Support NeoGAF

[Grief.exe]

Just realized something.

Whose to say wikileaks isn't holding on to emails that show kindness and fairness to sanders from the DNC? Or someone shutting down bias or actions to undermine sanders

They control the release, we have no idea if they are being transparent (they're not!)

Is it possible Russia will give asylumand transport to Asange in exchange for their help?

Wiki leaks may not even be disingenuous in this regard, they may not even have received emails that don't prove the narrative.

 

[Suikoguy]

I'm laughing at the gmo-peach thing to prove they're not cops.

That... just makes no sense at all, lmao.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Just realized something.

Whose to say wikileaks isn't holding on to emails that show kindness and fairness to sanders from the DNC? Or someone shutting down bias or actions to undermine sanders

They control the release, we have no idea if they are being transparent (they're not!)

That has been their tactic in their past hacks. If the pattern holds they will eventually insert forged material as well.

 

[JP_]

re: voting 3rd party etc. I think a big part of why these conversations are so often fruitless is because people have this idea that who they vote for represents who they are as a person. Instead of using the ballot box to determine who gets elected, they use the ballot box to declare their morals and principles. What that means is they either vote for somebody they don't align with completely and to them it feels like they're compromising their principles, they throw away their vote on a third party, or they just stay at home and don't vote. I think this is partly driven by how we generally talk about voting and politics in America. We talk about voting as a personal choice, rather than something that has consequences for everybody. Politics is a taboo -- not something you discuss in polite company. These sentiments reinforce this "keep it to yourself" mentality that then reinforce this perceived link between their vote and their personal identity.

I think if we want to create a more productive democracy, we need to change that dialog -- what you see instead is people insulting them for voting 3rd party, calling them idiots or racists etc. There may be some truth there and it can feel good to say that stuff to them, but it's completely counter-productive. They'll get defensive and feel pushed out of the dem party -- Trump camp welcome them with open arms and make them feel welcome. Same thing happened with gamergate etc.

I'm just one guy so I don't expect to make much of a difference, but I can't help but experiment with the language I use when speaking to these people to try and figure it out and get through to them. Wanted to share a response I wrote recently on fb as an example (responding to someone saying they don't want to abandon their morals and principles by voting for Clinton):

"I'm not abandoning my conscience or voting against my morals. Not because I agree with everything Clinton stands for (I don't), but because my conscience pushes me to do what I think is best for society. A third party won't win, so voting third party won't advance my values. Voting third party would undeniably help trump win -- that goes directly against my morals and principles and him winning would be disastrous for the progressive values I believe in. That's why voting third party would actually be abandoning my morals and principles.

What you mark on the ballot doesn't define your morals and principles, it just helps decide who gets elected. Elections are about results -- I don't just want to talk about my progressive values by voting third party, I want to actually do what's needed to make those progressive values a reality for me and everyone else that is at risk of suffering under a Trump presidency."

Toying around with the idea of trying to write a Medium piece that fleshes this out more. This won't satisfy the people that believe in the 'burn it all down and we get something better' theory, but that's basically another topic.

 

[B-Dubs]

That... just makes no sense at all, lmao.

Everyone knows cops can only eat GMO foods. It's how they get their power from THE MAN.

 

[Voysa Reezun]

I've said it before, but IMO the legitimate concerns about GMOs are in the wide latitude companies have to patent seeds, to destroy the crops of farmers who plant the wrong seeds or who have GMO seeds that somehow make their way into crops that shouldn't be there, etc.

I don't get the "GMOs kill!" side of that issue, though. I was driving yesterday behind a dude with a "Our Water Is Poisoned: No More Fluoride!" bumper sticker, and that's about where I see the big to-do over the safety of GMOs.

Or maybe some of it is just a nebulous "we hate corporations, corporations use GMOs" thing. And I'd make the argument that generationally, Millennials (who I typically see being against GMOs) are like the reverse of Baby Boomers in that the latter were fascinated that you could get everything canned, pre-made, and freeze-dried, and we're far enough along that we're bored with that shit and are all about organic and natural and going back to earth. So I guess there is a hodge-podge of things there to cause this, but I'm always frustrated that it focuses on GMOs in a way that isn't supported scientifically instead of focusing on something that is a legit problem for the modern farmer who supports the stomachs of millions of people with his or her work.

 

[remist]

All this talk about how we shouldn't be surprised the DNC wasn't impartial and besides them rigging the outcome is a good thing anyway is a little silly. For one the DNC itself claims impartiality in its charter and youd almost certainly Be in a tiny minority who would be fine with that changing.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

re: voting 3rd party etc. I think a big part of why these conversations are so often fruitless is because people have this idea that who they vote for represents who they are as a person. Instead of using the ballot box to determine who gets elected, they use the ballot box to declare their morals and principles. What that means is they either vote for somebody they don't align with completely and to them it feels like they're compromising their principles, they throw away their vote on a third party, or they just stay at home and don't vote. I think this is partly driven by how we generally talk about voting and politics in America. We talk about voting as a personal choice, rather than something that has consequences for everybody. Politics is a taboo -- not something you discuss in polite company. These sentiments reinforce this "keep it to yourself" mentality that then reinforce this perceived link between their vote and their personal identity.

I think if we want to create a more productive democracy, we need to change that dialog -- what you see instead is people insulting them for voting 3rd party, calling them idiots or racists etc. There may be some truth there and it can feel good to say that stuff to them, but it's completely counter-productive. They'll get defensive and feel pushed out of the dem party -- Trump camp welcome them with open arms and make them feel welcome. Same thing happened with gamergate etc.

I'm just one guy so I don't expect to make much of a difference, but I can't help but experiment with the language I use when speaking to these people to try and figure it out and get through to them. Wanted to share a response I wrote recently on fb as an example:

"I'm not abandoning my conscience or voting against my morals. Not because I agree with everything Clinton stands for (I don't), but because my conscience pushes me to do what I think is best for society. A third party won't win, so voting third party won't advance my values. Voting third party would undeniably help trump win -- that goes directly against my morals and principles and him winning would be disastrous for the progressive values I believe in. That's why voting third party would actually be abandoning my morals and principles.

What you mark on the ballot doesn't define your morals and principles, it just helps decide who gets elected. Elections are about results -- I don't just want to talk about my progressive values by voting third party, I want to actually do what's needed to make those progressive values a reality for me and everyone else that is at risk of suffering under a Trump presidency."

Toying around with the idea of trying to write a Medium piece that fleshes this out more. This won't satisfy the people that believe in the 'burn it all down and we get something better' theory, but that's basically another topic.

Pigeon literally just posted showing this isn't true. It works!

From a research paper:
"Citizens generally try to cooperate with social norms, especially when norm compliance is monitored and publicly disclosed"

(I could have sworn we've talked about this before with other issues like gay marriage and racism)

 

[Suikoguy]

Everyone knows cops can only eat GMO foods. It's how they get their power from THE MAN.

It's like that Lewis Black joke:

"If it wasn't for my horse, i wouldn't have spent that year in college"

 

[Nazgul_Hunter]

That has been their tactic in their past hacks. If the pattern holds they will eventually insert forged material as well.

Yeah. It's dangerous. If I were the DNC, I would find a way to release all the emails ourselves to stem that somehow. That said, there's probably a lot of stuff there they don't want out for confidentiality and strategic reasons. If the hackers do have everything, they're probably holding that to release later for maximum damage.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

All this talk about how we shouldn't be surprised the DNC wasn't impartial and besides them rigging the outcome is a good thing anyway is a little silly. For one the DNC itself claims impartiality in its charter and youd almost certainly Be in a tiny minority who would be fine with that changing.

I think we're proving pigeons point about shame. People are forced into their position because it looks bad to the group. Otherwise most Hillary supporters and establishment people would be fine with preserving the party at the expense of pushing bernie out if it was a risk

 

[Grief.exe]

It's good to keep things in perspective. We have to deal with the radical left in some situations, but for the most part they tend you be unorganized and ignored.

Republicans have to deal with the radical right so pervasively that their entire platform, rhetoric, candidate, and media is structured around a post factual radical ideology.

 

[Wilsongt]

https://twitter.com/JoyAnnReid/status/757953339841708032

hahahaha

Over there. Over there. There's an orange little twat with small hands over there.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Yeah. It's dangerous. If I were the DNC, I would find a way to release all the emails ourselves to stem that somehow. That said, there's probably a lot of stuff there they don't want out for confidentiality and strategic reasons. If the hackers do have everything, they're probably holding that to release later for maximum damage.

I don't doubt there could be more but strategically how does this make sense?

You release the worst first then follow it up with more confirming.

Releasing something, having the party still unify and bernie go full throated. Then you release something? Bernie isn't going to stop endorsing her. He's taking the stand that she's better than trump.

The people that would be swayed were never important anyways.

I understand the fear but unless the literally have evidence of a crime by clinton herself (which I doubt) then its not gonna move the needle on election day

 

[BlastProcessing]

All this talk about how we shouldn't be surprised the DNC wasn't impartial and besides them rigging the outcome is a good thing anyway is a little silly. For one the DNC itself claims impartiality in its charter and youd almost certainly Be in a tiny minority who would be fine with that changing.

Extreme example. If David Duke was running for Senate as a Democrat would you want the DNC to immediately distance themselves from him? Should they stay impartial? The RNC and the RNSC both immediately repudiated him and said he his ideas had no place in their party. Where they wrong to do so?

 

[BitStyle]

https://twitter.com/M_Gelin/status/757932636736225280



https://twitter.com/M_Gelin/status/757933480584019968

I'm hoping that he manages to get through their thick heads.

(Edit: sigh, beaten)

Good shit, Bernie

 

[thestopsign]

re: voting 3rd party etc. I think a big part of why these conversations are so often fruitless is because people have this idea that who they vote for represents who they are as a person. Instead of using the ballot box to determine who gets elected, they use the ballot box to declare their morals and principles. What that means is they either vote for somebody they don't align with completely and to them it feels like they're compromising their principles, they throw away their vote on a third party, or they just stay at home and don't vote. I think this is partly driven by how we generally talk about voting and politics in America. We talk about voting as a personal choice, rather than something that has consequences for everybody. Politics is a taboo -- not something you discuss in polite company. These sentiments reinforce this "keep it to yourself" mentality that then reinforce this perceived link between their vote and their personal identity.

I think if we want to create a more productive democracy, we need to change that dialog -- what you see instead is people insulting them for voting 3rd party, calling them idiots or racists etc. There may be some truth there and it can feel good to say that stuff to them, but it's completely counter-productive. They'll get defensive and feel pushed out of the dem party -- Trump camp welcome them with open arms and make them feel welcome. Same thing happened with gamergate etc.

I'm just one guy so I don't expect to make much of a difference, but I can't help but experiment with the language I use when speaking to these people to try and figure it out and get through to them. Wanted to share a response I wrote recently on fb as an example (responding to someone saying they don't want to abandon their morals and principles by voting for Clinton):

"I'm not abandoning my conscience or voting against my morals. Not because I agree with everything Clinton stands for (I don't), but because my conscience pushes me to do what I think is best for society. A third party won't win, so voting third party won't advance my values. Voting third party would undeniably help trump win -- that goes directly against my morals and principles and him winning would be disastrous for the progressive values I believe in. That's why voting third party would actually be abandoning my morals and principles.

What you mark on the ballot doesn't define your morals and principles, it just helps decide who gets elected. Elections are about results -- I don't just want to talk about my progressive values by voting third party, I want to actually do what's needed to make those progressive values a reality for me and everyone else that is at risk of suffering under a Trump presidency."

Toying around with the idea of trying to write a Medium piece that fleshes this out more. This won't satisfy the people that believe in the 'burn it all down and we get something better' theory, but that's basically another topic.

I think that boils down what everyone needs to realize pretty succinctly.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

how do they determine sticky threads. this seems like good choice http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1252953

 

[Zornack]

It's good to keep things in perspective. We have to deal with the radical left in some situations, but for the most part they tend you be unorganized and ignored.

Republicans have to deal with the radical right so pervasively that their entire platform, rhetoric, candidate, and media is structured around a post factual radical ideology.

But at least the radical right vote. The radical left just makes a bunch of noise then is absent at the voting booth.

 

[pigeon]

Pigeon literally just posted showing this isn't true. It works!

From a research paper:
"Citizens generally try to cooperate with social norms, especially when norm compliance is monitored and publicly disclosed"

(I could have sworn we've talked about this before with other issues like gay marriage and racism)

Honestly these discussions remind me of a consistent conversation that happens in game dev where players who are otherwise very intelligent and good at systems will consistently ask for systems that make them monetize to be changed so that they don't have to monetize.

My view of this is generally that the system is working. People complain about systems that put pressure on them because they don't like pressure and complaining and asking for change is one way to try to relieve it. But ultimately a lot of those people also just do what the pressure says because that's a more reliable solution.

 

[BlastProcessing]

re: voting 3rd party etc. I think a big part of why these conversations are so often fruitless is because people have this idea that who they vote for represents who they are as a person. Instead of using the ballot box to determine who gets elected, they use the ballot box to declare their morals and principles. What that means is they either vote for somebody they don't align with completely and to them it feels like they're compromising their principles, they throw away their vote on a third party, or they just stay at home and don't vote. I think this is partly driven by how we generally talk about voting and politics in America. We talk about voting as a personal choice, rather than something that has consequences for everybody. Politics is a taboo -- not something you discuss in polite company. These sentiments reinforce this "keep it to yourself" mentality that then reinforce this perceived link between their vote and their personal identity.

I think if we want to create a more productive democracy, we need to change that dialog -- what you see instead is people insulting them for voting 3rd party, calling them idiots or racists etc. There may be some truth there and it can feel good to say that stuff to them, but it's completely counter-productive. They'll get defensive and feel pushed out of the dem party -- Trump camp welcome them with open arms and make them feel welcome. Same thing happened with gamergate etc.

I'm just one guy so I don't expect to make much of a difference, but I can't help but experiment with the language I use when speaking to these people to try and figure it out and get through to them. Wanted to share a response I wrote recently on fb as an example (responding to someone saying they don't want to abandon their morals and principles by voting for Clinton):

"I'm not abandoning my conscience or voting against my morals. Not because I agree with everything Clinton stands for (I don't), but because my conscience pushes me to do what I think is best for society. A third party won't win, so voting third party won't advance my values. Voting third party would undeniably help trump win -- that goes directly against my morals and principles and him winning would be disastrous for the progressive values I believe in. That's why voting third party would actually be abandoning my morals and principles.

What you mark on the ballot doesn't define your morals and principles, it just helps decide who gets elected. Elections are about results -- I don't just want to talk about my progressive values by voting third party, I want to actually do what's needed to make those progressive values a reality for me and everyone else that is at risk of suffering under a Trump presidency."

Toying around with the idea of trying to write a Medium piece that fleshes this out more. This won't satisfy the people that believe in the 'burn it all down and we get something better' theory, but that's basically another topic.

I agree with this and would add one more dimension to it. People focus too much on the Presidency. If you want a true grassroots movement, it has to start with local and state government and work it's way up. If you have new ideas that are outside of the mainstream, you can't expect to just skip all of the steps and leap frog to the highest office. 3rd parties can have an important place in American politics, just not at the Presidential level.

 

[RastaMentality]

how do they determine sticky threads. this seems like good choice http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1252953

It's just that everyone here isn't American so that could be a problem

 

[Suikoguy]

It's just that everyone here isn't American so that could be a problem

I'd think it'd be fair to sticky it for a couple of weeks at least, before the registration deadlines.

Also needs absentee voter information from here:
http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/absentee-and-early-voting.aspx

 

[HylianTom]

Ratings for DNC Night 1 are in: slightly higher than RNC Night 1 (by about 400,000 - this does not include cable).
http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/dem...tion-ratings-night-one-bigger-rnc-1201823316/

 

[sphagnum]

Honestly these discussions remind me of a consistent conversation that happens in game dev where players who are otherwise very intelligent and good at systems will consistently ask for systems that make them monetize to be changed so that they don't have to monetize.

My view of this is generally that the system is working. People complain about systems that put pressure on them because they don't like pressure and complaining and asking for change is one way to try to relieve it. But ultimately a lot of those people also just do what the pressure says because that's a more reliable solution.

You might say it's a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.

 

[Jeels]

It's so much easier pushing the Democratic party to the left than it is voting for a "left" third party enough for them to have sizable enough power in government to effect change. Anyone voting third party is ineffective at enacting change and honestly, if they want to waste their political capital/power, it's what they deserve.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Honestly these discussions remind me of a consistent conversation that happens in game dev where players who are otherwise very intelligent and good at systems will consistently ask for systems that make them monetize to be changed so that they don't have to monetize.

My view of this is generally that the system is working. People complain about systems that put pressure on them because they don't like pressure and complaining and asking for change is one way to try to relieve it. But ultimately a lot of those people also just do what the pressure says because that's a more reliable solution.

I agree.

This might be related in a similar manner
I saw this gawker piece and it frustrated me to no end

People are upset. Yes, “Bernie or Bust” is an unrealistic and counterproductive position to hold. Yes, it is foolish to imagine, as some expressed, that Bernie would stage a last-ditch floor battle for delegates and somehow pull out a great populist triumph at the last second. Yes, the Democratic nominee is far preferable to the Republican one and will do far more to advance (at least a little) towards these progressives’ ideals.

But people are upset. People are fucking enraged. All is not well. People are not just mad at Hillary Clinton, or at the current crop of Republican losers. People are mad that they have gone fifty fucking years without a raise. People are mad that it’s been 50 years since the Civil Rights Act and we have the same segregated slums and the same people getting shot by police. People are mad that life in America is unfair, not due to an act of god but due to many small acts of the two political parties that are celebrating themselves this month. This is a hole that has been dug over years, over decades, over generations. The people at the bottom of the hole can’t see the sun any more. They will not be satisfied with a small stool to stand on. They want to live on solid ground. That’s not an option that our major political parties take seriously. Hence our current mood.

The Democrats are the smart vote. But the Democrats are also the cynical vote. They are the ones who promise to be better than they actually are. Michelle Obama’s speech last night, powerful and bracing and unifying, offered a taste of the extraordinary oratorical strength that has helped to hold this nation together, barely, over the past eight years. That oratorical strength is leaving in January of next year. After that, it will take something stronger to sustain us.

It raises legit points and says basically everyone fails them which I dont think is fair to say.

Yes, there hasn't been progress on those things.

BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE VOTED FOR A PARTY THAT OPPOSES THESE GOALS.

I'm sick of bill clinton getting blamed for people voting for conservatives or wondering why we made no progress from 2001-2008. Maybe because the same people complaining are voting for the people who contribute to these problems! Why are we to blame when we have no power because you're not voting for us?

The system works, you're just voting for people who intentionally break the system then wonder why its not working perfectly.

What happening in 2008-2010, 1932-1946, 1948-1968. Besides real complaints about foreign affairs stuff got done, because you have a party that wanted to fix things. We got labor rights in this period, we got civil rights, we got health care, financial reform.

but we're shocked when we vote for republicans and "the system doesn't work." Its not both sides. One side makes it worse!

 

[User1608]

Good shit, Bernie

Indeed, really good to see! He gets it and I'm glad he's doing all he can.

Ratings for DNC Night 1 are in: slightly higher than RNC Night 1 (by about 400,000 - this does not include cable).
http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/dem...tion-ratings-night-one-bigger-rnc-1201823316/

So much for the Donald being a draw.

Seriously though, seems good.

 

[JP_]

Ratings for DNC Night 1 are in: slightly higher than RNC Night 1 (by about 400,000 - this does not include cable).
http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/dem...tion-ratings-night-one-bigger-rnc-1201823316/

Seems like a good sign to me.

 

[Slayven]

Amazing what a couple hours make. Now don't fuck it up DNC

 

[brainchild]

He is a dem. He's already switched. Anyone upset over him being elected as an Independant and changing to a democrat should have been pissed off a year ago when he switched.

I know it's a minor thing, but in an election where trust and character has been such a weapon against Clinton, to have the supposed beacon of light openly lie about his intentions and go back on his word is galling. Talk about different standards.

He's going to, in all likelihood, switch to dem during reelection for his seat.

His constituents were not upset at him switching to dem because they knew it was for a future election (in which he would have given up his seat). Now that he's out of the running for that election (and will keep his seat) he will fulfill the remainder of that term the way he started it.

You can lodge your complaints against him if he still runs as an independent during reelection. As of now, your response is premature.


And to be frank, Bernie's handling of this situation is a prime example of why his supporters like him, and makes him even more trustworthy.

 

[dramatis]

As long as nobody boos bill. You don't boo a president. It's a new level of rude.

Nah I'm okay with people booing Bill. He's Bill, he needs a few boos now and again.

Life among the Berned

I mean these guys, really?

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/life-among-the-berned-214099

Give me a break. Keep reading for squabbles within New Mexico delegation and their fights against Indiana. Democrats being Democrats.

The interaction of the NM delegates lol

“They don’t respect us,” Peters nearly yelled.

“They’ve been fighting with the poor delegates with Indiana,” Trujeque scolded. “It’s not respectable.”

“Well, I don’t find it respectable that Hillary Clinton lied under oath!”

“In the Democratic Party, there’s room for disagreement,” Peters insisted. “Instead you’re exercising fascism.”

“I’ve been involved in the Democratic Party for years and there’s no fraud, no corruption we take care of everyone. Some people have never been involved.”

“I’ve been involved for many years!”

“Well, I’ve never seen you!”

“That’s because I’ve lived in New Mexico for almost a whole year!”

“Well, then don’t try to change us New Mexicans!”

The Sanders delegate admits he's barely even properly a guy of the state lol

 

[remist]

Extreme example. If David Duke was running for Senate as a Democrat would you want the DNC to immediately distance themselves from him? Should they stay impartial? The RNC and the RNSC both immediately repudiated him and said he his ideas had no place in their party. Where they wrong to do so?

Yea, no need for the DNC to get involved. Leave it to voters and other candidates to marginalize that kind of nutter.

 

[pigeon]

This chart is unnecessarily difficult to read, but the core message is that Trump continues to underperform Romney among nearly every demographic in the NBC/WSJ poll. Hillary underperforms Obama only with African-Americans and ages 45-64. Incredibly, people 65 and up are currently breaking for Hillary.

 

[lyrick]

This chart is unnecessarily difficult to read, but the core message is that Trump continues to underperform Romney among nearly every demographic in the NBC/WSJ poll. Hillary underperforms Obama only with African-Americans and ages 45-64. Incredibly, people 65 and up are currently breaking for Hillary.

65+ sounds like it's going to favor Women's leanings, Men tend to have a shorter lifespans.

 

[Brinbe]

Bernie to formally nominate HRC tonight during the roll call vote... Gonna be lurking S4p later.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/26/polit...ks-for-sanders-to-nominate-clinton/index.html

 

[balladofwindfishes]

My grandparents hate Trump, but absolutely love Hillary. (72 and 76)

Just anecdotal though. Neither have ever voted in their lives, so it's not really anything. Just saying, I understand why really old people might go for Hillary.

My Grandpa is offended by the stuff Trump says, while my Grandma thinks it's ridiculous a reality TV host is a candidate.

Both are extremely liberal though (Grandpa more than Grandma). Unusual for people their age. I was actually shocked hearing my Grandpa rant to the TV when some dude on Fox News was talking about gay marriage. Never expected someone his age to say "who gives a damn what two people do, as long as they love each other"

 

[dramatis]

Politico also has an article up by a guy who wrote a screenplay 'Rodham' that will probably be made into a movie post election.

I soon found my inspiration waiting in the headlines. As I was trying to figure out a character, a team of Navy SEALs killed Osama bin Laden. I was immediately struck by the photo of President Barack Obama’s advisers in the Situation Room, watching the raid on Abbottabad unfold. Hillary Clinton was one of the only women in the room, and she was also the only person who was visibly shaken—the only person with any emotions to speak of. Everyone else seemed stern and somber and uninteresting. But there was Clinton: She’d spent her career trying to be as asexual as possible, but in that moment, she seemed to me to be letting her guard down, showing her vulnerability, her gender. The picture jogged a hazy memory of a historical photo from when she had been a rising star attorney, dressed in a 1970s-era outfit with those big round glasses, working on the Watergate impeachment committee with her boss, John Doar.

Who, I wondered, was that woman?

I imagine screenplays about all the characters in this election are probably pretty hot right now in Hollywood.

 

[Slayven]

Pigeon what happen to Paul Ryan?

 

[brainchild]

Bernie to formally nominate HRC tonight during the roll call vote... Gonna be lurking S4p later.

This should be good.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

This chart is unnecessarily difficult to read, but the core message is that Trump continues to underperform Romney among nearly every demographic in the NBC/WSJ poll. Hillary underperforms Obama only with African-Americans and ages 45-64. Incredibly, people 65 and up are currently breaking for Hillary.

white women!

 

[B-Dubs]

Nah I'm okay with people booing Bill. He's Bill, he needs a few boos now and again.

People need to know not to poke the bear. The DNC, Hillary, and Obama took the time to aim him at the GOP, the Bernie Bros need to know not to mess with that. Boo him on a smaller stage, not when he's fully armed and ready to fire.

 

[lyrick]

My grandparents hate Trump, but absolutely love Hillary. (72 and 76)

Just anecdotal though. Neither have ever voted in their lives, so it's not really anything. Just saying, I understand why really old people might go for Hillary.

My Grandpa is offended by the stuff Trump says, while my Grandma thinks it's ridiculous a reality TV host is a candidate.

Both are extremely liberal though (Grandpa more than Grandma). Unusual for people their age. I was actually shocked hearing my Grandpa rant to the TV when some dude on Fox News was talking about gay marriage. Never expected someone his age to say "who gives a damn what two people do, as long as they love each other"

Get them registered and give them a lift to the polls.

 

[Valhelm]

I'm surprised white women prefer Trump to Romney by such a wide margin.

Racism against minorities is more important than sexism that affects you, I guess.

 

[Chezzymann]

So trumps leading by about 1% in the poll of polls now... Is this a first? Have any of the Monday polls been done after the whole DNC email leak thing? I wonder if that will affect it

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Have we discussed that Bill is going to be campaigning in Utah?

head fake. force trump out there

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I'm surprised white women prefer Trump to Romney by such a wide margin.

Racism against minorities is more important than sexism that affects you, I guess.

They prefer Romney to Trump
Romney was +14, Trump is only +3

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Get them registered and give them a lift to the polls.

They're not going to vote, it's not worth my time. They can't leave the house, my grandfather can no longer walk, and my grandma needs to take care of him. They won't understand an absentee vote.

This is New York, anyway.

I'm bugging my parents to vote though. Slowly making that happen. Just have to position it that Louise Slaughter might be in trouble, that'd get them to move (even if she isn't).

 

[Ophelion]

Politico also has an article up by a guy who wrote a screenplay 'Rodham' that will probably be made into a movie post election.

I imagine screenplays about all the characters in this election are probably pretty hot right now in Hollywood.

I remember the photo he's talking about. It struck me also that Hillary was the only one in the room with an emotional reaction. I believe she had her hands covering her mouth. She looked nervous, but not afraid. It was an interesting moment captured in time.

 

[B-Dubs]

I'm surprised white women prefer Trump to Romney by such a wide margin.

Racism against minorities is more important than sexism that affects you, I guess.

This election season constantly reminds me of that LBJ quote about racism, only it also applies to sexism from the look of it. Give someone something to be racist about and they won't notice you fucking them in the ass without lube.

I remember the photo he's talking about. It struck me also that Hillary was the only one in the room with an emotional reaction. I believe she had her hands covering her mouth. She looked nervous, but not afraid. It was an interesting moment captured in time.

To hear the story she was just yawning when they took the photo :lol