• 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 |OT5| Archdemon Hillary Clinton vs. Lice Traffic Jam

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats...anguage-on-gop-platform.html?via=twitter_page


lol Cruz. LGBT Bathroom among top priorities. This fucking guy. This fucking party.

They really want to die on the hill of LGBT rights? It's pretty remarkable. I mean, is there anything so inconsequential to the people fighting against it in the history of the world (note: inconsequential to bigots, not victims). Why does this matter so much? It has no affect on their lives!

I continue to find this position so bizarre.

This is why I never believed the gay marriage ruling would solve the problems republicans have on that issue by taking them off the hook ("the court has made its ruling, that's the end of it."). Much of the base is dominated by very religious people who are resentful of social progress on gay issues. They will never give up.

The GOP is looking for another wedge issue to build on top of shifting social grounds. Remember when republicans started fights over abortions before x amount of weeks? They know they've lost on abortion and instead moved the goalposts, hoping new ground would help them. It didnt. Likewise they thought the "bakers forced to make gay cakes" would be a successful goal post move. It wasn't. Now it's bathrooms. It won't be (although disrespecting trans people is probably easier to get away with than disrespecting gay people).

The DOJ basically trolled NC into taking another overreach and further inciting the national far right's persecution complex. Amazing. I wonder if Trump will flip flop on this?
 

hawk2025

Member
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats...anguage-on-gop-platform.html?via=twitter_page


lol Cruz. LGBT Bathroom among top priorities. This fucking guy. This fucking party.

They really want to die on the hill of LGBT rights? It's pretty remarkable. I mean, is there anything so inconsequential to the people fighting against it in the history of the world (note: inconsequential to bigots, not victims). Why does this matter so much? It has no affect on their lives!

I continue to find this position so bizarre.

The death throes (I hope) of people that, a few decades from now, will get the "They still had a problem with that in 2016?" reaction from the vast majority of people.

History typically isn't kind to this kind of shit.
 
I assumed I was still registered as an independent, and thus unable to vote in Oregon's closed primary, but apparently my registration was switched to Democrat at some point. So this weekend I did my civic duty and cast my vote for Hillary in a meaningless contest that Bernie will easily win (I don't get the Pacific Northwest's obsession with Sanders). Also voted for Ron Wyden, because he's a great Senator, who is getting primaried for some unknown reason. November can't get here fast enough; enough appetizers, it's time for the main course.

So the DNC isn't satisfied with changing the registrations of Sanders supporters to independent, now they're changing Clinton supporters to Democrats? WHERE WILL THE FRAUD END?
 

Fedelias

Member
lXqA4Gg


Just got this ad on mobile...
 

User1608

Banned
We are strong and will always move against losers like Mccrory. We'll win. I stand with my brothers and sisters over there in NC. It's so heartbreaking to see that shit.
 
This is why I never believed the gay marriage ruling would solve the problems republicans have on that issue by taking them off the hook ("the court has made its ruling, that's the end of it."). Much of the base is dominated by very religious people who are resentful of social progress on gay issues. They will never give up.

The GOP is looking for another wedge issue to build on top of shifting social grounds. Remember when republicans started fights over abortions before x amount of weeks? They know they've lost on abortion and instead moved the goalposts, hoping new ground would help them. It didnt. Likewise they thought the "bakers forced to make gay cakes" would be a successful goal post move. It wasn't. Now it's bathrooms. It won't be (although disrespecting trans people is probably easier to get away with than disrespecting gay people).

The DOJ basically trolled NC into taking another overreach and further inciting the national far right's persecution complex. Amazing. I wonder if Trump will flip flop on this?

Weirdly enough the only group Trump isn't really all that hateful towards is the Queer community.

Probably because he lacks the religious fundamentalism that drives most of that hatred.
 

Bowdz

Member
Man, Loretta Lynch is so goddamn awesome. That speech was straight fire. Again, I just do not understand why this couldn't have waited until next year. If you're a Republican and this is something you care about, why do you have to pass it in an election year when EVERYTHING is at stake? Did they not learn from 2012 that they lose anytime they are talking about social issues? It's just nuts.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
This is why I never believed the gay marriage ruling would solve the problems republicans have on that issue by taking them off the hook ("the court has made its ruling, that's the end of it."). Much of the base is dominated by very religious people who are resentful of social progress on gay issues. They will never give up.

The GOP is looking for another wedge issue to build on top of shifting social grounds. Remember when republicans started fights over abortions before x amount of weeks? They know they've lost on abortion and instead moved the goalposts, hoping new ground would help them. It didnt. Likewise they thought the "bakers forced to make gay cakes" would be a successful goal post move. It wasn't. Now it's bathrooms. It won't be (although disrespecting trans people is probably easier to get away with than disrespecting gay people).

The DOJ basically trolled NC into taking another overreach and further inciting the national far right's persecution complex. Amazing. I wonder if Trump will flip flop on this?

Uh, what? No. This isn't remotely true.
 

studyguy

Member
I believe it was NPR that had a news story not too long ago sprung off of the problems with Cruz and Evangelicals in regards to Trump.

That the whole 'Defending Religious Liberties' term was more and more being used as a dogwhistle tactic much in the same way that previous legislation was hammered over people's heads in regards to putting down civil rights legislation and older anti gay rights legislation.

Can't exactly say stop the gays anymore since no one buys into that, almost like the southern strategy (shit the southern strat was even mentioned by name in the news piece iirc). Rather they say they're defending religious liberties as the cloak serves as a good middleground for both dems and republicans. Who doesn't want to defend religious liberties for everyone, right? The problem is that the term gets loaded to the brim by the majority of the people using it to define it in very, very narrow terms.

Thus we end up with ass backwards pushes for anti-trans/gay/minority rights under the guise of RELIGIOUS LIBERTY. Shit's a pain but at least it looks like people wise up to it real quick thanks to the internet making the moves more obvious.
 
I believe it was NPR that had a news story not too long ago sprung off of the problems with Cruz and Evangelicals in regards to Trump.

That the whole 'Defending Religious Liberties' term was more and more being used as a dogwhistle tactic much in the same way that previous legislation was hammered over people's heads in regards to putting down civil rights legislation and older anti gay rights legislation.

Can't exactly say stop the gays anymore since no one buys into that, almost like the southern strategy (shit the southern strat was even mentioned by name in the news piece iirc). Rather they say they're defending religious liberties as the cloak serves as a good middleground for both dems and republicans. Who doesn't want to defend religious liberties for everyone, right? The problem is that the term gets loaded to the brim by the majority of the people using it to define it in very, very narrow terms.

Thus we end up with ass backwards pushes for anti-trans/gay/minority rights under the guise of RELIGIOUS LIBERTY. Shit's a pain but at least it looks like people wise up to it real quick thanks to the internet making the moves more obvious.

It still amazes me how fast we've gone from anti-gay amendments passing in blue states to "religious liberty" dog whistles backfiring in red states.
 

Holmes

Member
Is HA Goodman ok? Like is there a mental illness that he has that causes him to be a pathological liar who lives in a world of delusion?
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I'm beginning to think Hillary should pick warren. The only real weakness is it leaves the seat open.

I like Perez a lot but I don't think we really need to shore up Latinos
 
A source familiar with Trump’s thinking explained that the billionaire businessman was reluctant to add new layers of policy experts now, feeling it would only muddy his populist message that has been hyperfocused on illegal immigration, trade and fighting Islamic extremists.

“He doesn’t want to waste time on policy and thinks it would make him less effective on the stump,” the Trump source said. “It won’t be until after he is elected but before he’s inaugurated that he will figure out exactly what he is going to do and who he is going to try to hire.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/donald-trump-administration-transition-222944#ixzz48C4p2YCf
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

“It won’t be until after he is elected but before he’s inaugurated that he will figure out exactly what he is going to do and who he is going to try to hire.

“It won’t be until after he is elected but before he’s inaugurated that he will figure out exactly what he is going to do.

DYING INTERNALLY
 

hawk2025

Member
I'm beginning to think Hillary should pick warren. The only real weakness is it leaves the seat open.

I like Perez a lot but I don't think we really need to shore up Latinos

I was thinking the same today, but I feel like I'm missing something.

I dunno.
 
I don't think Hillary's response to Trump's comments is enough. She just said that she's going to run her campaign in a positive way and he can go and do whatever he wants etc.

I dunno. I think what Trump is saying needs a more direct response. I don't think she can just deflect it.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Wow, we were sorta close to having two candidates facing each other with no policies.
 
Full remarks from Loretta Lynch on HB2


This action is about a great deal more than just bathrooms. This is about the dignity and respect we accord our fellow citizens and the laws that we, as a people and as a country, have enacted to protect them – indeed, to protect all of us. And it’s about the founding ideals that have led this country – haltingly but inexorably – in the direction of fairness, inclusion and equality for all Americans.

This is not the first time that we have seen discriminatory responses to historic moments of progress for our nation. We saw it in the Jim Crow laws that followed the Emancipation Proclamation. We saw it in fierce and widespread resistance to Brown v. Board of Education. And we saw it in the proliferation of state bans on same-sex unions intended to stifle any hope that gay and lesbian Americans might one day be afforded the right to marry. That right, of course, is now recognized as a guarantee embedded in our Constitution, and in the wake of that historic triumph, we have seen bill after bill in state after state taking aim at the LGBT community. Some of these responses reflect a recognizably human fear of the unknown, and a discomfort with the uncertainty of change. But this is not a time to act out of fear. This is a time to summon our national virtues of inclusivity, diversity, compassion and open-mindedness. What we must not do – what we must never do – is turn on our neighbors, our family members, our fellow Americans, for something they cannot control, and deny what makes them human. This is why none of us can stand by when a state enters the business of legislating identity and insists that a person pretend to be something they are not, or invents a problem that doesn’t exist as a pretext for discrimination and harassment.

Let me speak now to the people of the great state, the beautiful state, my state of North Carolina. You’ve been told that this law protects vulnerable populations from harm – but that just is not the case. Instead, what this law does is inflict further indignity on a population that has already suffered far more than its fair share. This law provides no benefit to society – all it does is harm innocent Americans.

Instead of turning away from our neighbors, our friends, our colleagues, let us instead learn from our history and avoid repeating the mistakes of our past. Let us reflect on the obvious but often neglected lesson that state-sanctioned discrimination never looks good in hindsight. It was not so very long ago that states, including North Carolina, had signs above restrooms, water fountains and on public accommodations keeping people out based upon a distinction without a difference. We have moved beyond those dark days, but not without pain and suffering and an ongoing fight to keep moving forward. Let us write a different story this time. Let us not act out of fear and misunderstanding, but out of the values of inclusion, diversity and regard for all that make our country great.

Let me also speak directly to the transgender community itself. Some of you have lived freely for decades. Others of you are still wondering how you can possibly live the lives you were born to lead. But no matter how isolated or scared you may feel today, the Department of Justice and the entire Obama Administration wants you to know that we see you; we stand with you; and we will do everything we can to protect you going forward. Please know that history is on your side. This country was founded on a promise of equal rights for all, and we have always managed to move closer to that promise, little by little, one day at a time. It may not be easy – but we’ll get there together.
 

BanGy.nz

Banned
I'm beginning to think Hillary should pick warren. The only real weakness is it leaves the seat open.

I like Perez a lot but I don't think we really need to shore up Latinos

Perez should help with the far left as well, he might not have the profile of Warren but he's got the record that's undeniably progressive.
 

IrishNinja

Member
Let me put this in ways you can understand

Sonic is an itinerant hedgehog who can only hold 200 rings at a time, whose main source of employment involves running spasmodically through confusing stages with deadly spikes

Robotnik is a casino owner with millions of rings, six out of the seven chaos emeralds, and turns people like you into robots

Yet Angel Island levies a flat tax of 100 rings every year

Late, but jesus wept, this was fantastic
Actually saw it making the rounds in tiwtter...congtars huelen, you can say dumb shit all over the net! And yeah, riding for minorities = bigoted, another classic observation there
 
It is actually astounding what is happening. We just cannot digest all of it. We've been immersed in pure insanity for too many months. History will look at this election as the craziest thing of all time. Trump is Leicester City. Or maybe He's more like Spurs, overcame amazing odds only to finish second.
 

ivysaur12

Banned
Also this is good. Allows her not to get dragged in the mud while her army of surrogates can do that for her:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/rubycramer/clinton-trump-attacks?utm_term=.fcjeO5YwV#.rbvA264Ox

STONE RIDGE, Va. — Hillary Clinton declined Monday to respond directly to questions about Donald Trump’s personal attacks, his focus on the scandals of the 1990s, and his recent claim that the former first lady acted as an “enabler.”

“I’m running my campaign. I’m not running against him. He’s doing a fine job of doing that himself,” Clinton said, stopping to speak with reporters after a small roundtable-style campaign event here in northern Virginia on “work-life balance.”

As she has in the past, Clinton made clear on Monday that she has no plans to engage with Trump on the subject of her husband. Over the weekend, the presumptive GOP nominee raised the issue repeatedly at campaign stops in Oregon and Washington, claiming that Clinton mistreated the women who have accused her husband of misconduct and sexual abuse.

When a reporter asked if the line of attack is fair, Clinton said she would let Trump “run his campaign however he chooses.”

“I’m going to run my campaign, which is about a positive vision for our country with specific plans that I think will help us solve problems that we’re facing, knocking down those barriers that stand in the way of people,” she said. “I am going to continue to really reach out to people, to listen to people, and make the case for the kind of president that I would be.”

Pressed on whether she felt the need to “correct the record” on Trump’s claims, Clinton declined again to respond.

“I have nothing to say about him and how he’s running his campaign,” she said, but noted that she’s spent weeks on the campaign trail “answering” Trump on the issues she said voters care about. “I’m answering him all the time.”

“I’m answering him on the differences between our records, our experience, what we want to do for our country, how important it is to try to unify the country, and I have been very clear that a lot of his rhetoric not only reckless, it’s dangerous.”
 

HylianTom

Banned
So Trump is basically running on a Monty Hall policy platform.

What's behind the curtain? Something substantial and worthwhile? A lesser prize? A ZONK?
 
This seems to confirm that he has been playing a joke character this whole time. And everyone bought into it.

I don't bother reading his articles, but the few I did read seemed to come across as little more than attempts to get people to watch his videos. I do have a real problem with people like him though, in that they fill people's heads with nonsense about how the political process works, which can lead to disengagement when things don't work the way they expect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom