• 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 would let Tim Tebow do unspeakable things. But no eye contact because I hate myself for finding him hot. I'm actually glad he's noy speaking at the RNC.
 
he might try to convert you, in both ways

Although I was hoping he'd do something like this at the RNC

tim-tebow-pants-off-eye-of-the-tiger.gif
 

Wilsongt

Member
I have a question for the policy wonks in here.

Clinton said she is going to take up Bernie's torch to make free/affordable college an option. However, state university budgets are controlled by state legislatures, and it recent years, Republican controlled congresses have continuously cut funding to higher education, thus causing these universities to increase their tuition, even if they wanted to put a tuition free increase in place. How does Clinton plan on getting around this and is it even possible to provide affordable college at this rate?
 

royalan

Member
I think people wanted him to go harder on police. But IMO he was being a President. He was definitely towing the line and trying to cater to both sides.

Ah, pretty much what I figured then.

People are going to have to wait until Obama leaves office before he goes in.
 
Or the Hunger Games.
I was actually going to go that route originally but I lost my faith in trying to sound like the Donald.

Honestly, at this rate I'm wondering if something crazy happens on Election Day. Plenty of lone wolf types these days who want to make the world burn. Not to mention bigger threats out there too.
Man, you need to take something to calm your nerves. Whatever happens, happens. I have faith the Donald will lose.

Tim Tebow denies that he will speak at the RNC (video):

https://www.facebook.com/TimTebow/videos/500296036836329/
This is going to be such a shit show. The lack of funding, people denying they are attending when they are on the RNC list, potential gaps in speaking time, the potential VP being announced Monday or even Tuesday at this rate, and anything else that may go awry on top of all of this.
 

Effect

Member
I think people wanted him to go harder on police. But IMO he was being a President. He was definitely towing the line and trying to cater to both sides.

Haven't watched it yet but him going harder would very likely go against the tone and direction he's taken for the last several days.
 
some guy on cnn thirty minutes ago said, "the international terror game is much different than ten years ago" cool your jets there jack ryan
 
Got stuck at work and missed it.

What made it bad???

He seemed really out of it. I think the Nice attacks were really distracting him.

He also seemed really unsure how to approach questions, or how to word things to adequately consider both sides. It just felt to me like other than giving real thought out answers to the questions he opted to give a lot of non answers because the set up of the show and environment made him uncomfortable.

I turned it off after they briefly talked about the death of Freddy Gray to focus on the Mom who beat her kid at the protest event.
 
some guy on cnn thirty minutes ago said, "the international terror game is much different than ten years ago" cool your jets there jack ryan
Our terrorism understanding is so bad. (I'm not of the we make the terrorism with our foreign policy dudes though)

I legit think so much hyping of the threat is purely a desire for another cold war type enemy to hate and project our fears on.
 

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
Got stuck at work and missed it.

What made it bad???

He didn't engage in demagoguery. The Main OT thread was basically implying he was an Uncle Tom for not just ripping the police non-stop.

He seemed really out of it. I think the Nice attacks were really distracting him.

He also seemed really unsure how to approach questions, or how to word things to adequately consider both sides. It just felt to me like other than giving real thought out answers to the questions he opted to give a lot of non answers because the set up of the show and environment made him uncomfortable.

I turned it off after they briefly talked about the death of Freddy Gray to focus on the Mom who beat her kid at the protest event.

From my understanding, this was taped prior to the Nice attacks. This was done legitimately on the fly from my understanding, so the "unsure" aspect is him, well, thinking thoughtfully about his answers before answering.

EDIT: Unleashed Obama is basically how Holder has always talked. Expecting more than that is going to lead to disappointment.
 
Jeez every terrorist attack is a reason for OT and our media to pretend civilization is in irrevocable decline.

It's like the 20th century never happened.

I understand the shock and fear of indiscriminate attacks on ones personal safety but the hyperbole and sheer insanity of statements is insane it's totally divorced from reality.
 
some guy on cnn thirty minutes ago said, "the international terror game is much different than ten years ago" cool your jets there jack ryan
Different from. Different FROM.

I legit think so much hyping of the threat is purely a desire for another cold war type enemy to hate and project our fears on.
I think that's a gross misrepresentation of the fear catalyzed by 9/11. People are authentically (even if it is not correct to be) afraid of "Islamic terrorism" and they are offended that Hussein Obama does not "take it seriously". If anything, cold war romanticism fuels our desire to paint China and Russia as future existential threats. Neocons are probably annoyed that we have a terrorism threat to distract us from that.

I agree with your point that the hysteria is obnoxious, though. I made a big rant about it in that thread if you care to read it.
 
It's really hard to explain how there the only existential threat that terrorism poses is entirely dependent on our own actions. There will never be any way to prevent lone terrorist attacks like this, but I feel like that's a very depressing view to have
 
It's really hard to explain how there the only existential threat that terrorism poses is entirely dependent on our own actions. There will never be any way to prevent lone terrorist attacks like this, but I feel like that's a very depressing view to have

Yeah, I tried to make this point in the other thread, too.
 

GutsOfThor

Member
Jeez every terrorist attack is a reason for OT and our media to pretend civilization is in irrevocable decline.

It's like the 20th century never happened.

I understand the shock and fear of indiscriminate attacks on ones personal safety but the hyperbole and sheer insanity of statements is insane it's totally divorced from reality.

No shit! How do some of those people function from day to day?
 
It's really hard to explain how there the only existential threat that terrorism poses is entirely dependent on our own actions. There will never be any way to prevent lone terrorist attacks like this, but I feel like that's a very depressing view to have
Exactly.

I and most of the people are going to live our lives the same tomorrow.

What can we do besides fundamentally altering our society for a false sense of security.

As someone whose delt with anxiety in the past its actually useful for stuff like this. Live your live and don't let yourself get caught up in things (like watching the news 24/7) and you get happier, can see things clear headed and don't trap yourself.

People love wallowing in catastrophic thinking though.
 
Townhall was a predictable dumpster fire. On some level you have to respect a man who walks into a public lions den with no weapon. He knew how it would look and did it anyway because he thought it might reach a certain audience. Personally I don't think it did, and I think it was poorly done, but I won't shit on someone for trying to do good.
 

Grief.exe

Member
Jeez every terrorist attack is a reason for OT and our media to pretend civilization is in irrevocable decline.

It's like the 20th century never happened.

I understand the shock and fear of indiscriminate attacks on ones personal safety but the hyperbole and sheer insanity of statements is insane it's totally divorced from reality.

Using a threat like terrorism or immigration to rile up your base for a power grab is a despicable tactic, but it seems to be used effectively by right wing governments throughout history.

Think about Trump, the success of Brexit, or even something like Hitler coming to power.
 
Using a threat like terrorism or immigration to rile up your base for a power grab is a despicable tactic, but it seems to be used effectively by right wing governments throughout history.

Think about Trump, the success of Brexit, or even something like Hitler coming to power.
I was gonna post about how I don't think "fear of terrorism" isn't actually fear of terrorism but don't think it's the best time to armchair psychoanalysize
 

pigeon

Banned
It's really hard to explain how there the only existential threat that terrorism poses is entirely dependent on our own actions. There will never be any way to prevent lone terrorist attacks like this, but I feel like that's a very depressing view to have

Rational ignorance.

I mean, I think most people get in their car every day accepting the huge risk of death that entails, eat food from the supermarket accepting the possibility of being horribly poisoned, etc. Life is organized, thermodynamics hates that.

Terrorism just seems a little more personal, I guess. I think more than anything it's the idea that somebody might hate you enough to kill you without even really knowing you that makes people react poorly. Here in America we don't hate the people we send bombs to kill. We don't even know about them!

edit: metsfan calling me out as a dick, feels bad but probably somewhat accurate
 
Rational ignorance.

I mean, I think most people get in their car every day accepting the huge risk of death that entails, eat food from the supermarket accepting the possibility of being horribly poisoned, etc. Life is organized, thermodynamics hates that.

Terrorism just seems a little more personal, I guess. I think more than anything it's the idea that somebody might hate you enough to kill you without even really knowing you that makes people react poorly. Here in America we don't hate the people we send bombs to kill. We don't even know about them!

edit: metsfan calling me out as a dick, feels bad but probably somewhat accurate
You talking about the psychoanalyze thing?

Didn't mean it like that. I was referring to specifically what I was going to post. Which was a bit more pointed.


I don't think it's rational ignorance. I think it's chosen. Look at some people's response to mass shootings vs their response to terrorism. I mean yeah sure we have some people that diablos everything. But many people irrationally fear one over the other. I think that says something about what they're actually concerned about, rather than fear of personal safety.

People haven't altered their activities like gathering in public and actively complain with security things they themselves called for. People don't think it's gonna happen to them but still "fear" it.

I think it's another thing they're often times fearing. It's a loss of political power and control, represented by shocking actions which they are unable to control.

(I'm mainly referring to right wing reactionaries and the desire to hype this into wwiii)

Quotes like this

Check out @GovPenceIN's Tweet: Today’s terrorist attack in France is a horrific reminder of the threat facing Western civilization. This must end.
 

Valhelm

contribute something
Jeez every terrorist attack is a reason for OT and our media to pretend civilization is in irrevocable decline.

It's like the 20th century never happened.

I understand the shock and fear of indiscriminate attacks on ones personal safety but the hyperbole and sheer insanity of statements is insane it's totally divorced from reality.

I think the publicization of terror attacks plays such a huge role in promoting feelings of danger, which plays right in the hands of reactionaries like Trump who claim their irresponsible strongman policies will keep us safe. Mass violence has always existed, but now every major attack catches our attention for weeks.

So far, our century is absolutely the most peaceful in human history. We live longer and healthier lives than ever before.
 
He's a well funded incumbent. Whoever they get has a shorter period of time to get money and name recognition.
That's why it'll be someone with name recognition and no baggage from the Pence administration. Susan Brooks would work well.

Trust me when I say Hoosier Republicans are desperate for "Generic GOP Candidate" right now. They don't need the money or huge name recognition. They just need to be a mild Republican who isn't Mike Pence. They'll do fine.
 
I have a question for the policy wonks in here.

Clinton said she is going to take up Bernie's torch to make free/affordable college an option. However, state university budgets are controlled by state legislatures, and it recent years, Republican controlled congresses have continuously cut funding to higher education, thus causing these universities to increase their tuition, even if they wanted to put a tuition free increase in place. How does Clinton plan on getting around this and is it even possible to provide affordable college at this rate?

Hillary's free college plan won't get passed and it's super light on details as of now so I don't know if the plan itself could be analyzed.
 

Valhelm

contribute something
The frustrating thing about terrorism is how inconsequential it is, numbers-wise. Obviously, the deaths of civilians are tragic. But terrorism is more scary than dangerous.

Why should the deaths of 32,000 Americans, killed every year in automotive accidents, be less of an urgent problem than the dozens killed by terrorists?
 

Wilsongt

Member
The frustrating thing about terrorism is how inconsequential it is, numbers-wise. Obviously, the deaths of civilians are tragic. But terrorism is more scary than dangerous.

Why should the deaths of 32,000 Americans, killed every year in automotive accidents, be less of an urgent problem than the dozens killed by terrorists?

Because terrorists don't have lobbyist throwing money around in congress and aren't bought by big terror.

Unless you're Hillary.
 

leroidys

Member
I have a question for the policy wonks in here.

Clinton said she is going to take up Bernie's torch to make free/affordable college an option. However, state university budgets are controlled by state legislatures, and it recent years, Republican controlled congresses have continuously cut funding to higher education, thus causing these universities to increase their tuition, even if they wanted to put a tuition free increase in place. How does Clinton plan on getting around this and is it even possible to provide affordable college at this rate?

Our higher education system needs to be massively reformed, and budget is definitely a part of that IMHO. No doubt we need more funding, but we also need to shift the priorities of that money away from comprehensive liberal arts schooling, administration, sports teams, and building giant, beautiful campuses. What college has become in the US is simply not sustainable (obviously).
 
So... Never?
No, just until Trump gets elected.

Also, to answer your question, most states get a lot of federal funding for education. The proportion is very significant and for smaller (red) states that can't bankroll their own colleges the way Cali or Texas can, that number is very huge to them. Integral to Clinton's plan is forcing colleges to adopt serious cost cutting measures in order to receive funding. So it's a one-two-punch of increasing funding and decreasing spending (backed by power of the purse).

The frustrating thing about terrorism is how inconsequential it is, numbers-wise. Obviously, the deaths of civilians are tragic. But terrorism is more scary than dangerous.

Why should the deaths of 32,000 Americans, killed every year in automotive accidents, be less of an urgent problem than the dozens killed by terrorists?
One is a crime and the other is an accident. Are you serious right now?
 

Ether_Snake

安安安安安安安安安安安安安安安
Ah, pretty much what I figured then.

People are going to have to wait until Obama leaves office before he goes in.

Don't think he will, he'll be spending his time talking about climate change and stay clear of that.
 

Grief.exe

Member
The frustrating thing about terrorism is how inconsequential it is, numbers-wise. Obviously, the deaths of civilians are tragic. But terrorism is more scary than dangerous.

Why should the deaths of 32,000 Americans, killed every year in automotive accidents, be less of an urgent problem than the dozens killed by terrorists?

You can actually make a game for what kills more Americans a year than Terrorism attacks or rifles, both get constant media attention whenever an attack happens.

Bears, lightning strikes, ladders, vending machine accidents. These are technically more dangerous to Americans.
I'm exaggerating some of these
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom