I would've offered him a beer and had a full fledged conversation with him, if he wanted to. And I'd tell him that although I disagree with his politics, I respect him, unlike Trump who I hate, and then I'd be like "You hate him too right? Just between me and you?" because I know he totally does hate him but I just wanna hear him say it.
-
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!
- Thread starter B-Dubs
- Start date
- Status
I would've offered him a beer and had a full fledged conversation with him, if he wanted to. And I'd tell him that although I disagree with his politics, I respect him, unlike Trump who I hate, and then I'd be like "You hate him too right? Just between me and you?" because I know he totally does hate him but I just wanna hear him say it.
ShironRedshift
Member
An important thing to note is that he wasn't even just any random Trump surrogate, but a campaign staffer who's responsible for Trump's minority outreach program. It wasn't someone completely random doing that, but someone who's literal job is to try and reach out to minority voters.
Of course, Lemon and the rest of the panel completely roasted him and gave him absolutely no room or victories on anything, which was absolutely glorious to see and made it entirely worth it for me to see him get shut down like that, but when you have your staffers who are supposed to be in charge of reaching out to minorities not only saying that Trump doesn't need to explicitly call out and entirely reject these people from his events and make it clear that he finds that type of behavior unacceptable, not only is he not willing to admit that, but trying to insinuate that direct video evidence of such behavior that clearly shows it happening was fabricated and isn't real.... yeah, those poll numbers among African-Americans/Hispanics/etc aren't going to be changing any time soon when that's the type of people you have in charge of that.
Fenderputty
Banned
Link
The Autumn Wind
I admitted as much in my post before that one. Doesn't mean I don't think a whole lot less of them too.
Lmao Boston is cool.
Yeah, any politician is cool with me...except for the extremists like Trump, Rick Scott, etc.
I would hope so but nope. It's so cringe inducing.
That's so cool! I happen to travel there a lot by the aforementioned intersection.
Yeah, it really does, doesn't it. Until one remembers the Schiavo stuff...
Indeed. I too would absolutely love to talk to the saner conservatives! I'm sure I'd learn a lot from listening to their own perspectives and ideologies, given how they governed and made decisions in their positions. It would be fascinating.
Again, the Trumps and bigger crazies can get the hell out of here.
I had to watch a pair of kids for a while back, and one of them was a religious 11 year old that hated gays and considered himself a conservative. Inside my head I was like shit what do I do with this kid? In the end, I only told him he wasn't going to be a conservative for long. (Asian kid in NYC, I'd like to see him try.)
Dominican Power
Member
Republic Party is so done for.
Excuse me while I alert Politico that the Clinton campaign is actively organising a protest in Seattle.
#BothSideAreTheSame
It's not over yet, but it's looking good for now. Our goal needs to be making every swing Senate race flip dem and take back the House.
Krauthammer has always been against Trump, but ouch
http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...star-family-can-trump-cross-fitness-threshold
http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...star-family-can-trump-cross-fitness-threshold
Yup. The man may rise a bit periodically, but he will only bring himself back down again anyway.
Yup
That right there should scare the shit out of every American and the World. The reason why he likes Russia and wants to do a solid for Russia is because Putin is nice to Trump.
Strategy and national interests? Who the fuck needs that!
titiklabingapat
Member
How do the Olympics usually affect the polling, historically speaking? I know the conventions usually happen after the Olympics but do people usually answer the same, the numbers get closer, etc during the event?
The Olympics are usually just a pause button if I remember correctly. Like a time-out the campaigns can use to get their heads on straight and come up with a game plan.
Maybe they'll give everyone a chance to forget how garbage Trump has been the last week or so, if he can manage to shut the fuck up long enough for it to happen.
I'll take any Clinton victory/Trump defeat and be thankful for it, but like......holy shit how profoundly disappointing will it be if/when the map this year ends up looking just like 2012's map? Like at that point, if things are baked in to that degree regardless of ANYTHING the candidate does/says/represents, why even bother with the whole drawn out campaign process
I want 400+ evs
I want 400+ evs
Beer Monkey
Member
Mark my words, if some idiot celebrity bigot like Chuck Norris or Ted Nugent runs in 2020 or 2024, they will win the Republican nomination.
Trump has revealed the future. The Republican establishment has revealed their future, which is the base of their party.
Trump has revealed the future. The Republican establishment has revealed their future, which is the base of their party.
Jeff Zucker
President of CNN
Jeff Zucker Concedes CNN Has Been A Little Too Liberal
Jeff Zucker praises Corey Lewandowski, slams Vice and BuzzFeed
Zucker is just terrible. It's not important to have a voice that supports the white nationalist fascist candidate, regardless of which party they represent.
whyamihere
Banned
Jeff Zucker ruined NBC, now he's going to ruin CNN.
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
Yeah. Win is priority number one, but we need a blowout. Not something Republicans can look at and say "we can tweak this..."
VendettaRed07
Member
Wonder how many write-ins Harambe is going to get
Sean Hannity has been having a tantrum on twitter tonight, especially against Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal.
For an idea of Stephens' work, here's one of his most recent columns:
My favorite Hannity tweet, directed at Stephens:
His show on November 9th is going to be must-see TV.
For an idea of Stephens' work, here's one of his most recent columns:
My favorite Hannity tweet, directed at Stephens:
His show on November 9th is going to be must-see TV.
RastaMentality
Banned
Put Hannity on a panel election night. I'll watch Fox the entire night just for it.
After reading that Krauthammer article, i clicked on his bio...
I mean come on he's got to recognize the symptoms he is describing here. I doubt his 32% of fascist diehards will care but this candidate is unfit for this office, vote
Yea that's bullshit. Should have let Fox get Cory L. He's a fascist pig on air even
One of my biggest Election Night 2012 disappointments was that he and O'Reilly weren't on-air that night. But the night after was pretty sweet.
nationally they might be losing power but locally they are as powerful as ever. people keep rewarding them for obstructing democrats so why would they stop.
VendettaRed07
Member
Hope he thought about a solid VP choice
I'm pulling for Zoboomafoo
Nah. Harambe / Cecil the Lion is the winning ticket.
Amibguous Cad
Member
It's not because it's baked in - it's because Clinton is a really weak candidate. A Fox News poll has Johnson doing better among independents than her (something like 35 Trump 23 Johnson 22 Clinton). She's got the worst unfavorables of any candidate in the modern era (read: post Eisenhower), with the exception of her opponent this general election. Third parties are polling way better than they usually do because the main parties have both nominated historically weak candidates. Most of it is undeserved but a lot of the country, including moderates, independents, and nevertrump republicans hate Clinton.
Basically the Republicans nominated Goldwater and the Democrats nominated Mondale. And Mondale does win that election, but there's no doubt that the dem's shortsightedness got bailed out by the republicans being frankly suicidal.
You'd see those 400+ EVs if O'Malley had gotten the nod.
Enter the Dragon Punch
Banned
here's something good from Reddit: "Let's just purely focus on their views"
uses multiple sources, but mostly isidewith
kinda cool. i had no idea trump was actually against net neutrality
uses multiple sources, but mostly isidewith
kinda cool. i had no idea trump was actually against net neutrality
AntraxSuicide
Banned
Maybe? You do pay taxes on grants as income.
Edit:
I disagree entirely. Like, I've had this conversation before so I'm not inclined to do it again, but there really are just that many racists and authoritarians who cheer for "law and order" and the death of "political correctness."
Obama himself would not have much better support; 40% of the country would vote Republican if they nominated a corpse (and to be fair, if the Dems run Kanye in 2024, he'd do just as well at a minimum).
VendettaRed07
Member
He's too boring. We already have Harambe, Cecil doesn't add anything to the ticket or bring anyone in that Harambe himself wouldn't already attract.
Zoboomafoo will bring so much more energy
He has experience being under water, unlike Cecil
And just like America's dad should, he can't help himself from playing the harmonica
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
I had no idea Stein wants to withdraw from NATO, she grows more crazy every time I learn something about her!
LO-FUCKING-L
The man is hot and all, but O'Malley would have gotten barely any black support. He's pretty loathed.
Sorry Adam
Tranqueris
Banned
So Trump is going to Wisconsin today and none of the Wisconsin GOP people including Ryan are going to be at his rally. I think he had a relatively less insane day today, well actually he did talk about a scandalous Iran tape that no one else could find because it actually turned out to be tv news b roll, but that being said I really don't see his self control lasting longer than a day, so that rally should be interesting.
VendettaRed07
Member
Amibguous Cad
Member
Right, 40% of the vote. The same percentage Mondale got in his 525-13 landslide defeat against Reagan.
I'm really hoping the democrats exit their echo chamber at some point, because if they don't they're going to nominate themselves off a cliff at some point. Whitewater and the rest of the scandals were bullshit but they irrevocably damaged Clinton as a candidate, and not just with Republican diehards. It was obvious when this cycle started that she was nearly unelectable, and in a normal campaign season would have meant an easy victory for Jeb or Rubio. As it stands they've merely accepted a small probability of an October surprise handing the White House to Trump.
shinra-bansho
Member
Lol Jeb. Ok. Now I know you're joking.
Nearly unelectable?
She's a two-time First Lady, a twice-elected NY senator, and a Secretary of State. She had a 66% approval rating when she served in the State Department. Hint, that's pretty damn high.
Hillary Clinton does come with baggage, but she's one of the most battle tested and CERTAINLY the most qualified candidate the Democrats could have put up in 2016, and there isn't a single candidate the Republicans put up this year that could have taken her. Her campaign was prepared for all of them.
The mud Hillary is being dragged through now would have been waiting for any other Democratic candidate. Thank GOD we had Hillary, a candidate who's been vetted by this very Republican machine for the last 20 years.
Beer Monkey
Member
Bill Clinton got 43% of the popular vote in 1992 and a 370 electoral vote landslide.
Hillary is going to get WAY more than 43% of the popular vote in the general. She'll get an outright majority.
Stop trolling. Hillary is a very good candidate.
Voysa Reezun
Banned
I just don't agree with this response. If you want to observe a party that nominated itself off a cliff because of being stuck in an echo chamber, look at the 2016 GOP. Hillary Clinton is in no way an example of "nominating...off a cliff." Forty percent of the country is inclined to see anyone running with a (D) next to his or her name as though s/he were the embodiment of Al-Qaeda itself.
Clinton is a pretty unpopular nominee, to be sure, though a lot of that also comes from unnecessary damage inside her own party after a guy who just now decided to join the party attacked from the left while trying to get the party to...nominate itself off a cliff by choosing him.
It's pretty clear that the Democrats did exactly what they needed to do, which is not nominate the type of leftist that would sink them in the general. Nominating McGovern or Mondale would be nominating oneself off a cliff; this is just nominating a left-center candidate who is damaged by the right ginning up scandals combined with standard misogyny - and she'd still be competitive with Jeb! or Marco right now simply because she's got a lot of positives to her campaign (popular sitting president, decent economy, more baked in electoral votes).
Are you living in the same reality as the rest of us? Since when do democrats live in an echo chamber when it comes to presidential primaries? Democrats fight it out, always have. It's the nature of the democratic party to fight to the end when it comes to intra-party presidential politics. Republicans fall in line, they live in an echo chamber strongly divorced from reality and the last 2 presidential elections have shown this.
Amibguous Cad
Member
That was with Perot winning 15% of the vote. No one was going to win an outright majority with such a strong third party candidate.
Right. Hillary Clinton is the Ryan Leaf of political candidates. On paper, they've got all the tools to succeed and you can understand why someone used a number one draft pick on them. Put them on the field and it's another question.
And I can't say that I disagree with most of this, either. It's just that people are ignoring how big the downsides you're listing are. Center-left establishment picks with her kind of experience aren't supposed to be as weak as she is. On the merits, she should be close to a slam dunk. Obama was right: she's the most qualified candidate to run for president in recent memory, certainly within my lifetime.
But you say it is "just" nominating a center-left candidate with trumped up scandals dogging her and standard misogyny. But the numbers say there's nothing "just" about it. Those liabilities are evidently hurting her much more than anyone is willing to give it credit for, largely because the misogyny is hateful and the scandals are stupid. That's what I mean by the echo chamber. But the job of the party is to nominate a candidate that will win elections, and they haven't done that this cycle. To review:
-Trump's lack of institutional support, terrible favorability ratings, and extreme views unacceptable to a large portion of the American people would predict a landslide victory for the Democrats. While the lead is comfortable as of today, we're not looking at a 1984 electoral map.
-An extremist and self-identified socialist led her in a head-to-head matchup against the presumptive nominee of the other party by comfortable margins throughout most of the primaries. Yes, he would have been sunk once the attack campaigns kicked in, but the country was at least well apprised of Sanders' leftism and socialism, and they still preferred him. Sanders was self-evidently unelectable; the fact that he led at any point reveals some pretty fundamental weaknesses in Clinton as a candidate.
-Both the short-fingered vulgarian and the free market fundamentalist with a rounding error chance of winning the election do better than her among independents (that was as of Jun 9, and only one poll, but again, that this was true at any time is striking).
-Lastly, she has the worst favorability ratings of any major party candidate in modern history, including Mondale, Dukakis, and Goldwater. She is within three points of Trump.
Any one of these could be dismissed. But taken together? We can either accept that independents have become more racist, more libertarian, and more socialist simultaneously, that Johnson, Trump, and Sanders have all magically moved into the American mainstream seemingly overnight.
Or we can accept that a good portion of the country, and not only Republicans, irrationally loathes Clinton.
shinra-bansho
Member
Independents are just ashamed Republicans.
It is pretty silly to say "sure, Hillary is looking like she'll win normally red states and start converting lifelong GOP voters to Democrats, but she's not going to win 49 states, so she must suck!" You're picking one of the most historically lopsided electoral outcomes to compare against.
Sanders never led Clinton head to head. Beating another candidate by more than your opponent beats that candidate is obviously not a good metric. There are too many other variables and, since they will never be held accountable for the claim, it's easy to say "I'll vote for Sanders but I'll never vote for Clinton!" Since we know that the vast majority of Sanders supporters are now Clinton supporters it's very safe to say this polling result was meaningless.
Independents aren't real. They are mostly conservatives. I am not sure why people keep bringing them up as though this hasn't been known since it started happening a lot in 2010.
She did. They're actually way better now. People just had to get to know her!
There's also a third option, which is that, once again, you have created a model of the American political system which doesn't match reality.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked