Support NeoGAF

[Iolo]

Hmm.

There is precedent:

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-06-30/trump-mcmahon-house

Donald Trump boasts that he elevated real-estate dealmaking to an art form. But in 2008, there was one transaction that he just couldn't seem to close.

That was when Trump swooped in, promising to rescue Ed McMahon, the longtime announcer for NBC's The Tonight Show who was in failing health and facing foreclosure on his six-bedroom mansion in Beverly Hills, California.

Like some of Trump's other charitable pledges, this one generated an avalanche of publicity, only to mire in confusion and delay once the TV cameras moved on. Trump negotiated for months over the property without striking a deal, with McMahon and his family in limbo. Then another deep-pocketed investor stepped in and resolved McMahon's predicament with no fanfare.

Trump still chalks up the McMahon deal as a win, according to Michael Cohen, his special counsel.

 

[Paskil]

This is one of the best gifs I've ever seen. It needs more appreciation.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Really not good that more Americans view Trump as being more honest and trustworthy. Wtf America.

that's going to change the moment Trump is the official nominee and every single day is a new story about Trump screwing over X person or Y contractor or Z business.

DNC has so much shit on him, we've already heard that they don't want to scare him away with huge fundraising, so a bunch of money is on hold till after the convention.

What is about to happen once the email situation is out of the way is going to compare to the US military facing off against the Iraq military in the first gulf war.

We're on the verge of witnessing the political equivalence to the Highway of Death

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

The FDA is finally recommending that we ban shock collars for autistic people that self-harm.

Wow, our society fucking hates the mentally ill.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Queen gonna booze it up. Yassss queeen.

She just needs to record everything the GOP reps say while drunk.

 

[Chichikov]

The FDA is finally recommending that we ban shock collars for autistic people that self-harm.

Wow, our society fucking hates the mentally ill.

This is of course an abomination, but as far as I know, only the JRC is currently using those barbaric methods.
And that place needs to be burned to the ground.

 

[DrForester]

Trump really should pick a candidate that wants to privatize Social Security and Medicare, come to us, Florida.

I'm thinking less and less that Trump is going to pick a VP that will "balance" him out a little bit, and more and more thinking he's just going to get a yes-man sycophant.

 

[Link]

The FDA is finally recommending that we ban shock collars for autistic people that self-harm.

Wow, our society fucking hates the mentally ill.

This is still a fucking thing?

 

[Crisco]

So ..... let's say the roles were reversed and the Dems nominated a Trump equivalent like say, Kanye West. The Republicans put up an establishment candidate like a Romney or a Bush. Any of you voting for Kanye in that scenario?

 

[NYCmetsfan]

This was on a vox article on Bee vs. Oliver

The reason for this is simple: Oliver rarely draws the connection between the horrible injustices he’s reporting on and how we at home either profit from or indirectly support them.

When he discusses, say, medical debt, it’s with the implication that medical debt is just one of the world’s many ills, one that we should probably get around to fixing someday, but also one that will require sustained political action, probably from somebody else, to truly solve.

This approach — knowing about stuff is more important, ultimately, than doing stuff — is very much in keeping with the traditional role of the comedian as a detached, amused observer. But it’s also a recipe for viewer ego-stroking, especially in an era when TV audiences are self-selected niches who seek out programs that will speak to their partisan opinions.

And don’t get me wrong. Samantha Bee thinks everybody who disagrees with her is completely and totally incorrect — if not utterly idiotic. She frequently presents those who oppose her own political positions as enemies in the grinding trench war she’s waging.

But because she also views them as actual opponents, rather than uneducated folks who only need to hear the right information (laced with jokes!) to see the light, she weirdly grants them more respect. The only way to defeat them is to overturn the system itself.

Thus, she’s not terribly interested in coddling her audience. This is the world all of us have built, she posits, and if we’re going to make it better, it will be together.

I never really thought about that but it makes a lot of sense.

Oliver is well-to-do liberals talking to other well-to-do liberals who can point out how screwed up things are but never really want to upset their place in it. And kind of just want everything to fix itself if we just point it out

 

[johnsmith]

How racist is Kanye?

 

[Father_Brain]

First of all there is a lot of debate on the connection with jews and israel in the jewish community.

But its not "rich" for people to condemn outsiders who try to impose on them what they are compared to a internal debate on what the identity means.

Hi, also a non-Zionist Jew here. Do I really need to point out how often the label of "self-hating Jew" is applied by Israel apologists (both domestic and overseas) to non-Zionist Jews, or even liberal Zionists who err too far on the liberal side for their tastes?

 

[kess]

Here's a Fortune Magazine article from March (!) that should be added to the lists of links Trump has with White Supremacy.

The Little Bird software analyzed Twitter content to generate a ranked list of just under 2,000 #WhiteGenocide “influencers” as of February 8. The more impactful, the higher up on the list (which, understandably, ebbs and flows a bit over time).

Since the start of his campaign, Donald Trump has retweeted at least 75 users who follow at least three of the top 50 #WhiteGenocide influencers. Moreover, a majority of these retweeted accounts are themselves followed by more than 100 #WhiteGenocide influencers.

But the relationship isn’t limited to retweets. For example, Trump national campaign spokesperson Katrina Pierson (who is black), follows the most influential #WhiteGenocide account, @Genophilia, which is best known for helping to launch a Star Wars boycott after it became known that the new film’s lead character was black. (Below are some recent #WhiteGenocide tweets from @Genophilia.)

The official Twitter account for Trump’s campaign in Nevada follows #WhiteGenocide influencers #3 and #40.

The official Twitter account for Trump’s campaign in North Carolina previously followed #20, #74 and #77.

Tana Goertz, a senior Trump advisor and co-chair of his Iowa campaign, follows #74 and #117.

Nancy Mace, Trump’s South Carolina coalitions director, follows #20 and #35.

Elizabeth Mae Davidson, a former campaign staffer who later sued Trump’s campaign for alleged sexual discrimination, follows #40.

Dena Espenscheid, Trump’s Virginia field director, follows #5, #22 and #35.

That last example is notable, because one of those followed accounts refers to itself as AdolfJoeBiden and has a profile image of Joe Biden with Hitler’s mustache and haircut — something that would have been visible to Espenscheid were she to have followed the account while using almost any device.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Hi, also a non-Zionist Jew here. Do I really need to point out how often the label of "self-hating Jew" is applied by Israel apologists (both domestic and overseas) to non-Zionist Jews, or even liberal Zionists who err too far on the liberal side for their tastes?

and?

There's a big difference between that and Corbyn deciding what position Jews should take on jewish nationalism

 

[Wilsongt]

Chris Christie is going to get Sec. of Getting McDonalds.

Secretary of being Food Minion.

 

[googleplex]

.... Which liberals would be mad about amnesty and infrastructure spending?

The ones that demand ideological purity in all things. The ones that see compromise of any sort as treason against the electorate, "selling out" to the establishment. Basically Bernie Sanders.

 

[Father_Brain]

and?

There's a big difference between that and Corbyn deciding what position Jews should take on jewish nationalism

I don't really see how that line of reasoning doesn't culminate in the notion that non-Jews shouldn't criticize Israel or Zionism at all.

 

[Father_Brain]

.... Which liberals would be mad about amnesty and infrastructure spending?

If she can actually achieve those things, great.

But I think the last decade should have taught her, and all Democrats, that trying to get the GOP to negotiate in good faith on anything is a fool's errand.

 

[Diablos]

Chris Christie is going to get Sec. of Getting McDonalds.

Sec. of dumping M&M's back into the box

 

[ampere]

So ..... let's say the roles were reversed and the Dems nominated a Trump equivalent like say, Kanye West. The Republicans put up an establishment candidate like a Romney or a Bush. Any of you voting for Kanye in that scenario?

If I were not confident that one nominee was mentally stable enough to be commander-in-chief then I could not vote for them, and I think Kanye would not inspire such confidence and I would have to vote against him. Single issue voter until the issue of mental stability of the commander-in-chief is dealt with so to speak. Can't fix a world that we blow up with nukes

This was actually my number one issue with Palin as McCain's VP, if he somehow died it would be fucking dangerous to have that lunatic as POTUS. It's also my #1 issue with Trump even before the other million problems with him

I would be horrified at the state of the Democratic electorate if we came to the point where Kanye was nominated

 

[Bowdz]

So ..... let's say the roles were reversed and the Dems nominated a Trump equivalent like say, Kanye West. The Republicans put up an establishment candidate like a Romney or a Bush. Any of you voting for Kanye in that scenario?

Not a chance in hell. Shitty policy is one thing, but having a Commander in Chief who lacks basic cognitive function is significantly more concerning.

 

[Chichikov]

and?

There's a big difference between that and Corbyn deciding what position Jews should take on jewish nationalism

Where did he say that?

 

[Cesare Borgia]

.... Which liberals would be mad about amnesty and infrastructure spending?

I think the assumption is that Hillary will have to make major concessions to get either done (assuming republicans retain the House). Immigration reform won't be passed anytime soon IMO, but in the magical event that a compromise was reached it would include border security measures that some liberals and immigration activists wouldn't be happy about. And there would likely be no pathway to citizenship.

Infrastructure spending would likely not go nearly as far as it needs to and include some program cuts to pay for it that liberals would be dismayed by.

 

[Teggy]

The table was going with Scott Brown.

Could you imagine if we wound up with a Brown/Forma debate?

This whole story is a bit strange, though, because when Lewandowski was fired it was reported that he wanted to leak their pick, which implies they made it a while ago.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Sounds like Christie then?

I'm thinking less and less that Trump is going to pick a VP that will "balance" him out a little bit, and more and more thinking he's just going to get a yes-man sycophant.

This is why I'm backing Christie in the Veepstakes. The guy has set himself up as the go-to yes man; he's an all-in Trump supporter who's held a real political office of a decently important state. That he was a terrible person in that office is irrelevant; Trump needs someone on the ticket that won't say the shit that Ryan and McConnell do every time Trump says something racist.

If she can actually achieve those things, great.

But I think the last decade should have taught her, and all Democrats, that trying to get the GOP to negotiate in good faith on anything is a fool's errand.

That's a feature of the last 6 years, not a long-term assessment of any party. I think you can chip into enough Maine-style Republicans who loathe the Tea Party obstruction folks and would abandon them in a negotiated attempt at some compromise.

I mean, if Hillary makes immigration her ACA, then a lot of the more intelligent Republicans will realize that opposing such reform could turn Hispanic voters into black voters, and that would damn near permanently lock the Presidency from them. The DNC primary would effectively be the general election for decades if they lose Hispanic voters that badly.

If I were not confident that one nominee was mentally stable enough to be commander-in-chief then I could not vote for them, and I think Kanye would not inspire such confidence and I would have to vote against him. Single issue voter until the issue of mental stability of the commander-in-chief is dealt with so to speak. Can't fix a world that we blow up with nukes

This was actually my number one issue with Palin as McCain's VP, if he somehow died it would be fucking dangerous to have that lunatic as POTUS. It's also my #1 issue with Trump even before the other million problems with him

I would be horrified at the state of the Democratic electorate if we came to the point where Kanye was nominated

If the race was Romney vs Kanye, I'd vote Romney. 3rd party votes are pointless, and people should still vote. If those were my options, I'd put country over party.

 

[Father_Brain]

That's a feature of the last 6 years, not a long-term assessment of any party. I think you can chip into enough Maine-style Republicans who loathe the Tea Party obstruction folks and would abandon them in a negotiated attempt at some compromise.

Six years? Hardly. The 110th Congress, from 2007 to 2009, was marked by then-unprecedented levels of GOP obstructionism, and that was before the Obama presidency.

 

[The Technomancer]

Yeah, and as a Jew (and ex-Israeli) who is not a zionist and doesn't support the policies of Israel, the fact that Israel insists on blurring the lines between Jews and the state of Israel/Zionism upset me on a personal level.

Structurally its similar to the problem we have when discussing Islam right? Insomuch as we need to simultaneously be able to recognize marginalization within some populations while also be free to be critical of states that represent institutional power. Anti-semitism is still widely prevalent and Israel continues to do horrible things and people who claim that you can't support both claims simultaneously drive me nuts

 

[Y2Kev]

I would think Scott Brown would be a perfect VP for Trump. Why is he not in the mix?

 

[minor effort]

I would think Scott Brown would be a perfect VP for Trump. Why is he not in the mix?

Only winners allowed, not two-time losers.

 

[Chichikov]

Structurally its similar to the problem we have when discussing Islam right? Insomuch as we need to simultaneously be able to recognize marginalization within some populations while also be free to be critical of states that represent institutional power

It's a bit different I think, there isn't a country which claims to represent the interests of all Muslims like Israel does.
Also, Israel is intentionally blurring the line between religion and ethnicity when it comes to being a Jew, so that complicates matters further.

 

[Bowdz]

I think the assumption is that Hillary will have to make major concessions to get either done (assuming republicans retain the House). Immigration reform won't be passed anytime soon IMO, but in the magical event that a compromise was reached it would include border security measures that some liberals and immigration activists wouldn't be happy about. And there would likely be no pathway to citizenship.

Infrastructure spending would likely not go nearly as far as it needs to and include some program cuts to pay for it that liberals would be dismayed by.

I disagree. It'll likely be the same bill the Senate passed in 2013 and I can easily see it being passed even with a split Congress. It would have passed on votes alone if Boehner had brought it up for a vote and we know that Ryan is SIGNIFICANTLY more pro immigration than Boehner. The political capital will be there in 2017 for a quick win and despite Trump's racist minority, there will absolutely be the desire by the Dems and enough non idiotic Republicans to get it done.

 

[User1608]

I disagree. It'll likely be the same bill the Senate passed in 2013 and I can easily see it being passed even with a split Congress. It would have passed on votes alone if Boehner had brought it up for a vote and we know that Ryan is SIGNIFICANTLY more pro immigration than Boehner. The political capital will be there in 2017 for a quick win and despite Trump's racist minority, there will absolutely be the desire by the Dems and enough non idiotic Republicans to get it done.

I'm hoping you're right. Boehner is such an ass.

 

[Suikoguy]

If she can actually achieve those things, great.

But I think the last decade should have taught her, and all Democrats, that trying to get the GOP to negotiate in good faith on anything is a fool's errand.

I'm sure she knows that, she is more politically savvy than Obama was his first term. But, you always make the attempt, before abandoning it. Plus, making the attempt and getting votes on things gives down ticket something to campaign on.

 

[Valhelm]

How does that make it less bad?

Why does trump have white nationalist interns?

How many white nationalist interns does Hillary have?

How many of Hillary's white nationalist interns have retweeted other white nationalists or tweeted racist pictures?

Because this means it's probably an accident, rather than deliberate anti-Semitism. Because Trump is a far right candidate, his employees probably browse far-right websites. If Trump's people had designed the picture themselves, that would mean he or his staff were deliberately trying to breed anti-Semitism.

 

[Link]

I'm sure she knows that, she is more politically savvy than Obama was his first term. But, you always make the attempt, before abandoning it. Plus, making the attempt and getting votes on things gives down ticket something to campaign on.

Exactly. Gun control, for example. I think deep down, Democrats knew none of those bills would pass, but by forcing a vote, now it's all on record and can be used against Republicans in November. It's the same reason they're fighting for a vote in the House as well, even though the Senate already voted them down.

 

[Yoda]

New York Times: ‘President Hillary Clinton?’ She Wants Progress on Immigration and to Drink With G.O.P.

This article might as well be a PR piece from her campaign... Why would the Republicans compromise with her? Not compromise = they win during midterms; and unlike Obama, liberals won't be there for HRC if her first 4 years are her trying to cram corporate bullshit down America's throat.

 

[Valhelm]

This is a really elementary economic question, but why is our current reserve system better than a national bank or even the gold standard?

Why do many libertarians wish to return to the gold standard?

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Hmm:

Ye vs. Romney: Romney
Ye vs. Sasse: Sasse

Kim Kardashian vs. Romney: Romney
Kim Kardashian vs. Sasse: Kim?

Kendrick Lamar vs. Romney: Kendrick
Kendrick Lamar vs. Sasse: Kendrick

This is a really elementary economic question, but why is our current reserve system better than a national bank or even the gold standard?

Why do many libertarians wish to return to the gold standard?

With the federal reserve, a government agency can change market liquidity and influence interest rates. Libertarians hate all government so therefore they want a system where the government cannot influence interest rates or change overall liquidity.

 

[whyamihere]

Hillary's plan to get Republicans wasted before they sign on to compromising is certainly novel.

 

[itschris]

This article might as well be a PR piece from her campaign... Why would the Republicans compromise with her? Not compromise = they win during midterms; and unlike Obama, liberals won't be there for HRC if her first 4 years are her trying to cram corporate bullshit down America's throat.

Well, the article does go into more detail:

Her calculation is that she will be dealing with a Republican Party that is deeply fractured and demoralized after the defeat of Mr. Trump, whose leaders will be searching for ways to show they can govern and to court Hispanics if Mr. Trump loses badly with them. Mrs. Clinton also thinks a huge Democratic turnout this fall would put the Senate back in her party’s hands, while Speaker Paul D. Ryan and the Republicans would have a reduced majority in the House.

What Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Clinton do not know — but regularly explore in conversations, according to friends — is whether Republican leaders, even if their power is diminished, would be in a mood to cooperate.

Mrs. Clinton has been a lightning rod for their base for two decades. Much of her budget plan — about $1.4 trillion in new spending over the next decade and $1.2 trillion in tax increases aimed mostly at the wealthy, according to a recent independent report — is noxious to House and Senate Republicans.

Yet some of them are open to her two early priorities: $275 billion in infrastructure spending, and an immigration bill with a path to citizenship like the one already passed by the Senate. Given how deeply immigration has divided the Republican Party, no other issue would probably reveal more about the ability of a President Hillary Clinton and a Republican-led House to work together.

...

She hopes to reassure progressives with her executive actions, which would also include new protections for undocumented immigrant parents, as well as her personnel appointments. Having women make up half of her cabinet would be historic (in recent years, a quarter to a third of cabinet positions have been held by women), and Democrats close to Mrs. Clinton say she may decide to retain Ms. Lynch, the nation’s first black woman to be attorney general, who took office in April 2015.

It's certainly not a sure thing that Republicans would work with her, but she should at least make the attempt. And if that fails, she can resort to executive actions that will hopefully stand up in court after she fills Scalia's seat.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

McConnell and Corbyn should just round up enough Republicans to allow closure on a vote to allow a pathway to citizenship. Paul Ryan can find some RINOs in the House and allow a vote on it.

Everything McConnell has done in the last 7 years has blown up in his face and every Republican voter already hates him, just take away the possibility of "I'm going to deport 11 million people" as being something the next Republican candidate says.

 

[plagiarize]

This article might as well be a PR piece from her campaign... Why would the Republicans compromise with her? Not compromise = they win during midterms; and unlike Obama, liberals won't be there for HRC if her first 4 years are her trying to cram corporate bullshit down America's throat.

Weirdly this posts reads like a hit piece from the Sanders campaign.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Compromiaw or no Compromise. Republicans are winning 2018. I see no current evidence to that changing no matter how bad Trump gets blown out.

 

[Spoiled Milk]

Cram corporate bullshit down our throats like... a bank bailout, free trade agreements, healthcare reform without public option, letting Shell drill in the arctic, etc.?

Thanks Obama.

 

[Amir0x]

Compromiaw or no Compromise. Republicans are winning 2018. I see no current evidence to that changing no matter how bad Trump gets blown out.

yup plz liberal supreme court dismantle gerrymandering ho ho ho

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Compromiaw or no Compromise. Republicans are winning 2018. I see no current evidence to that changing no matter how bad Trump gets blown out.

Has that gotten McConnell anything or left his party in better shape? He's brought in a bunch of insane people that hate him.

 

[Maledict]

Hillary's plan to get Republicans wasted before they sign on to compromising is certainly novel.

From all accounts she can drink practically anyone under the table so it's definitely worth a shot!

 

[NeoXChaos]

As for Gerrymandering its bad on a state and federal level. Don't know what you expect the Supreme Court to do about that.

As for State Legislatures and governorships if you ran them all in a Presidential Year the most obvious outcome different from the midterm would be Democrats doing well in the Swing and Blue States. That's it. Unless you have a plan to tackle control in Kansas or South Carolina good luck with that

 

[Aaron Strife]

Hillary's plan to get Republicans wasted before they sign on to compromising is certainly novel.

Well Boehner did that voluntarily and it didn't seem to work.

I do think during Hillary's first 100 days or so there will be a sense of token cooperation, and a jobs/infrastructure bill would be a pretty easy sell to start with. Immigration might be more testy, but GOP leaders should know by now they can't win shit in terms of national elections until they stop hating Hispanics. I could see those two items passing.

Student loan reform is the next major thing I hope she tackles and unless the Democrats have the House, I can't see much getting done on that that's meaningful, unfortunately.

 

[Amir0x]

As for Gerrymandering its bad on a state and federal level. Don't know what you expect the Supreme Court to do about that.

As for State Legislatures and governorships if you ran them all in a Presidential Year the most obvious outcome different from the midterm would be Democrats doing well in the Swing and Blue States. That's it. Unless you have a plan to tackle control in Kansas or South Carolina good luck with that

Why, I'm hopeful a liberal supreme court would take cases that would allow them to slowly whittle away the ability to gerrymander effectively. I am hopeful! Like so!