• 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.
V

VRMN

Member
Oblivion said:
What would be the benefit of having McCain support Hillary for Democrats?
Click to expand...
Presumably one major elected Republican endorsing would open the floodgates.

I think the downside politically of not being able to run against Trump in down ballot elections would out weigh it though.
 
D

DataStream

Member
Oblivion said:
What would be the benefit of having McCain support Hillary for Democrats?
Click to expand...

There was a time when some Democrats would have voted for McCain if there was a weak Dem nom, he was considered to be a true civil servant as opposed to a member of a party. As a former GOP Presidential candidate, it would provide cover for other party members to openly renounce Trump as well.

VRMN said:
Presumably one major elected Republican endorsing would open the floodgates.

I think the downside politically of not being able to run against Trump in down ballot elections would out weigh it though.
Click to expand...

I don't think there are that many non-radicalized GOP representatives left in congress that have the spine to come out, just enough to make it a significant story and undermine Trump's authority. There is plenty of hatred of Congress without Trump coming into the picture and you could show how their inability to legislate was what empowered Trump in the first place.
 
B

Bowdz

Member
B-Dubs said:
She's already apologized and admitted she's fucked up though. The fact is that's not nearly enough to make it go away because there's nothing else for them to talk about with her. With Obama they could go on about his inexperience, the only complaint they have on Clinton is the e-mails.
Click to expand...

Yes, she has said that, but she ALWAYS qualifies everything she says. It is not effective and it neutralizes the apology. She is in the right, don't get me wrong, but her answers are always "Well, look, I've said it was a mistake, BUT it's something that other SoS' have done, and as Director Comey said, I told the truth to the FBI". There is ALWAYS a qualification and that is what makes her look shady or dodgy, whether that is fair or not.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Iolo said:
I'm actually waiting for conservatives to go spy through Khan's windows to see if he has granite countertops
Click to expand...
Its worse.

Far Right “Anti-Jihad” Loon Walid Shoebat Smears Khizr Khan as “Muslim Brotherhood Plant”
I won’t bother quoting from this mess. Again, if you know how these people work you already know what you’ll find — Khan once wrote a paper on shariah, and that’s all it takes. They’re off, smearing Khizr Khan as a Muslim Brotherhood “plant” working with the Clinton campaign to convert the whole country to radical Islam. In this weird right wing fantasy, Khan’s son — who was killed in Iraq warning fellow US soldiers away from an exploding vehicle — was also a secret Muslim agent who died before he could stage a jihad attack.
Click to expand...
 
D

digdug2k

Member
thefro said:
It ought to be "I've made a mistake, I apologize for it and I've learned from it." I don't think she's completely out of the woods to where she can talk about it in any more detail without using legalese (since Gowdy wanted the FBI to investigate whether she lied to Congress).
Click to expand...
Meh. I think she can probably pass the buck better than that. i.e. "I took every precaution that was in place to ensure that nothing classified was sent from or to it. As far as I knew at the time those precautions worked, but obviously they weren't 100% fullproof." Saying "I made a mistake" at this point in the campaign doesn't seem like it will help her. The 6 people out there who will find it makes her seem more "human" are still not going to vote for her because of it.

She can even throw in a "Much like the VA, our entire government's technology stack is in need of a major overhaul. I look forward to doing so with the cooperation of Congressman Gowdy once I'm in office." i.e. try to change the story to one of government bureaucracy fuck-up. Heck, she could bring up the ACA roll out if she wants and let Obama take some heat for her.
 
F

Felix Lighter

Member
Oblivion said:
What would be the benefit of having McCain support Hillary for Democrats?
Click to expand...

Every respected Republican leader that chooses not to endorse Trump and is public about it hurts Trump with moderate/old style/establishment Republicans. He would never endorse Clinton, though, unless on the same day he switched parties officially and ended his Senate race. However, if pushed far enough, I could possible see him pull his endorsement but i don't see that happening until Trump's campaign was completely lost anyway, so it would be essentially meaningless at that point.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
McCain a la 2000 is someone I could have supported if we had a terrible candidate. Like, he's gone a little off recently, but he used to be fairly middle of the road. I think he was probably a decent human being, and he didn't deserve the shit Dubya through at him.
 
J

Joe Shlabotnik

Banned
Oblivion said:
What would be the benefit of having McCain support Hillary for Democrats?
Click to expand...

I don't personally think it's needed or wanted, and don't think it would do wonders for Hillary's progressive bona fides.

That said, the only thing the media loves more than extreme partisanship is extreme bipartisanship. Chris Matthew's reaction would be literally pornographic.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Bowdz said:
Yes, she has said that, but she ALWAYS qualifies everything she says. It is not effective and it neutralizes the apology. She is in the right, don't get me wrong, but her answers are always "Well, look, I've said it was a mistake, BUT it's something that other SoS' have done, and as Director Comey said, I told the truth to the FBI". There is ALWAYS a qualification and that is what makes her look shady or dodgy, whether that is fair or not.
Click to expand...

The problem is if she drops the qualifications it makes it look like she did something illegal since no one can be bothered to have a decent understanding of what happened, which would then just make it worse. If she were a more talented politicians the answers she's giving would be enough, but she isn't.

Joe Shlabotnik said:
I don't personally think it's needed or wanted, and don't think it would do wonders for Hillary's progressive bona fides.

That said, the only thing the media loves more than extreme partisanship is extreme bipartisanship. Chris Matthew's reaction would be literally pornographic.
Click to expand...

There's people on this forum who would literally jerk off if McCain endorsed her.
 
T

theprodigy

Member
Wilsongt said:
H. A. Goodman
H. A. Goodman – ‏@HAGOODMANAUTHOR

If we're blessed to have @DrJillStein and @ninaturner together, Trump has no chance. Get on the ballot, debate stage, we win. #JillNina2016
12:45 AM - 1 Aug 2016
72 RETWEETS139 LIKES

#blessed
Click to expand...

why are you so obsessed with this irrelevant idiot
 
F

Fox318

Member
If the 2000 McCain won the GOP would be so different today.

Neocons and teaparty groups probably wouldn't have any power.
 
S

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
StoOgE said:
The thing is, she likely didn't circumvent "norms".

It's how the Bush administration did things, and congressmen and senators and their staff almost all have their own e-mail servers, including those who have clearance for classified information.

The real point is, we have a cyber security issue at all levels of US government, and Hillary definitely was part of that and made poor decisions, but if anyone really gave a flying fuck about national security we would be thinking of solutions to systemic issues.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think the best way forward is to seize on the situation to push for modernization in communication technology and security.
 
N

nature boy

Member
Roland_Gunner said:
Sally Bradshaw, one of the authors of the RNC's 2012 autopsy is leaving the party. The GOP losing a batch of its non-crazy staff is becoming a real story here.
Click to expand...
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/08/01/politics/sally-bradshaw-jeb-bush-donald-trump-florida/index.html
Jeb Bush's top adviser, Sally Bradshaw, has left the Republican Party to become an independent, and says if the presidential race in Florida is close, she'll vote for Hillary Clinton.

Bradshaw, who's been close to the former Florida governor for decades and was senior adviser to his 2016 campaign, officially switched her registration to unaffiliated. She told CNN's Jamie Gangel in an email interview that the GOP is "at a crossroads and have nominated a total narcissist -- a misogynist -- a bigot."
"This is a time when country has to take priority over political parties. Donald Trump cannot be elected president," Bradshaw said.
The departure from the Republican Party of a Bush loyalist -- Bradshaw began her career working for George H.W. Bush's 1988 campaign -- is the latest sign of an influential and respected member of the GOP establishment turning against Trump.


"This election cycle is a test," Bradshaw said. "As much as I don't want another four years of (President Barack) Obama's policies, I can't look my children in the eye and tell them I voted for Donald Trump. I can't tell them to love their neighbor and treat others the way they wanted to be treated, and then vote for Donald Trump. I won't do it."
Click to expand...

Yikes.
 
B

Bowdz

Member
Basileus777 said:
No endorsement would be worth the penalty of having McCain as SoD.
Click to expand...

Everyone knows that Michele Flournoy will be the next SoD (srs). She's was on Bams' shortlist since the beginning and was his top pick as his last replacement except she didn't want the job at the time. She's a lock for Clinton's administration.
 
D

DataStream

Member
Joe Shlabotnik said:
I don't personally think it's needed or wanted, and don't think it would do wonders for Hillary's progressive bona fides.

That said, the only thing the media loves more than extreme partisanship is extreme bipartisanship. Chris Matthew's reaction would be literally pornographic.
Click to expand...

It really comes down to whether you think Clinton can make enough of a case for herself vs. how much of a case against Trump is needed. If the election is about disqualifying Trump and lowering his ceiling, then it likely helps.

I want a progressive agenda and will do what I can to make sure that voice is heard, but I think at this point an asymmetrical approach is safe to explore.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Douthat's arguments today are so insufferable.

Every [elite] liberal would vote for a Republican to beat Trump.

But he says it such a big ask for Republicans to vote for Hillary because some something abortion?

I mean sacrificing 4 years of power is a big ask to fight against literal fascism?

They're pretty much as bad as Bernie bros in their need to feel self actualized in their votes.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
bangbang i'm a timpani said:
So is this as bad or worse than the judge thing for trump?
Click to expand...

Personally? I think it's a lot worse. You don't touch the military. You don't touch military families. You definitely, definitely, don't touch Gold Star Families. You just don't. This is so deeply understood that no one normally even feels the need to mention this.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
adam387 said:
Personally? I think it's a lot worse. You don't touch the military. You don't touch military families. You definitely, definitely, don't touch Gold Star Families. You just don't. This is so deeply understood that no one normally even feels the need to mention this.
Click to expand...
This isnt unheard of. The right mocked Kerry's service.

If you get in the way...
 
M

MassiveNights

Banned
There's a new election update on 538: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-clintons-bounce-appears-bigger-than-trumps/

Also with some thoughts behind each polling model they use on their site.

It sounds like polls-only takes into account the last few weeks of polling when attributing a percentage chance.

He also says he likes his polls-plus model the best.

Polls-only: I tell you what, this thing has been trending to Trump for weeks. The guy was down 7 percentage points in June, and now he’s just about tied it up. What’s that? You’re telling me that some of that was a convention bounce? Sorry, bud — you didn’t program any assumptions about a convention bounce into me. So I wouldn’t know anything about that. The Trump train was rolling down the tracks. You expect me to turn around on a dime based on a few good polls for Clinton? If she’s really gained that much, I’m gonna have to see more proof. I know you think I’m as stubborn as an old Cray-2, but one of these days, I’ll save your behind from getting too far out in front of itself.

Now-cast: I’m so excited about these polls! Last week I thought TRUMP WAS WINNING! Now I think CLINTON’S WINNING! Maybe Clinton’s winning by A LOT! But even for me, four polls isn’t that much data. A few more good polls for Clinton and I’m going to get REALLY EXCITED!

Polls-plus: I’m not sure what you’re all so worked up about. That convention bounce for Mr. Trump? I predicted it ahead of time. I’ve been the very picture of composure, really, barely moving at all over the past two weeks. I must say, though, that I disagree with my friend, Mr. Polls-only. According to my calculations, Mr. Trump’s momentum stopped a couple of weeks ago. I don’t think he should get a lot of credit for that middling convention bounce of his. So I’m happy enough to believe that the next shift in the race will be toward Mrs. Clinton. But be careful, friend. Mrs. Clinton may be in the midst of a convention bounce of her own. Let’s wait for a couple of weeks for things to settle in.

Personally, I think polls-plus makes the most persuasive case for itself and is telling the story that best fits the evidence we have in hand. We know that the polls can be pretty wild around the party conventions. We also know that, by a few weeks after the conventions, they do a very good job of picking the eventual winner:
Click to expand...
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Roland_Gunner said:
There's a difference between a shadowy group of millionaires running ads and a parties Presidential candidate personally going after the parents of a solider who died serving the country.
Click to expand...
True. I'm just trying to say this kinda stuff has been brewing. They also attack Cindy shaeen
 
U

User 463088

Banned
NYCmetsfan said:
This isnt unheard of. The right mocked Kerry's service.

If you get in the way...
Click to expand...

True enough. But, again, he was the candidate. It was still beyond the pale, but there was, arguably, a link between what they said about Kerry and what he was saying. It was bullshit. It was gross. It shouldn't have happened....and Kerry's campaign was shit at dealing with it.

From a purely political standpoint, it was a really, really effective and good idea for the Bush people to do what they did. I still can't believe how freaking good at it they were.

I just feel like solider's who have lost their lives are so far out of bounds that I never thought someone would touch that.
 
I

Ignatz Mouse

Banned
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

The "I survived development hell" club (7 years+) of games (2024 edition)
36
2K
Holammer replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5
230
40K
elbourreau replied
Evolution of Open World Games 1980-2021
2 3
141
12K
IbizaPocholo replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
58K
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