Support NeoGAF

[royalan]

I think an exciting VP pick will affect how the media covers Hillary, which in turn could effect her support. I mean, the media has made it clear already that they don't really want to cover Hillary, and Hillary's only making it easier for them to ignore her by being boring (when she's not tripping into a scandal).

Also, I think previous VP picks didn't garner much interest and/or change a candidate's trajectory because, optically, they've all been boring old white men. We can get into the specifics all we want about so-and-so potentially delivering whichever state, but to the average person all they see is another boring old white man on the ticket. Yawn....

Let's not pretend like McCain picking Palin didn't cause a surge of initial interest. She just ended up being an idiot and damaging the ticket.

Someone competent that goes against the norm here could very generate positive interest in the Clinton ticket. And choosing another woman? It would make an already-historic candidacy that much more historic.

I think we make a mistake by continuing to hold an election year that has defied almost every norm to the rigid standards of the norm. VPs don't traditionally do much...but what about this election is traditional?

 

[Y2Kev]

Does it matter? It seems to matter more how the media covers the pick than what the pick actually means. Like is that the real blowup of the Pence pick? That he got lost in uncertainty shuffle, then fell below the fold, and then had a buttfucking logo.

I think picking Warren would have great coverage. And I think that's probably the most important.

And I think moms know Warren more than they know Vilsack or something. And Warren can continue to just pound on Trump and Trump can say incredibly offensive things. That's the other benefit...Manafort can't seem to control him when Warren is around!

edit: Royalan actually beat me to it.

 

[HylianTom]

I think this idea of her having this degree of effect is fanciful.

If picking her was really that powerful then she may as well be the candidate not the running mate.

Which I guess is sort of fitting. Since ultimately, a lot of Warrenmania feels like what people are really after is a backdoor Warren Presidency.

It's weird because by many accounts the VP role is a sack of shit with no real power. Unless you're an Obama or a Bush and want a Biden or need a Cheney.

If forced to guess, I don't think she'd needle very much, either. In the past, I've usually tried to use words like "nudge" to fit the kind of effect I think she'd bring. Anyone expecting dramatic swings is going to be sorely disappointed.

(And the backdoor Warren thing is semi-creepy in that I've heard too many folks mention it positively, usually in a "what if something happens to Hillary? Eh? Eh?" context.)

 

[DataStream]

I've been trying to figure out a drinking game for the RNC watch party I'm hosting that wouldn't get us all plastered within 10 minutes.

I think I figured it out, drink every time you see a POC. Finish your drink if they are giving a speech.

 

[B-Dubs]

I've been trying to figure out a drinking game for the RNC watch party I'm hosting that wouldn't get us all plastered within 10 minutes.

I think I figured it out, drink every time you see a POC. Finish your drink if they are giving a speech.

What's the point of a drinking game that limits you to one beer?

 

[User 463088]

I've been trying to figure out a drinking game for the RNC watch party I'm hosting that wouldn't get us all plastered within 10 minutes.

I think I figured it out, drink every time you see a POC. Finish your drink if they are giving a speech.

When the convention opened, drink. And don't stop until it's over. That's my general plan. I got all my work done for next week.

I agree with keV. The Warren pick is about energy and a media narrative. I think it helps with the far left. Plus she's so good at attacking. She would chew Pence up.

 

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

Clinton should pick this legend and get the US on track to move to the metric system.

 

[shinra-bansho]

It'll get positive coverage for a week/new cycle. I mean if that's the rationale one wants to use to choose the running mate then it's kind of whatever.

Pence probably would have got some positive coverage too, if it wasn't such a clusterfuck of an announcement.

Random aside Diamond Joe is here being Vice Presidential.

EDIT: You couldn't have found an image of him that wasn't 2MB?

 

[Dalthien]

I think this idea of her having this degree of effect is fanciful.

If picking her was really that powerful then she may as well be the candidate not the running mate.

Which I guess is sort of fitting. Since ultimately, a lot of Warrenmania feels like what people are really after is a backdoor Warren Presidency.

It's weird because by many accounts the VP role is a sack of shit with no real power. Unless you're an Obama or a Bush and want a Biden or need a Cheney.

I completely agree that VP picks in general have very little effect (barring some sort of Palin-esque catastrophic pick). Voters make their decision based on the presidential choices, not the VPs.

Where I do think that Warren could play a helpful role though would be in the way she antagonizes Trump and gets under his skin. Right now, it doesn't matter much if Trump goes after some senator from MA, that doesn't stand out from him going after everyone else the same way. But if she's the VP nominee, there's a non-zero chance that she could get some vile, misogynistic attack from Trump, and him doing that to a VP selection as the race is in full gear and getting full national attention - that could definitely help lock women in to Clinton's side, and help boost Dem votes across the board.

The other area where she could perhaps play a constructive role would be in helping to bring over Bernie's donation base. A lot of Bernie supporters will obviously vote Hillary in the general, but they may not have the motivation to open their pocket books up the same way they did for Bernie. Warren could help drive some of those donations Hillary's way by offering up a genuine reason for some of these Bernie supporters to get more engaged than simply just voting for Hillary in November.

That's not to say that Warren will the VP selection, but I think she does bring some possible tangible strengths to the campaign.

 

[User 406]

What's the controversy with voter ID laws? Maybe I'm misunderstanding it, but I don't see a problem with it, in order to vote you have to show a state or federal ID, simple. Wouldn't that prevent voter fraud?

Late quote, but I think it's pretty important to emphasize that voter fraud doesn't really happen. Things like polling location hours and weather have a more significant effect on elections by orders of magnitude. It doesn't even qualify as a rounding error. A voter ID law has an even worse cost/benefit ratio than those idiotic welfare drug testing money sinks.

Voter ID is essentially a solution looking for a problem that doesn't exist.

With that in mind, it becomes clear that the real reason for voter ID laws is to disenfranchise people. So arguments over how it could be properly and fairly implemented are a red herring, because even a fair voter ID law would be abused in many places for its original intended purpose, which is to prevent people from voting.

 

[NeoXChaos]

People its going to be okay. Kaine is a fine choice.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I mean the same way that the sack won't help with men, I don't see how the warren helps particularly with women.

If you're going to point out a group she appeals to it's just the left flank of the base.

Soccer moms in the centre aren't going to give a shit. Even if this thread swoons.

Soccer moms in the centre don't really exist, though. The number of genuine swing voters in American politics is at an all-time low; partisanship is just too high and the parties are simply too far apart. We're not in the 1960s any more. Winning elections in modern America isn't really about swing voters, it's about voter enthusiasm - making sure your own people actually turn up.

That doesn't mean run off to the left, because "your own people" often barely give a shit about the precise leftness/rightness of it, it's an identity thing. But it does mean that just picking Kaine because soccer mums love a steady hand at foreign policy (...do they? really?) is also probably not a good idea.

 

[DrForester]

Meanwhile, at the Republican National Convention...

 

[shinra-bansho]

There's a bloc of self-professed moderate voters that Obama won in the last two cycles, and it's still a larger bloc than the self-professed liberal.

The thing is, these positives that people bring up, they're doing from their own perspective.

She's outspoken and has her own profile.
She will attack Trump and get into a twitter war.
She's adding another woman to the ticket.
She is and will generating a lot of press coverage about herself.

These are also all potential negatives. On the bolded, maybe I'm being cynical, but I still think whatever the US electorate may say to you when you ask them about it, a two-woman ticket is going to hurt more than help.

The only unequivocal positive that someone's mentioned is the last one by Dalthien, that she'll help in getting small dollar Bernie donors. Maybe.

 

[Geg]

I know there has to be some reason why they're called white elevators, but still, why

 

[Valhelm]

There's a bloc of self-professed moderate voters that Obama won in the last two cycles, and it's still a larger bloc than the self-professed liberal.

The thing is, these positives that people bring up, they're doing from their own perspective.

She's outspoken and has her own profile.
She will attack Trump and get into a twitter war.
She's adding another woman to the ticket.
She is and will generating a lot of press coverage about herself.

These are also all potential negatives. On the bolded, maybe I'm being cynical, but I still think whatever the US electorate may say to you when you ask them about it, a two-woman ticket is going to hurt more than help.

The only unequivocal positive that someone's mentioned is the last one by Dalthien, that she'll help in getting small dollar Bernie donors. Maybe.

The question is -- how many men will vote for a woman president, but draw the line at VP?

I could see some men being unconsciously alienated by a two-lady ticket, maybe. But couldn't similar numbers of young women be alienated by a centrist male VP?

 

[Man God]

Having another Republican Senator from MA will be just as embarrassing as it was last time.

 

[bomma_man]

It'll get positive coverage for a week/new cycle. I mean if that's the rationale one wants to use to choose the running mate then it's kind of whatever.

Pence probably would have got some positive coverage too, if it wasn't such a clusterfuck of an announcement.

Random aside Diamond Joe is here being Vice Presidential.

EDIT: You couldn't have found an image of him that wasn't 2MB?

and going to Carlton v West Coast? is the AFL trying to create an international incident?

 

[shem935]

The question is -- how many men will vote for a woman president, but draw the line at VP?

I could see some men being unconsciously alienated by a two-lady ticket, maybe. But couldn't similar numbers of young women be alienated by a centrist male VP?

How many black voters were offended at Obama picking Biden?

 

[VendettaRed07]

Also, I think previous VP picks didn't garner much interest and/or change a candidate's trajectory because, optically, they've all been boring old white men. We can get into the specifics all we want about so-and-so potentially delivering whichever state, but to the average person all they see is another boring old white man on the ticket. Yawn....

Let's not pretend like McCain picking Palin didn't cause a surge of initial interest. She just ended up being an idiot and damaging the ticket.

Someone competent that goes against the norm here could very generate positive interest in the Clinton ticket. And choosing another woman? It would make an already-historic candidacy that much more historic.

This

All of this

 

[Y2Kev]

Soccer moms in the centre don't really exist, though. The number of genuine swing voters in American politics is at an all-time low; partisanship is just too high and the parties are simply too far apart. We're not in the 1960s any more. Winning elections in modern America isn't really about swing voters, it's about voter enthusiasm - making sure your own people actually turn up.

That doesn't mean run off to the left, because "your own people" often barely give a shit about the precise leftness/rightness of it, it's an identity thing. But it does mean that just picking Kaine because soccer mums love a steady hand at foreign policy (...do they? really?) is also probably not a good idea.

Yay warren

And I don't think Pence actually adds much to Trump. He was already nearing 80% with the evangelicals. Adding a wackaroo can't help that much. Whereas some recent national polls that have Clinton tied or performing poorly have like 72% of democrats.

 

[Man God]

Honestly Palin was probably a net positive to McCain's campaign. It was everything else that really doomed him. And by everything else I mean the last eight years and the looming recession.

 

[shinra-bansho]

The question is -- how many men will vote for a woman president, but draw the line at VP?

I could see some men being unconsciously alienated by a two-lady ticket, maybe. But couldn't similar numbers of young women be alienated by a centrist male VP?

I don't think this would be entirely along gender lines. There are plenty of [younger gay] men and Kev, to whom a two-woman ticket is actually more appealing.

By the same regard there are women for whom unconscious bias ingrained by culture makes the idea of a two-woman ticket unappealing.

I think this is something that polling probably doesn't capture well either. Because no one wants to consciously admit to being someone who wouldn't vote for two women, or a gay man, or a black person. Especially anyone who self-identifies as liberal.

 

[HylianTom]

I know Hillary gets criticized for being too robotic, too careful and choosy with her words, too calculating, etc - but this is one case where I'd be happy if her campaign has researched and focus-tested the hell out of every possible pick, lol..

(Even if testing found nothing, I'd much rather have the info.)

 

[Suikoguy]

Meanwhile, at the Republican National Convention...

That's... oh wow.
Nobody thought at any step in the process from the ordering to putting it up, that perhaps they should have gone with something else?

 

[User 463088]

There's a bloc of self-professed moderate voters that Obama won in the last two cycles, and it's still a larger bloc than the self-professed liberal.

The thing is, these positives that people bring up, they're doing from their own perspective.

She's outspoken and has her own profile.
She will attack Trump and get into a twitter war.
She's adding another woman to the ticket.
She is and will generating a lot of press coverage about herself.

These are also all potential negatives. On the bolded, maybe I'm being cynical, but I still think whatever the US electorate may say to you when you ask them about it, a two-woman ticket is going to hurt more than help.

The only unequivocal positive that someone's mentioned is the last one by Dalthien, that she'll help in getting small dollar Bernie donors. Maybe.

I respect what you're saying, and in an ideal world, I may agree. But, I still think she helps more than she hurts. By having her on the ticket, you get to own that enthusiasm. Just having her out there, on the trail throwing bombs is a way to make people go "Damn, what could have been..." If she's not the choice, I think the campaign has to be VERY careful how they use her. Who in their right mind would wait two hours to hear Kaine talk? He and Hillary had NO chemistry whatsoever. Now,there was energy between her and Warren and her and Castro (although I'm not a fan of Castro as the choice).

I feel like this election is about who can get the base out. We have an advantage in that Trump has no fucking GOTV operation to speak of. We've already got a large group of people who are voting against Trump...but they're not voting FOR Hillary. I feel like we need to do something to act as an olive branch to that group of people. If Warren can excite a few people who weren't going to bother to vote to vote...then hell ya. Pick her. There is no one whatsoever who is going to go "Oh man, Kaine!? Sign me the hell up!

With Trump being a bombastic asshat, I feel like we need something on our side that revs up the energy a bit. Royalan and I would walk naked over burning coals to vote for Queen, but not everyone would. I don't really like the concept of enthusasim, because it's hard to quantify. BUT, something to get people a bit more excited surely couldn't hurt.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Why is Y2Kev arguing with himself

I'm so confused

 

[User 463088]

Why is Y2Kev arguing with himself

I'm so confused

Even though Mommy and Daddy love each other a lot, they still argue from time to time. It doesn't mean that they don't love us any less.

 

[DataStream]

If the country is ready for a female President then it's ready for an all woman ticket until I see polling that proves otherwise.

 

[Suikoguy]

If the country is ready for a female President then it's ready for an all woman ticket until I see polling that proves otherwise.

The only argument i've seen against Warren is she "Would do more good in the Senate".

But honestly, i'm not sold on that.

 

[User 463088]

The only argument i've seen against Warren is she "Would do more good in the Senate".

But honestly, i'm not sold on that.

The Senate is heavily based on seniority, isn't it? She has very little of that. Bernie's also going to be treated as heir apparent to the progressive wing, for whatever reason. If we take back the Senate, what will she be Chair of? I don't actually know. Would be interesting to see.

 

[pigeon]

The VP pick is like lunch. It doesn't fucking matter so stop talking about it and just choose something.

I think Clinton should just say that her VP will be a player to be named later

Spoiler

plus cash

.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Even though Mommy and Daddy love each other a lot, they still argue from time to time. It doesn't mean that they don't love us any less.

...

I thought they were the same person

I remember when Shinra wasn't a mod and he had the tag, I assumed it was a joke that it was Kev's alt.

 

[ampere]

The problem isn't citizens its Buckley v. Valeo. We need to divorce the idea money is equivalent to electoral speech and subject to strict scrutiny under the 1st amendment.

There needs to be some scepticism of restrictions but we've gone crazy.

Yeah that's true, if there were some ceiling established for individuals the Citizen's United decision wouldn't even matter anymore as corporations being "people" would still be subject to that limit.

I definitely think the whole Koch brothers situation is quite problematic, but since they give to so many different downticket campaigns, I'm not sure it'd be easy to enact legislation to prevent that behavior. Unless there were some "you cannot give more that $X to political campaigns per year" law. But maybe that's too unrealistic to expect to pass

The VP pick is like lunch. It doesn't fucking matter so stop talking about it and just choose something.

I think Clinton should just say that her VP will be a player to be named later

Spoiler

plus cash

.

Clearly you've never gotten something too spicy for lunch and paid the price later...

Lunch is srs

 

[shinra-bansho]

I mean, hypothetical, if you polled people and asked them if they're ready for an all female Senate, or an all female Supreme Court, or an all female Cabinet, would you expect more positive or negative responses?

I feel the same applies to the query that's already been referred to about whether people are ready for a woman President to begin with.

Or polling that says that three-quarters would vote for a gay or lesbian President?

Social desirability bias is a thing.

Maybe I'm being far to cynical. I don't know.

 

[Cesare Borgia]

Kaine or Ivanka.

 

[pigeon]

I think Clinton will probably end up picking a white dude for mostly the same reason Obama did, but I think she actually wants to pick Warren right now.

Also I think the VP guessing rules are unfair and my Kaine guess should be counted as "generic white dude" because I knew it would be SOME generic white dude. Who knew that specific white dude was going to have a bribery scandal?

 

[Fuchsdh]

I know Slayven was probably joking with that Colin Powell suggestion in the other OT, and he's definitely not someone they would pick anyhow... but fuck that guy for standing up in my high school and telling us Iraq was our problem now. Asshole.

 

[Holmes]

Keeping Kaine's old seat in November 2017 would be a lot harder than keeping Warren's seat in April 2017.

 

[TestOfTide]

I want it to be Warren not just because of the benefits, but so that I can jokingly float in my dad's face about it (he kept telling me that "Warren wouldn't want to give up the power of being a senator"). No, he's not crazy conservative.

 

[Tarkus]

Little brother's friend came over and we played some black ops 2 local multiplayer on Wii u. In the game's start menu cinematic there is a moment showing Reagan, my younger brother that is a trump supporter saw that and started chanting REAGAN REAGAN REAGAN at us. He also said that he was a pro at first person shooters and would dominate us. Five games or so later, (I won or tied nearly all the games, bragbragbrag) having come in 4th almost every time and struggling to get a single kill in some matches, he angrily denounced us as teaming faggots that always ganged up on him, and stormed out of the room 🍉

Black OPs 2 on Wii U? Sad

 

[User 463088]

Black OPs 2 on Wii U? Sad

How about NO.

Just had a 33-1 TDM on the Wii U, Thank you.

Spoiler

Also had a 35-6 where we lost by 1 because my team was a mess.

 

[Tarkus]

How about NO.

Just had a 33-1 TDM on the Wii U, Thank you.

Spoiler

Also had a 35-6 where we lost by 1 because my team was a mess.

You were playing with kids

 

[RustyNails]

People need to understand that not all democracies are the same, and not all of them are borne from the same factors that led rise to say a swiss democracy which went through hundreds of years of violence, bloodshed and civil strife. This is what I find hugely hypocritical with self proclaimed "secular liberals". Our own western civilization goes through hundreds of years of iterations of "Democracy" and thats okay, but we want other countries to skip all the resistance and embrace free democracy instantly. Completely disregarding the fact that we have kepy messing with their state of affairs for a long time by assisting coups when it suits us and failing to recognize legitimate democratically elected political parties when it suits us.

Islam/religion has not been a dominating problem to the people in Middle-east/Turkey that has caused a strife similar to the Church of England in 1500's. A democracy in Tunisia is not the same as the one in US. Islam still is part of history and people want it that way. What they want more is stability, good governance, good schools, jobs, and security. Erdogan has provided all these and more to Turkey, despite being an autocratic maniac in other regards. The people over there apart from the affluent citizens dont have a big opinion on the fact that he is clamping down on free press.

Okay, Gen. Pervez Musharraf was a pretty good ruler for a dictator in Pakistan despite questionable record on various things. But on the same thought, Gen. Zia ul Haq is the father of raficalization (the wahhabist kind) of Pakistan. We know what we get what democratically elected officials. People in Turkey know Erdogan has despotic tendencies but he kept winning elections, each by a bigger margin than last (except the 2015 one). Why do we want to mess with the mandate they're freely giving to their chosen ruler?

 

[Rebel Leader]

Meanwhile, at the Republican National Convention...

 

[GoldenEye 007]

Rebel Leader

.

 

[Valkrai]

Meanwhile, at the Republican National Convention...

Maybe they mean the color of the elevator for people to spot right? Right?

 

[Y2Kev]

Keeping Kaine's old seat in November 2017 would be a lot harder than keeping Warren's seat in April 2017.

This is actually true too. Maybe Dems can run Martha coakley again!!!!

 

[Y2Kev]

I think Clinton will probably end up picking a white dude for mostly the same reason Obama did, but I think she actually wants to pick Warren right now.

Also I think the VP guessing rules are unfair and my Kaine guess should be counted as "generic white dude" because I knew it would be SOME generic white dude. Who knew that specific white dude was going to have a bribery scandal?

I don't get it. Why cant she pick Warren if she wants to right now?

 

[Wilsongt]

H. A. Goodman
H. A. Goodman – ‏@HAGOODMANAUTHOR

Bernie, nobody loves you more, but PLEASE DO NOT GIVE DEAR LEADER our emails addresses. She doesn't deserve them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbqOSQnctZY …

Too late, Haha. Bernie already hacked that list.

Also, the Kimmy Jung Un name calling is completely childish