Support NeoGAF

[User 406]

I don't get how someone your age can speedrun Dark Souls. Haven't your motor neurons basically gone to shit?

At this point more than half of my grey matter is massively optimized for Warhawk and the souls games. Use it or lose it.

 

[Jack Remington]

I donated ONE TIME to Hillary Clinton, and now I get emails every single day. Got a few from Bill too. This is a typical email:

Jack, even with our delegate lead, we can’t underestimate Senator Sanders and his team.

He won three contests last weekend and his supporters raised $4 million in the 48 hours following. They aren't letting anything distract or discourage them, and we can't either.

We have the pledged delegate lead, the most votes, the most wins, and the most support -- because we've poured everything we have into this campaign. We’ve fought hard in every single state. We’re not backing down now.

With just a few hours to go before our fundraising deadline, we're still looking for 4 donations from Los Angeles to hit our goal by midnight tonight. Will you dig deep and chip in just $5 to let me know you're still with me? We have work to do.

You’re one of our most committed supporters. Because you've saved your payment information, your donation will go through immediately:

I've donated once, and I'm one of her most committed supporters.

 

[Kangi]

Speaking of which, is there footage of MSNBC from the 15th I can rewatch? I want to hear Maddow's groan when Hillary took Missouri.

 

[johnsmith]

Somebody call the Waaaahmbulance

http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-...bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-apology-221457

 

[Basileus777]

I donated ONE TIME to Hillary Clinton, and now I get emails every single day. Got a few from Bill too. This is a typical email:



I've donated once, and I'm one of her most committed supporters.

This is what all political organizations will do once they have your name on a donor list. In like 5 years you'll stop getting them.

 

[User 463088]

Speaking of which, is there footage of MSNBC from the 15th I can rewatch? I want to hear Maddow's groan when Hillary took Missouri.

I know Rachel wants Bernie, but I'm damn proud of her 99% of the time. The way she hit Bernie on the "We didn't try" shit was beautiful. She may be partisan, but she's a damn good journalist.

 

[User 463088]

I donated ONE TIME to Hillary Clinton, and now I get emails every single day. Got a few from Bill too. This is a typical email:



I've donated once, and I'm one of her most committed supporters.

I never knew you were a bank.

 

[Zona]

https://twitter.com/People4Bernie/st...01567401504768

lol no you won't. No different than that gaffer who said the college kids would make phone calls and lobby the Supreme Court to give in to their demands.

Paul Ryan going to apparently see millions of kids outside his office demanding free college or else his members are going to be thrown out.

I really don't understand this argument. Even if you managed to get a few million people to show up outside Ryan's office, if they had the power to remove Ryan he wouldn't still be there. Why would he, or any other senator or congressperson, care about millions of people who already failed to remove him from office, and their party from the majority?

 

[Wilsongt]

I know Rachel wants Bernie, but I'm damn proud of her 99% of the time. The way she hit Bernie on the "We didn't try" shit was beautiful. She may be partisan, but she's a damn good journalist.

It almost seems as if Fox is coming to Bernie's defense. But they are only doing it because he is a Not Hillary (TM).

 

[User 406]

I've donated once, and I'm one of her most committed supporters.

That's because nobody actually supports Hillary. And who would? She's totally been bought and paid for by Big Jack Remington. Beyond beyond corrupt corrupt.

 

[Y2Kev]

I donated

then i unsubscribed

it was easy

 

[excelsiorlef]

I donated ONE TIME to Hillary Clinton, and now I get emails every single day. Got a few from Bill too. This is a typical email:



I've donated once, and I'm one of her most committed supporters.

Ignoring that. This is a classy email in terms of showing respect to her opponent.

 

[RustyNails]

I donated

then i unsubscribed

it was easy

Tell us who you donated to. This is shame free zone.

 

[Macho Madness]

Tell us who you donated to. This is shame free zone.

Gilmore

EDIT: oh you were asking who Kev donated to.

Rand.

 

[Wilsongt]

Speaking of no shame...

Now that FFXV is no longer the biggest piece of vaporwear in existance, how are The Last Guardian folks holding up?

 

[CCS]

A lot of the talk about ideological purity has pissed me off so allow me a small rant.

What is ideological purity in the context of demanding Sanders or bust? Is it a brave and noble stand against the corruption of the Democrat party, a principled statement that you will not vote for a candidate whose beliefs do not completely align with your own? No. What it is is a childish protest, designed to allow you to feel the most wonderful of emotions: self-righteous congratulation. You do stand with minorities and the disabled and LGBT people and every other oppressed group. In fact, you stand with them so strongly, so committedly, that for their own good you are willing to subject this country to a government that will do everything in its power to break and dismantle every construction of progress that has been erected over decades, so that the Democrat party will realise the need to come and pray at your feet for forgiveness for its ideological infidelity. It is the demand that the only voice that should matter in a democracy is yours. It is the belief that your apathy, your moral cowardice, your refusal to face the consequences of your every single privileged action, is justified by the Democratic party not nominating your favourite candidate. It is your self-righteous throne that you will sit on as those less fortunate than yourself face irrecoverable damage to their lives and they are sacrificed to your God of purity, of refusal to compromise, of being utterly unwilling to accept how the world is, because your fantastic dream of what it should be is far more pleasant than facing reality.

Fuck ideological purity.

 

[teiresias]

Speaking of no shame...

Now that FFXV is no longer the biggest piece of vaporwear in existance, how are The Last Guardian folks holding up?

Fine, since TLG is likely to not suck as much as FFXV.

 

[Y2Kev]

Tell us who you donated to. This is shame free zone.

Of course I donated to Hillary. She is the only serious candidate running. Now I get all these personal phone calls though asking me to bundle. Like sorry I have deals to close.

 

[Holmes]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=199891284&postcount=76

wrecked

omg

 

[Macho Madness]

Of course I donated to Hillary. She is the only serious candidate running. Now I get all these personal phone calls though asking me to bundle. Like sorry I have deals to close.

Wall Street!!!

 

[User 463088]

A lot of the talk about ideological purity has pissed me off so allow me a small rant.

What is ideological purity in the context of demanding Sanders or bust? Is it a brave and noble stand against the corruption of the Democrat party, a principled statement that you will not vote for a candidate whose beliefs do not completely align with your own? No. What it is is a childish protest, designed to allow you to feel the most wonderful of emotions: self-righteous congratulation. You do stand with minorities and the disabled and LGBT people and every other oppressed group. In fact, you stand with them so strongly, so committedly, that for their own good you are willing to subject this country to a government that will do everything in its power to break and dismantle every construction of progress that has been erected over decades, so that the Democrat party will realise the need to come and pray at your feet for forgiveness for its ideological infidelity. It is the demand that the only voice that should matter in a democracy is yours. It is the belief that your apathy, your moral cowardice, your refusal to face the consequences of your every single privileged action, is justified by the Democratic party not nominating your favourite candidate. It is your self-righteous throne that you will sit on as those less fortunate than yourself face irrecoverable damage to their lives and they are sacrificed to your God of purity, of refusal to compromise, of being utterly unwilling to accept how the world is, because your fantastic dream of what it should be is far more pleasant than facing reality.

Fuck ideological purity.

But Hillary tho.....

 

[Makai]

omg

"Hillary still messages me "

 

[Y2Kev]

And as I said, they’re mostly people who aren’t going to like Trump, at least if the excellent reporting from Politico and other news organizations is right.

oh nate

 

[Iolo]

I donated ONE TIME to Hillary Clinton, and now I get emails every single day. Got a few from Bill too. This is a typical email:

I've donated once, and I'm one of her most committed supporters.

Dear X. Ann Mobil—
You're one of our most committed supporters...

 

[Wilsongt]

Fine, since TLG is likely to not suck as much as FFXV.

Sir, sir.
No. *pulls off glove and smacks in the face*

 

[User 463088]

Ohio's GOP chair Matt Borges is hinting he wants Pubis' job next year.

Also, the GOP's website wants to know my location. I'ma go with no on that one. Not gonna make it easy on them.

 

[Makai]

Hillary has the ugliest website.

Bernie's is pretty good. Trump has DDOS protection on his.

Best website is easily Ted Cruz - http://tedcruzforamerica.com

 

[User 463088]

I need that Joseph Altuzarra Hillary tee.

I need it in my veins.

 

[ampere]

Dear X. Ann Mobil—
You're one of our most committed supporters...

Hah

 

[East Lake]

Your first link (the Princton study) is a theoretical assessment that doesn't do the due diligence to make it into anything more than interesting. A few key flaws:
1. It presumes public polling matches 1:1 with good policy. The jobs of politicians isn't just to give people what they want, it is to give people what they need and what would best serve the nation even if the general populous disagrees.

Um, no. That argument is kind of gross in its judgment. The government should be representative of what people want, or at least more than it is now. If people are too poorly educated to know what a good budget looks like then it should be effectively communicated that they're not voting for candidates that represent what they want, and why.

2. As for the second paper (by the Roosevelt Institute): of course large corporations make up the majority of political campaign finance. We all know this. This existed before Citizen's United and has only grown since. Unless you can show where campaign contributions have led to Clinton giving favors however I'm dubious as to the relevance of this link. In fact, the paper linked is from the 2012 election cycle and goes into detail on the surprising (to them I guess) amount of corporate support Obama had. What favors did that buy? Did substantial financial support to his 2008 campaign from the financial sector buy Obama's bias on Dodd-Frank and the Consumer Protection Act (the answer is a resounding "NO")? Money in politics is a problem but money in politics isn't the problem at the presidential level. POTUS candidates, especially Democrat POTUS candidates, are far more focused on personal legacy than financial gain. The money in politics problem is at the local, state, and house levels where a million dollars can make a huge difference and where politicians can much more easily hide.

The solution to this is not a campaign finance "purity pledge" by those on the left but instead legitimate reforms that start with the SCOTUS, allowing for a challenge to and refutation of Citizen's United in a future hearing. In brief the Dems can't refuse special interest money until they get legislation forcing everyone to refuse it, otherwise the GOP will continue to dominate state houses and Congress while they pass progressively more and more corrupt campaign financial "laws".

So in response to these papers you agree money is a problem, particularly a local level but that Democrats, unlike the republicans are the good guys who aren't captured by the same mechanisms. Moreover we know this because democrats are focused on their legacy as opposed to republicans. I don't think it needs to be argued further that speculating on the inner motivations of the candidates is not evidence or an argument, and is probably just as speculative or even more so than calling Hillary power hungry.

As for the three Haiti related articles, they're he said/she said nonsense.

1. The suggestion that Hillary Clinton had direct influence on her husband's oversight of Haitian assistance is laughable. The State Dept. was obviously involved (as it would be with any Sec. of State) and assisted in constructing deals to theoretically improve the economy, but that is well within the standard purview of the position. No proof of political favoritism evident. Meanwhile Bill Clinton's efforts in Haiti have not worked out well, but then neither have the efforts of any other assistance attempt in Haiti post-earthquake. Red Cross for example has effectively wasted almost all the charitable contributions they've received.

You say this as if the Red Cross did its absolute best for Haiti or something. The incompetence of that organization doesn't generalize to others. The Clintons have been quite successful in making sure Haiti doesn't develop, for example.

2. The merit of the argument in the second article hinges entirely on the belief that the DR and Nicaragua were also going to implement similar increases in minimum wage laws. As the U.S. based powers involved likely knew the corporate stances on those wage increases (i.e. if they happen we're leaving) and the fact that a job paying $0.31 an hour is better than no job, it isn't exactly a cut and dry situation of supporting corporations over the opinions of the citizenry present. Lets not forget that Haiti elected and generally loves Aristide, who's policies were a huge part in leading to country into the economic ruin it experiences today. Their government has made bad choice after bad choice for decades.

US policies played a huge part in the country's economic ruin today, Bill Clinton even admitted it! This seems to be a natural extension of the voters don't get what they want mindset. Poor Haitians are simply too dumb to know what's good for them, so better to have the Clintons make those decisions for them.

3. As for the merits of rice subsidies in the U.S., I would just have to ask how much you think one nation should be beholden to the well-being of another. Arkansas is, relative to the U.S., an economically poor state that is not a viable competitor with the corn belt on soy and corn production. That is what their alternative would be if the rice subsidies were removed however, as there is greater market demand in the U.S. for corn and soy. The U.S. is a major food exporter around the world and depressing U.S. rice prices might hurt some countries but it does lower the cost of food globally, what could easily be argued as a net gain. Clinton obviously feels remorse about this as the impact of the subsidy is obvious in Haiti, but even his own feelings of guilt ignores just how many people have been fed thanks to U.S. rice subsidies.

What you're doing is shitposting, just shitposting via links instead of making the arguments yourself.

Not shitposting at all. We have to remember that these subsidies aren't "for the good of all people" or something. It might help Arkansas farmers, and it may have positive effects in some places. But Bill Clinton wiping out the the local food producing region shouldn't be handwaved away as some sort of enlightened, but at the same time misguided policy that gave Haitians the opportunity to work in a factory making cheap underwear for wages at the state department's preferred level.

Can you substantiate this? Goldman isn't known for owning non-financial companies. It's not like Bain, a huge holding company.

If they do own Drummond, I'd like to know when the acquired them. Goldman went public in 98 and only really starting buying companies then. And at that time and for a while afterwards, they were just buying financial companies. Seems unlikely they owned an energy company at the time of the allegations.

Never mind the nonsense that a person who gets paid to speak to such a company is somehow bought by them, and also culpable for their actions. Does Malcolm Gladwell also have blood on his hands?

As Coriolanus pointed out they did own a Colombian coal company CNR, but I think they sold it, and afiak they did (or do) own other commodities businesses. I mixed up Drummond and CNR since I read about both a while ago but that post was mostly a joke on conspiracy theorists connecting the dots too much. I do think it has interesting links in it though!

 

[Suikoguy]

You say this as if the Red Cross did its absolute best for Haiti or something. The incompetence of that organization doesn't generalize to others. The Clintons have been quite successful in making sure Haiti doesn't develop, for example.

Whoa whoa whoa, hold on a minute. You are claiming that the Clintons have intentionally sabotaged Haiti? That's a hell of a claim, with nothing to back it up.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Are we for eliminating protectionist subsidies now? I can't keep up.

I'm also a bit confused because I was under the impression that every word out of Clinton's mouth had been poll-tested to death. How much more representative of dumb people can you get.

The 538 forecasts change whenever a poll comes out and then keep changing as exits and results come in.

Greenpeace are:
1. Ideologues
2. Have no fucking idea what they're talking about 99.9% of the time.

This is from a few pages ago but warrants seconding.

 

[East Lake]

Whoa whoa whoa, hold on a minute. You are claiming that the Clintons have intentionally sabotaged Haiti? That's a hell of a claim, with nothing to back it up.

There's plenty to back it up but it's generally not a topic that's covered as much in contrast to the middle east or something, and to be fair that's more to do with Bill, though not his problem exclusively.

 

[T'Zariah]

There's plenty to back it up but it's generally not a topic that's covered as much in contrast to the middle east or something, and to be fair that's more to do with Bill, though not his problem exclusively.

No, fuck that.

Show me the receipts.

Don't make such a (likely) bullshit claim and not back it up with some credible sources.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Seth Mandel ‏@SethAMandel 1h1 hour ago
Seth Mandel Retweeted McKay Coppins
Heard @kkondik on the radio this morning saying if his numbers continue to slide they might flip Mizzou on their map

 

[The Lamonster]

Somebody call the Waaaahmbulance

http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-...bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-apology-221457

oh brother. Talk about a sore loser.

Seth Mandel ‏@SethAMandel 1h1 hour ago
Seth Mandel Retweeted McKay Coppins
Heard @kkondik on the radio this morning saying if his numbers continue to slide they might flip Mizzou on their map

The college? I sure hope that's what he's referring to, since us Missourians hate it when people think they can call the state by the name of the college in Columbia...

 

[Cybit]

I remember my dad rambling about how universities were indoctrination factories when I was still in high school. Even as much of a Good Little Republican as I was at the time, it still sounded more than a little dubious to me. I also remember him uttering the phrase, "Only someone so highly educated could be so stupid." In regards to an environmentalist on TV discussing climate change in the early 2000's.

It's amazing what even highly intelligent people can convince themselves of.

Eh, normal college is not - but liberal arts academia is absolutely an indoctrination factory, lol. (the missus is in it, and she's astounded at the groupthink and belief in orthodoxy involved)

 

[Suikoguy]

No, fuck that.

Show me the receipts.

Don't make such a (likely) bullshit claim and not back it up with some credible sources.

Some quick research shows the disconnect between those wanting to help and those affected by a disaster. Basically, organizations swoop in and want to rebuild and fix everything themselves, when the people who will reside there should better included in the process. Chelsea Clinton wrote about this in an email, and it's a pretty smart observation that was buried. Nowhere near sabotaging, and it's fucking ludicrous to say it was.

 

[T'Zariah]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pkmq7VwWBSw

Cenk being a moron on national television

 

[excelsiorlef]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pkmq7VwWBSw

Cenk being a moron on national television

Lol she's in a lot of trouble.... fucking Cenk

So what's this Democracy Spring thing?

 

[Bowdz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pkmq7VwWBSw

Cenk being a moron on national television

Lmao, fucking scrubs.

 

[Makai]

Heilemann thinks Bernie is competitive in NY

 

[Aaron Strife]

Seth Mandel ‏@SethAMandel 1h1 hour ago
Seth Mandel Retweeted McKay Coppins
Heard @kkondik on the radio this morning saying if his numbers continue to slide they might flip Mizzou on their map

On the Clinton vs. Trump map?

Let's go nuts! Utah and Idaho are just Lean R!

 

[Box of Kittens]

Heilemann thinks Bernie is competitive in NY

90-10 Clinton win confirmed.

 

[Makai]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wmzc0hvB-oY

wth Hillary already targeting Trump

 

[pigeon]

Um, no. That argument is kind of gross in its judgment. The government should be representative of what people want, or at least more than it is now. If people are too poorly educated to know what a good budget looks like then it should be effectively communicated that they're not voting for candidates that represent what they want, and why.

This argument is quite facile, in my view, because it assumes that all it takes is "education" to understand how to choose good government policies. That assumption does seem popular, but I think it's false. Policy isn't just one complex topic, it's a variety of complex topics. The average person is not going to be an expert on any of them. Nor should they! That is literally the entire point of a republican democracy -- you are supposed to elect people to be experts for you, and then expect them to execute on the goals you've communicated to them as well as they can.

 

[GYODX]

Eh, normal college is not - but liberal arts academia is absolutely an indoctrination factory, lol. (the missus is in it, and she's astounded at the groupthink and belief in orthodoxy involved)

It absolutely is a place where opinionated professors try to instill their (usually leftist) political views on young and impressionable people.

Here in Puerto Rico for instance, professors (usually non-STEM) will hammer on about Puerto Rican nationalism and the supposed benefits of independence from the US. That's why a disproportionate amount of independence advocates here are college students.

 

[Bowdz]

90-10 Clinton win confirmed.

Lmao, you fucking loath Halperin and Heilemann. Beyond the rolling clusterfuck that is WADR, what has contributed to your dislike?

 

[Makai]

My professors were actually extremely open to opposing views. Except for the science guys, of course.

 

[Kangi]

Somebody call the Waaaahmbulance

http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-...bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-apology-221457