• 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 |OT6| Delete your accounts

Status
Not open for further replies.
V

VendettaRed07

Member
THE PANDERING

Bernie Sanders
14 mins ·
Last week, Golden State was down three games to one. Tonight, they finished off a great comeback in California. I’m thinking that next week, we’ll have a big win in California, too.
Click to expand...
 
I

itschris

Member
I really, really hope Bernie doesn't pull off a surprise California win. I don't want him to be able to use that as an excuse to keep going until the convention to convince superdelegates to switch (obviously such a strategy would be a complete failure, but still, it would be better for the party if he doesn't do that).
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Abinash117 said:
Party loyalty is a thing. If he doesn't support the president nominee than it can cause further fracturing of the party. It might be an extremely uncommon thing for a party to reject a nominee. It can also jeopardize your own positioning in the party aswell. No one wants to be that guy and no one wants to be the one to damage their own party. It could be also cultural. Besides it is easy to say you endorse, but not in actuality support them and they need someone to go against Hillary. Lets say if have some like Trump get rid some of the racism and bigotry, and make him a more like a ultra-captialist or instead of Trump it is Romney or GWB. Now there's a Democratic nominee that is almost like Andrew Jackson, but has a few solid policies that actual can make the country better. I would image some will still vote for the Democratic nominee. Or how about someone like Jill Stein, but a little more nuttier; I would image that many people in this thread would still come around and vote for her.
Click to expand...

I disagree with Stein on GMO and Vaccination issues, but I would have no problem supporting someone who believes those things if that's the nominee. Those are so much smaller of issues than proposing an outright ban on muslims and promoting collective punishment.

Again, he is literally running on a platform that bans muslims from entering the country, and the collective punishment of killing people just for being related to terrorists. Please tell me how anything the radical left does is in any way comparable to that.

That's literally the type of thing that made Mussolini and Hussein evil. Anti-vax isn't evil, collective punishment and by extension Trump straight up is.

Edit: And I agree this type of absolute moralistic response isn't going to change anyone's mind, but this both sides are the same shit that's even being invoked with donald fucking trump is pissing me off, and i need it get it off my chest.
 
D

danm999

Member
Has there been a single poll showing Bernie ahead in California? You've got to basically have a Michigan level miss at this point with none of the factors that caused Michigan to miss.
 
A

Avon Barksdale

Member
CjwYLbTVAAABFZx.jpg:orig
Click to expand...

Bernard at Game 7 of the Western Conference Finals tonight.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
thepotatoman said:
I disagree with Stein on GMO and Vaccination issues, but I would have no problem supporting someone who believes those things if that's the nominee. Those are so much smaller of issues than proposing an outright ban on muslims and promoting collective punishment.

Again, he is literally running on a platform that bans muslims from entering the country, and the collective punishment of killing people just for being related to terrorists. Please tell me how anything the radical left does is in any way comparable to that.

That's literally the type of thing that made Mussolini and Hussein evil. Anti-vax isn't evil, collective punishment and by extension Trump straight up is.
Click to expand...

What if there was a Dem with Trump's protectionist economic policies? Like imagine Trump, only without all the racist shit.
 
I

itschris

Member
danm999 said:
Has there been a single poll showing Bernie ahead in California? You've got to basically have a Michigan level miss at this point with none of the factors that caused Michigan to miss.
Click to expand...

Agreed, I think it's very unlikely, but I still can't help but worry a little bit.
 
V

VendettaRed07

Member
Bernie's next tweet I'm sure

YESTERDAY, THE DISNEY CHANNEL SHOWED THE 1997 CLASSIC BRINK!

I THINK NEXT WEEK, WE ARE GOING TO COME FROM BEHIND TO DEFEAT HILLARY CLINTON, JUST LIKE ANDY "BRINK" BRINKERSON DID IN THE LAST LEG OF THE DOWN-HILL RACE, AFTER CHEAPLY BEING PULLED TO THE GROUND AND PUNCHED OFF CAMERA TO DEFEAT VAL AND X-BLADZ!!!!
Click to expand...
 
A

Abinash117

Member
thepotatoman said:
I disagree with Stein on GMO and Vaccination issues, but I would have no problem supporting someone who believes those things if that's the nominee. Those are so much smaller of issues than proposing an outright ban on muslims and promoting collective punishment.

Again, he is literally running on a platform that bans muslims from entering the country, and the collective punishment of killing people just for being related to terrorists. Please tell me how anything the radical left does is in any way comparable to that.

That's literally the type of thing that made Mussolini and Hussein evil. Anti-vax isn't evil, collective punishment and by extension Trump straight up is.
Click to expand...

I wasn't comparing based on policies I was comparing on disdain and perceived craziness of the of president nominee. If you really have an embarrassing person that wins the nominee of the party you support, but there's a nominee that you know that would destroy the country on the opposite party many Democrats would be in the same position as the Republicans.
 
D

Ding II

Member
I for one appreciate hearing SourShoes' thoughts, even if I don't agree can't (fully) empathize with them. I do sympathize quite a bit. It'd be nice if people didn't act like big meanies to him.

BTW, hi. Long time PoliGAF reader; first time poster. (Don't believe that "Junior" shit. My original username got eaten in the great forced password change of '14.)

If anyone cares, I'm old, white, male and hetero. For most of my life I was politically disinterested, didn't ever vote, but leaned Republican. When Obama came along, he was the first presidential candidate that I respected as a person. (Carter also seemed like a decent and thoughtful dude after he got out of office, but that was a decent bit before my time.) I registered Democrat and voted for Obama in '08 and '12. Nope, didn't vote in '10. I'm still learning. Lived in No. Calif for most of my life, but had to stop working in '11 due to health reasons and move to low-overhead Georgia. Yes, it's a little weird.

Back in the day, I haaaaated the Clintons. Nowadays, I merely dislike them. Nonetheless, I'll certainly be voting straight-ticket D this year, because, well, duh.

Also, Obamacare has been a huge boon to us. I'm now "officially" disabled and thus able to get Medicare, but my wife went a couple years without coverage. It was such a relief when we were able to get something for her off the Marketplace. But as SourShoes implies, the insurance companies themselves are still giant assholes. It doesn't seem to matter who pays their premiums, they are still looking to weasel out of everything possible. Hard to blame this on Obama, in my mind.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Kristoffer said:
So yeah, I'm definitely going to call anyone dense if they really think that voting for Trump is based on bigotry. Maybe it's based on compliance with bigotry, but let's be honest; do you really expect non-Muslims to really care about Muslims when the Antichrist has been destroying your America for 8 years?
Click to expand...

I am not sure that there's a super meaningful distinction between "racist" and "fine with racism." Maybe there's a Simpsons gif to help me out here.

Basically, if you want to vote for Trump because you believe that he'll cut your taxes, fine. But you should probably own it then. Just go ahead and say "I'm voting for Trump because it is more important to me that I'll get a tax cut than it is to not elect an overt, outspoken racist and sexist as President." Then, you know, let people make their own judgments.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Abinash117 said:
I wasn't comparing based on policies I was comparing on disdain and perceived craziness of the of president nominee. If you really have an embarrassing person that wins the nominee of the party you support, but there's a nominee that you know that would destroy the country on the opposite party many Democrats would be in the same position as the Republicans.
Click to expand...

But the policy is the problem. I'd have no problem voting for Kanye West if he's the democrat against a more serious republican, as long as Kanye West isn't promoting the types of things Trump is supporting.

B-Dubs said:
What if there was a Dem with Trump's protectionist economic policies? Like imagine Trump, only without all the racist shit.
Click to expand...

I'm kinda 50/50 on the whole thing anyway. Globalism is a lot like technology where it gives economic benefits but tends towards inequality and can hurt the lower class overall.

Personally I prefer all globalism and technology and using the economic benefits from that to create government programs so all may benefit, but I don't hate protectionist policies as a second best alternative.

But if the left was the one nominating someone with the racist policies Trump has, I would vote republican, despite disagreeing with every one of their economic policies. It can't be understated how scary Trump's racism is.
 
K

Kusagari

Member
So once Bernie pulls off his miraculous California comeback what's supposed to happen?

Since, you know, he's still going to be getting his ass kicked.
 
P

Paskil

Member
Kusagari said:
So once Bernie pulls off his miraculous California comeback what's supposed to happen?

Since, you know, he's still going to be getting his ass kicked.
Click to expand...

When he wins 85-15 in California, all the super delegates will see the error of their way and will finally realize that only Bernie can beat Trump in November, causing a death of several super delegates in their stampeding rush to change their allegiance from Killary to Bernie. Then and only then will the true presumptive nominee be named.
 
H

hawk2025

Member
thepotatoman said:
But the policy is the problem. I'd have no problem voting for Kanye West if he's the democrat against a more serious republican, as long as Kanye West isn't promoting the types of things Trump is supporting.



I'm kinda 50/50 on the whole thing anyway. Globalism is a lot like technology where it gives economic benefits but tends towards inequality and can hurt the lower class overall.

Personally I prefer all globalism and technology and using the economic benefits from that to create government programs so all may benefit, but I don't hate protectionist policies as a second best alternative.

But if the left was the one nominating someone with the racist policies Trump has, I would vote republican, despite disagreeing with every one of their economic policies. It can't be understated how scary Trump's racism is.
Click to expand...

But... it's not a second best. And it's not true that it hurts the lower class overall.

Look at the graphs back on page 179, or read this:

http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/the-incredible-miracle-in-poor-country.html?m=1

So many people have come out of poverty since the 70s.

Protectionism is a fool's errand.
 
S

Sibylus

Banned
I can sympathize with feeling like you're backed into a corner with your party's choice of candidate, but if a candidate is so toxic, hateful, and offers unviable policy like Trump, wouldn't your conscience be more at ease turning your sword against him rather than falling on it? You don't owe the candidate a vote.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
Donald Trump is just pretty fundamentally unfit to be President. It's not just a matter of a particular stupid remark or ridiculous policy.

It's basically everything.

He should in no way be trusted to command the world's most powerful military and steer the largest economy.
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
thepotatoman said:
I disagree with Stein on GMO and Vaccination issues, but I would have no problem supporting someone who believes those things if that's the nominee. Those are so much smaller of issues than proposing an outright ban on muslims and promoting collective punishment.

Again, he is literally running on a platform that bans muslims from entering the country, and the collective punishment of killing people just for being related to terrorists. Please tell me how anything the radical left does is in any way comparable to that.

That's literally the type of thing that made Mussolini and Hussein evil. Anti-vax isn't evil, collective punishment and by extension Trump straight up is.

Edit: And I agree this type of absolute moralistic response isn't going to change anyone's mind, but this both sides are the same shit that's even being invoked with donald fucking trump is pissing me off, and i need it get it off my chest.
Click to expand...

An anti vaxxer president with power could literally cause a pandemic
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
Paskil said:
When he wins 85-15 in California, all the super delegates will see the error of their way and will finally realize that only Bernie can beat Trump in November, causing a death of several super delegates in their stampeding rush to change their allegiance from Killary to Bernie. Then and only then will the true presumptive nominee be named.
Click to expand...

If he made her noon viable, which won't happen he'd actually take the pledged delegate lead I believe.
 
I

itschris

Member
Kusagari said:
So once Bernie pulls off his miraculous California comeback what's supposed to happen?

Since, you know, he's still going to be getting his ass kicked.
Click to expand...

Well, straight from the horse's mouth:

CHUCK TODD:

Let me start with a simple question, but maybe a complicated answer. How do you win? Senator Clinton has basically declared herself the nominee, the math is certainly very much in her favor. Explain to me how you're the nominee in July in your head.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS:

Fair question. And I think there are three paths to victory. Number one, I want to go into the convention with more pledged delegates than Secretary Clinton. And that's going to be an uphill fight. Because for 270 or so delegates, and we've got 46 percent of the pledged delegates. What I want to do, and I think we can, is win California here, and win under the big vote, do very, very well in the other five states.

And I believe going into the convention, if we can do this, with the majority of pledged delegates, is a very symbolic victory. Second of all, we're going to talk to those superdelegates in states where we have won landslide victories, 60, 70, 80 percent of the vote, to say, "Do what the people in your state want. They voted for Bernie Sanders, you as the superdelegates should follow their wishes."

Third point and most important point, as you know Chuck, there are over 400 superdelegates who came onto secretary Clinton's campaign eight months before the first ballot was cast. Before anybody else was in the race. Before they could get a sense of what the campaign was about.

Right now, in every major poll, national poll and statewide poll done in the last month, six weeks, we are defeating Trump often by big numbers, and always at a larger margin than Secretary Clinton is. We're going to make the case to the superdelegates, "Your job is to make sure that Trump is defeated, that Bernie Sanders, in fact, for a variety of reasons, not just polling, is the strongest candidate.

...

CHUCK TODD:

But without a California victory, you can't win a majority of pledged delegates. And obviously, you will once again not succeed in a big state with a diverse population. It's going to be hard for you to convince Democrats to go with you without a California victory. Fair?

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS:

Hey, look, Chuck, California is the big enchilada, so to speak. Obviously it is enormously important, and obviously we want to win it. But let me just tell you something. You know, my campaign has been written off from before we started. Nobody thought we would do anything. We've now won 20 states, primaries and caucuses, and I think by the end of the process, we may win half of the states. So we're going to fight till the last vote is cast and try to appeal to the last delegate that we can.
Click to expand...

Basically, he wants to pull off a win in California to keep the delegate gap as small as possible and gain some "momentum" at the end of the primary season, and then convince superdelegates to switch (especially those who declared before any state voted) by citing how he does better in the polls against Trump.
 
HUELEN10

HUELEN10

Member
Kusagari said:
So once Bernie pulls off his miraculous California comeback what's supposed to happen?

Since, you know, he's still going to be getting his ass kicked.
Click to expand...

If the narrow path to victory succeeds, we out up a fight at the DNC, Sanders wins, Clinton gets indicted, and we work together to stop Trump.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
Also from what I recall reading trade liberalisation has been the most effective at poverty reduction in places with strong institutions. But less so in places of institutional void.

It also just can't be looked at from the income side but what that income buys due to liberalisation reducing costs.
 
H

hawk2025

Member
shinra-bansho said:
Also from what I recall reading trade liberalisation has been the most effective at poverty reduction in places with strong institutions. But less so in places of institutional void.

It also just can't be looked at from the income side but what that income buys due to liberalisation reducing costs.
Click to expand...


It's obviously more complicated than "read this blog post", but the basics of the past 40 years are so overwhelmingly positive that it's not worth missing the forest for the trees when talking about it at a high level IMO.


Taking the above: I think I would theoretically vote for Romney over Stein.
 
R

Retromelon

Member
Donald Trump picks up his most ringing endorsement yet

"Most reasonable people don't vote a lot! It's only the goddamn old, white, rich people with sticks up their ass and the fuckin white poor rednecks that are so fuckin uneducated that they believe this republican horseshit. They go out and vote like crazy because they want to take their country back and make it great again. By the way, the stock market is officially way well over twice what it was when Bush left it and Obama got Bin Laden and Obama got us healthcare, and Obama resurrected the economy, and Obama's trying to get us out of, you know, the wars that he got us into and etcetera, so I really wanna make America great again like it was before we elected Barack Obama. That's really what I want. Why don't somebody sodomize me with a rusty fishing knife while they're at it!"
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom