• 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 |OT7| Notorious R.B.G. Plans NZ Tour

Status
Not open for further replies.
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
I mean, "don't have people in your country that don't share all your values" seems like a good argument for ejecting Oklahoma and Kansas from the union or at least stopping immigration from those states to California, Illinois, and NY.

We're leaving behind lots of liberals in Kansas and Oklahoma then, but we'll also be leaving behind liberals if we ban all immigration from India.
 
G

Glitchfire

Banned
Suikoguy said:
If the majority of the state wants to allow slavery should they be allowed too?
Click to expand...

That is an unfair example given that true democracy did not exist during that time. Only white, land-owning males could vote then. If non-landing owning whites & non-whites could vote during that time it would have been voted out.
 
C

Crocodile

Member
Image.ashx
 
G

gcubed

Member
This is like watching the best of Reddit come to life. Right down to baby Einstein's democracy paint by numbers

Edit... banned?!? But it was just getting fun
 
A

ampere

Member
danm999 said:
What if a majority of people in this thread don't consider Bill Maher a scholar?
Click to expand...

It was pretty funny when he did that reading of Anthony Weiner's text messages with Jane Lynch. That's probably his highest point

Scholarly?

rrAZOwB.gif
\

As scholarly as a dramatic reading of text message sex talk can be
 
M

Measley

Junior Member
Glitchfire said:
As a Mexican American, his judge comment was a bad political move. But judges do have biases (see Supreme Court) and asking, privately, for a new judge would have been the move.

Outside of that, his alleged 'racism' has been overblown.
Click to expand...

When you say that someone is incapable of doing their job because of their racial heritage, that's textbook racism. If someone points out that its a racist comment and you double and triple down on it, then you're a racist.

A temporary Muslim ban is not racist.
Click to expand...

There wouldn't be a call for a muslim ban if the vast majority of muslims looked like northern Europeans instead of scary brown people.

EDIT: Whoops, banned!
 
K

kess

Member
Funny that the the talking points against Hillary today are "blood money," "she speaks on behalf on evil, usurious corporations," and "is she a real Christian."

This is some primordial populism, right here.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
chiym1992 said:
I don't think it's been posted here, but here are the details on a new compromised gun amendment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/22/us/politics/senate-gun-control-no-fly-list-terrorism.html?smid=tw-nytpolitics&smtyp=cur

Some takeaways:



I assume Kirk will vote for this too (which still won't be enough), but I have a lot of reservations on basing this off those two lists. Especially if people are only able to appeal after they have been denied. I understand we all want some form of gun control, but I would rather be starting from closing the gun show loophole. It's weird to think that the government can take away one of your rights by simply putting you on a list, and you can only appeal until you try to exercise it, even if it's one that I don't agree with at all.
Click to expand...
I think these senators might be open to voting for it, in addition to Kirk and the four sponsoring the bill (Ayotte, Collins, Flake and Graham)

McCain (Flake is a co-sponsor, he's voted to expand background checks before)
Toomey (famously made an attempt to expand background checks with Manchin)
Portman (said he might be open to the idea, being lobbied by the Gang of 8 here)
Rubio (same as Portman being lobbied here, if he runs for reelection he might want this as polling showed it extremely detrimental to his numbers)
Heller (maybe? He seems to be fairly moderate for a GOPer)
Sasse (seems to be trying to strike a more moderate tone for the GOP in spite of Trump)

That puts us at 57 assuming all Democrats are on board, and I'm kind of out of ideas. Maaaaybe Orrin Hatch? He's come around on Dem-sponsored legislation before. McConnell saying he wants it to get a vote doesn't guarantee his support either.
 
U

User 85168

Banned
Aaron Strife said:
I think these senators might be open to voting for it, in addition to Kirk and the four sponsoring the bill (Ayotte, Collins, Flake and Graham)

McCain (Flake is a co-sponsor, he's voted to expand background checks before)
Toomey (famously made an attempt to expand background checks with Manchin)
Portman (said he might be open to the idea, being lobbied by the Gang of 8 here)
Rubio (same as Portman being lobbied here, if he runs for reelection he might want this as polling showed it extremely detrimental to his numbers)
Heller (maybe? He seems to be fairly moderate for a GOPer)
Sasse (seems to be trying to strike a more moderate tone for the GOP in spite of Trump)

That puts us at 57 assuming all Democrats are on board, and I'm kind of out of ideas. Maaaaybe Orrin Hatch? He's come around on Dem-sponsored legislation before. McConnell saying he wants it to get a vote doesn't guarantee his support either.
Click to expand...

I don't expect it to pass at all. It needs 14 Republicans if the Dems and Independents all vote for it, which they won't.
 
F

fauxtrot

Banned
Aww, I missed all the fun on my drive home from work.

If you say Reddit three times in one page, I'm pretty sure it summons someone like that... like a fedora wearing Bloody Mary.
 
U

User1608

Banned
So I've been reflecting a lot about health insurance and I really feel awful for those unable to be covered. So many people have blood on their hands, like governors who refused to expand the ACA. It really should be a right regardless of one's income or job (or lack thereof). I hope one day this becomes a reality, because reading about good people passing away is so tragic.
 
A

AntraxSuicide

Banned
Cybit said:
South Asian who grew up in tea party country during the 80s/90s, gonna agree with Kris. When the majority of your environment is ignorant or prejudiced and you can't just shut them out; you tend to see the nuance in people, and growing up in that area, you get a front-row view of watching people who were not prejudiced become prejudiced (or be prejudiced against your kind but being told that you are the exception).

Having lived in Seattle for about 9 years now, I think the difference between Val & Kris vs Slay & Shinra may be embodied in whether there was an option to retreat to a place where your subculture was sufficiently large enough versus a place where that was not the case. (Also, age is a big part of this, as people growing up in the early 2000s to now have the internet that can create that sufficiently large subculture to not have to get to personally know prejudiced / ignorant people)

EDIT: AKA small ass place or city / suburbia. I suspect if I had grown up in Seattle I would be more along Shinra and Slay's line of thinking than Kris and Val's.
Click to expand...

shinra-bansho said:
I think for the most part the bolded is wishful thinking. And I have no particular interest in bringing people who hold such views into the fold anyway, even if the policies advocated for will ultimately help them.

You keep using this refrain of "inferior human beings". I think fratbro jocks who throw the skinny kid into the dumpster. Or the mean store clerk who wouldn't let Julia Roberts shop are pretty shit people too, that isn't some sort of indictment on their humanity. The views they hold and the actions they take make them shit.

Also, Cybit I was born in the 80s and grew up in the 90s in a backwater called Auckland. So I don't know if your theory holds.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that doesn't hold for me either since I've only lived in rural Mississippi.

If we're at a point where out-and-proud racists are just "troubled," then we've lost our moral center as a party. It is impossible to blast the Republicans for appealing to white nationalists and then turn around and try to argue that we should be more appealing to white nationalists.
 
T

thestopsign

Member
I traced GlitchFire from the OT thread back to PoliGAF right as he was banned. He had that classic approach of dumping an extreme view without providing any back up, ignoring any follow up questions or comments, and proceeding to dump another, unrelated extreme view.

They always love to post lots of random links to irrelevant articles (or comics in his case) too.
 
C

Captain Pants

Killed by a goddamned Dredgeling
Glitchfire's assault on PoliGAF reminded me of this old political cartoon.
y87L9D5.jpg
Click to expand...
Edit: Because of the way ads load on mobile GAF now, I accidentally wandered into FakeGAF just now... I'm so confused as to what that is.
 
S

Spoiled Milk

Banned
thestopsign said:
I traced GlitchFire from the OT thread back to PoliGAF right as he was banned. He had that classic approach of dumping an extreme view without providing any back up, ignoring any follow up questions or comments, and proceeding to dump another, unrelated extreme view.

They always love to post lots of random links to irrelevant articles (or comics in his case) too.
Click to expand...
I thought he was doing okay. The requirement on GAF is to just be able to support your dissenting opinion and he was mostly doing that... with some vitriol attached.

pigeon said:
You're kidding, right?
Click to expand...
I mean, I know why he was, but I think he was treading a fine line and didn't cross it.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Kristoffer said:
I mean, I know why he was, but I think he was treading a fine line and didn't cross it.
Click to expand...

Then it looks like you were both wrong!

The reason they don't discuss mod policy is specifically to ensure there isn't a fine line to tread.

I'm probably breaking policy just explaining this!
 
A

Armaros

Member
pigeon said:
Then it looks like you were both wrong!

The reason they don't discuss mod policy is specifically to ensure there isn't a fine line to tread.

I'm probably breaking policy just explaining this!
Click to expand...

On just about every forum ive been on.

Forum Rule Lawyers were always about how much they could get away with without technically breaking the rules so they could cry foul if they get punished.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2025 Edition
2
98
7K
digdug2 replied
The "I survived development hell" club (7 years+) of games (2024 edition)
36
3K
Holammer replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5 6
263
52K
Topher replied
Xbox 360 'First Party' dev/pub output DID NOT drop in 2nd half after Kinect, but barely changed. People are likely mixing up TP exclusives with FP.
2 3
148
8K
feynoob replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
61K
DGrayson replied
Top Bottom