Support NeoGAF

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

I think one of the biggest testaments to how fucked up the Republican Party is, is that it does so badly with women. In most developed democracies, women tend to support economically rightwing parties moreso than men - e.g., in the UK women support the Conservatives at higher rates than men, in France they support UMP/the Republicans at higher rates than men, and in Germany they support the CDU at higher rates than men. Women should be a natural constituency for the Republicans - women across developed countries continually place higher value on familial bonds, traditionalism, and are typically more restrictive in their attitudes towards welfare. The fact they're not Republican indicates just how out of control the Republicans are; they've lost the ability to actually be a genuine political force that campaigns for particular demographics and have just become an angry shouty mob.

People in Europe don't care about religion so pandering to religious psychopaths isn't really a good political strategy.

 

[Iolo]

cenk is directly profiting from all the views and paid subs he is getting from sanders supporters so he knows he has to go along with them until they can't be milked anymore. after that he will probably dial it down a bit and try and get back many of the viewers that left since many sanders supporters are likely not going to remain as politically active once bernie drops out.

It is only a matter of time before they turn on Cenk as part of the establishment.

 

[Holmes]

I think one of the biggest testaments to how fucked up the Republican Party is, is that it does so badly with women. In most developed democracies, women tend to support economically rightwing parties moreso than men - e.g., in the UK women support the Conservatives at higher rates than men, in France they support UMP/the Republicans at higher rates than men, and in Germany they support the CDU at higher rates than men.

Is that so? Women support the Liberals/NDP (depending if it's Lib vs. Con or NDP vs. Con election) at higher levels than the Conservatives in Canada.

 

[Maledict]

I think one of the biggest testaments to how fucked up the Republican Party is, is that it does so badly with women. In most developed democracies, women tend to support economically rightwing parties moreso than men - e.g., in the UK women support the Conservatives at higher rates than men, in France they support UMP/the Republicans at higher rates than men, and in Germany they support the CDU at higher rates than men. Women should be a natural constituency for the Republicans - women across developed countries continually place higher value on familial bonds, traditionalism, and are typically more restrictive in their attitudes towards welfare. The fact they're not Republican indicates just how out of control the Republicans are; they've lost the ability to actually be a genuine political force that campaigns for particular demographics and have just become an angry shouty mob.

Um, women are more likely support labour over the conservatives in the UK. In the last election the conservatives had more women voters than labour (because they won and the difference in the vote was quite big relatively), but the gender breakdown shows that woman are more likely to vote for labour than men. Particularly young women, whereas old woman support conservatives.

As we have seen in recent elections, the Conservative-Labour swing among the men and women vote overall was very similar. Both vote Conservative in relatively equal proportions, while women are slightly more likely to vote Labour and less likely to vote UKIP. There are more differences though if we do not treat men and women as homogenous groups. Most notably, younger women had the biggest swing to Labour of any group, while older women had a small swing back to the Conservatives. The two groups are almost exact opposites of each other: Labour has a 20 point lead among women aged 18-24, while the Conservatives have an 18 point lead among women over 55.

 

[johnsmith]

Pretty much the same thing as the NYT piece but I like the headline

The Good News Is That Donald Trump’s Campaign Is an Absolute Strategic and Managerial Garbage Fire


http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/05/trumps-campaign-is-a-managerial-garbage-fire.html

Donald Trump’s election as president of the United States would pose an unprecedented threat to the health of American democracy and possibly world stability. There is, however, an upside: Trump’s campaign is an absolute garbage fire. By all accounts it is the most organizationally and strategically inept campaign for a successful major-party nominee in recorded history. Ashley Parker and Maggie Haberman round up many of the details, but the basic story that emerges from their reports and others is that Trump has absolutely no idea what he’s doing.

 

[Paskil]

So the disadvantage to the boxing promoters debate offer is that it would be on pay-per-view. Most of the Sanders supports probably can't afford it after giving their last $27 to the campaign.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Um, women are more likely support labour over the conservatives in the UK. In the last election the conservatives had more women voters than labour (because they won and the difference in the vote was quite big relatively), but the gender breakdown shows that woman are more likely to vote for labour than men. Particularly young women, whereas old woman support conservatives.

That's quite a recent pattern, see: http://www.ncpolitics.uk/2015/03/history-voting-patterns-gender.html/

it is beginning to break apart as trend, for some reason the voting differences between younger women and older women are huge, much larger than the divide between younger and older men.

 

[hawk2025]

@Crab

I have the quote for the top of your thread.


“A society can be Pareto optimal and still perfectly disgusting.”
― Amartya Sen

 

[Maledict]

That's quite a recent pattern, see: http://www.ncpolitics.uk/2015/03/history-voting-patterns-gender.html/

it is beginning to break apart as trend, for some reason the voting differences between younger women and older women are huge, much larger than the divide between younger and older men.

I'm not sure 15 years counts as quite recent anymore.

How was 2001 15 years ago? Where is time going? We're becoming old Crab!

 

[VendettaRed07]

Saw the video of Bernie talking about Trump backing out, saying he hopes he changes his mind.

I feel bad. He looked so defeated

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I'm not sure 15 years counts as quite recent anymore.

How was 2001 15 years ago? Where is time going? We're becoming old Crab!

2001 is recent because once a paper becomes sufficiently well known in comparative government people keep citing it even though it isn't true.

 

[Alcander]

Lol that "fuck trump" sign on cnn

 

[Deleted member 231381]

@Crab

I have the quote for the top of your thread.


“A society can be Pareto optimal and still perfectly disgusting.”
― Amartya Sen

Sen's writing on utilitarianism is pretty good, although I'm not sure I find it entirely convincing. I think he's right to suggest we strip too much information away from what is good about a state of affairs when we reduce it solely to preferences, I'm less convinced about his argument we are trying to maximize options which doesn't seem to me to really be much of an improvement over preferences. I quite like Railton's response - Alienation and the Demands of Morality [1984] iirc.

 

[hawk2025]

Sen's writing on utilitarianism is pretty good, although I'm not sure I find it entirely convincing. I think he's right to suggest we strip too much information away from what is good about a state of affairs when we reduce it solely to preferences, I'm less convinced about his argument we are trying to maximize options which doesn't seem to me to really be much of an improvement over preferences. I quite like Railton's response - Alienation and the Demands of Morality [1984] iirc.

I quite like discussing the fundamentals of preferences, which is often overlooked

Savage and Aumann's approach to choice under uncertainty is great:

http://web.stanford.edu/~jdlevin/Econ 202/Uncertainty.pdf



There is no entirely convincing approach, that's what makes it beautiful!

 

[VendettaRed07]

I've heard like 65 "FUCK YOUUUUU"s on MSNBC just there lol

 

[Jenov]

You guys watching MSNBC? Big protest in San Diego. They had a reporter on scene trying to do an interview and the entire crowd started yelling FUCK TRUMP as loud as they could, then they started destroying an effigy of Trump, stomping it on the ground.

 

[Tamanon]

You guys watching MSNBC? Big protest in San Diego. They had a reporter on scene trying to do an interview and the entire crowd started yelling FUCK TRUMP as loud as they could, then they started destroying an effigy of Trump, stomping it on the ground.

:/

 

[Dominican Power]

This is amazing.



http://www.vox.com/2016/5/27/11794970/donald-trump-energy-gullibility

What will Trump's chairman-of-the-board lack of interest in details — and susceptibility to hucksters and extremists — look like when and if he becomes leader of the free world? We have somewhat of a precedent for this, in the presidency of one George W. Bush.

Bush was legendarily incurious about the nuts and bolts of how his administration ran. He did not have a strong grasp on the levers of power or the details of policy.

As a result, he was shaped by the people around him — Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the rest of the old-school, industry-friendly, warmongering GOP establishment. Energy policy guidance, for instance, was in many cases literally written by fossil fuel lobbyists. Whether Bush was a full-on "puppet," as the left is prone to thinking, or merely malleable, the result was that in areas outside his personal interest (which was most areas), he followed his advisers.

Trump is even less curious, even more uninterested in the details, than Bush. In areas outside of immigration and trade — as with energy — he too would turn policy over to advisers.

Those advisers would either look like the dysfunctional circus he's assembled around him so far or (as Republicans hope) like the GOP establishment. The result would either be lunacy or (best-case scenario!) merely the corruption and extremism of the Bush years.

I can just see it: Trump in the Oval Office, reading a speech from his teleprompter, reacting to it in real time.

"So we have no choice but to declare martial law ... oh, hey, martial law, about time!"

Jesus Christ! Bush was a hot mess. We definitely can not go back to having an even bigger buffoon than Bush as president ever again. I feel sorry for the people who sacrificed himself for that clown. Obama isn't perfect but he's world class compared to those two.

 

[Spoiled Milk]

Laugh it up while you can, libs. Trump may be a dumpster fire but pandora's box has been opened now that the Republicans know the winning formula. Just a little more tweaking and they'll salvage everything worth saving from the horrible, polarizing candidate...

And at the end of the first term of a deeply flawed president...

They'll have those ingredients mixed together into a winning formula.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

You guys watching MSNBC? Big protest in San Diego. They had a reporter on scene trying to do an interview and the entire crowd started yelling FUCK TRUMP as loud as they could, then they started destroying an effigy of Trump, stomping it on the ground.

Did the effigy have small hands?

 

[VendettaRed07]

If Trump gets blown out the GOP will go for the most establishment of establishment candidate they can in 2020

Spoiler

 

[B-Dubs]

Did the effigy have small hands?

If it didn't have comically small hands then these people are doing it wrong and need to get with it!

 

[Tamanon]

Jesus Christ that's a gigantic Bush.

Are we back in the '60s?

 

[hawk2025]

Quote your bushes people, jeez

 

[zou]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...15e02e-2386-11e6-aa84-42391ba52c91_story.html



Cenk however is not crazy:

Cenk is really big on making sure he explains what the media is saying, and explains the reality it’s not covering. I’m seeing these events from the same perspective

Lol

 

[B-Dubs]

Lol

Ugh, never got what people saw in TYT.

 

[JesseEwiak]

Yup, you guys got it all wrong. Who's a former Vice President seen as yesterdays news to the press but still is loved by the base.

Yup, you got it.

2020 : Clinton vs.Cheney!

 

[Spoiled Milk]

Jesus Christ that's a gigantic Bush.

Are we back in the '60s?

wtf are you even talking about, I'm so lost

If Trump gets blown out the GOP will go for the most establishment of establishment candidate they can in 2020

Spoiler

Then he'll be treated just like this dweeb.

Laughed out of the convention for being a low energy RINO loser.

(Fun fact is that Nelson Rockefeller was actually best friends with Jeb's grandfather. Maybe we really are reliving the 60s. Quagmire war wearing out Americans? Hillary Clinton volunteered for Goldwater? Socialism threatening Democracy / Democrats?)

 

[Dominican Power]

Laugh it up while you can, libs. Trump may be a dumpster fire but pandora's box has been opened now that the Republicans know the winning formula. Just a little more tweaking and they'll salvage everything worth saving from the horrible, polarizing candidate...

And at the end of the first term of a deeply flawed president...

They'll have those ingredients mixed together into a winning formula.

I don't think so. Trump is a special case. If someone else tries to do what's dong is now, they'll get buried before they get any traction.

 

[Ether_Snake]

Pretty much the same thing as the NYT piece but I like the headline

The Good News Is That Donald Trump’s Campaign Is an Absolute Strategic and Managerial Garbage Fire


http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/05/trumps-campaign-is-a-managerial-garbage-fire.html

Donald Trump’s election as president of the United States would pose an unprecedented threat to the health of American democracy and possibly world stability. There is, however, an upside: Trump’s campaign is an absolute garbage fire. By all accounts it is the most organizationally and strategically inept campaign for a successful major-party nominee in recorded history. Ashley Parker and Maggie Haberman round up many of the details, but the basic story that emerges from their reports and others is that Trump has absolutely no idea what he’s doing.

It's working though. Guy won the Republican nom spending very little money. He has a huge advantage which is that he has the microphone and everyone is listening. That counts for a lot no matter what bullshit you spout in an election. The average joe doesn't want to hear Hillary speak to journalists or giving a speech, and the journalists don't really want to talk to her either.

The real thing to take from this is that in the US, you can win the presidency by throwing random shit at the wall.

 

[hawk2025]

Please.


No more pictures of giant old men.




Please.

 

[Spoiled Milk]

Please.


No more pictures of giant old men.




Please.

I'm on mobile, I can't even tell.

 

[JesseEwiak]

It's working though. Guy won the Republican nom spending very little money. He has a huge advantage which is that he has the microphone and everyone is listening. That counts for a lot no matter what bullshit you spout in an election. The average joe doesn't want to hear Hillary speak to journalists or giving a speech, and the journalists don't really want to talk to her either.

The real thing to take from this is that in the US, you can win the presidency by throwing random shit at the wall.

Eh, you can do it in the primary because they're extremely low turnout and Trump had the advantage of massive free media. In a wider national election where turnout has to be 55%, it doesn't scale.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Cenk is really big on making sure he explains what the media is saying, and explains the reality it’s not covering. I’m seeing these events from the same perspective

Lol

Like the time Cenk accused Correct the Record and the Clinton campaign of hiring all the people who harassed and sent death threats to Roberta Lange.

Lmao

 

[Suikoguy]

I'm on mobile, I can't even tell.

You can quote on mobile too.

 

[Iolo]

Like the time Cenk accused Correct the Record and the Clinton campaign of hiring all the people who harassed and sent death threats to Roberta Lange.

Lmao

Fun fact, Cenk used to be a Limbaugh shill before switching sides. Like David Brock!

 

[Aaron Strife]

Fun fact, Cenk used to be a Limbaugh shill before switching sides. Like David Brock!

I feel like former conservatives can be the biggest purity trolls.

Wasn't Alan Grayson a republican?

Edit: no that was Patrick Murphy

 

[Iolo]

And Hillary Clinton!

 

[VendettaRed07]

I feel like former conservatives can be the biggest purity trolls.

Wasn't Alan Grayson a republican?

I'm not a purity troll T__T

 

[Aaron Strife]

I'm not a purity troll T__T

Can be, I know plenty of examples to the contrary. Like Warren

 

[hawk2025]

I have more than a handful of ex-RonPaulista friends that are now the ones going the most crazy with the purity tests and their own championing of the "progressive" future.

Nothing against changing your mind, however, on the contrary. But I don't think these people necessarily have. It's just that their idea of what constitutes governance is completely foreign to me.

 

[Suikoguy]

And Hillary Clinton!

I think that falls into the same camp as me being sorta Republican in Middle School

Also, my brother went to http://www.bearpride.org/
Should I be worried Adam?

 

[Paskil]

Hillary owes Trump and Sanders a singing telegram, or something. Saved from the email coverage! Ha, good men! Trump really is a Clinton plant.

 

[Ether_Snake]

Eh, you can do it in the primary because they're extremely low turnout and Trump had the advantage of massive free media. In a wider national election where turnout has to be 55%, it doesn't scale.

Trump is getting a lot of attention now and will continue to, much more than Hillary, because of how popular the story is that he managed to get this far and might just win. People want to see this show.

Anyway I think the best thing Hillary can do is stay away from the ads themselves. Trump was at his weakest when he went overboard attacking Rubio like a child, his numbers actually started going down when he did so and he stopped soon after realizing he had gone too far, which brought his numbers back up after the following debate where he calmed down significantly. You want him to be childish, and need to use his own airtime against himself.

If I was working for Hillary's campaign, I'd make it 90% Trump videos and quotes, 10% Hillary's message and NEVER have Hillary alone, always with people/families/workers, and keep at it until his numbers go down enough, then reverse as you get close to the election to get the vote out by campaigning with Obama/Biden/Michelle/anyone cool in the last sprint.

 

[Aaron Strife]

I have more than a handful of ex-RonPaulista friends that are now the ones going the most crazy with the purity tests and their own championing of the "progressive" future.

Nothing against changing your mind, however, on the contrary. But I don't think these people necessarily have. It's just that their idea of what constitutes governance is completely foreign to me.

People just want to feel like they're above the system or whatever. I don't think it's so much about ideology as it is about bandwagoning.

I'm seeing people who complained about Obama being too liberal or a big spender supporting Bernie.

 

[hawk2025]

Hillary owes Trump and Sanders a singing telegram, or something. Saved from the email coverage! Ha, good men! Trump really is a Clinton plant.

The report is still gonna have some steam and it will be used in November, but the timing of this debate shenanigans sure was convenient, eh?

 

[BanGy.nz]

I have more than a handful of ex-RonPaulista friends that are now the ones going the most crazy with the purity tests and their own championing of the "progressive" future.

Nothing against changing your mind, however, on the contrary. But I don't think these people necessarily have. It's just that their idea of what constitutes governance is completely foreign to me.

FOMO.

 

[Suikoguy]

People just want to feel like they're above the system or whatever. I don't think it's so much about ideology as it is about bandwagoning.

Yep, that's the primary cause for the rise of "Independents in Name Only".

 

[hawk2025]

FOMO.

My cohort is very late 20s and early 30-somethings. I don't think FOMO was a thing for us, but perhaps I'm wrong

 

[shinra-bansho]

Bernie is only running in the first place because he wanted a platform to push his issues. Maybe at some point actually winning seemed feasible, but that doesn't remove his original goal to push his issues.

Bernie being allowed to attack trump to his face helps push those issues, and probably helps the democratic party that are more aligned with those issues. It isn't about getting one last chance to bash hillary on TV to win a primary he's practically already given up on.

Remember this is a guy that defended hillary for the email scandal in the middle of a democratic debate. People pick out every single last quote he ever had attacking Hillary, which get thrown into headlines and tweets and then reposted here, which paints the picture of his campaign into being something it's not when he praises Hillary more often than he criticizes her.

What campaign are you watching? Lol.

This was a last ditch grasp for media oxygen, and trying to play to his repeated refrain of pointing to GE polls and saying he'd be better. It was at best a self aggrandising stunt.

There would have been parts of this ridiculous farce that hurt the Clinton GE campaign too. But Trump would have probably lost on balance, Sanders would get a chance to face him even though he's the also ran, and try to fuel his narrative of being the stronger opponent. On a false premise since Clinton will beat Trump resoundingly in the official GE debates between the actual nominees.

At no point was this nonsense an attempt to "help the Democratic Party."