• 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.

Bowdz

Member
Lmao at the Diablosing over Murphy. You guys act like you've never seen Florida politics before. Remember when Rubio lied about the expenses on his government expense card and how it did jack shit to him? Murphy will have a rough patch, but the Florida race will be about the top of the ticket, take it to the bank.

And stop Diablosing.
 

Slayven

Member
Lmao at the Diablosing over Murphy. You guys act like you've never seen Florida politics before. Remember when Rubio lied about the expenses on his government expense card and how it did jack shit to him? Murphy will have a rough patch, but the Florida race will be about the top of the ticket, take it to the bank.

And stop Diablosing.

The old Florida modifier. Like if you go on a blind date in Florida, you shouldn't be surprised if your date offers you bath salts. In other states it would be gum.
 

nillah

Banned
I think with Trump, we will see more change within the first 6 months than we did with Obama in both his terms. But than again, if Trump DOESNT win, we'll know America and the world ain't ready for no Trump...
 

Bowdz

Member
The old Florida modifier. Like if you go on a blind date in Florida, you shouldn't be surprised if your date offers you bath salts. In other states it would be gum.

Indeed.

I'm not a Floridian, but their politics is scummy from top to bottom.
 
Lmao at the Diablosing over Murphy. You guys act like you've never seen Florida politics before. Remember when Rubio lied about the expenses on his government expense card and how it did jack shit to him? Murphy will have a rough patch, but the Florida race will be about the top of the ticket, take it to the bank.

And stop Diablosing.
.

I eye rolled at the whole thing. Rubios comments about hating the Senate and his shit record will move more voters then the fact he isn't an accountant.
 

Slayven

Member
Indeed.

I'm not a Floridian, but their politics is scummy from top to bottom.

inr7c7hd6xrec522fodt.jpg
 
And might I just say:

This is why the Democratic Party matters.
This is why being a member of the Democratic Party matters.
This is why a Democratic Congress matters.

Clmer_6VEAEIB9P.jpg:large


Edit: Kathy Griffin RT Elizabeth Warren=gaygasm. YASSS QUEENS

And people call this woman a traitor, sell out, shill, etc. Makes my fucking blood boil. Warren is damn saint.
 

benjipwns

Banned
The right of self-defense doesn't come with a list of legitimate and illegitimate applicable tools. Just an inherent duty to consider the scope of retaliatory force.

Personally, for myself, the latter figure is zero but I suggest each choose their own value after some thought during times of peaceful reflection.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
A moment from the House floor, from @LukeRussert


Now I want donuts..

This sounds hilariously like something Biden would probably do. He probably actually does this at important meetings with foreign dignitaries.
 
the sit in is kinda stupid.....
Americans are broadly in favor of the most basic types of gun controls like background checks and ammunition magazine limitations, but the House GOP refuses to hold votes on even something as basic as terror watch list checks. They're proving a point, and given the media coverage of it it's working well. I've seen and heard as many people talk about this today than Trump's speech.

They refuse to hold votes solely because it would make them look bad politically. The recess for the 4th begins Friday and there'll be pressure to force the protests to end in one way or another.
 
WASHINGTON — As Democrats on Capitol Hill staged a sit-in in the House chamber seeking a vote on gun policy measures, the ACLU sent a letter to senators opposing the latest compromise measure being considered.

The measure — proposed by Republican Sen. Susan Collins and backed by the Democrats’ leader in that chamber, Sen. Harry Reid — is a more narrow version of the “terrorism watchlist” gun ban measure proposed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein that was rejected earlier in the week.
Collins’ measure utilizes the No-Fly List and the Selectee List as the basis for restricting gun purchases — which would include a far narrower group of individuals than the broad terrorism watchlist used in Feinstein’s original proposal — but that change was not enough to lead the ACLU to support the measure.

“The ACLU strongly urges you to vote against the Collins Amendment because it uses the error-prone and unfair watchlist system, along with vague and overbroad terms, as a predicate for a proceeding to deny a firearms permit,” the ACLU officials wrote in the letter. “The Collins Amendment relies on both the No Fly List, by codifying its criteria, and the Selectee List, by direct reference.”
https://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidn...rorism-watch-l?utm_term=.hlbb1Zrae#.rjvjyLJbN

I'm with the ACLU. This compromise bill sucks. Do a sit in for a better bill, thanks.
 

Makai

Member
http://www.gamecabinet.com/rules/Nomic.html

It's a game about passing laws. I'm trying this out with some coworkers on our company messenger. Basically a bureaucracy simulator. In two days, we've accomplished:

Adding five players.
Changing rule passage from unanimous vote to N - 1 vote where N is the total number of players.
Some weak protections from bills of attainder and disenfranchisement.
Rules can only be passed during office hours.
Removing a player from the game while he's on PTO so we aren't blocked.

My proposal for a prime minister that could pass multiple rules per turn drew interest but was shot down.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
I appreciate the sit-in; the bill is complete horse shit unless they put actual oversight on the actual fucking list.

Agreed, but the point of this one is just to make the GOP look bad. They won't move on it so the Dems can just beat them over the head with something that sounds perfectly fine and reasonable.
 

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
Agreed, but the point of this one is just to make the GOP look bad. They won't move on it so the Dems can just beat them over the head with something that sounds perfectly fine and reasonable.

Hence why I'm fine with the sit-in. :D
 

ampere

Member
Also, not like Paul Ryan's House is well run or productive anyway! Might as well protest something important and fight for change.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Dave Wasserman ‏@Redistrict 22m22 minutes ago
House D's aren't going to convince R's to hold a vote. Rather, they'd need to convince their own voters to migrate to GOP-held districts.
Dave Wasserman ‏@Redistrict 7m7 minutes ago
The great governance challenge of this era is to break up DC's partisanship-industrial complex. No easy ways to achieve that.

Dave Wasserman ‏@Redistrict 25s25 seconds ago
In 2014, only 14.6% of eligible voters participated in congressional primaries that were tantamount to election in >90% of districts.

Dave Wasserman ‏@Redistrict 2m2 minutes ago
Unless that changes, the political fringes will continue to paralyze Congress & everyone else will be left out in the cold.
.
 
Yeah. For all the "sky is falling" talk by gun nuts, it's not like I'm the dictator and all guns are now banned (which I would def do). We just want some regulations, like no terror suspects buying guns and full background checks.

I swear half of my father-in-law's Facebook posts nowadays are some variation of "Obama's trying to take away everyone's guns." Like literally he's attempting to ban guns according to these posts.
 

Does this NOT point back to collusion/collaboration?

The last 'supposedly' leaked documents I posted spoke of how the DNC was using the media to muddy the waters around HRC ethics. Isn't it a bit curious that none of the mainstream media, with the exception of Fox (which will illicit an eye-roll, I completely understand), is reporting on these leaks, basically saying before Hillary was even a candidate, she was a front-runner? The Young Turks have spoken on it.

What about the California Elections? Why is it seeming more and more that any other candidate, let alone Bernie Sanders, never stood a chance?

This is making the rounds; it isn't just isolated to liberal news outlets, yet the DNC, Hillary's campaign, no one is speaking out to even denounce it. That doesn't scare the shit out of anyone else, even if she is your candidate of choice? Its almost like your vote doesn't count, and no one is denying it.

Edit: Eh, I guess the Gun reform sit-in and Libertarian meeting or whatever are more important than something like this. Nothing to see here.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Does this NOT point back to collusion/collaboration?

The last 'supposedly' leaked documents I posted spoke of how the DNC was using the media to muddy the waters around HRC ethics. Isn't it a bit curious that none of the mainstream media, with the exception of Fox (which will illicit an eye-roll, I completely understand), is reporting on these leaks, basically saying before Hillary was even a candidate, she was a front-runner? The Young Turks have spoken on it.

What about the California Elections? Why is it seeming more and more that any other candidate, let alone Bernie Sanders, never stood a chance?

This is making the rounds; it isn't just isolated to liberal news outlets, yet the DNC, Hillary's campaign, no one is speaking out to even denounce it. That doesn't scare the shit out of anyone else, even if she is your candidate of choice? Its almost like your vote doesn't count, and no one is denying it.

giphy.gif
 
This "don't listen to the polls!!!!1!" bullshit is exactly how no one in the media saw Trump coming. PPP kept coming up with these insane results about how many Republicans thought that Islam was evil and that Obama was a Muslim and that the Confederacy should have won the war and centrist people kept yelling that these were "troll polls."

And then Trump comes along and has nothing but white nationalism and crushes a field of 16 competitors that fully represents the GOP's intellectual qualities. And Trump dominates despite the fact that Trump will probably start a nuclear war with China and is clearly not religious or not prepared to be president.

I agree. Trump pretty much proves that millions of people in this country are racist as hell, and you can't even use the "team/tribe" thing for the primary. Explain how Trump won that primary? Racism, straight up.

The interpretation is not flawed. Pretty much every scholar I'm aware of who has looked at the language, looked at what the framers said about it, looked at legal decisions since then, looked at similar amendments and laws from the time, etc. has concluded that it says that individual gun ownership needs to be a constitutional right in order to allow functioning ("well-regulated") militias to form and provide necessary defense. The amendment says individual people need to be able to own guns, period.

Whether we should still have the amendment is a matter for debate, but the actions of our government being fundamentally limited by the interpretive boundaries of the Constitution (which are flexible, but not infinite) is one of the cornerstones of the political legitimacy of the American government in the national psyche. And, sociologically speaking, legitimacy is a pretty important thing.

Nah, it's pretty easy for a SC to rule it outdated. It's easy; just takes 5 people to do it. I mean, do we think most of our government is actually covered and intended by the Elastic Clause? Come on. We all know it's a wink wink nudge nudge thing. We could totally do that today. RBG brings it up sometimes in public tours.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidn...rorism-watch-l?utm_term=.hlbb1Zrae#.rjvjyLJbN

I'm with the ACLU. This compromise bill sucks. Do a sit in for a better bill, thanks.

Perfect is the enemy of good, and to be perfectly frank, all gun laws are ultimately flawed in some way. Better to start actually passing something though, and maybe we cut into the stats. But if we keep this hunt for loopholes going, we'll never pass anything.
 

Mario

Sidhe / PikPok
Does this NOT point back to collusion/collaboration?

How? Why is is it that the DNC having some documents stored on their server detailing attacks against presidential candidates a bad thing?

They SHOULD be collecting these types of documents, forming strategies, and establishing talking points over time, and they SHOULDN'T be waiting until after the primaries and the convention to start that process. The quite likely have a "Bernie folder" too, which probably includes communications, strategies, and talking points supplied from his campaign.

There is no evidence of any wrongdoing by the DNC here whatsoever. It demonstrates no DNC bias towards Clinton. It demonstrates no "cooperation" by the media.


As to why she might have been considered a likely or leaving candidate by anyone before she officially declared? The GOP started attacking her as such in November 2012! And they, and Fox, kept up those attacks ever since.

Plus, in any speculative polling from that point, she was far and away the leading pick.
 

Crisco

Banned
The interpretation is not flawed. Pretty much every scholar I'm aware of who has looked at the language, looked at what the framers said about it, looked at legal decisions since then, looked at similar amendments and laws from the time, etc. has concluded that it says that individual gun ownership needs to be a constitutional right in order to allow functioning ("well-regulated") militias to form and provide necessary defense. The amendment says individual people need to be able to own guns, period.

Whether we should still have the amendment is a matter for debate, but the actions of our government being fundamentally limited by the interpretive boundaries of the Constitution (which are flexible, but not infinite) is one of the cornerstones of the political legitimacy of the American government in the national psyche. And, sociologically speaking, legitimacy is a pretty important thing.

Fine, but that says nothing about regulating the ownership of certain weapons that framers could not have possibly known would exist 200 years from when they wrote the law. If you think writers of the 2nd Amendment envisioned an American where citizens could buy a weapon that a 7 year old could kill 50 people with in 2 minutes, then I'm sorry but you're a fucking idiot. No one is saying you can't own guns, just that a crazy asshole shouldn't be able to buy an assault rifle from a retail store and shoot 100 people with it the same day. There's a huge fucking gulf between that and banning all gun ownership.
 

fauxtrot

Banned
Edit: Eh, I guess the Gun reform sit-in and Libertarian meeting or whatever are more important than something like this. Nothing to see here.

Sorry, the stuff you bring up are just non issues and I think if you understood the workings of a political party and the type of coordination it has to have with the leading candidate (and others to a lesser degree) to be prepared for the General Election, you wouldn't be able to twist things to come to this conclusion you obviously want to see. It doesn't have to do with "collusion" or anything if the sort. The more you delve into politics and its inner-workings, the more you'll likely realize oversimplification is part of the problem.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom