• 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.
K

kadotsu

Banned
The whole last day of tweets has just been

clinton-computer-101~_v-modPremium.jpg
 
B

Balphon

Member
DrForester said:
Out of curiosity, are they up against NFL games? I thought they tried to avoid that.
Click to expand...

The first two are.

However, the CPD is a bipartisan entity. And the complaint of the Sanders campaign was that it needed the debate to increase its national exposure, which Trump most certainly does not

That would be applying logic to Trump's ramblings, though.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
sc0la said:
Problem is they literally can't prosecute him right now. Can you imagine the conspiracy theories and absolute insanity from the right about making him a "political prisoner" I would expect militia groups in the streets that night.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, prosecution is definitely out of the question (at this stage). But at the very least the CIA should let it be known that Trump fucked up.
 
B

Balphon

Member
If Trump were at all calculating he'd try to protest the debates unless Stein and Johnson are included. They'd jump at the chance, the crowded stage would benefit him most, and if/when the Commission didn't allow it he could "Crooked Hillary" it up.
 
Amibguous Cad

Amibguous Cad

Member
Iolo said:
What win margin would be required for you to view her presidency as legitimate, or is there any such margin?
Click to expand...

A majority of electoral votes? Hell, even if she loses the popular vote. Or even the vote of the House should a miracle happen and and a third party manages to siphon enough electoral votes to prevent anyone from getting a majority. I believe in the rule of law. If you win the election in the terms set out in the constitution your presidency is legitimate.

It's not about her legitimacy, I just think the democrats chose the worst possible time to nominate someone that alienates a large portion of both swing voters and the far left.

pigeon said:
This is also completely wrong. The NeverTrumpers exist because they know that their party was taken over by a white nationalist fascist. That is bad! More to the point it's disqualifying for Republicans who associate with him in future elections.
Click to expand...

That's...what I said? NeverTrumpers exist because the white nationalist fascist isn't going to to deliver the goods on free trade, pro-business policies, abortion rights, all the rest. If they had the party unity at all costs because Hillary's so damn terrible thing going on like establishment democrats desperately want to be the case, we'd be in much more trouble than we are right now.



pigeon said:
Since everything you understand above about the currently political situation is wrong, unsurprisingly, this is also wrong. Ideological crusades are exactly how the Republican party got led out onto a limb that the rest of America won't go out on, which weakened their institutional control to the point that their underlying white nationalism became the dominant force. It's part of the party realignment currently taking place. I have no idea why people feel the desire to accelerate the Democratic Party's downfall by insisting on ideological persecution of Democratic politicians when all the evidence shows they're going to move left along with the rest of the country.
Click to expand...

So, like, do you not think it would have been better if the far left had had the clout to end the political careers of some of the people who got us into Iraq? That reauthorized the Patriot Act? You've baldly asserted that holding their candidates to strict ideological tests is what led to Trump's nomination, ignoring the fact that he is the least ideologically disciplined candidate of the entire field. He wasn't the tea party candidate; Cruz was, and he lost. An ideologically disciplined Republican party would never have nominated an isolationist, anti-trade, bla bla bla I've listed it all above.

You're going to have to do better than a post hoc ergo propter hoc to establish why far right primary challenges led to Trump's nomination.
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Somebody made a good point. Even if Trump's comments about the Saudi base were made up, buncha people at the State dept. and other national security agencies have to still be scrambling to tell our allies that Trump's lying and doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. In other words, even if it's not classified info, Trump's inane comments still result in lots of trouble for our diplomats/intelligence agents.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
H. A. Goodman ‏@HAGOODMANAUTHOR 1m1 minute ago

#UnityIn5Words IF NOT BERNIE THEN JILL.
2 retweets 5 likes
H. A. Goodman ‏@HAGOODMANAUTHOR 2m2 minutes ago

#UnityIn5Words JILL STEIN NOT HILLARY CLINTON.
5 retweets 7 likes
H. A. Goodman ‏@HAGOODMANAUTHOR 3m3 minutes ago

#UnityIn5Words FOUR CLINTON SCANDALS BEFORE ELECTION.
3 retweets 6 likes
H. A. Goodman ‏@HAGOODMANAUTHOR 8m8 minutes ago

#UnityIn5Words COMPUTERS HATE HILLARY. VOTE JILL.
4 retweets 7 likes
H. A. Goodman ‏@HAGOODMANAUTHOR 8m8 minutes ago

#UnityIn5Words TRUMP IS A CLINTON PLANT.
6 retweets 23 likes
H. A. Goodman ‏@HAGOODMANAUTHOR 9m9 minutes ago

#UnityIn5Words DNC CHEATED NOW VOTE JILL.
12 retweets 25 likes
H. A. Goodman ‏@HAGOODMANAUTHOR 10m10 minutes ago

#UnityIn5Words BERNIE DEFEATED TRUMP BY TEN.
12 retweets 25 likes
H. A. Goodman ‏@HAGOODMANAUTHOR 22m22 minutes ago

#UnityIn5Words YOU SHOULD HAVE NOMINATED BERNIE. There, five words.
 
T

thcsquad

Member
DrMungo said:
Trump is Bobby Newport
Cruz is Jamm , threatening shutdowns and other shenanigans
Click to expand...

I saw Jamm as more prone to personal insults, bullying, and enriching himself. This is trump.

Cruz does stand for principles. Crazy principles. He is Patton oswalts character.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Amibguous Cad said:
That's...what I said? NeverTrumpers exist because the white nationalist fascist isn't going to to deliver the goods on free trade, pro-business policies, abortion rights, all the rest. If they had the party unity at all costs because Hillary's so damn terrible thing going on like establishment democrats desperately want to be the case, we'd be in much more trouble than we are right now.
Click to expand...

No. This response is literally baffling to me.

Republicans didn't break away from the party because they think Trump won't fulfill Republican priorities. Lots of previous Republican nominees have had trust issues with their coalition and didn't see the same effects.

Republicans are breaking away from Trump because white nationalism is outside the bounds of acceptable American politics and fascism is literally anti-American. Supporting Trump isn't dangerous because of Trump's heterodoxy, it's dangerous because it's literally supporting a crazy person who wants to destroy democracy, and people will not be charitable about that in the future.

The fact that you don't seem to see that and that you reduce white nationalism to "not delivering on Republican priorities" is straightforwardly disturbing to me.

Amibguous Cad said:
So, like, do you not think it would have been better if the far left had had the clout to end the political careers of some of the people who got us into Iraq? That reauthorized the Patriot Act?
Click to expand...

There are kind of a lot of ideas in here that I disagree with, so it's hard to pick just one out. Suffice to say I don't really see why it would benefit us to give the far left a veto over presidential candidates since, by definition, the far left is far from the mainstream and thus will reduce the power Democrats will have to enact progressive policies by doing so. Since my goal is to enact more progressive policies, I would like to win elections and enact them.

Amibguous Cad said:
You've baldly asserted that holding their candidates to strict ideological tests is what led to Trump's nomination, ignoring the fact that he is the least ideologically disciplined candidate of the entire field.
Click to expand...

I didn't assert it, I explained the causal chain of events. I'll spell it out a little more clearly. Ideological pressure caused zealots to get elected to office and reduced the Republican majorities by losing winnable races. This eroded the institutional control of the GOP, leading to them having less control of the party or ability to apply pressure. This in turn meant that they were unable to unify on an acceptable establishment candidate and instead fractured into supporting several different establishment candidates. As a result, they were unable to suppress the direct white nationalism that lay at the ugly heart of the Republican Party, and so it broke through.

Trump would easily have been defeated if the GOP establishment had just told Jeb, Walker, Newt, etc. etc. to drop out and get lost and unified their support behind Marco Rubio or whoever. In a normal situation, that's what would happen -- review the history of Mitt Romney winning the 2012 primary, especially the part where Pawlenty dropped out extremely early even though he was the most dangerous threat to Romney. Since the GOP had lost establishment control it couldn't happen this year.

Ultimately demographics changes are at the heart of the change, since that's what drove the GOP into enough of a hole that ideological crusaders were able to take over in the first place.

Hopefully this clarifies why I have no desire to see the same thing happen to the Democratic Party. Coalescing around a generally acceptable progressive candidate is what the system is designed to do in order to win elections, move the country leftwards and enact progressive policies. Let the oligarchy do their job!
 
U

User 463088

Banned
I've been busy all day and kind of annoyed I have to start working again. Sad.

(((Harry Enten))) ‏@ForecasterEnten 58m58 minutes ago
If Trump won't debate it's because he's afraid Clinton would whoop his behind. /fin.
Click to expand...

This is truth.
 
A

Abinash117

Member
pigeon said:
This is staggeringly incorrect. Trump is easy to categorize. He's a white nationalist fascist. All of his policies fit perfectly into that bucket.



This is also completely wrong. The NeverTrumpers exist because they know that their party was taken over by a white nationalist fascist. That is bad! More to the point it's disqualifying for Republicans who associate with him in future elections.



Since everything you understand above about the currently political situation is wrong, unsurprisingly, this is also wrong. Ideological crusades are exactly how the Republican party got led out onto a limb that the rest of America won't go out on, which weakened their institutional control to the point that their underlying white nationalism became the dominant force. It's part of the party realignment currently taking place. I have no idea why people feel the desire to accelerate the Democratic Party's downfall by insisting on ideological persecution of Democratic politicians when all the evidence shows they're going to move left along with the rest of the country.
Click to expand...


I say Donald Trump isn't a white nationalist. He doesn't follow the ideology, but uses it. Of course, one can say what difference does it make, and I would say that one believes in it and the other doesn't. The best way to describe Donald Trump is a opportunistic and non-strict ideological bond individual that leans to the right. He will say anything that he thinks that will help him win, but not going so far as going to liberal positions too often as in he probably doesn't inherently believe in them. But he does not adhere to ideology long term and that in a way makes him not big supporter on some issues. Which means when it comes to social issues he does not particularly care about them. He'll never push for liberal social positions and if he does it'll be more than half-assed.

But if I have to describe Trump's ideology it'll probably be a mixture of paloconservatism, nationalism, and stoking the fear of the other( which is usually racism).
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
pigeon said:
No. This response is literally baffling to me.

Republicans didn't break away from the party because they think Trump won't fulfill Republican priorities. Lots of previous Republican nominees have had trust issues with their coalition and didn't see the same effects.

Republicans are breaking away from Trump because white nationalism is outside the bounds of acceptable American politics and fascism is literally anti-American. Supporting Trump isn't dangerous because of Trump's heterodoxy, it's dangerous because it's literally supporting a crazy person who wants to destroy democracy, and people will not be charitable about that in the future.

The fact that you don't seem to see that and that you reduce white nationalism to "not delivering on Republican priorities" is straightforwardly disturbing to me.



There are kind of a lot of ideas in here that I disagree with, so it's hard to pick just one out. Suffice to say I don't really see why it would benefit us to give the far left a veto over presidential candidates since, by definition, the far left is far from the mainstream and thus will reduce the power Democrats will have to enact progressive policies by doing so. Since my goal is to enact more progressive policies, I would like to win elections and enact them.



I didn't assert it, I explained the causal chain of events. I'll spell it out a little more clearly. Ideological pressure caused zealots to get elected to office and reduced the Republican majorities by losing winnable races. This eroded the institutional control of the GOP, leading to them having less control of the party or ability to apply pressure. This in turn meant that they were unable to unify on an acceptable establishment candidate and instead fractured into supporting several different establishment candidates. As a result, they were unable to suppress the direct white nationalism that lay at the ugly heart of the Republican Party, and so it broke through.

Trump would easily have been defeated if the GOP establishment had just told Jeb, Walker, Newt, etc. etc. to drop out and get lost and unified their support behind Marco Rubio or whoever. In a normal situation, that's what would happen -- review the history of Mitt Romney winning the 2012 primary, especially the part where Pawlenty dropped out extremely early even though he was the most dangerous threat to Romney. Since the GOP had lost establishment control it couldn't happen this year.

Ultimately demographics changes are at the heart of the change, since that's what drove the GOP into enough of a hole that ideological crusaders were able to take over in the first place.

Hopefully this clarifies why I have no desire to see the same thing happen to the Democratic Party. Coalescing around a generally acceptable progressive candidate is what the system is designed to do in order to win elections, move the country leftwards and enact progressive policies. Let the oligarchy do their job!
Click to expand...
Pigeon is spitting truth right now
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
That feeling when you're an RA asked to make a serviceable but lame proof in the appendix better and you come up with a completely different proof... that is highly questionable in its superiority due to also being serviceable but lame.

My proof has less dumb notation I guess?
 
U

User 463088

Banned
My favorite is the old white guy who just has no idea what he's supposed to do, so he randomly hugs himself and prays its over soon..

Also, the fact that there was one pride flag is pretty cool. There were so many this year. It was great.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Abinash117 said:
I say Donald Trump isn't a white nationalist. He doesn't follow the ideology, but uses it. Of course, one can say what difference does it make, and I would say that one believes in it and the other doesn't. The best way to describe Donald Trump is a opportunistic and non-strict ideological bond individual that leans to the right. He will say anything that he thinks that will help him win, but not going so far as going to liberal positions too often as in he probably doesn't inherently believe in them. But he does not adhere to ideology long term and that in a way makes him not big supporter on some issues. Which means when it comes to social issues he does not particularly care about them. He'll never push for liberal social positions and if he does it'll be more than half-assed.

But if I have to describe Trump's ideology it'll probably be a mixture of paloconservatism, nationalism, and stoking the fear of the other( which is usually racism).
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure why you would think that Trump is not a white nationalist. He's behaved pretty consistently in support of it for many years and he was clearly raised in it. It runs in his family, after all.

Also I'm kind of unsure what the difference is between "nationalism and racism", which you are fine identifying with him, and white nationalism. I think paleoconservatism is pretty clearly inaccurate since Trump demonstrates zero interest in limited government and in fact explicitly wants to expand it in a bunch of ways in order to put his white nationalist goals in practice.
 
A

aspiegamer

Member
NFL games as an excuse? Nice. Does he personally have tickets? Wouldn't want him to have to sacrifice a fun evening out! Does he know about stubhub? 1st, Mon, Sept 26. Mondays are only on cable, and Trump's target demographics you'd think might include people more likely to steal cable. VP! Following Tuesday. Tuesdays are my designated relaxation days, and I'm sure there's some new video game coming out. Ooh, WWE 2k16? Disgusting, that's a pretty shitty game to ask for a delay with. Okay, this one can stay. Plus this will be immensely boring.

The dreaded "Town Hall" is on a Sunday. I can see some frustration with that, but not because of a football game, directly; Because every American is hungover and tired from watching football all day before debate time. However, I am curious whether the NFL or the Commission on Presidential Debates get network preference on NBC. Plus I'm sure The Walking Dead or some other zombie action shit is on. Cardinals vs 49ers? Awful. No one inclined to watch a debate would mind skipping that game.

The final is on a Wednesday, and, really, as the only day of the week left no football, we should be reserving that day to rest ourselves for more football. No debates allowed! Sad! Just pick Thursdays. The Thursday games always suck. *checks* ...Fuck, I get 2 a year and I'm going to the Oct 13th game. PLEASE DO NOT RESCHEDULE! FUCK TRUMP! SAD!
sangreal said:
He has a trumpist primary challenger
Click to expand...
He's actually running some ads here, and that's pricey for a House campaign since his district straddles 2 media markets and his has no hub city. So, hey, the fact that he's taking it at all seriously is interesting.
Random aside; All the collections of Bill Clinton balloon gifs around the internet today made it tolerable.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
Gary Johnson has said "yeah, I support abortion and do not support right to refusing gay people." and he has got movement conservatives so mad.

The fucking stupid idea of tying Ayn Rand's Satanist ideals to fundamentalist Christianity causes movement conservatives to just be dumb all the time. Ayn Rand would be sooooo hated by all Republicans if she was alive today.

Seriously though, Ayn Rand is the basis of Satanism. Her philosophy was more anti-Christian than any other philosophy Satanists had ever seen so they took her ideas and added spooky shit to them to make a fake religion.

I know the marriage of libertarians and religious conservatives in reality was basically religious conservatives trading tax cuts for laws that discriminated against LGBT people and women, but movement conservatives that pretend to be intellectual got the stupid idea that these ideas weren't directly contradictory.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
I searched for "abortion" on Twitter and immediately saw images comparing Holocaust deaths to the number of abortions in the United States.

I'm 80% sure this is why is Jewish Americans are overwhelmingly Democrat.
 
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