Spoiled Milk
Banned
I cheated by looking at his other tweets. He hates conservatives, so it must be the Intercept.
-
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
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
Aaron Strife
Banned
Nah man, Clinton's being Clinton.
I find it strange that people don't feel the need to substantiate assessments of the Clintons being super corrupt or dishonest, as if it's just some universal fact that everyone's already on the same page on.
whyamihere
Banned
NYCmetsfan
Banned
He's a glenn beck of the left
I was curious if the Bernie Sanders campaign's FEC violations had any precedent, so I went searching on the FEC's site to compare with Obama's 2008 campaign (the most recent major campaign with a similar focus on small donors). If you want to have a look yourself, the right listing is Obama for America. You can find the relevant files under Filings; look for the ones named RFAI. For example, to compare with Bernie's recent report, you can see Obama's Amended April report here:
http://www.fec.gov/fecviewer/CandCm...y.fec.gov/pdf/259/28039813259/28039813259.pdf
Some problems, but only 27 pages long, compared to 639 pages for Bernie. Even the original unamended April report was only 58 pages. And Obama's 2008 campaign actually ended up getting fined $375,000 for their violations after an audit was completed. Perhaps the Sanders campaign could end up getting their own large fine at some point in the future.
Hillary's 2016 campaign is squeaky clean compared to either of them - they've only gotten one RFAI so far, and it's only two pages long.
http://www.fec.gov/fecviewer/CandCm...y.fec.gov/pdf/259/28039813259/28039813259.pdf
Some problems, but only 27 pages long, compared to 639 pages for Bernie. Even the original unamended April report was only 58 pages. And Obama's 2008 campaign actually ended up getting fined $375,000 for their violations after an audit was completed. Perhaps the Sanders campaign could end up getting their own large fine at some point in the future.
Hillary's 2016 campaign is squeaky clean compared to either of them - they've only gotten one RFAI so far, and it's only two pages long.
excelsiorlef
Member
If they do I wonder if he'll just claim it's part of the establishment conspiracy.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
I have to think there's a really good campaign to be made against the GOP in general based on how the Republican Party has allowed its members to scam people for the last 20 or so years.
Newt Gingrich and Ben Carson ran for president just to steal money and they were extremely successful at stealing money and no one is calling this out on the right. It's got to matter to some people.
Newt Gingrich and Ben Carson ran for president just to steal money and they were extremely successful at stealing money and no one is calling this out on the right. It's got to matter to some people.
Poodlestrike
Banned
A little late to this but modern nuclear power is safer, more efficient, and cleaner than literally anything in its remote weight class, power production wise. I say "remote" because literally nothing is in nuclear power's weight class when it comes to power generation. More people have gotten cancer from coal plants than nuclear ones (probably, it's tough to measure). Solar, wind, these are nice, but ultimately not viable replacements for fossil fuels. Nuclear is the future, and the sooner the better.
gutter_trash
Banned
do any of the candidates have green eyes?
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Man, Cruz made his wife just as fucked up as he is.
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/05/hei...dential-campaign-to-the-fight-to-end-slavery/
googleplex
Member
I appreciate you making your argument more clear!
Sure, I agree with this, and I would add that your analysis should ideally make an effort to take into account the actions of third party actors who have more access to primary sources than you do and motivations that would affect their actions if certain theories are correct. I think that's how situational analysis works.
Like, when I say "why do you think the DNC is supporting her," that's a genuine question! I am happy to hear theories about that. But I think if your starting point is that this really is an obviously potentially criminal situation then you should probably have an answer to that question, because it's kind of important.
Sure, I think there's some truth to this. I think that Biden's tentative run was largely about the possibility of the email scandal getting legs, and I said so at the time. But I think that the failure of that run says a lot about what the eventual decision of the DNC was.
I'm not suggesting that the DNC is logical. I'm saying that it's self-interested, which is a little different. I don't think recognizing the self-interest inherent in the actions of political individuals would make you more likely to support the Iraq War in 2001 or so -- I think it would do the opposite, frankly. So I don't think the comparison is particularly apt. Most people who argued for the war did so because they thought that, in one way or another, they'd get what they wanted out of it. The DNC doesn't get anything they want if Hillary gets put in jail.
Jack Remington
Banned
It speaks to the lack of good conservative media sites that function as news. I'm trying to think of what sites they would actually link.
WSJ - decent, but behind a paywall, op-ed section is bigoted garbage a lot of the time
National Review - regularly full of racism, LGBT-phobia, and the majority of the content only exists to bash liberals
RedState - racism, conspiracy theories, and bigotry galore
New York Post - fucking LOL
Breitbart - sometimes decent, runs more actual "news" than most others.
The Blaze - fucking LOL
The Federalist - mostly exists to bash liberals or do pep rallies for the hard right.
Fox News - sometimes a good choice, but is literally part of the Republican establishment
Conservatives just don't have many news sites that actually focus on telling the news as their primary objective. The majority of it is about how Obama and liberals are dead wrong about some issue, are evil, or are working on some kind of conspiracy.
The best "conservative news" is found on regular news sites from writers who happen to be conservative.
JesseEwiak
Member
Yup, I think it's clarifying that for instance, Robert Costa, who everybody in DC respected as a hard news reporter for the National Review jumped over to the Post as soon as he possibly could.
Plus, the center-left has stole all their good policy - ObamaCare is the Heritage Foundation plan plus actual good things, Obama's for expanding EITC, cap 'n' trade has become socialism, and so on, and so forth. Hell, the Obama White House has even hopped on the loosening licensing requirements for various jobs train.
I mean, I have one right-leaning but sane and elections based site I visit to keep myself honest about the elections, but I look at the conservative sites more to know what weird arguments I'll see on Reddit or Facebook than for actual news.
whyamihere
Banned
How could you forget World Net Daily?
Same problem in the UK. The only conservative newspapers who aren't completely insane are the Telegraph, which isn't great and is behind a soft paywall, and the Times, which is behind a hard paywall. Couple that with the fact that the BBC are impartial and that Sky are worse than the BBC in every way and there aren't a whole lot of decent sharable conservative news sites.
Why shoot it into space when we can make reactors that are powered by it instead?
Stump said:
Huelen's a goober, but dog$ was an asshole. The latter was way less deserving of coming back. I've seen him post the other day. Hopefully he mellowed out a bit at least.
STUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMP!!!
JesseEwiak
Member
I mean, the thing is, I think it's highly probable that yes, the PT was insanely corrupt as a party in Brazil (like every other party in Brazil - it's like if a whole nation only had New York, Louisiana, and Illinois political parties to choose from), but also the conservative elites are using this as an opportunity to reverse or severely cutback the various good policies Lula and his successor instituted.
DataStream
Member
My friend who works as a civil engineer got a notice from caltrans of an organized hacking campaign of electronic signs to display anti-Trump messages.
Poodlestrike
Banned
I provisionally approve of this tomfoolery.
You can wriggle all you want, but if you vote for Trump that means you ARE racist.
Jack Remington
Banned
What would need to happen for DC statehood to happen? I read that Muriel Bowser wants to make it a ballot initiative. What would happen after that? Would Congress need to approve it?
Edit: yes.
http://www.vox.com/2014/11/12/7173895/new-columbia-congress-marijuana-legalization
They should have done this in 2009. If Democrats do manage to get the House this fall, they should make this a priority next year.
Edit: yes.
http://www.vox.com/2014/11/12/7173895/new-columbia-congress-marijuana-legalization
They should have done this in 2009. If Democrats do manage to get the House this fall, they should make this a priority next year.
Depends on the implementation.
The US Constitution is the ultimate provision for Washington DC as it explicitly gives Congress complete legislative control over the federal district. So actually just taking all of Washington DC as it is now and declaring it a state would require an amendment.
But although the district can't be larger than 10 square miles, there's no limit to how small it can be. It would be fine to reduce the official District of Columbia to contain just, like, the Mall and the White House and a couple other important federal buildings, and push the rest of the district out into either its own state or back into Maryland.
It would also probably (though debatably) be legal to just pass a law saying that the District isn't a state but gets representatives and senators as if it were a state, and it would certainly be fine for Congress to create a municipal government with lawmaking authority (in fact they had one before and they got rid of it). So DC could also pretty easily be made a state in all but name.
Either way it's a solvable problem and there's periodically some energy in Congress to deal with it, but never enough to actually solve it.
They actually tried. https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/157
The Senate put an amendment on it banning DC from ever restricting gun rights, and the bill died in the House as a result.
Yeah, the constitution says:
Practically, since it would give Democrats a boost, especially in the Senate, it would require a solid Democratic majority in the House and at least 60 Democratic Senators (unless they eliminate the filibuster). I bet the Republicans would attempt to stop it in the courts, too. They'd probably argue that it violates the constitution to make the capital district a state, though I think the plan in the link you gave should easily pass muster:
Jack Remington
Banned
I kind of fantasize about a Fuck You tour early next year.
Get rid of the filibuster
Confirm Garland immediately
Have RBG and Breyer retire, replace them with Goodwin Liu and another leftist, preferably a woman and a minority
Fill every single lower court vacancy in one day
Admit DC to the Union
Admit Puerto Rico too if they want it
Do immigration reform with the path to citizenship
It would be like Operation Bagration for liberals.
