• 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.
R

Rebel Leader

THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
DAYUM

6HCSfeJ.jpg
Click to expand...

---

CNN going all in
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
God that Canova AMA is a gold mine. On the Iran deal.

Admittedly he's rational on the pist Iran deal plan but everything about Obama is clownshoes

I have expressed some criticism of the deal, and I think the State Department could have done a better job negotiating. But now that it has been adopted, of course I support keeping it, as going back would be a big mistake. My main problem with the agreement revolved around the inspection protocols and the timeline of lifting of the sanctions. I think we should have negotiated for inspections that are harder to skirt, and I think that the sanctions and release of frozen assets should have been lifted on a schedule to provide an incentive for Iran to continue its compliance. Granted, I was not in the room, but I don’t think that Obama has been the strongest negotiator. The Affordable Care Act, while partly successful, also has had major problems with costs being so high. A public option could have helped alleviate these problems, and hopefully taken us to a single-payer system like we need. Obama did not negotiate hard for the single-payer system, but instead argued from the middle and got a result to the right— a Republican idea from the 90s.
Click to expand...

https://m.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/4ozqk9/hi_reddit_im_tim_canova_im_challenging_debbie/d4gux0j

The conversation thread is entertaining as fuck. It includes accusations that Obama could have done it because he had the people and accusations that he didn't try 100%.


This past Saturday at the annual Florida Democratic Caucus meeting, Debbie Wasserman Schultz was asked by Carlos Calzadilla, a recent high school graduate if she would debate me. She was asked in front of room filled at the Labor Caucus. I was not there, but from what I was told she had no answer, she was red-faced, bowed her head and scurried back to her seat, and the room then erupted in laughter and applause. She deserves ridicule for ducking debates. I am now hoping to hire Carlos as a field organizer! I think anyone who sees Wasserman Schultz live should ask her the same debate question and they should videotape the exchange. She should have nowhere to hide, perhaps except on the softball Chuck Todd and Rachel Maddow interviews!
Click to expand...

Maddow confirmed not progressive enough.


No, I am not at all concerned. In the 1st quarter, about 10 percent of our fundraising came from donations within Florida. Wasserman Schultz also raised about two-thirds of her money from outside Florida. My donations are an average size of $17. She's taking a lot of money from PACs funded by corporations based outside Florida, a lot of Delaware chartered corporations. And I had more individual donations in Florida than she did!
Click to expand...

Only 10% from in state and he tries to make it on par with 33%


Convene a bipartisan caucus of House and Senate members committed to overturning Citizens United, committed to publicly financed elections, and unwilling to accept corporate money. I would support the Brand New Congress in challenging those who refuse to get on board with these reforms.
Click to expand...

Okkkk buddy. Bi-partisan rrrrright.

believe Edward Snowden did this country a service. In a democracy, the people should know what their country is doing with their tax dollars and in their name. Yes, I've heard about the leaked DNC files, and understand that it shows some internal DNC memos from last May that strategize how to promote the Hillary Clinton campaign and stifle her opposition within the party.
Click to expand...

Pander to those conspiracy theorists...

The biggest mistake of the Democrats in 2009-2010 was to not take care of the millennials who had just turned out for us in 2008. There were no New Deal jobs programs like during the Great Depression. Instead of Si, se puede, it was "no, we can't." So we got a trickle down recovery, the millennials got turned off from politics, and the Dems lost big in 2010. How to recover politically from the 2010 debacle and subsequent redistricting and gerrymanders? We need a progressive agenda that crushes at the polls, the sooner the better. I have long thought that Bernie was the only candidate who could lead such a wave.
Click to expand...

Ahh yes 2010 was all Obama's fault lol.

Yes, it was a big missed opportunity for Obama in 2009. We can only accomplish these ideas if we elect a lot of progressives to Congress in 2016 and 2018. Recall, that many Democrats lost in 2010, which sealed the coffin on any future progressive reforms. This is why Bernie is talking about down-ballot races, and why he reminds us that this is a movement, and movements take time.
Click to expand...

This guy is literally riding Sanders' name

Our progressive movement has raised tens of millions of dollars for Bernie Sanders. What happens next year and the following year, where does all that money and energy go? That's what we have to figure out. Again, the reason I like the Brand New Congress is that it could be a game changer, it could bring down Citizens United and give us publicly financed election, and tear down the rule of corporations. With Bernie's campaign, we had a common platform, a single focus, and the grassroots responded accordingly. Moving forward, we will need a common platform and single focus for our movement.
Click to expand...

He's got less substance than Sanders. Impressive

My question: I know you oppose open borders, but support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. Can you expand on your stance and ideas on the issue? Do you consider yourself a moderate on this issue compared to your fellow democrats? How does your stance on this contrast with DWS?


TimCanova2016 • 2d, 17h
Thanks and sorry we didn't get to meet at the Blue Gala. I think open borders become a safety valve for failed states south of our border, and often it's the US (both public and private sectors) that are propping up corrupt oligarchs that don't take care of their people, who then undertake the often dangerous migration over borders and into the US.
I suspect there are some Democrats like DWS that like to talk about comprehensive immigration reform, but never push it as a top priority. As long as the problem is unresolved, it continues to be a grievance against Republicans. Democrats who talk the talk, but don't walk the walk are the real "moderates." I don't see myself as moderate on the issue because I think this is another issue that has to come up for a vote in the first 100 days of a new administration.
Click to expand...


Asked to clarify his immigration plans... onstead creates conspiracy theory about DWS and other Democrats.

On why Sanders hasn't conceded
Because no delegate has actually cast a vote yet, because he wants to push for badly needed reforms at the DNC, because a lot can happen between now and the convention, because votes are still being counted in California and lawsuits are pending in other states. Hundreds of super delegates pledged their support for Hillary Clinton before the first primary or caucus. Is it too much to ask delegates to actually vote before Bernie drops out?
Click to expand...

FRAAAAAAUD

The corporate media is a terrible force. Chuck Todd has Wasserman Schultz on his show last week, 10 minutes of easy questions, followed by 3 minutes of even easier discussion about some annual softball game (yes, it was literally a softball interview). Most of my appearances on cable TV recently have been limited to about 3 minutes total and all questions about the presidential horserace. There should be Free Air Time for candidates, broadcasters should owe some responsibilities to the public interest in exchange for all the subsidies they receive.
Click to expand...

So every crackpot should get a tv spot? It's funny he complains he gets asked about the Presidential race yet most of his answers were basically DWS bad Sanders good. When you basically campaign by talking almost exclusively about Sanders no shit they're gonna just ask you about Sanders. Canova has no reallt ideas or personality of his own. He seems to literally be pandering by talking about the current hotness.

Ok maybe I'm at bitch eating crackers with this guy but this is exactly what I worry about when Sanders starts endorsing and purity testing That we're just going to get a lot of people who won't actually do anything to help the progressive movement because they're not good candidates but hey they pass the ideological purity test.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
bangbang i'm a timpani said:
clinton fans in this thread are already on their victory lap it seems like. that trump speech yesterday is getting good reviews despite how much of it was nonsense.
Click to expand...

Uh....no it's not? I mean, CNN said if you ignore all of the lies it was fine...but, no. His speech got close to zero coverage on mainstream and nightly news. The entire cycle is dominated by the Sit-in.

Also, "Clinton fans" and "this thread" are synonymous. We're all neo-liberal shills. And gay. We're all pretty much gay.
 
B

balladofwindfishes

Member
bangbang i'm a timpani said:
clinton fans in this thread are already on their victory lap it seems like. that trump speech yesterday is getting good reviews despite how much of it was nonsense.
Click to expand...

CNN doesn't even mention his speech at all on their website. It's all the Dem sit in and Brexit for political news (as it should be)

A speech by Gary Johnson is currently better represented on CNN's homepage than Donald
 
B

bangbang i'm a timpani

Banned
balladofwindfishes said:
CNN doesn't even mention his speech at all on their website. It's all the Dem sit in and Brexit for political news (as it should be)

A speech by Gary Johnson is currently better represented on CNN's homepage than Donald
Click to expand...

adam387 said:
Uh....no it's not? I mean, CNN said if you ignore all of the lies it was fine...but, no. His speech got close to zero coverage on mainstream and nightly news. The entire cycle is dominated by the Sit-in.

Also, "Clinton fans" and "this thread" are synonymous. We're all neo-liberal shills. And gay. We're all pretty much gay.
Click to expand...

i totally get what you guys are saying but cnn isn't exactly the way people receive news nowadays. the washington beat sites all have good coverage.
 
A

aspiegamer

Member
royalan said:
Welp, there goes his 2020 presidential run.

I don't understand how the GOP doesn't see how catastrophically bad they look right now...
Click to expand...
Democrats probably didn't even think this would go so well. The sit-in is a way bigger story today than any of Trump's attack stuff yesterday which was surely aimed at winning at least one news cycle in a media war the GOP has been hammered by the past few weeks. Ryan had to know that adjourning in the dead of night while skipping other business wouldn't look good... Right? That one CNN poll showing 90% in favor of the "no fly no buy" shouldn't be terribly surprising, and it's unbelievable how obvious something has to be to get 9 in 10 Americans to agree with it. You couldn't get 9 of 10 to condemn Hitler, African famines or animal abuse.

Coverage later today should be all Brexit, and it damn well should be. That has massive implications globally and certainly for the US.
bangbang i'm a timpani said:
clinton fans in this thread are already on their victory lap it seems like. that trump speech yesterday is getting good reviews despite how much of it was nonsense.
Click to expand...
Good reviews among people desperately looking for reassurance isn't the same as good reviews with the general public. Trump seriously needs to stop giving these teleprompter speeches early in the day, btw. Clinton always gets to counter it and gets just as attention as a result.
bangbang i'm a timpani said:
i totally get what you guys are saying but cnn isn't exactly the way people receive news nowadays. the washington beat sites all have good coverage.
Click to expand...
I'd argue that people who predominately feed off inside-the-beltway media are more isolated than anyone who follows that darn pesky lamestream media. Those all are already political junkies. Those are the people who wanted to be reassured.
 
E

Ecotic

Member
Morning Joe is kind of funny to me in how the third and fourth string has to step in to host the show from time to time.
 
P

plagiarize

Banned
Polls, betting odds, etc are all pointing in the right direction for Remain to win today. A ten point margin sounds pretty good based on the data we have. Undecideds usually break for whatever the status quo is (if you aren't sure, staying as is seems the safest thing to do... we saw this with the Scottish independence referendum too).

I was slightly worried a week or so ago, but today I'm feeling pretty confident. Not 100%. I'll be checking the results for sure. As a Brit, obviously this is super important to me even if I live in Yankland now.

But it looks like the gamble has paid off and that Cameron did something right for once. A sigh of relief will be breathed, and Europe will have that little bit more leverage over the UK. It's a real shame this whole referendum has been argued on nonsense that has solely focused on whether leaving or staying in would be a bigger catastrophe for the UK and almost none of it has been about the pros and cons of being in Europe. Why both sides decided to take that tack I'll never know.

Europe isn't just good for the UK. A strong Europe is good for the world, and Europe is stronger with the UK in it than out of it.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
plagiarize said:
Polls, betting odds, etc are all pointing in the right direction for Remain to win today. A ten point margin sounds pretty good based on the data we have. Undecideds usually break for whatever the status quo is (if you aren't sure, staying as is seems the safest thing to do... we saw this with the Scottish independence referendum too).

I was slightly worried a week or so ago, but today I'm feeling pretty confident. Not 100%. I'll be checking the results for sure. As a Brit, obviously this is super important to me even if I live in Yankland now.

But it looks like the gamble has paid off and that Cameron did something right for once. A sigh of relief will be breathed, and Europe will have that little bit more leverage over the UK. It's a real shame this whole referendum has been argued on nonsense that has solely focused on whether leaving or staying in would be a bigger catastrophe for the UK and almost none of it has been about the pros and cons of being in Europe. Why both sides decided to take that tack I'll never know.

Europe isn't just good for the UK. A strong Europe is good for the world, and Europe is stronger with the UK in it than out of it.
Click to expand...

I know this is British politics, so maybe off topic....

But, if Remain wins...do you think that it will seriously hurt Boris' chances at being PM? He's been so vocal in his support for leave, tying himself to Farage....I feel like it fucks up his chances. Not that I'm 100% sure the Torries would have voted him in as leader anyway, especially with Labour being the dumpster fire it is atm.
 
M

Maledict

Member
plagiarize said:
That just underlines how FRAUDY the FRAUD is though! The exit polls for the last general had Tories doing much worse than they did. So obviously FRAUD FRAUD FRAUDY FRAUD.

Cameron is clearly a FRAUD wizard. So Remain FRAUD. You know?

If I just close my eyes and convince myself I'm not part of a fringe belief, I don't have to worry about my views being out of the mainstream. So... FRAUD.
Click to expand...

Um, nope. The BBC exit poll at the last election was the first sign we had that the polls were wrong - it predicted a MUCH stronger Tory result than any polling. in fact it was so out of line with the polls that we even had conservatives on television saying that they didn't believe it and it was outside their expectations.

It was the polls that were wrong - the exit poll was unfortunately very accurate.
 
P

plagiarize

Banned
adam387 said:
I know this is British politics, so maybe off topic....

But, if Remain wins...do you think that it will seriously hurt Boris' chances at being PM? He's been so vocal in his support for leave, tying himself to Farage....I feel like it fucks up his chances. Not that I'm 100% sure the Torries would have voted him in as leader anyway, especially with Labour being the dumpster fire it is atm.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine Boris being PM under any circumstances. He's basically Trump if Trump had been in politics for a long time. The guy is hilarious, but in so much as you're laughing with him and at him just about equally. It would be crazy for the Tories to select him, and sure while the UK has been getting progressively more right wing over the last decade or so, I do think the tories have if anything been moving towards the center.

Pro EU. Pro gay marriage. Believers in climate change... all that stuff. Economically they're still trying to cut the shit out of everything. They're still blaming everything on the poor and immigrants. They're still doing a lot of stuff that I really don't like, but they're much easier to tolerate than the GOP.

Boris... god. If he had a chance, Remain winning will derail it, but I don't think he has a chance.

But yeah... the guy has a lot of the same characteristics as Trump. Says whatever the fuck he wants to say. Terrible hair. Comes out with outright racist stuff. Is desperate for the spotlight.
 
M

Maledict

Member
adam387 said:
I know this is British politics, so maybe off topic....

But, if Remain wins...do you think that it will seriously hurt Boris' chances at being PM? He's been so vocal in his support for leave, tying himself to Farage....I feel like it fucks up his chances. Not that I'm 100% sure the Torries would have voted him in as leader anyway, especially with Labour being the dumpster fire it is atm.
Click to expand...

To be honest, no-one knows. The entire thing is so in the air it could go a million ways.

Boris has certainly solidified his lead over the Brexit camp - but he's also really pissed off the remain Tories, to the point where several swapped sides over the campaign Leave had been running. He's generally not viewed very favourably by other MPs, as he's seen to be very self serving and lazy. The question is whether he would get through to the final round of two - it might be that Gove gets the Brexit vote instead of him, and the rest coalesce around the main Remain candidate.

If leave happens then he will be PM within 6 months, that's practically guaranteed.
 
O

Orbis Tabula

Member
Loudninja said:
I cant think of any reason why someone would be against this.
Click to expand...

Sorry I'm so late to respond to this, and most of my views have been better explained by more intelligent posters than me, but I'll do my best.

Basically, I think the bill is stupid. As much as I'd like to see gun control passed, theres a pretty glaring flaw with this proposal, constitutionally. Inasmuch as the notion of "political capital" actually exists, I think that the Dems have a lot on this issue, and it rankles that they're choosing to waste it on what I consider the worst possible option for gun control proposals. I'd much rather see "universal background checks" as the headline than "terror loophole."

Maybe the other posters are right, though. Maybe this looks better to people on the outside. Perhaps it's a play to make Republicans looks stupid so the Dems can get yet more political capital. I'm sure that's what a lot of the politician suporting the move are thinking. But I just don't like it. I guess it's too much sausage making for me. I dunno.
 
C

Crisco

Banned
Teggy said:
What is the true danger in standing up to the NRA? It seems that:

-there is support among the members of the NRA for background checks and other measures
https://www.americanprogress.org/pr...hecks-see-nra-as-out-of-touch-new-poll-finds/

-the actual amount of money provided to NRA backed candidates is really not that high

Is it just the fear that the NRA will disrupt their reelection campaigns?
Click to expand...

It's not so much losing direct support from they are concerned about, but the NRA supporting their opponent in a primary. Being branded anti-gun by the NRA will sink any Republican campaign.
 
P

plagiarize

Banned
Teggy said:
What is the true danger in standing up to the NRA? It seems that:

-there is support among the members of the NRA for background checks and other measures
https://www.americanprogress.org/pr...hecks-see-nra-as-out-of-touch-new-poll-finds/

-the actual amount of money provided to NRA backed candidates is really not that high

Is it just the fear that the NRA will disrupt their reelection campaigns?
Click to expand...

NRA members tend to vote the way the NRA tells them too. If they paint a candidate as anti NRA and throw their support (and funds) behind their opponent, they have a pretty good record of taking people's seats from them.

That's basically what makes them so scary to republicans. Not just that they'll fund their opponent, BUT that they're essentially a voting block.

What we really need to do isn't to shame GOP members for caving to the NRA but to work to ruin the credibility of the NRA with it's members. The NRA doesn't represent it's members. It represents gun companies. That's what we need to convey.

If the NRA represented it's members it would be pro background checks. If it represented it's members it would be pro waiting periods (since they reduce the number of gun suicides). They would be pro mandatory training (since they stop NRA members accidentally shooting themselves or others). But it doesn't represent it's members.

The NRAs power is it's ability to get people elected. If we take that away, we take the fear of crossing them away.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
plagiarize said:
I can't imagine Boris being PM under any circumstances. He's basically Trump if Trump had been in politics for a long time. The guy is hilarious, but in so much as you're laughing with him and at him just about equally. It would be crazy for the Tories to select him, and sure while the UK has been getting progressively more right wing over the last decade or so, I do think the tories have if anything been moving towards the center.

Pro EU. Pro gay marriage. Believers in climate change... all that stuff. Economically they're still trying to cut the shit out of everything. They're still blaming everything on the poor and immigrants. They're still doing a lot of stuff that I really don't like, but they're much easier to tolerate than the GOP.

Boris... god. If he had a chance, Remain winning will derail it, but I don't think he has a chance.

But yeah... the guy has a lot of the same characteristics as Trump. Says whatever the fuck he wants to say. Terrible hair. Comes out with outright racist stuff. Is desperate for the spotlight.
Click to expand...

Maledict said:
To be honest, no-one knows. The entire thing is so in the air it could go a million ways.

Boris has certainly solidified his lead over the Brexit camp - but he's also really pissed off the remain Tories, to the point where several swapped sides over the campaign Leave had been running. He's generally not viewed very favourably by other MPs, as he's seen to be very self serving and lazy. The question is whether he would get through to the final round of two - it might be that Gove gets the Brexit vote instead of him, and the rest coalesce around the main Remain candidate.

If leave happens then he will be PM within 6 months, that's practically guaranteed.
Click to expand...

Thanks both of you for responding :)

Ya, I agree that if Leave wins, he will be PM by years end/beginning of next year. UK has a chance to neuter his political ambitions and stay in the EU. Don't fuck this up, please.
 
P

plagiarize

Banned
adam387 said:
Thanks both of you for responding :)

Ya, I agree that if Leave wins, he will be PM by years end/beginning of next year. UK has a chance to neuter his political ambitions and stay in the EU. Don't fuck this up, please.
Click to expand...

I'll say this, IF Boris were to end up PM, we'll get a fairly good idea of what Bernie vs Trump would have looked like.
 
T

thestopsign

Member
thepotatoman said:
https://www.predictit.org/market/1529/who-will-win-the-2016-republican-vice-presidential-nomination

Jeff Sessions - 22¢
Newt Gingrich - 21¢
Chris Christie - 10¢
Joni Ernst - 8¢
Mary Fallin - 7¢
John Kasich - 5¢

From that list, I'm personally rooting for Scott Brown, Jan Brewer, or Jeb Bush.
Click to expand...

I got in on Newt when he was 11¢, I thought he was the obvious choice. I'm just going to ride it out until selection as I stand to gain a lot.

bangbang i'm a timpani said:
is their bias toward the left or right?
Click to expand...

They have a right lean typically. I believe they had Romney ahead of Obama most of 2012.
 
M

Maledict

Member
plagiarize said:
I'll say this, IF Boris were to end up PM, we'll get a fairly good idea of what Bernie vs Trump would have looked like.
Click to expand...

The difference is, Boris is actually very clever. Lazy, but very smart. His entire "Schtick" is an act - I've literally seen him, minutes before giving a speech, deliberately mess his hair up, loosen his tie and start speaking differently. Trump is a narcissistic moron, whereas Boris is just a very good fake politician.
 
P

plagiarize

Banned
Maledict said:
The difference is, Boris is actually very clever. Lazy, but very smart. His entire "Schtick" is an act - I've literally seen him, minutes before giving a speech, deliberately mess his hair up, loosen his tie and start speaking differently. Trump is a narcissistic moron, whereas Boris is just a very good fake politician.
Click to expand...

They aren't identical. But I think Boris is probably the closest the UK has to a Trumpesque candidate.
 
T

thebloo

Member
Ugh, Canova sounds so slimy in that. Seriously, glimpses of a better spoken Trump. "I was not there, but..."
"I was told"
"I suspect"

He's gonna get blown away anyway.
 
N

Nazgul_Hunter

Member
Man, there really is no better evidence of good ol' fashioned quid pro quo corruption in Washington than House GOP not supporting measures that 90% of REPUBLICANS support, just because the NRA tells them not to support it.

I hope this is the turning point where Democrats can really rally behind these super popular measures and label the republican opposition for what it really is, corruption.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Wasserman's latest Tweet about how Pennsylvania is trending red is interesting. It's a battleground state.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2025 Edition
2 3
103
8K
rofif 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