rules.

It's a nonsensical mentality that requires people be lifetime public servants and/or never engage with industry prior to or after public office.

Yes but this isn't about Bill Clinton, Harry Reid or Barnie Frank, it's about the former Secretary of State, first lady and congresswoman running for President.

The questions had nothing to do with what 'private citizens' want to do, the main question was, since none of the people (that were mentioned there) that are using Hillary's fundraising methods ever took one dollar in private speaking fees, because it would have been illegal due to senate and house rules, if those fees are so innocent and meaningless, why are those rules in place then? Why if it is known that those rules are there, would a candidate for president not observe those rules for herself?

The point of the questioning wasn't the details of campaign finance laws, it is the much deeper issue of a revolving door between industry and politics, a conflict of interests in our government and the corrupting opportunities that brings with it. And I would also note that there is a giant difference between going to an industry cocktail party or speaking to someone from within the industry, and getting a $250.000 check 'for free'.
 
Why would a private citizen have to observe rules for Congressional or Administration members? She was a former Secretary of State, a former Senator, a former First Lady, which means all of nothing in terms of what one can do.

What are "Hillary's fundraising methods" they're just fundraising methods. Hi Belinda!
 
She doesn't have to, but since she didn't, I think that criticizing and questioning those speeches and those fees is fair game, and so Barnie Frank melting down over simple questions is not a good look. Remember, neither Bernie nor any of the Republican candidates gave speeches to GS for such fees, so it's not like we're expecting something out of the ordinary. Besides, it it really that strange to say that if something is illegal for a congressperson, perhaps it should also be illegal for a presidential candidate?

You are telling me that you are completely comfortable with someone getting millions of dollars from various industries behind closed doors and then turning around and saying 'I will regulate and take on these industries'? Cause I'm not!
 
Yes but this isn't about Bill Clinton, Harry Reid or Barnie Frank, it's about the former Secretary of State, first lady and congresswoman running for President.

The questions had nothing to do with what 'private citizens' want to do, the main question was, since none of the people (that were mentioned there) that are using Hillary's fundraising methods ever took one dollar in private speaking fees, because it would have been illegal due to senate and house rules, if those fees are so innocent and meaningless, why are those rules in place then? Why if it is known that those rules are there, would a candidate for president not observe those rules for herself?

The point of the questioning wasn't the details of campaign finance laws, it is the much deeper issue of a revolving door between industry and politics, a conflict of interests in our government and the corrupting opportunities that brings with it. And I would also note that there is a giant difference between going to an industry cocktail party or speaking to someone from within the industry, and getting a $250.000 check 'for free'.

All of them are still in office or dead. Lewis, Pelosi and Reid have been in office since 1987 in some form or another. Obama went from young Senator to President, and Kennedy was in office from 1962 to the day he died.
 
She wasn't a presidential candidate at the time. The activities of declared candidate committees are regulated.

You essentially want to regulate and/or criminalise people's behaviour and activities out of public office, simply for having held or wanting to hold in future public office.

It is nonsense.

And would forbid President Kev, which would be a travesty.

I want to regulate the revolving door between politics and industry, yes that is correct. I think that no sitting official should be allowed to get millions from any industry, I think that all elections should be publicly funded and I think that no Presidential Candidate should be allowed to cozy up to rich people and big corporations and WS firms. Absolutely.
You're going beyond the activities of presidential candidates. You're not talking about sitting officials. You're talking about people engaging in private capacities, outside of public office. As Clinton was. She wasn't a Senator, she was a Cabinet member, she wasn't First Lady, she wasn't a Presidential candidate.

She was Hillary Clinton, private citizen.
 
I want to regulate the revolving door between politics and industry, yes that is correct. I think that no sitting official should be allowed to get millions from any industry, I think that all elections should be publicly funded and I think that no Presidential Candidate should be allowed to cozy up to rich people and big corporations and WS firms. Absolutely.


Interesting comments by Anderson Cooper on Stern btw:

http://www.newser.com/story/223777/anderson-cooper-says-how-hes-voting-shocks-howard-stern.html

Anderson Cooper doesn't think he's voting in the 2016 elections—and doesn't think other reporters should either, Mediaite reports. "I don’t think I’m gonna vote," the CNN reporter said Monday on the Howard Stern Show. "I don’t think reporters should vote."
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
I want to regulate the revolving door between politics and industry, yes that is correct. I think that no sitting official should be allowed to get millions from any industry, I think that all elections should be publicly funded and I think that no Presidential Candidate should be allowed to cozy up to rich people and big corporations and WS firms. Absolutely.

So it's just the Big Corporations and Wall Street you are worried about? Who is to determine what someone can and can't do?
 
I want to regulate the revolving door between politics and industry, yes that is correct. I think that no sitting official should be allowed to get millions from any industry, I think that all elections should be publicly funded and I think that no Presidential Candidate should be allowed to cozy up to rich people and big corporations and WS firms. Absolutely.

They don't.
 

jaekeem

Member
I want to regulate the revolving door between politics and industry, yes that is correct. I think that no sitting official should be allowed to get millions from any industry, I think that all elections should be publicly funded and I think that no Presidential Candidate should be allowed to cozy up to rich people and big corporations and WS firms. Absolutely.

I don't think any of your proposals will fly in America because of how free speech is interpreted, unless there is some kinda seismic shift in how people understand the bill of rights.

I would also like a world where all the elections are publicly funded, ignoring your other ideas, but that would basically mean going to war with every single interest group on both sides of the aisle. And they're not all big businesses either, unless you think the oil lobby is somehow analogous to emily's list or planned parenthood.
 

CCS

Banned
I want to regulate the revolving door between politics and industry, yes that is correct.

1. I think that no sitting official should be allowed to get millions from any industry

2. I think that all elections should be publicly funded

3.I think that no Presidential Candidate should be allowed to cozy up to rich people and big corporations and WS firms. Absolutely.


Interesting comments by Anderson Cooper on Stern btw:

http://www.newser.com/story/223777/anderson-cooper-says-how-hes-voting-shocks-howard-stern.html

1. They don't.

2. I agree, but while the system is as it is people have to fight with what they have.

3. So someone should decide at the very start of their career if they might ever want to run for president? If you say that before implementing 2 than that's the most ridiculous restriction I've ever heard of.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
1. No, but they are a start.
2. The people of the United States.

That's... going to be fun to try to regulate. Are we all going to vote on which jobs are acceptable?

Besides, why are you worried what a person does before being elected anyway? I can sorta see an argument for limited work after the person leaves office, as that is the only leverage those places might have, withholding a cushy job.

Look at Tom Wheeler, what exactly has he done wrong from having worked with Cable companies before he took the position? Is there any evidence it has affected his position?
 

jaekeem

Member
That's... going to be fun to try to regulate. Are we all going to vote on which jobs are acceptable?

Besides, why are you worried what a person does before being elected anyway? I can sorta see an argument for limited work after the person leaves office, as that is the only leverage those places might have, withholding a cushy job.

Look at Tom Wheeler, what exactly has he done wrong from having worked with Cable companies before he took the position? Is there any evidence it has affected his position?

Neel Kashkari too. Dude worked at Goldman, and now he's one of the loudest voices for breaking up the banks as the Minneapolis Fed Bank President.

The notion that people are somehow tainted for public office after working in the private sector, or certain parts of it, is just so abjectly cynical about human nature. Is someone not allowed to make some money and then dedicate their lives towards public service after gaining some work experience in the field?
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
The Bern Identity - Feel the Bern
The Bern Supremacy - Consistent Moral Purity
The Bern Ultimatum - "I swear I'll vote Trump!"
The Bern Legacy - Revolution! *skips voting in down ballot races and midterms*

I here there is a new one coming out, and Matt Damon is back!

EDIT: holy shit I missed the throwing money at hillary thing yesterday!
 

Trancos

Member
Weaver is the kind of guy who will let the whole world burn if Bernie could be the king of the ashes. No nuance, no negotiations, no mercy, never back down, always escalate. Destroy everything if it's necessary. 'We must prevail even if it is by destroying our allies'.

It scares me that a guy like that is (hypothetically) close to a very important cabinet role (in the alternative ending where Bernie wins) of the most powerful nation in the world.
 

CCS

Banned
Weaver is the kind of guy who will let the whole world burn if Bernie could be the king of the ashes. No nuance, no negotiations, no mercy, never back down, always escalate. Destroy everything if it's necessary. 'We must prevail even if it is by destroying our allies'.

It scares me that a guy like that is (hypothetically) close to a very important cabinet role (if the alternative ending where Bernie wins) of the most powerful nation in the world.

I think he's just desperate not to lose again. His career is basically one high profile failure after another.
 
She doesn't have to, but since she didn't, I think that criticizing and questioning those speeches and those fees is fair game, and so Barnie Frank melting down over simple questions is not a good look. Remember, neither Bernie nor any of the Republican candidates gave speeches to GS for such fees, so it's not like we're expecting something out of the ordinary. Besides, it it really that strange to say that if something is illegal for a congressperson, perhaps it should also be illegal for a presidential candidate?
You are telling me that you are completely comfortable with someone getting millions of dollars from various industries behind closed doors and then turning around and saying 'I will regulate and take on these industries'? Cause I'm not!

So far Bernie hasn't been able to give a single piece of evidence that her paid speeches negatively impacted her legislation or office positions. Not a ONE. Everything is accusation and conspiracy theories. Absolutely no substance in his attacks, like his policies. She has made a ton of speeches, a lot for great causes and gave a lot of that money back to charity. Yet he focuses on that one speech or two because Wall St happens to be the devil incarnate.

Yes I am pretty comfortable with Hillary because her character is sound despite all the baseless insinuations otherwise.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I woke up today to a bell tolling. I thought it was symbolic. CAN'T WAIT! Going to go vote multiple times by using the aliases of dead convicted felon black lesbian women who are illegally registered six times.
 
So far Bernie hasn't been able to give a single piece of evidence that her paid speeches negatively impacted her legislation or office positions. Not a ONE. Everything is accusation and conspiracy theories. Absolutely no substance in his attacks, like his policies. She has made a ton of speeches, a lot for great causes and gave a lot of that money back to charity. Yet he focuses on that one speech or two because Wall St happens to be the devil incarnate.

Yes I am pretty comfortable with Hillary because her character is sound despite all the baseless insinuations otherwise.

Not true, he gave the example of the bankruptcy bill in an interview recently.

Information about that situation here

Hillary Clinton pledged to help stop the bill and Warren writes that she later learned the Clinton White House — which had been poised to approve the legislation — turned on a dime after the first lady’s concern became apparent. Bill Clinton vetoed the bill after it passed Congress in his waning days in office.

Warren blames Clinton’s about-face as senator on the impact of campaign contributions. “The bill was essentially the same, but Hillary Rodham Clinton was not,” she wrote. “Hillary Clinton could not afford such a principled position. Campaigns cost money, and that money wasn’t coming from families in financial trouble.”

Warren also recounted this perspective in a fascinating 2004 interview with Bill Moyers.

Warren Video here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12mJ-U76nfg


And we're not talking about 'one or two speeches', we're talking about 729 speeches between Hillary and Bill, totaling 153 million dollars.
 
So nervous about today.

Bernie tends to do well when he has time to focus on a single state and spending a lot of time in that state. Debates only help him because he can act as hollier than thou.

Come on Hillary, give me a 15 point margin please!
 

Clefargle

Member
I hope Hildawg puts her heel down on this primary and clutched a 10+ point victory. Then it's off to the salt mines on Reddit to haul in the spoils. Mmmmmm
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS

8:34 AM: Cartoon_soldier posts a tweet about turnout being at "record high levels" with an ominous "..."

11:55 AM: Pigeon scares off three new posters from Azerbaijan, Russia, and Uzbekistan, respectively, complaining about American democracy

1:04 PM: Diablos, responding to a Bernie fan's personal story on Medium, has a meltdown about why the DNC can't better control the message

4:00 PM: First posts asking "when exit polls will start" even though they always come out after 5

5:00 PM: Exit polls are delayed

6:00 PM: Exit polls show Hillary winning black voters by only 2 points

9:00 PM: Polls close. FUCK! Trump wins NY. Dem race too early too call with Clinton lead.

9:43 PM: Hillary called winner, I go on crow spree for aggressive reality deniers of last week.

That's just sad.

:covermouth
 
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS

8:34 AM: Cartoon_soldier posts a tweet about turnout being at "record high levels" with an ominous "..."

11:55 AM: Pigeon scares off three new posters from Azerbaijan, Russia, and Uzbekistan, respectively, complaining about American democracy

1:04 PM: Diablos, responding to a Bernie fan's personal story on Medium, has a meltdown about why the DNC can't better control the message

4:00 PM: First posts asking "when exit polls will start" even though they always come out after 5

5:00 PM: Exit polls are delayed

6:00 PM: Exit polls show Hillary winning black voters by only 2 points

9:00 PM: Polls close. FUCK! Trump wins NY. Dem race too early too call with Clinton lead.

9:43 PM: Hillary called winner, I go on crow spree for aggressive reality deniers of last week.

:covermouth
Disappointed that you didn't make it Uzbekibekistan.
 

Trancos

Member
Not true, he gave the example of the bankruptcy bill in an interview recently.

Information about that situation here



Warren Video here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12mJ-U76nfg


And we're not talking about 'one or two speeches', we're talking about 729 speeches between Hillary and Bill, totaling 153 million dollars.

The complete definition of 'circumstantial', 'conspiracy theory' and " hearsay'

A private meeting with no witnesses, She said that she said (hearsay)
An imaginary cause-effect relation with no proof at all: Bill vetoed because of HRC (conspiracy theory)
She voted for it when she was senator (circumstantial)

try that in a court of law. The whole cause-effect relation is speculation at best.
And I still don't get where the speeches fit in there? there is no speeches in this story.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
If Bernie wins NY, and that is unlikely but if, I wouldn't go around laughing at or mocking people that support Hillary, because their support for her is as legit as other people's support for Bernie.

I don't care what you're going to do honestly. When Hillary is crowned, I will beam with pride.

Voted in Brooklyn. Probably a dozen or so people there, which isn't bad for a primary at 6:30 in the morning.

...
 
I don't care what you're going to do honestly. When Hillary is crowned, I will beam with pride.
...

That is completely different from saying you are going to revel in the disappointment on the other side. Being proud is fine. Mocking and disparaging the other side is not, regardless of who you support. Or, at least I think that a unified party is important.
 

danm999

Member
If Bernie loses badly today I think it's time for his campaign to call it quits. The next few heavy delegate states are hardly any better for him and at this rate even a 70-30 thrashing in Cali wouldn't get the job done.

I had no problem with him staying in until recently, he was still a message candidate with what seemed like a net positive impact on things. Now it's all recriminations and temper tantrums that the establishment have pulled the rug out from under him and it's just getting sad. His most prominent opportunity to keep it to the issues recently have been fiascos (that NY Daily interview...) and I don't know what to make of this Vatican trip.
 

CCS

Banned
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS

8:34 AM: Cartoon_soldier posts a tweet about turnout being at "record high levels" with an ominous "..."

11:55 AM: Pigeon scares off three new posters from Azerbaijan, Russia, and Uzbekistan, respectively, complaining about American democracy

1:04 PM: Diablos, responding to a Bernie fan's personal story on Medium, has a meltdown about why the DNC can't better control the message

4:00 PM: First posts asking "when exit polls will start" even though they always come out after 5

5:00 PM: Exit polls are delayed

6:00 PM: Exit polls show Hillary winning black voters by only 2 points

9:00 PM: Polls close. FUCK! Trump wins NY. Dem race too early too call with Clinton lead.

9:43 PM: Hillary called winner, I go on crow spree for aggressive reality deniers of last week.



:covermouth


You missed Adam alternating between YAASSSSSSING and asking to be held for 4 hours :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom