• 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.

Emarv

Member
It seem like the media is doing some pretty aggressive fact checking of Trump, at least on twitter. Don't know how it's playing on TV.

CNN basically said "Classic Trump" and then moved on back to the Orlando story.

So about as terribly as you'd expect.
 

Meowster

Member
I'm terrified to see fellow Democrats (not here but some gay Dems that I am friends with) say that that was a good speech. Like.
 

Emarv

Member
LOL. Where Trump was born (red) versus where Orlando shooter was born (blue). via Katy Tur's twitter.

Ck2hLXqXAAEw37G.jpg
 

Dierce

Member
Someone important needs to come out and say that we will not succumb to the tactics of our enemies, to the hatred and bigotry that these terrorists propagate. Make it perfectly clear that trumps words are in line with the worst possible ideas.
 
Someone important needs to come out and say that we will not succumb to the tactics of our enemies, to the hatred and bigotry that these terrorists propagate. Make it perfectly clear that trumps words are in line with the worst possible ideas.

Someone has. Hillary, Pres. Obama, etc.

If you mean a prominent republican....well, they've been beating this horse for a while.
 

Rebel Leader

THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
Someone important needs to come out and say that we will not succumb to the tactics of our enemies, to the hatred and bigotry that these terrorists propagate. Make it perfectly clear that trumps words are in line with the worst possible ideas.

We have but it won't be from a republican.

Because they care more about a republican winning and keeping thier seat than anything else
 
Someone important needs to come out and say that we will not succumb to the tactics of our enemies, to the hatred and bigotry that these terrorists propagate. Make it perfectly clear that trumps words are in line with the worst possible ideas.

It only matters if someone in GOP says it.

Obama/Hillary already said something to that effect.
 
The most important thing is how this becomes an issue for the entire GOP.

He doubled down on his ban, and now the GOP either accepts it (HA) or runs away from it.

They're still in deep shit.
 
Good. People need to know who Trump really is.

People already know who Trump is. We've known for over a year. If you still supported Trump after he supported banning all Muslims from the US, you're probably in agreement with his continued vilification of Islam, and NBC News tossing up a "Pants on Fire" graph won't do squat to change those people's minds. We don't have anyone in the media with the gravitas of an Edward R. Murrow or Walter Cronkite who can tell America "McCarthyism is wrong" or "we can't win in Vietnam" and get the majority of the country to agree with them. Trump supporters will ignore the "biased lamestream media" and continue citing white power blogs as proof of their convictions and there's not a damn thing rational people can do to overcome that level of delusion.
 

itschris

Member
FiveThirtyEight: Be Wary Of Claims About How The Orlando Attack Will Affect The Election

As my colleague Nate Silver wrote, Trump voters reacted positively to his calls for a temporary ban on any Muslims’ entering the U.S. and tougher restrictions on immigration more generally. Trump won a far higher percentage of the vote during the primaries among people who listed immigration as the issue most important to them and among those who favored a temporary ban on Muslim immigrants.

But, as Nate pointed out at the time, it’s difficult to tease out exactly how much of a bounce Trump really got. Moreover, Trump’s support didn’t move much after the bombings in Brussels in March, which suggests the voters disposed to favor Trump due to the threat of terrorism may have already moved into his camp. That is, voters are now aware of Trump’s positions, and he may not have any more ground to gain.

This leads to a second point: The general election electorate is much different than a GOP primary electorate. Just because Trump gained support among Republicans after a terrorist attack doesn’t necessarily mean he’ll gain among voters at large. Trump, for instance, saw his favorability ratings among Republicans go up during the primary, while at the same time they went down among both Democrats and independents. You can see this split between the Republican and general electorate on specific issues, too. In the most recent ABC News/Washington Post May poll — which found Trump leading Clinton in the horse race by 2 percentage points — just 43 percent of Americans favored a temporary ban on Muslim immigration,1 compared with 64 percent of Republicans. In the same poll, Clinton was more trusted than Trump on immigration, 51 percent to 42 percent, while Republicans favored Trump on the issue 83 percent to 11 percent.
 
Plus, this shit only plays well with the base. College educated whites (as a demographic) are hopefully smart enough to not fall for this disgusting shit.

Not related, but Hideo Kojima is currently explaining to Geoff Keighley how a cup works.
 
I'm only one non-white person, but my ears perk up every time someone starts vilifying a group of people. That stuff won't play with anyone who isn't already in the white majority. I'm nervous enough to go register voters right now, honestly.
 
It only matters if someone in GOP says it.

Obama/Hillary already said something to that effect.

Honestly, there's only one surrogate that can do it for the GOP. Mitt Romney.

I can't believe it, but he's really turned out to be the only Republican with a spine. I'd love for him to go on another press tour slamming Trump on it.
 
Honestly, there's only one surrogate that can do it for the GOP. Mitt Romney.

I can't believe it, but he's really turned out to be the only Republican with a spine. I'd love for him to go on another press tour slamming Trump on it.

Is there something Romney wants that we could give him to encourage him a bit more? Some Ambassadorship or something? Anything?
 
Is there something Romney wants that we could give him to encourage him a bit more? Some Ambassadorship or something? Anything?

He can be an ambassador for sure! Shit, he can run the Los Angeles Olympic Committee for getting the Olympic Games here.

I don't mind. Anything that helps ensure Trump is the biggest loser works for me.

BTW, condolences. I know you didn't know this person much but it's still someone you were aware of personally whose life has unnecessarily been stripped.
 
You'd think shit like this would put a lot of things into perspective. Certainly with the Presidential race. I've got some good friends who weren't even knocked out of their anti Clinton hate bubble by the events of the last two days.

Not one mention of them between their links to stories purporting to document all the terrible things the Clintons have done.

Certainly not a voter that Clinton is going to win back.

If anyone dares ask me why I prefer Clinton to Sanders in the next few days, I will point to her making common sense gun control such as universal background checks and reinstating the assault weapons ban as part of her platform, and Sanders not.

I will credit Sanders for calling for gun control yesterday, as I will any politician, even if it doesn't go as far as I'd like or even if they haven't always been on the right side of the issue in my eyes.

We can pass legal constitutional restrictions on guns that can reduce the number of mass shootings and the reduce the number of dead at the ones that still occur. I won't stop campaigning for that until we have done it.

Yes there are other things we can do, and other things we should do, and if you want to take one of those up as personal crusade, I encourage you to. But let's stop refusing to even consider whether gun control might help.

We can't bring back the dead. We can't ban a religious belief. Realistically we can't expect the constitution to get rewritten. But we can pass something like an assault rifle ban. We fucking can. We did it in 1994. It withstood every legal challenge on it. We can do it again.

If we refuse to even consider legal measures that might help based on slippery slope illogic, because it's more important that you can own an assault rifle than it is that LGBT people can go out to a fucking nightclub... you really need to take another look at why you feel that way. You really need to look at who around you is voicing such opinions. What are they trying to do? Do they have an agenda?

Seriously question the nature of anyone who agrees with you. Ask why you hold that position.
 

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
Of course not. The court could have some common sense that the government's interest in gun safety is really high and its limiting the 1st amendment would require a lot more.

Lets not pretend we don't have different standards for different parts of the consitution

Eh; Doing that would almost certainly provoke a pretty strong constitutional response. Plus, there's no way the government wouldn't push for this ability and end up getting it as well. The saddest part about our gun control debate is that it's framed by the two extremes - an assault weapon ban is currently "ban guns that look scary" in terms of how it is currently set up. There's no actual definition for an assault weapon beyond "shit we make up". There's nothing about automatic vs semi-automatic, lethality of the weapon...none of that. Just shit we put on a list.

https://popehat.com/2015/12/07/talking-productively-about-guns/ is a pretty good article written about how both sides don't really understand what they're actually advocating for.
 
Plus, this shit only plays well with the base. College educated whites (as a demographic) are hopefully smart enough to not fall for this disgusting shit.

Not related, but Hideo Kojima is currently explaining to Geoff Keighley how a cup works.

I kinda-use-to belive that until this Primary happened.
 

Merrymint

Member
I don't post often and not in here at all, but after watching that Trump speech and still see people say #Imstillnotwithher on twitter scares me. I wanna know with whom they are with.


hi everyone.
 
I don't post often and not in here at all, but after watching that Trump speech and still see people say #Imstillnotwithher on twitter scares me. I wanna know with whom they are with.


hi everyone.

My co workers are #stillnotwithher and are between not voting this year or writing in Bernie.
 

pigeon

Banned
Considering how stupidly made the watchlist is in this country...this is a terrible fucking idea. There are thousands of horror stories of folks who have the same name as someone on the watchlist, or the FBI/CIA got the watchlist wrong, or etc...I'm not a fan of giving the government the ability to suspend the Constitution for people who they arbitrarily add to a government controlled watchlist. I know people who have TS clearance who were put on the watchlist because they had the same name as someone else...mind you, they continued to have TS clearance and then wasn't allowed to fly to go to a meeting for their job...at the Pentagon.

Sure, I mean, I get that. That's why I said what I did about the watchlist being a bad idea.

If we agree that having a terrorist watchlist is a good idea in the first place, then we should be restricting gun ownership the same way we restrict, like, taking flights on airplanes. Surely we can agree that anybody we don't think should be allowed to buy a ticket on an airplane probably shouldn't be allowed to own a gun either.

If you don't think we should be trying to track people who are potential dangers to us or to national security than obviously any restriction on their rights seems dumb to you.

I think that our currently existing terrorist watchlist probably sucks. In the general case I think it would make sense to identify possibly dangerous people and track them, but I don't think we have taken the right approach for the list we made so far since it's mostly just, like, are you a Muslim and did you go to Saudi Arabia like every other Muslim in the world.
 
I don't post often and not in here at all, but after watching that Trump speech and still see people say #Imstillnotwithher on twitter scares me. I wanna know with whom they are with.


hi everyone.
Usually they just want to write in Sanders or vote third party.

There's also some fuckwits who think Trump would be better than Clinton.

Got into it with someone on fb (mutual friend) who said Trump was "no worse than Reagan" while saying Hillary was nothing more than a snake in the grass, and that SCOTUS appointments were no big deal because cases take "four years on average" to reach the Court. I engaged with him for a little bit but had to throw my hands up because I mean holy fucking shit guys.
 

Emarv

Member
Trump should pick this gun shop owner as his VP.

"I don't want to answer questions." *proceeds to answer questions*
 
Eh; Doing that would almost certainly provoke a pretty strong constitutional response. Plus, there's no way the government wouldn't push for this ability and end up getting it as well. The saddest part about our gun control debate is that it's framed by the two extremes - an assault weapon ban is currently "ban guns that look scary" in terms of how it is currently set up. There's no actual definition for an assault weapon beyond "shit we make up". There's nothing about automatic vs semi-automatic, lethality of the weapon...none of that. Just shit we put on a list.

https://popehat.com/2015/12/07/talking-productively-about-guns/ is a pretty good article written about how both sides don't really understand what they're actually advocating for.

No I understand what I'm advocating for. I am for people not having an inherent unquestioned right to have a gun. In order to get a gun you should have a vetted excuse (that doesn't include vague "self-defense" without a actual threat) and register said weapon and ammo.

Like every other developed nation on earth
 
So...

Trump just proposed that the administration should make their list of terrorist suspects public because people deserve to know who they are?

Best case scenario:
Lynchings all over the place, people being fired who are simply being watched, and all those people who are active go dark and try to change identities as they now know they are under surveillance.

What the fuck is he thinking? Even for Trump this is insanity.
 

Merrymint

Member
My co workers are #stillnotwithher and are between not voting this year or writing in Bernie.

I know everyone wants to freely exercise their right to vote, but its so important we don't get Trump. Its honestly worrying(maybe it shouldn't as much as it is) me a bit, I feel people are getting in line, but not many of the bern people are.

Usually they just want to write in Sanders or vote third party.

There's also some fuckwits who think Trump would be better than Clinton.

Got into it with someone on fb (mutual friend) who said Trump was "no worse than Reagan" while saying Hillary was nothing more than a snake in the grass, and that SCOTUS appointments were no big deal because cases take "four years on average" to reach the Court. I engaged with him for a little bit but had to throw my hands up because I mean holy fucking shit guys.

I think Bernie made the dnc seem more corrupt than the rnc. There in lies the problem, and it worries me even though people are lining up behind Hillary we still have a good amount of people like on your facebook or his coworkers up there that will just write in or vote for Stein. Tried making an argument to a friend about how important the scotus vote was to us, but he brushed it off too. I've had a few good arguments with people on twitter, but the most were a waste. Especially ones who just post the memes.
 

Slayven

Member
I'm only one non-white person, but my ears perk up every time someone starts vilifying a group of people. That stuff won't play with anyone who isn't already in the white majority. I'm nervous enough to go register voters right now, honestly.
No lies detected, shit rolls down hill and minorities all catch a bit of it
 

pigeon

Banned
Thank you for the information POLIGAF. I was wondering about this after last night and was wanting to ask.

I think that this could have been an opportunity for some Republican candidates.

I think that giving a more or less overtly fascist speech and claiming that Obama is in league with the terrorists is not the way to take advantage of that, and so I don't think it will help Trump. The GOP is just going to have to spend this week disavowing him again.

Also, from the Post:

wapo said:
White House press secretary Josh Earnest said later Monday that he had not spoken with the president about Trump's criticisms, but he emphasized that "when you are focused on something as big as helping the country respond to the worst mass shooting in the nation's history, it's important not to get distracted by things that are so small."

Emphasis mine.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ent-obama-was-involved-with-orlando-shooting/
 

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
Sure, I mean, I get that. That's why I said what I did about the watchlist being a bad idea.

If we agree that having a terrorist watchlist is a good idea in the first place, then we should be restricting gun ownership the same way we restrict, like, taking flights on airplanes. Surely we can agree that anybody we don't think should be allowed to buy a ticket on an airplane probably shouldn't be allowed to own a gun either.

If you don't think we should be trying to track people who are potential dangers to us or to national security than obviously any restriction on their rights seems dumb to you.

I think that our currently existing terrorist watchlist probably sucks. In the general case I think it would make sense to identify possibly dangerous people and track them, but I don't think we have taken the right approach for the list we made so far since it's mostly just, like, are you a Muslim and did you go to Saudi Arabia like every other Muslim in the world.

Ahh ok, didn't see the entire "the watchlist is a dumb idea" bit. My bad. :D

No I understand what I'm advocating for. I am for people not having an inherent unquestioned right to have a gun. In order to get a gun you should have a vetted excuse (that doesn't include vague "self-defense" without a actual threat) and register said weapon and ammo.

Like every other developed nation on earth

Maybe one day we'll get there. :-/ I think the US will have to come up with a unique situation since you already have such mass proliferation of guns in the country already. (Also..3D printers potentially makes any such laws completely moot)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom