• 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 |OT9| The Wrath of Khan!

Status
Not open for further replies.
U

User 463088

Banned
Trump you idiot. You ask people to pray for you, you don't then say "..because I pray for you!"

THATS NOT HOW PRAYER WORKS

"Once I get in, I will do my thing very well."

And he thinks the only way he's getting to heaven is if he becomes President.

DID HE JUST SAY GOD'S FANTASTIC?
 
C

campfireweekend

Member
kirblar said:
It's due to Sanders making it an issue in the primary.

Minimum Wage is another one.
Click to expand...
Ah, yeah. Most left leaning economists say you can raise it to maybe 12 and have few disemployment effects, but really why do that at all when you can just expand EITC.

I also don't like how some on the left consider EITC corporate welfare. Still way better than the economic ideas found on the right, tho.
 
G

Gotchaye

Member
campfireweekend said:
Ah, yeah. Most left leaning economists say you can raise it to maybe 12 and have few disemployment effects, but really why do that at all when you can just expand EITC.

I also don't like how some on the left consider EITC corporate welfare. Still way better than the economic ideas found on the right, tho.
Click to expand...

Yes, some people are really hostile to anything that isn't companies having to pay a living wage to all employees out of their own profits. There's a lot of "if you can't afford to pay your workers a living wage then you're a bad company and should go under" sentiment.
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
Plinko said:
The landline/mobile statistics there seem really off. I would think they'd try for a more realistic spread, but I guess the way they dealt with the rest of the poll kind of cancels that out.
Click to expand...

They're not a very good pollster.

QPac Senate:

https://www.qu.edu/news-and-events/...ing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2372

Florida - Republican incumbent Sen. Marco Rubio with 48 percent and U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy, the Democrat, at 45 percent, too close to call. Rubio tops another Democrat, U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson, 49 - 43 percent;

Ohio - Portman leads Strickland 49 - 40 percent;

Pennsylvania - Democratic challenger Katie McGinty at 47 percent, with Republican incumbent Sen. Pat Toomey at 44 percent, too close to call.
Click to expand...
 
U

User 463088

Banned
Michael McFaul
‏@McFaul
BTW, Trumps line that Obama founded ISIS echoes exactly a myth propagated by Russian state-controlled media and bloggers.

McFaul is a former US Ambassador to Russia.
 
C

campfireweekend

Member
Gotchaye said:
Yes, some people are really hostile to anything that isn't companies having to pay a living wage to all employees out of their own profits. There's a lot of "if you can't afford to pay your workers a living wage then you're a bad company and should go under" sentiment.
Click to expand...
Wait, are you taking a shot at what I'm saying, or am I reading hostility that isn't there?

Apologies if it's the latter.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
TPP is fine, but I find the argument of expanding power in Asia to get an advantage over China in soft power to be extremely unconvincing. We should probably be trying to be friends with China instead of fighting diplomatic battles.
 
S

Sianos

Member
Kristoffer said:
He's obviously talking about religious belief and participation. The religious right consistently decry an increasingly faithless society.

Mocking imprecisions in speech even when the meaning is eminently clear is actually veiled classism.
Click to expand...

So, what you're saying is that when Trump speaks, his meaning is eminently clear and that it is disingenuous to pretend to ignore his implications and to play semantic games to twist around a statement with clear implications by abusing his poor handling of the English language to obfuscate the clumsily obvious true meaning?

I like your idea so much, I think we should apply it to everything he has to say and has said.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I mentioned it in the other thread, but the fact that Priebus is threatening Trump to withdraw money is bizarre. If they pull that off, all they do is make him unhinged. He'll damage the party even worse.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
Let's just take a moment to remember that the only people that ever came close to challenging Trump in the primary were Ben Carson and Ted Cruz.

That is a diseased primary base.
 
G

Gotchaye

Member
campfireweekend said:
Wait, are you taking a shot at what I'm saying, or am I reading hostility that isn't there?

Apologies if it's the latter.
Click to expand...

The latter. People who I disagree with are strongly opposed to wage subsidies on the grounds that this is actually subsidizing companies for refusing to pay decent wages, and commonly express the opinion that it is better for companies that would go under if they had to pay everyone a living wage to go ahead and do it and decrease the surplus population.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
TPP is fine, but I find the argument of expanding power in Asia to get an advantage over China in soft power to be extremely unconvincing. We should probably be trying to be friends with China instead of fighting diplomatic battles.
Click to expand...

That'd be the best case scenario, but they aren't exactly playing by the rules everyone else is right now. We've got to play the hand we've been dealt, not the one we wish we had.
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
Okay. I'm making this call now.

Feingold
Duckworth
Bayh
Hassan
McGinty
Cortez Masto
Ross
Murphy

...will win.

Kirkpatrick
Strickland
Kander

...will lose. From higher % of win to lowest.
 
S

Spoiled Milk

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
TPP is fine, but I find the argument of expanding power in Asia to get an advantage over China in soft power to be extremely unconvincing. We should probably be trying to be friends with China instead of fighting diplomatic battles.
Click to expand...
No. It's either us, or them. This is a battle for hegemony.

Sianos said:
So, what you're saying is that when Trump speaks, his meaning is eminently clear and that it is disingenuous to pretend to ignore his implications and to play semantic games to twist around a statement with clear implications by abusing his poor handling of the English language to obfuscate the clumsily obvious true meaning?

I like your idea so much, I think we should apply it to everything he has to say and has said.
Click to expand...
Straight lol'd.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Let's just take a moment to remember that the only people that ever came close to challenging Trump in the primary were Ben Carson and Ted Cruz.

That is a diseased primary base.
Click to expand...

The funny thing is Pat Robertson of all people warned the GOP over this years ago. Said everybody has to be so crazy to make it through their primary that they have almost no shot at the presidency.
 
C

campfireweekend

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
TPP is fine, but I find the argument of expanding power in Asia to get an advantage over China in soft power to be extremely unconvincing. We should probably be trying to be friends with China instead of fighting diplomatic battles.
Click to expand...
It's kinda reductive to say TPP's main goal is to reduce the soft power of China.

Really there are feelers being sent out on both sides about China possibly joining TPP some day down the road. It's just that the agreement is written in such a way that if enough people in china's sphere of influence join TPP, it will force China to join as well, and the act of joining the partnership, due to the regulations therein, will make us more competitive with China, and have allowed us to have set the rules, rather than had we just waited for China to set the rules, or some bilateral asia-pacific agreement that would be more generous towards china's industries.

Edit: if we don't pass TPP, they'll pass RCEP, and we'll probably have to join it someday to stay competitive, but they'll have written the rules for Asia Pacific trade.
 
N

nature boy

Member
Plinko said:
The landline/mobile statistics there seem really off. I would think they'd try for a more realistic spread, but I guess the way they dealt with the rest of the poll kind of cancels that out.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's a questionable poll, but either way it shows FL is competitive (although I wonder if Latinos are under sampled).
 
K

kirblar

Member
Gotchaye said:
The latter. People who I disagree with are strongly opposed to wage subsidies on the grounds that this is actually subsidizing companies for refusing to pay decent wages, and commonly express the opinion that it is better for companies that would go under if they had to pay everyone a living wage to go ahead and do it and decrease the surplus population.
Click to expand...
The instant you include kids/spouses, the "Living wage" concept implodes in on itself.
 
C

campfireweekend

Member
Gotchaye said:
The latter. People who I disagree with are strongly opposed to wage subsidies on the grounds that this is actually subsidizing companies for refusing to pay decent wages, and commonly express the opinion that it is better for companies that would go under if they had to pay everyone a living wage to go ahead and do it and decrease the surplus population.
Click to expand...
Gotcha. There is some evidence that companies set wages that are below the natural competitive levels, due to monopsony powers (McDonald's is an example), and minimum wages are a good way to force companies to at at least bring wages to their natural levels, but those natural wages are not nearly living wages, so wage subsidies are a very useful policy lever.
 
A

Abinash117

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
TPP is fine, but I find the argument of expanding power in Asia to get an advantage over China in soft power to be extremely unconvincing. We should probably be trying to be friends with China instead of fighting diplomatic battles.
Click to expand...

That is assuming we hadn't tried already. It also is assuming that the 'friendship' will be in any good faith. Lastly, it is also assuming the China wants to be friends to begin with. China wants to have greater influence in Asia, many Asian countries don't want that and the US wants more influence in Asia as well. The type of influence in Asia is not something China would probably want, and so they will push back. It is not the matter of being friends because the two countries have different ideas on what type of influence they want to enforce and how exactly they do it.
 
G

GusBus

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
I think every minority group in America other than Orthodox Jews now hates the GOP or at least Trump, it's impressive honestly.
Click to expand...

Even in that community (I have strong family ties) there are many who question his candidacy.

Worth noting is that Hillary has historically polled well within Hasidic communities (Ultra-Orthodox) since they benefit heavily from social welfare programs.
 
T

thehypocrite

Member
whyamihere said:
Hillary went in on TPP today. It's (probably) dead, JIm.
Click to expand...
I'm conflicted about trade. I feel that the benefits for a developed country are overstated and concentrated a the top and the negatives understated and more devastating than projected, which makes mitigating initiatives insufficient in reality.

I also think that because of tax/salaries system differences, the benefit of trade agreements aren't as good as advertised for the partnering countries due to their political structures and institutions.

I guess I can reduce my point to the fact that unless a new redistribution paradigm goes in hand with these trade agreements that can allow everyone that's impacted by them have a good life standard they should be put on hold.

Now, I do concede that there could be reasons beyond the economics that make trade agreements desirable for nations, like participation Vs exclusion, possibility (in USA more of an inevitability) of dictating terms, fencing certain international actors to limit their hegemony and control in certain regions, etc. This is maybe the realpolitik part with which I struggle a bit to truly understand, (maybe moral qualms?). These reasons could justify trade agreements because of their long term value, but a much harder idea to present and sell to the general public.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
whyamihere said:
Hillary went in on TPP today. It's (probably) dead, JIm.
Click to expand...
Obviously she's flip-flopped before, but generally in the direction she was already heading (attn: fringe liberals, going from "civil unions and no constitutional ban on marriage" to "yeah it should be legal" is not the reversal of an opportunistic politician, it is a natural progression and the same road America took) with the exception of the Iraqi War (which she already had reservations about, if Bernie gets away with voting for the crime bill because he made a speech about not liking it Hillary should too), but I can't see her making a full flop on this after explicitly campaigning against it.

If Obama gets it through the lame duck I can't imagine she'd do much to reverse it though.

whyamihere said:
Okay. I'm making this call now.

Feingold
Duckworth
Bayh
Hassan
McGinty
Cortez Masto
Ross
Murphy

...will win.

Kirkpatrick
Strickland
Kander

...will lose. From higher % of win to lowest.
Click to expand...
I can get behind this, although I certainly hope we can snag those last three as well.

More importantly though, where's Patty Judge
 
A

AndyD

aka andydumi
Abinash117 said:
That is assuming we hadn't tried already. It also is assuming that the 'friendship' will be in any good faith. Lastly, it is also assuming the China wants to be friends to begin with. China wants to have greater influence in Asia, many Asian countries don't want that and the US wants more influence in Asia as well. The type of influence in Asia is not something China would probably want, and so they will push back. It is not the matter of being friends because the two countries have different ideas on what type of influence they want to enforce and how exactly they do it.
Click to expand...

I will be honest I am not terribly familiar with Asian politics and economy. Would those countries prefer China or the US in terms of influence and power in the region? Naturally I assume they want neither but that's not realistic with two superpowers pushing in.
 
S

Sianos

Member
Kristoffer said:
Straight lol'd.
Click to expand...

It's so funny for me watching Trump surrogates out in the media have to simultaneously defend both the notions that "he plainly says what we're all thinking like it is!" and "he is a master of multi-layered advanced irony, how could you take what he says at face value?!"

They don't realize that their defense of one undermines the other! I want to see more attacks against his surrogates along the lines of that one tweet:

Trump voter: "Trump says exactly what he means"
Trump: "Someone shoot my opponent"
Trump voter: "He didn't mean that"

https://twitter.com/LindaStern3/status/763180210757963776
 
C

campfireweekend

Member
AndyD said:
I will be honest I am not terribly familiar with Asian politics and economy. Would those countries prefer China or the US in terms of influence and power in the region? Naturally I assume they want neither but that's not realistic with two superpowers pushing in.
Click to expand...
Even "communist" countries (read Vietnam) in the region would prefer US hegemony.
 
K

kirblar

Member
thehypocrite said:
I'm conflicted about trade. I feel that the benefits for a developed country are overstated and concentrated a the top and the negatives understated and more devastating than projected, which makes mitigating initiatives insufficient in reality.

I also think that because of tax/salaries system differences, the benefit of trade agreements aren't as good as advertised for the partnering countries due to their political structures and institutions.

I guess I can reduce my point to the fact that unless a new redistribution paradigm goes in hand with these trade agreements that can allow everyone that's impacted by them have a good life standard they should be put on hold.

Now, I do concede that there could be reasons beyond the economics that make trade agreements desirable for nations, like participation Vs exclusion, possibility (in USA more of an inevitability) of dictating terms, fencing certain international actors to limit their hegemony and control in certain regions, etc. This is maybe the realpolitik part with which I struggle a bit to truly understand, (maybe moral qualms?). These reasons could justify trade agreements because of their long term value, but a much harder idea to present and sell to the general public.
Click to expand...
The agreements are designed to press these countries forward on a number of issues. From the wiki @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership#United_States

Good governance

According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, signatories are required to join the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC); criminalize bribery of public officials; have in place a code of conduct for public officials; take measures to decrease conflicts of interest; effectively enforce anti-corruption laws and regulations; and involve private organizations in the fight against corruption.[63]
Human rights

According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the TPP prohibits exploitative child labor and forced labor; ensures the right to collective bargaining; and prohibits employment discrimination.[64] The USTR asserts that "research by the International Labor Organization and the World Trade Organization finds that combining expanded trade opportunities with strong protections for workers can help workers move from informal-sector jobs into formal work in wage-paying, regulated export industries which offer a minimum wage, benefits, and safety programs".[64] The USTR asserts that "research also shows that trade improves human rights conditions by fostering pluralistic institutions and increasing open exchanges of information."[64]

PolitiFact rates President Obama's claim that due to the Trans-Pacific Partnership "we've got a country like Malaysia taking really serious efforts to crack down on human trafficking" as "mostly true".[65] PolitiFact notes that Malaysia began to comply with the TPP in June 2015, amending its law to improve the treatment of trafficking victims.[65] Among the changes, Malaysia gave victims better access to government shelters, transitional housing and more victim-friendly restitution procedures.[65] Malaysia has also taken steps to stop human trafficking within the construction industry.[65]
Click to expand...
This stuff is good- it's providing incentives for these countries to shape up and modernize.
If Obama gets it through the lame duck I can't imagine she'd do much to reverse it though.
Click to expand...
Exactly, her "opposition" won't mean much once it's in place.
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
Aaron Strife said:
Obviously she's flip-flopped before, but generally in the direction she was already heading (attn: fringe liberals, going from "civil unions and no constitutional ban on marriage" to "yeah it should be legal" is not the reversal of an opportunistic politician, it is a natural progression and the same road America took) with the exception of the Iraqi War (which she already had reservations about, if Bernie gets away with voting for the crime bill because he made a speech about not liking it Hillary should too), but I can't see her making a full flop on this after explicitly campaigning against it.

If Obama gets it through the lame duck I can't imagine she'd do much to reverse it though.


I can get behind this, although I certainly hope we can snag those last three as well.

More importantly though, where's Patty Judge
Click to expand...

Judge will do worse than Kander.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5
235
42K
OverHeat 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
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
Top Bottom