• 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 |OT8| No, Donald. You don't.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Diablos

Member
The numerous polls that show Johnson is pulling a lot more support from trump? Guy is a libertarian and former republican governor. He is the second option many republicans are looking at.
He is liberal on some social issues though. Pot, gay marriage. Could sway some people on the fence about Hilldawg because they don't like her.
 
Mike Pence is an insane person:

When Donald Trump’s running mate Mike Pence was a talk radio show host in Indiana, he wrote an op-ed declaring the film Mulan was an attempt by some “mischievous liberal” at Disney to influence the debate over women in the military.

The 1999 op-ed ran on a website for Pence’s radio program that was uncovered by BuzzFeed News.

“Despite her delicate features and voice, Disney expects us to believe that Mulan’s ingenuity and courage were enough to carry her to military success on an equal basis with her cloddish cohorts,” wrote Pence. “Obviously, this is Walt Disney’s attempt to add childhood expectation to the cultural debate over the role of women in the military.”

“I suspect that some mischievous liberal at Disney assumes that Mulan’s story will cause a quiet change in the next generation’s attitude about women in combat and they just might be right,” Pence continued. “(Just think about how often we think of Bambi every time the subject of deer hunting comes into the mainstream media debate.)”

Disney’s film is based on the 6th century Ballad of Mulan.

Pence argues Mulan’s romance with a superior officer proved women cannot serve in the military.

“It is instructive that even in the Disney film, young Ms. Mulan falls in love with her superior officer! Me thinks the politically correct Disney types completely missed the irony of this part of the story,” writes Pence. “They likely added it because it added realism with which the viewer could identify with the characters. You see, now stay with me on this, many young men find many young women to be attractive sexually. Many young women find many young men to be attractive sexually. Put them together, in close quarters, for long periods of time, and things will get interesting. Just like they eventually did for young Mulan. Moral of story: women in military, bad idea.”

https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkacz...man-out-of-you?utm_term=.nfBZXO3O4#.py4NlG2Ga
 
Gun control shouldn't be as huge of an issue as it is because capitalism, welfare programs, and drug rehabilitation has done far more to reduce violence and homicides than gun control ever has.

The only reason we ever talk about it is because the media knows RACE WAR and COPS TARGETTED sells.
 

Teggy

Member
George K. Howell‏ @GeorgeHowellCNN
UPDATE: Baton Rouge Police Department saying this shooting situation does not appear to be race related.


Going to be interesting to see what this means. Terrorism? Crazy people?
False flag?
 

pigeon

Banned
Gun control shouldn't be as huge of an issue as it is because capitalism, welfare programs, and drug rehabilitation has done far more to reduce violence and homicides than gun control ever has.

The only reason we ever talk about it is because the media knows RACE WAR and COPS TARGETTED sells.

You should try to make better arguments than this. Almost none of the discussion of gun control has anything to do with the media or the cop killings that have been taking place. This post actually makes me pretty annoyed because it suggests that you make zero effort to read and understand the posts other people make or the reasons for them.
 
Gun control shouldn't be as huge of an issue as it is because capitalism, welfare programs, and drug rehabilitation has done far more to reduce violence and homicides than gun control ever has.

The only reason we ever talk about it is because the media knows RACE WAR and COPS TARGETTED sells.

Yeah, I remember after Sandy Hook how all of the gun control people were screaming about RACE WAR and COPS TARGETED.

What they should have been talking about is how more capitalism, welfare and drug rehabilitation could have prevented it. The media really is culpable.
 

shem935

Banned
Haven't there been polls where Hillary goes down when he's an option?

Swear I remember seeing at least one.
Well yes they both go down by nature of their being a third option but that, to my knowledge never caused her to drop below his support. Also polls this far out don't matter anyway, so diablos don't worry, be happy, cause every little thing is gonna be alright.
 

Tarkus

Member
Shepard Smith is scolding Bobby Jindal live on Fox News for saying All Lives Matter during this tragedy
 
They both go down with Johnson, but Trump tends to moreso.

Is that really a surprise? There's plenty of people on the left who just want to back a third party just because. Nothing to get too hot and bothered by.
 
That's where passing one of those 'common sense' gun reforms would likely make a large difference. The 'gun show loophole' as it is commonly referred to is, in reality, just unregulated private sales. People can buy guns online, in person, or used at a gunshow (new sales still need to pass background checks) completely unregulated.
The irony is, there is already a system in place for when people purchase new guns online. Someone orders the gun and the site ships it to an FFA dealer that confirms identity and runs the background check. This could easily be expanded to private sales ubiquitously while also bringing more money into small businesses.

There is no possible way of keeping 300+ million legal guns out of the hands of bad people, but make the punishments extremely severe for selling a weapon without an FFA dealer and it will reduce the likelihood.

I've always taken a pocketbook stance on it, in that I think gun owners should be required to have insurance on their weapons that kicks in if the weapon is stolen. If it's determined by your insurance company that you weren't securing your weapon, then they won't cover damages (which would include any damage as a result of the weapon being stolen).

there are plenty of ideas that will possibly help, from smart guns, to a proper database tracking sales of registered firearms... which you can then use to actually enforce straw purchase or lax storage requirements... or a waiting period for all purchases and transfers, since the last few mass shootings all had gun purchases a few days before the shootings.

Nothing is going to stop them all, and i'm not one who believes in repealing the 2nd amendment, but there are a lot of good things to at least makes things a bit.. harder, or hold people a bit more accountable for what other people do with their guns

And agreeing with antraxsuicide, most responsible gun owners thing open carry is crazy because you become a target. You open carry a rifle and i think you really need a mental health evaluation

I'm in favor of gun control measures (pretty much all of them). I think my main point is that liberals (probably due to being very technocratic right now, which I like) tend to bring up arguments against gun control often with GOP talking points, which are frequently semantic. A huge pet peeve of mine is when liberals pull out the "there's no such thing as an assault weapon" line. Who fucking cares?

We should be using the GOP playbook on abortion for guns. Any way to reduce them should be a win, but we undercut ourselves so much before coming to the national stage with a plan.

In terms of preventing mass shooting I still firmly believe that most mass shooters have personality indicators and we should actually just be trying to identify and monitor or even control people with tendencies towards domestic violence, impulse control, brittle self-images, etc. Those are the people who go out and shoot people. Also maybe figuring out why we're producing so many of these people (although I suspect we always did and we just used to get rid of them by sending them to war or whatever).

I had the idea that we should have a linked database for gun ownership that also connects to county clerk offices so that if a gun owner files for divorce or county bills start piling up, the gov't could then move with caution that this person may be unstable.

One of the major issues with our "mental health" arguments is that we use super circular logic for it. "Someone killed a bunch of people, they must be crazy." And how do we know they were crazy? "They killed a bunch of people." But honestly? It's super easy to imagine a perfectly stable person turning into an active shooter if they happen to run into a shitty set of circumstances.

If you lose your job (which I'm unclear on how the govt would know that quickly), lose a family member, or get divorced, there should be a reaction from the state to help you adjust to that stress. And it doesn't mean you're insane. So I really like this personality argument.
 
The guy I'm dating....

His nephew (7) just told me he wants Trump to be President because he never washes his hair. And his brother (5) started crying because he wants the nice lady to win.
 

Fox318

Member
The guy I'm dating....

His nephew (7) just told me he wants Trump to be President because he never washes his hair. And his brother (5) started crying because he wants the nice lady to win.
He's convinced me to vote for Trump with that argument.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
The guy I'm dating....

His nephew (7) just told me he wants Trump to be President because he never washes his hair. And his brother (5) started crying because he wants the nice lady to win.
This is bullshit. Trump has the rugs laundered at least weekly.
Also, there is a nice lady running? *Googles*
 

pigeon

Banned
One of the major issues with our "mental health" arguments is that we use super circular logic for it. "Someone killed a bunch of people, they must be crazy." And how do we know they were crazy? "They killed a bunch of people." But honestly? It's super easy to imagine a perfectly stable person turning into an active shooter if they happen to run into a shitty set of circumstances.

If you lose your job (which I'm unclear on how the govt would know that quickly), lose a family member, or get divorced, there should be a reaction from the state to help you adjust to that stress. And it doesn't mean you're insane. So I really like this personality argument.

So I think we're agreeing on the direction of action but I do want to say, like, I don't actually agree that perfectly stable people turn into active shooters, I think that's kind of my point.

Almost all the mass shooters we've seen have not been very stable. They've had unstable jobs, unstable relationships, unstable housing, etc. Because they aren't stable people because of their serious personality issues, and that's the whole problem. There aren't any happily married fathers of three with two-story houses going out and shooting thirty people. In general the reaction from those around them is basically "yeah, that guy was dangerous." Often their family has specifically been trying to control their access to other people or dangerous items because they know the risk is there.

The majority of people will never, even if they lose their job and house and family, turn into mass shooters. That's why it's so important to focus on the people who might, because they are actually distinguishable and identifiable well before they hit the point of action.
 
I second this. I'm willing to avatar bet anyone that he won't. First, he will not pull 15%, second, the CPD would screw him anyway.

Not only that, it's the anticipation of the Clinton-Trump debates.
"Most watched event in tv history". Yeah, OK.
"Titanic fight".

Why would the networks want Gary Johnson when for the most part they've ignored him? He would be a distraction.

If he was polling 20% I could see a case. Sub 10 and low 10s? No chance.

Is Pence actually disliked enough for Indiana to be in play or are the demographics still not there

Indiana is not part of the route to the WH. If she wins Indiana, it's simply because the Trump campaign collapsed - not hard to imagine that happening.
 
Is Pence actually disliked enough for Indiana to be in play or are the demographics still not there
Indiana flipping in 08 was a bit of a fluke. Obama had a strong campaign structure there thanks to a competitive primary, and his ad game wasn't matched by McCain's campaign. Obama caught the GOP flat footed.

I don't think it's as naturally competitive as Missouri and the trends aren't there like they are in Georgia. Luckily Democrats can do very well there downballot without a presidential campaign (Donnelly's win which is owed to Mourdock's "legitimate rape" gaffe, but remember that Gregg also came very close in the governor's race and Gregg/Bayh will both be very well funded this year).
 
I could definitely support monitoring all losers who hit and stalk their partners and post insane stuff online, but you're probably looking at a watch list 10 million names long and that's gonna be pretty hard logistically.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Aaron Strife answered above but it was probably due to Gary Johnson stealing votes from John Mcc...wait
 

mo60

Member
Is Pence actually disliked enough for Indiana to be in play or are the demographics still not there

Depends on how strong a ground game the dems have in that state. If the republicans ground game is insanely weak there while the dems ground game is strong they can pull another upset there.Also if Gary Johnson can steal a bunch of republican votes there I do think Hilary will win that state this time.
 

Diablos

Member
Indiana flipping in 08 was a bit of a fluke. Obama had a strong campaign structure there thanks to a competitive primary, and his ad game wasn't matched by McCain's campaign. Obama caught the GOP flat footed.

I don't think it's as naturally competitive as Missouri and the trends aren't there like they are in Georgia. Luckily Democrats can do very well there downballot without a presidential campaign (Donnelly's win which is owed to Mourdock's "legitimate rape" gaffe, but remember that Gregg also came very close in the governor's race and Gregg/Bayh will both be very well funded this year).
Republicans were also not very enthusiastic. I always figured maybe a lot of usually reliable voters stayed home while Dems drowned them out.
 

Grief.exe

Member
Is Pence actually disliked enough for Indiana to be in play or are the demographics still not there

Pence was only +3 in the Governor race prior to being tapped by Trump and dropping out. If Trump had picked another candidate for VP it would be possible for Dems to take Indiana with downticket losses imposed by Trump. Could have been interesting.

His decision to take the VP slot is really win/win for him no matter the outcome. He doesn't have to worry about losing his close race in Indiana anymore, he could potentially become VP, and even if Trump loses he still gets huge national attention.
 

Holmes

Member
Also the economy was really bad in Indiana. Enough people in the state made the change from Republican to Democrat to tip the state to Obama.
 

thefro

Member
Which begs the question, how the hell did Obama win it in 2008

Strife already talked about it but:
- Competitive primary in 2008 and with the quirks of the calendar, basically both the Obama/Clinton campaigns were heavily mobilizing in the state and having rallies before the voter registration deadline in the state. There was a 6-week gap between the last March primary and Pennsylvania and a couple more weeks after that to Indiana/NC. So it was an eight week campaign, both candidates criss-crossed the state and organized like crazy. That infrastructure was huge in the fall.
- Bleed-over positive coverage of Obama from TV markets that cover both Indiana/Illinois in the Western part of the state.
- General feeling that Obama was a "Midwestern guy" and someone you could relate to and was seen as someone who could work in a bipartisan fashion, worked with Lugar, etc.
- Obama dumped a bunch of money into the state and McCain came in late.
- General Republican apathy in 2008 after Dubya, although Daniels still won in a landslide so there were split-ticket voters. A lot of moderate Republicans in the "donut counties" around Indianapolis voted for Obama.
 

gcubed

Member
So I think we're agreeing on the direction of action but I do want to say, like, I don't actually agree that perfectly stable people turn into active shooters, I think that's kind of my point.

Almost all the mass shooters we've seen have not been very stable. They've had unstable jobs, unstable relationships, unstable housing, etc. Because they aren't stable people because of their serious personality issues, and that's the whole problem. There aren't any happily married fathers of three with two-story houses going out and shooting thirty people. In general the reaction from those around them is basically "yeah, that guy was dangerous." Often their family has specifically been trying to control their access to other people or dangerous items because they know the risk is there.

The majority of people will never, even if they lose their job and house and family, turn into mass shooters. That's why it's so important to focus on the people who might, because they are actually distinguishable and identifiable well before they hit the point of action.

but how do you start this?

not to start a personal story too long but i have a family member who posts racist and inflammatory stuff all the time on facebook, gets very angry in discussions, is obsessed with guns, has OCD, can't hold a steady job, dropped out of college due to stress, etc and my wife and I agree that we wouldn't' be surprised if when something bad happened in his life that he could be one of these stories... how do you approach that situation? The parents aren't too helpful and help enable him, but i dont think its my place to push the topic.
 
You should try to make better arguments than this.
You mean up to the same quality as your crazy hypothetical question last night about what we should do if Obama, a constitutional lawyer and law abiding citizen, suddenly refused to step down from the presidency?

Almost none of the discussion of gun control has anything to do with the media or the cop killings that have been taking place.
Okay Mr. "you make zero effort to read the posts other people make", let me give you a rundown of the posts from the last five hours which prove you are 100% wrong.

If we get more and more dead cops at the hands of assault rifles (even though that's a stupid term), I could easily see a major push to ban them in a 1990's style ban.

I have no idea how we could prevent this behavior as a society. Obviously making guns harder to obtain could help, but people will always mimic things they see and it's not like we can stop mentioning tragedies in the news altogether.

Or just [ban] "high capacity guns"?

w

Any rifle that

1) Has semi-auto capability
2) Has a internal or external capacity of over five to six bullets

Should be removed from the public without either a service record (that is not discharged with mental health or dishonorable reasons) or an extensive amount of training and background checks.

Pistols with magazines with similar magazine sizes would also be the max, anything more should be banned as well as any extended magazines.

Media isn't helping make regional events into national stories for days on end

Banning semi-automatic long guns is nuts. Almost all long guns in the world are semi-automatic. People don't generally run around with bolt action rifles for hunting deer. That's like bow hunting.

If your goal is to limit guns that are best designed for killing humans, you could focus on caliber or ammo type. That might work.

Like I said, force weapon manufactures to create internal magazines that limit the weapon to 5-6 bullets per cartridge or have the weapon be difficult to modify with higher capacity magainzes. It can still be semi-automatic, but it prevents the type of carnage we see in these type of shooting events.

I'm simply talking about forcing weapons to have a limited amount of bullets per load so it forces more constant reloads, which in turn will create gaps in fire allowing officers to not be suppressed, people to run, people to have a chance to take action and not be forced to stand behind cover.

Taking guns away from black people I guess? A tank for every police officer?

So yes, if you really don't think the only reason we're talking about gun control right now is because cops got killed and the media is on full blast with its latest tragedy porn primetime performance, you live on another planet entirely.

This post actually makes me pretty annoyed
You're annoyed all of the time. I can't help that.

because it suggests that you make zero effort to read and understand the posts other people make or the reasons for them.
Besides the fact that I just pointed out you are wrong, I want to state that I was making a broader argument in response to a cultural leftist obsession with gun control, and elaborating on my personal sense of dissatisfaction with the media and its priorities that I have stated in here a few times over the past week, not necessarily responding to anyone in this thread.
 
This is bullshit. Trump has the rugs laundered at least weekly.
Also, there is a nice lady running? *Googles*

Jill Stien?

tumblr_ld5hq2GRmf1qeplj6o1_400.gif
 
On a lighter note, there's bound to be a viral picture of Trump at the Convention with a Pokemon on his head. Anyone wanna venture and guess which one it will be?
 
Yeah, I remember after Sandy Hook how all of the gun control people were screaming about RACE WAR and COPS TARGETED.

What they should have been talking about is how more capitalism, welfare and drug rehabilitation could have prevented it. The media really is culpable.
Okay, I actually made a typo, and meant to say "the only reason we are even talking about it right now."
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
Personally, I'm rooting for Hillary to pick Hillary.
Donald Trump somewhere right now: "you can pick yourself? Why didn't anybody tell me that was an option?!"
*sets an intern on fire*

On a lighter note, there's bound to be a viral picture of Trump at the Convention with a Pokemon on his head. Anyone wanna venture and guess which one it will be?
Probably Jynx
 
Another vote for Forma! ;P
Et tu!?

Mess.

He thought Hillary's name was Hilda. And she should be President because she is nice. And also because her dad was President. We tried to tell him that Bill was her husband, but he disagrees.The kid also thinks the best Ninja Turtle is Leonardo, so there's no arguing with him.
 
random cool fact I just discovered.

North Dakota has had a democratic senator in their class 1 seat since 1960, uninterrupted for 56 years!

North Dakota!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom