• 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.
B

Boke1879

Member
adam387 said:
It's as out as it's going to get. Most people don't care. DWS is gone. No one cares about that, because no one likes her. This cuts the elgs out of any furhter leaks because, again, she's gone. The handful of Berners who care wouldn't be happy unless we let them shoot Hillary and Debbie into the sun.

Edit:

Wait, ya, I think people got it wrong

In an email to NPR, the office of Rep. Marcia Fudge said she "has been named permanent chair of the Democratic National Convention."

She's only the permanent chair of the Convention, not the Committee.
Click to expand...

Either way. I think when all is said and done. She's gone.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Wait, she's out of the convention but not the committee? Hmm, I dont know if team Sanders will be ok with that. Want to see their response!
 
O

Officerrob

Banned
This Bernie or Bust delegate guy on CNN just said he wants to hear Bernie say on Monday night that he wants to fight for the nomination...
 
I

itschris

Member
Suikoguy said:
So will Marcia Fudge only run the DNConvention, or will she later take over the whole of the DNC?

Hmm
Click to expand...

Well, according to the CNN article, some people are considering Julian Castro for the Democratic National Committee:

Separately, a Democratic operative said Hispanic leaders close to Clinton and her high command were discussing Housing Secretary Julian Castro as a possible successor to Wasserman Schultz at the DNC helm.
Click to expand...

So, we'll see what happens. CNN also says DWS is being stubborn about resigning before November:

One close Clinton ally said the hope is that Wasserman Schultz would get the message and leave her position before the convention kicks off Monday. "But she is stubborn," the Clinton ally said.

Wasserman Schultz reluctantly agreed to relinquish her speaking role at the convention here, a sign of her politically fragile standing. But party leaders are now urging the Florida congresswoman to vacate her position as head of the party entirely in the wake of leaked emails suggesting the DNC favored Clinton during the primary and tried to take down Sanders by questioning his religion.

Democratic leaders are scrambling to keep the party united, but two officials familiar with the discussions said Wasserman Schultz was digging in and not eager to vacate her post until after the November elections.
Click to expand...
 
K

Kusagari

Member
Officerrob said:
This Bernie or Bust delegate guy on CNN just said he wants to hear Bernie say on Monday night that he wants to fight for the nomination...
Click to expand...

I love how they think the DNC is so corrupt but then somehow think they'll just change their minds to give Bernie the nomination because.
 
H

Holmes

Member
The RNC and Trump campaign concern trolling the left over Tim Kaine is interesting because I think it tells us that Trump's team doesn't think it has any room to grow. Assuming this, they need to pilfer support from the other side to put them over the top. It's a really sad and transparent display.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Officerrob said:
This Bernie or Bust delegate guy on CNN just said he wants to hear Bernie say on Monday night that he wants to fight for the nomination...
Click to expand...

I would like to hear Paul Ryan say that Nazis are bad and he won't vote for one.

Life is an endless series of compromises and disappointments.
 
B

Bowdz

Member
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...p-sanders-turning-out-to-be-weak-and-pathetic

Lmao, great outreach to Sanders' supporters Trump.

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump slammed Bernie Sanders on Sunday, calling the Vermont senator "weak" and "pathetic."

"There is no longer a Bernie Sanders 'political revolution.' He is turning out to be a weak and somewhat pathetic figure, wants it all to end!" Trump tweeted.
"Sorry folks, but Bernie Sanders is exhausted, just can't go on any longer. He is trying to dismiss the new e-mails and DNC disrespect. SAD!"
Click to expand...
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
I fully expect Bernie to come into the convention on a chariot flown by birds, and that they will give him the nom because he was cheated.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
Supposedly there's an internal poll of Mia Love's of Utah-4 that has the race Trump 29, Hillary-27, Johnson-26.

I still think a pro-Hillary PAC needs to run ads in Utah building up Johnson.
 
C

Crocodile

Member
I mean I can somewhat sympathize with DWS - its one thing to have people call for your head because you legit fucked up (one or more times). It's another for people to call for your head to appease conspiracy theorists who accuse you of transgressions you didn't actually commit. Like would anyone not be upset with the later? Yes there is value in "taking one for the team" but its a pretty big blow to your pride and self-worth.
 
B

brainchild

Banned
Piecake said:
http://www.vox.com/2016/5/9/11502464/gilens-page-oligarchy-study

You might find this article interesting
Click to expand...

I find it interesting that you linked me to an article that debunked a few studies as some kind of response to my post. I mean, I never vouched for those studies in the first place and it would be besides the point. The influence of money in politics is conventional wisdom. If you're going to challenge that conventional wisdom, I do not have the time nor the interest to entertain such an argument.

Ironically, this quote comes from the article you linked me

It's entirely possible, of course, to think the political theorists are wrong and that responsiveness really is the most important thing. These are matters of values, not of empirical truth or falsity. But strict responsiveness is not obviously the most important feature of a democracy.
Click to expand...

Hehe
 
A

ampere

Member
pigeon said:
I would like to hear Paul Ryan say that Nazis are bad and he won't vote for one.

Life is an endless series of compromises and disappointments.
Click to expand...

image.php
 
B

BlastProcessing

Member
brainchild said:
I find it interesting that you linked me to an article that debunked a few studies as some kind of response to my post. I mean, I never vouched for those studies in the first place and it would be besides the point. The influence of money in politics is conventional wisdom. If you're going to challenge that conventional wisdom, I do not have the time nor the interest to entertain such an argument.
Click to expand...

That money influences politics is conventional wisdom. How and how much it does is absolutely up for, nuanced, debate.

At first blush, the system you are proposing would be much more susceptible to outside influence. There would be way more chaos and noise for it to hide in and in a multi coalition fight, money would have larger value.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
I mean, she's not going to be seen at the convention anyway. I feel like Obama needs to make a phone call, though. If she's going to be stubborn, at least.
 
B

brainchild

Banned
BlastProcessing said:
That money influences politics is conventional wisdom. How and how much it does is absolutely up for, nuanced, debate.

At first blush, the system you are proposing would be much more susceptible to outside influence. There would be way more chaos and noise for it to hide in and in a multi coalition fight, money would have larger value.
Click to expand...

Well at least this post bears relevance to my actual post.

Anyway, the system that I proposed is not nearly fleshed out enough to debate this either way (it can't be distilled into simply a multi-coalition government), so there really is no point challenging your argument.
 
P

Piecake

Member
brainchild said:
I find it interesting that you linked me to an article that debunked a few studies as some kind of response to my post. I mean, I never vouched for those studies in the first place and it would be besides the point. The influence of money in politics is conventional wisdom. If you're going to challenge that conventional wisdom, I do not have the time nor the interest to entertain such an argument.

Ironically, this quote comes from the article you linked me



Hehe
Click to expand...

I said that you might find it interesting. Did I say it was undeniable proof that America was not an oligarchy? Apparently you don't like reading about things that challenge your views and prefer to stay in your own little bubble.

My mistake.

I am also not quite sure why you think that conventional wisdom means something is true. There are plenty of examples where research has been done on 'conventional wisdom' that has turned out to be not true. And it is perfectly possible for money to have an influence in politics while regular people also retaining an important voice in the process.
 
G

Geg

Member
When was the last time a third party candidate won a state?

edit: Oh wait that poll was only in one congressional district, not statewide
 
B

brainchild

Banned
Piecake said:
I said that you might find it interesting. Did I say it was undeniable proof that America was not an oligarchy? Apparently you don't like reading about things that challenge your views and prefer to stay in your own little bubble.

My mistake.

I am also not quite sure why you think that conventional wisdom means something is true. There are plenty of examples where research has been done on 'conventional wisdom' that has turned out to be not true. And it is perfectly possible for money to have an influence in politics while regular people also retaining an important voice in the process.
Click to expand...

I love for my views to be challenged, if I didn't, I wouldn't be posting in PoliGAF :)

Anyway, my misunderstanding is a result of there seemingly being a lack of information with regards to whatever you were really trying to say. Should I have merely taken your words at face value? If that is the case, then I concede to say that I was mistaken to assume that you implied more than what you actually said.


And I didn't say that challenging conventional wisdom was wrong, just that I didn't have to time nor interest to entertain it.
 
P

Piecake

Member
brainchild said:
I love for my views to be challenged. If I didn't, I wouldn't be posting in PoliGAF :)

Anyway, my misunderstanding is a result of there seemingly being a lack of information with regards to whatever you were really trying to say. Should I have merely taken your words at face value? If that is the case, then I concede to say that I was mistaken to assume that you implied more than what you actually said.
Click to expand...

I just thought you might find it interesting. That is also why I only quoted the part where you mentioned America as an oligarchy.

I honestly haven't even read your actual idea on how to fix things since I was skimming through about 5 pages of poligaf talk to see if there were any new developments.
 
B

brainchild

Banned
Piecake said:
I just thought you might find it interesting. That is also why I only quoted the part where you mentioned America as an oligarchy.

I honestly haven't even read your actual idea on how to fix things since I was skimming through about 5 pages of poligaf talk to see if there were any new developments.
Click to expand...

Alright, fair enough. My mistake.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

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
238
45K
Hrk69 replied
Evolution of Open World Games 1980-2021
2 3
141
13K
IbizaPocholo replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
59K
DGrayson replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
Top Bottom