Get rid of the filibuster
Confirm Garland immediately
Have RBG and Breyer retire, replace them with Goodwin Liu and another leftist, preferably a woman and a minority
Fill every single lower court vacancy in one day
Admit DC to the Union
Admit Puerto Rico too if they want it
Do immigration reform with the path to citizenship
It would be like Operation Bagration for liberals.
Jack Remington
Banned
She pretty much has to. Clinton could lose reelection, and we could have a Republican in the White House until 2028, at which point she'd be 95.
teruterubozu
Member
I doubt we'll get someone more liberal though, even with Clinton at the helm.
I think people look at this the wrong way. You just need someone more liberal than the median on the court to keep decisions swinging 5-4. You don't need to replace Scalia with RBG 2.0, you just need to replace him with someone left of Kennedy.
My problem with Garland, for example, is not ideology...it's age. Weird pick.
My problem with Garland, for example, is not ideology...it's age. Weird pick.
cartoon_soldier
Member
For Obama it is picking someone that has a chance to get a hearing and get approved. He is not playing the game with the Garland pick.
Hillary will hopefully tell Garland bye bye and pick Loretta Lynch
Mrs. Manky
Banned
Some asshole has put out a meme aimed at Bernie Sanders supporters that supposedly shows how to make DIY glowsticks.
It actually shows how to make a chlorine gas bomb.
Please let your Bernie friends know. Pool cleaning tablet + isopropyl alcohol = disaster.
http://mic.com/articles/143020/bernie-sanders-glowsticks-chlorine-and-isopropyl-alcohol?utm_source=policymicFB&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=WHFacebook&utm_content=inf_10_285_2&tse_id=INF_d852bfaaa4b5402dba260c9ef3c124df#.xEcAUbM0N
It actually shows how to make a chlorine gas bomb.
Please let your Bernie friends know. Pool cleaning tablet + isopropyl alcohol = disaster.
http://mic.com/articles/143020/bernie-sanders-glowsticks-chlorine-and-isopropyl-alcohol?utm_source=policymicFB&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=WHFacebook&utm_content=inf_10_285_2&tse_id=INF_d852bfaaa4b5402dba260c9ef3c124df#.xEcAUbM0N
cartoon_soldier
Member
If Hillary has a 639 page report from FEC for campaign finance violations we would have had a 50 page OT thread already.
someone make one for Bernie please.
someone make one for Bernie please.
Officerrob
Banned
Why beat a dead horse? The primary is over
I don't think anyone's saying that.
What people are saying is that coal and oil cause problems that are an immediate threat to the future habitability of the planet that seriously outweigh the problems with nuclear.
And as other people have pointed out, the tech has greatly improved. Along with improved safety, we now have reactor designs that can run on current nuclear waste, which considering that the whole point of nuclear power is to generate electricity from radioactivity is a pretty obvious efficiency move.
Well fuck, I need to do a reset soon then! >:|
That's the thing about lifetime appointments, she pretty much doesn't have to. She'll leave when she wants to leave.
Quoted for the new page, if you're one of those people with a lot of Bernie people on your Facebook, pass this around to make sure people are aware.
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
How convenient that a new person is speaking about dr. Ben ghazi.
I'm tired of hearing about this but I'm in a republican controlled town :/
I'm tired of hearing about this but I'm in a republican controlled town :/
http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...04-lessons-kerry-dean-edwards-gephardt-213884
A short rumination (from a former Kerry staffer) about how Bernie may be repeating history, and not for the better.
A short rumination (from a former Kerry staffer) about how Bernie may be repeating history, and not for the better.
Agreed so #dropouthillary
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
#Y2KevIsBaised
shinra-bansho
Member
Thank you, baised Kev.
RustyNails
Member
You only say that because Sippy Cupp writes for the Blaze.
Orbis Tabula
Member
The only way that thread would be any good is if you substituted Bernie's name for Hillary's in the title and text, just to trick people in to reacting badly because they hate her. But, obviously, mods probably wouldn't be too happy with that kind of petty trickery. For good reason.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Very rarely do presidents not win re-elections.
And 4 years isn't really enough time for the GOP to re-organize itself. They're at the tipping point of a re-alignment, and that doesn't really get resolved in just four years.
You're gonna see for the Democrats what the Republicans had in the second half of the 19th century.
Outside of Grover Cleveland (and Andrew Johnson, but he wasn't elected), every president was a Repulbican until Woodrow Wilson.
I think her fate lies with not only the GOP's sanity, but also with the economy. If we see a downturn, things could get dicey.
That said, the demographic clock keeps on ticking, making the path for almost any GOP nominee incrementally steeper. Without some sort of change in how each demographic segment of the population votes, we're approaching a point where backlash to recessions, etc isn't enough to deny a Democrat a win.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Yea, I think we're probably looking at that.
And it'll be the second time in our short history that race caused a single party to be in power for an entire generation.
- Status