• 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.
Haven't really heard about trump much this week. I don't understand this terrible, horrible, no good week he's been having. I don't think the abortion comments would actually make waves.
 

Makai

Member
Too bad you don't have the OG PS3. Could have grilled steaks.

200
 
Trump weakening here is good, not bad. Again, if he gets enough delegates to win the convention, that's the end. If he only gets a strong plurality, but not enough for an outright win, we get a contested convention.
 

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
AARP?

This is kind of one issue I'm a little iffy on w/r/t Democrats holding the line. Obama almost made a deal with Boehner to cut entitlement benefits and the deal only fell through because it didn't go far enough for the tea party. Like I could fully see Hillary taking SS benefit cuts as a compromise in order to get something done.

Like don't get me wrong, it's not like I think she'll get in there and immediately propose gutting everything, but the grand bargain fiasco makes me wary.

...if Obama and Boehner had been able to finalize their Grand Bargain...that was the future of the country saved. It's a ShatterPoint. I will spend the rest of my life wondering how we would have gone forward had they been able to seal that deal. It...it hurts me, deep inside, on a primal level, that it was rebuffed. That was...regardless of politics, and personal beliefs...with our country's population and belief....the right thing to do, IMO.. I know Barry's gonna spend the rest of his life wondering "What If?"..

Ugh,
 
AARP?

This is kind of one issue I'm a little iffy on w/r/t Democrats holding the line. Obama almost made a deal with Boehner to cut entitlement benefits and the deal only fell through because it didn't go far enough for the tea party. Like I could fully see Hillary taking SS benefit cuts as a compromise in order to get something done.

Like don't get me wrong, it's not like I think she'll get in there and immediately propose gutting everything, but the grand bargain fiasco makes me wary.

Ed: if Cramer is tying himself to Trump and Trump is the nominee, maybe Iron Eye could beat him... Hmmmmmmm... If Democrats want a House majority they'll need some shockers, seats that were never on the table.

With Schumer heading up the Senate, it worries me greatly.
 
...if Obama and Boehner had been able to finalize their Grand Bargain...that was the future of the country saved. It's a ShatterPoint. I will spend the rest of my life wondering how we would have gone forward had they been able to seal that deal. It...it hurts me, deep inside, on a primal level, that it was rebuffed. That was...regardless of politics, and personal beliefs...with our country's population and belief....the right thing to do, IMO.. I know Barry's gonna spend the rest of his life wondering "What If?"..

Ugh,
Entitlements don't need saving. Raise taxes, turn into special fund. Done.
 
AARP?

This is kind of one issue I'm a little iffy on w/r/t Democrats holding the line. Obama almost made a deal with Boehner to cut entitlement benefits and the deal only fell through because it didn't go far enough for the tea party. Like I could fully see Hillary taking SS benefit cuts as a compromise in order to get something done.

Like don't get me wrong, it's not like I think she'll get in there and immediately propose gutting everything, but the grand bargain fiasco makes me wary.

Ed: if Cramer is tying himself to Trump and Trump is the nominee, maybe Iron Eye could beat him... Hmmmmmmm... If Democrats want a House majority they'll need some shockers, seats that were never on the table.

It's not AARP. It was another group. I think it was the Alliance for Retired Americans. It was back in 2008, but I'm guessing nothing has changed since she hasn't been in the senate since then.
 
...if Obama and Boehner had been able to finalize their Grand Bargain...that was the future of the country saved. It's a ShatterPoint. I will spend the rest of my life wondering how we would have gone forward had they been able to seal that deal. It...it hurts me, deep inside, on a primal level, that it was rebuffed. That was...regardless of politics, and personal beliefs...with our country's population and belief....the right thing to do, IMO.. I know Barry's gonna spend the rest of his life wondering "What If?"..

Ugh,
Would rather wait until we have a Dem Congress and do something better tbh.
 
Also, NB I get very very very bored by metacommentary in here about the make-up of the thread, or the make-up of the OT, or this person being delusional, or that person being delusional, or this person's post in that person's thread.

Where's pigeon to talk about policy?

Or Kev to tell me about his money?

Or Ivy to post tanks?
 
Entitlements don't need saving. Raise taxes, turn into special fund. Done.

+1.

Also, geeks like us who sit looking at a computer all day are living longer. Blue collar workers aren't actually living all that longer, which basically means an increase in the retirement age is largely a cut to Social Security for blue collar workers, who will likely need it most.

http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/subtleties-of-life-expectancy-ctd/

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/05/the-life-expectancy-zombie/

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/13/life-expectancy-of-the-living-dead/

111312krugman1-blog480.jpg


Also, the whole point of the liberal project is to make life better overall - Keynes dreamed of 15 hour work weeks and retiring at 50. A retirement age of 65 was a good deal that was supposed to get better, not the best possible deal that's only going to get worse to appease the Washington Post editorial board.
 
Problem is, after the Bush tax cuts, I think the right thing to do was to hit entitlements and raise taxes. You can't get that money back, basically.

The right thing to do is never make one of the best anti poverty programs in the history of the world worse and less universal in a way that screws over the less fortunate. Raise the FICA cap, shift some funding, problem solved. No matter how much people on Face the Nation or Meet the Press say it, Social Security is not doomed. Hell, if we actually have some decent growth in the future, we don't even need to raise the FICA Cap (but it's still good policy regardless).
 
Guys, it's completely fair to ask questions about the candidate you want for president. There is no problem with that.

He called her a secret right winger who is hoping the GOP wins the house and Senate so that she can pass her right wing agenda.

That's not asking questions that's acute Clinton Derangement Syndrome.
 
I'm no Clinton fan, but the idea that general election polling is at all valid right now, when most of the country has not had the massive tax increases Bernie is calling for blared at them at full volume for two months, is laughable. I think Clinton is a pretty weak candidate who is only strong because of the complete implosion of the Republican party, but Sanders would be a disaster for the Dems in a general election.

Honestly a big part of why I don't support Sanders despite agreeing with most of what he stands for is that he would make such a terrible candidate. It doesn't matter how much you earnestly explain the net effects on people's finances of his proposals, campaigning on massively increasing everyone's taxes is electoral suicide. And there's a lot of attacks on him that no one has made yet that would be absolutely devastating. Trump's liabilities are so severe that who knows what would happen, but I think even Cruz could defeat him without much trouble and if Kasich or someone else who could essentially run as "generic Republican" came out of a contested convention it would likely be a landslide.

I also think he'd actually make a completely ineffective president since he would have no base of support in Congress and seemingly has no interest in building one (which is why I find all the talk of a "political revolution" to be such nonsense, a revolution can't begin and end with electing a president), nor does he really have the right skills to build consensus or any of a million things that are important for a president to do that being an independent Senator doesn't really prepare you for.
 
He called her a secret right winger who is hoping the GOP wins the house and Senate so that she can pass her right wing agenda.

That's not asking questions that's acute Clinton Derangement Syndrome.
Yeah it's dumb. People might point to Bill's working relationship with a GOP Congress but that was him trying to make the best of a shitty situation. His first two years were fairly progressive.

The only reason Obama doesn't have much that's equivalent to welfare reform (well the sequester) is because the GOP has completely gone off the deep end and no longer has rational policy goals. It's all just repeal Obamacare this, get rid of energy efficient lightbulbs and healthy school lunches that.
 

T'Zariah

Banned
Honestly a big part of why I don't support Sanders despite agreeing with most of what he stands for is that he would make such a terrible candidate. It doesn't matter how much you earnestly explain the net effects on people's finances of his proposals, campaigning on massively increasing everyone's taxes is electoral suicide. And there's a lot of attacks on him that no one has made yet that would be absolutely devastating. Trump's liabilities are so severe that who knows what would happen, but I think even Cruz could defeat him without much trouble and if Kasich or someone else who could essentially run as "generic Republican" came out of a contested convention it would likely be a landslide.

I also think he'd actually make a completely ineffective president since he would have no base of support in Congress and seemingly has no interest in building one (which is why I find all the talk of a "political revolution" to be such nonsense, a revolution can't begin and end with electing a president), nor does he really have the right skills to build consensus or any of a million things that are important for a president to do that being an independent Senator doesn't really prepare you for.

And what's most devastating is that, for once, the GOP would actually be TELLING THE TRUTH in their attacks.

Imagine the shit they would make up!
 
To be kind of frank, he seems like he'd be an ineffective President for entirely different reasons imo. He just doesn't seem to have any real interest in governing. Or policy outside his natural wheelhouse. There's probably argument to be made that this ultimately doesn't matter I suppose. And he does have some local level executive experience a long time ago. A President has his Cabinet, NSAdvisors, Joint Chiefs, CEA and so on. I'm not wholly convinced he's that interested in looking through briefing books etc.

Loathe Clinton as much as one can, no one can deny that she's a quick study wonk.
 
Yeah it's dumb. People might point to Bill's working relationship with a GOP Congress but that was him trying to make the best of a shitty situation. His first two years were fairly progressive.

The only reason Obama doesn't have much that's equivalent to welfare reform (well the sequester) is because the GOP has completely gone off the deep end and no longer has rational policy goals. It's all just repeal Obamacare this, get rid of energy efficient lightbulbs and healthy school lunches that.

The issue is, people legitimately don't understand what the political environment was like. Rush Limbaugh had a national TV show. Even the liberal New Republic (before that line was a joke) was calling for welfare reform. It still felt like entering parts of New York City or other major city centers as a white person outside of working hours was taking your lives in your own hands. I mean, we were less than three years out from the L.A. Riots.

To be kind of frank, he seems like he'd be an ineffective President for entirely different reasons imo. He just doesn't seem to have any real interest in governing. Or policy outside his natural wheelhouse. There's probably argument to be made that this ultimately doesn't matter I suppose. A President has his Cabinet, NSAdvisors, Joint Chiefs, CEA and so on. I'm not wholly convinced he's that interested in looking through briefing books etc.

Loathe Clinton as much as one can, no one can deny that she's a quick study wonk.

I've said this before and I'm 100% serious. For about six or seven years, I played consistently in a message board based political game, where you RP'd Congressman and Senators, passed bills, ran for office, gave speeches, reacted to administrator created events. Real nerdy shit. I fully believe every single nominee from either party during the time I played that game had more of an interest and deeper knowledge in foreign policy than Bernie has presented in this campaign.
 

Armaros

Member
To be kind of frank, he seems like he'd be an ineffective President for entirely different reasons imo. He just doesn't seem to have any real interest in governing. Or policy outside his natural wheelhouse. There's probably argument to be made that this ultimately doesn't matter I suppose.

Loathe Clinton as much as one can, no one can deny that she's a quick study wonk.

His slow/still nonexistent reaction to not have any foreign policy credentidals beaides the Iraq vote was telling.

Especially telling was him putting forward names of people that he had only ever met once and not in an advisory situation.

Like are you going to be doing that as President when something comes up that he doesn't really have an interested in dealing with?
 
Can we imagine what would have happened if Hillary had netted more delegates than Bernie in a state he won? Oh lawd help us all.
This is really an underrated aspect of how stupid caucuses are. Like, don't get me wrong, the way they limit turnout to people who have the ability/inclination to spend hours on the process is a huge problem. But the added layers to translate votes into delegates for the national convention that are vulnerable to all kinds of shenanigans doesn't get talked about enough.

Now, I don't really blame any campaign taking advantage of the rules that exist, but it's not a good look to make the will of the people a big talking point while gleefully taking advantage of this.
 
To be kind of frank, he seems like he'd be an ineffective President for entirely different reasons imo. He just doesn't seem to have any real interest in governing. Or policy outside his natural wheelhouse. There's probably argument to be made that this ultimately doesn't matter I suppose. And he does have some local level executive experience a long time ago. A President has his Cabinet, NSAdvisors, Joint Chiefs, CEA and so on. I'm not wholly convinced he's that interested in looking through briefing books etc.

Loathe Clinton as much as one can, no one can deny that she's a quick study wonk.

Everybody was giving Obama shit for his responses to Paris and San Bernardino, makes you wonder what a Sanders response would look like.
 
Bwahahaha

Yes, screw over your voters and pretend their votes don't count. Please proceed, Rovernor.

Not only that, but they're saying if they can stop Trump from hitting 1237 and deny him at the convention, that means they won.

If the polls hold and Cruz wins most of Wisconsin's delegates on Tuesday, that will have serious consequences for the rest of the Republican nomination battle, and will increase the likelihood of a chaotic, contested GOP convention. That's exactly the outcome a lot of Republican leaders want, and as a national story it's seen as a sort of comeback by the GOP establishment.
 
The Planned Parenthood fiasco was the turning point for me.

Planned Parenthood was "what are you doing?"

Going after John Lewis as if he was some sort of shill and not a goddamned American hero was when I was at, "OK, this isn't funny anymore."

“Donald Trump excites a lot of enthusiasm,” Rove said about the Republican frontrunner. “But he also excites a lot of anger within the Republican Party and outside of the Republican Party. And a fresh face might be the thing that could give us a chance to turn this election and win in November against Hillary.”

Karl, you don't tell the people who could end your parties chance at victory you're going to shiv them until the knife is in their back.
 

gaugebozo

Member
???

Anyone know the context of that video clip...? Didn't know Bernie had a history of being against space program funding, unless I'm misinterpreting it.

He what!? Holy shit. Whelp, any sympathy I had is gone. Not like the SSC would've helped or anything. Is this because Reagan okayed it?
 
This is really an underrated aspect of how stupid caucuses are. Like, don't get me wrong, the way they limit turnout to people who have the ability/inclination to spend hours on the process is a huge problem. But the added layers to translate votes into delegates for the national convention that are vulnerable to all kinds of shenanigans doesn't get talked about enough.

Now, I don't really blame any campaign taking advantage of the rules that exist, but it's not a good look to make the will of the people a big talking point while gleefully taking advantage of this.

Cock uses are a big mess. Having said that, there's no excuse for Clinton's delegates not showing up or having the required alternates in place. That type of thing needs to be fixed, although it doesn't make a huge bit of difference in the grand scheme of things.

The Planned Parenthood fiasco was the turning point for me.

My best friend was leaning towards Bernie until that happened. She work(ed) for Planned Parenthood. She was livid, absolutely livid.
 
Again, is there where I point out Bill Clinton vetoed the welfare reform bill twice?

But, I would hope Hillary Clinton would govern far from LBJ & Truman when it comes to nuking civilian populations or interning entire ethnicity in a certain area due to concerns over their loyalty or selling out the African American community to pass social welfare programs.

I don't think she'll even go through the effort of selling us out. Like every other politician she'll turn a blind eye after she gets that vote. She'll be back in 4 years though to tell us how bad it will be under the republicans if we don't reelect her. Maybe on of her compromises to "get things done" will screw us over.
 
To be kind of frank, he seems like he'd be an ineffective President for entirely different reasons imo. He just doesn't seem to have any real interest in governing. Or policy outside his natural wheelhouse. There's probably argument to be made that this ultimately doesn't matter I suppose. And he does have some local level executive experience a long time ago. A President has his Cabinet, NSAdvisors, Joint Chiefs, CEA and so on. I'm not wholly convinced he's that interested in looking through briefing books etc.

Loathe Clinton as much as one can, no one can deny that she's a quick study wonk.
Yeah, I think this captures the essence of why he'd be an ineffective president better than what I wrote. I guess I'd say that a lot of what I said is kind of a consequence of his lack of interest in governing. You can get away with using a position as independent Senator (or as a presidential candidate) to largely get a big picture message across. The presidency is a different story, no matter how much the left romanticizes the power of the bully pulpit.
 
???

Anyone know the context of that video clip...? Didn't know Bernie had a history of being against space program funding, unless I'm misinterpreting it.
It's pretty much in line with his view on anything.

Rebuild inferstructure, get single payer healthcare working, etc. funds towards other stuff if it is of any considerable cost and gets in the way of these things happening, defund it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom