• 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 2017 |OT2| Well, maybe McMaster isn't a traitor.

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

neurosisxeno

Member
benjipwns said:
iSideWith's French Presidential poll is available in English if anyone wants to take it:
Code: 
Candidates you side with...
48%	UNSUBMISSIVE FRANCE - Jean-Luc Mélenchon
48%	SOCIALIST PARTY - Benoît Hamon
44%	EN MARCHE! - Emmanuel Macron
41%	THE GREENS - Yannick Jadot
33%	THE REPUBLICANS - François Fillon
28%	NATIONAL FRONT - Marine Le Pen
21%	FRANCE ARISE - Nicolas Dupont-Aignan
Click to expand...

Mine was surprisingly similar;

66% Melenchon
64% Jadot
64% Hamon
64% Macron
61% Poutou
52% Arthaud
46% Dupont-Aignan
43% Fillon
33% La Pen
Click to expand...
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
Sanders decided to chime in on the Berkeley protests against Coulter

“I don’t like this. I don’t like it,” Sanders told The Huffington Post after speaking at a rally for Omaha mayoral candidate Heath Mello on Thursday night. “Obviously Ann Coulter’s outrageous ― to my mind, off the wall. But you know, people have a right to give their two cents-worth, give a speech, without fear of violence and intimidation.”

“To me, it’s a sign of intellectual weakness,” he said. “If you can’t ask Ann Coulter in a polite way questions which expose the weakness of her arguments, if all you can do is boo, or shut her down, or prevent her from coming, what does that tell the world?”

“What are you afraid of ― her ideas? Ask her the hard questions,” he concluded. “Confront her intellectually. Booing people down, or intimidating people, or shutting down events, I don’t think that that works in any way.”
Click to expand...

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58fb7006e4b00fa7de14bc3d?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

Funny I don't remember language even half this strong back when his supporters went nuts in Nevada
 
T

Tarydax

Banned
excelsiorlef said:
Sanders decided to chime in on the Berkeley protests against Coulter



http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58fb7006e4b00fa7de14bc3d?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

Funny I don't remember language even half this strong back when his supporters went nuts in Nevada
Click to expand...

Of. Fucking. Course.

God, fuck Bernie Sanders. The man who's incapable of learning about basic shit, even about his favorite issue, is the last person who gets to complain about intellectual weakness. This, from the guy who couldn't dedicate more than a few lines to condemning the behavior of his supporters? He can fuck right off.

It still kills me how he just "wanted to be polite" to Trump and "would be delighted" to have worked with him while saying Obama was weak and should be primaried. I'm convinced that him gaining influence among Dems was one of the worst things that could have happened to the Democratic Party. Stupid statements like this from him just cement my belief that he wouldn't hesitate to throw women and minorities under the bus if he were given the opportunity.
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
For comparison this is statement on the Nevada craziness

“It is imperative that the Democratic leadership, both nationally and in the states, understand that the political world is changing and that millions of Americans are outraged at establishment politics and establishment economics. The people of this country want a government which represents all of us, not just the 1 percent, super PACs and wealthy campaign contributors.

“The Democratic Party has a choice. It can open its doors and welcome into the party people who are prepared to fight for real economic and social change – people who are willing to take on Wall Street, corporate greed and a fossil fuel industry which is destroying this planet. Or the party can choose to maintain its status quo structure, remain dependent on big-money campaign contributions and be a party with limited participation and limited energy.

“Within the last few days there have been a number of criticisms made against my campaign organization. Party leaders in Nevada, for example, claim that the Sanders campaign has a ‘penchant for violence.’ That is nonsense. Our campaign has held giant rallies all across this country, including in high-crime areas, and there have been zero reports of violence. Our campaign of course believes in non-violent change and it goes without saying that I condemn any and all forms of violence, including the personal harassment of individuals. But, when we speak of violence, I should add here that months ago, during the Nevada campaign, shots were fired into my campaign office in Nevada and apartment housing complex my campaign staff lived in was broken into and ransacked.

“If the Democratic Party is to be successful in November, it is imperative that all state parties treat our campaign supporters with fairness and the respect that they have earned. I am happy to say that has been the case at state conventions in Maine, Alaska, Colorado and Hawaii where good discussions were held and democratic decisions were reached. Unfortunately, that was not the case at the Nevada convention. At that convention the Democratic leadership used its power to prevent a fair and transparent process from taking place. Among other things:

The chair of the convention announced that the convention rules passed on voice vote, when the vote was a clear no-vote. At the very least, the Chair should have allowed for a headcount.
The chair allowed its Credentials Committee to en mass rule that 64 delegates were ineligible without offering an opportunity for 58 of them to be heard. That decision enabled the Clinton campaign to end up with a 30-vote majority.
The chair refused to acknowledge any motions made from the floor or allow votes on them.
The chair refused to accept any petitions for amendments to the rules that were properly submitted.
“These are on top of failures at the precinct and county conventions including trying to depose and then threaten with arrest the Clark County convention credentials chair because she was operating too fairly.”
Click to expand...

https://berniesanders.com/press-release/statement-nevada/
 
A

Abinash117

Member
faisal233 said:
Does anyone doubt that the far left and far right are not being financed by the same people? They sure seem to have a strong affinity for candidates aligned with a certain foreign power.
Click to expand...

Many are doesn't everyone is. I really doubt anyone is paying that guy to say what he says.

I don't really understand their mind, but I think it has something to do with being more opposed to the establishment than the opposing political ideology. Plus, many left wing people or anybody that is considered fringe wants to be mainstream. Establishment Democrats/liberals are in their way.

I wonder if there is some kind of article or study about. It is a phenomenon that you see some people on that left are sympathetic to anti-establishment right wing people who tend to be very nationalistic.
 
S

SpaceCadetKeon

Banned
65% Mélenchon
65% Hamon
58% Macron
52% Jadot
37% Dupont-Aignan
32% Le Pen
32% Fillon

But I'm just an American who's never paid attention to French politics until this year, so what do I know?
 
O

Oriel

Member
My quiz results.

eyuRbRV.jpg


Not French but I am a big Macron fan.

excelsiorlef said:
Sanders decided to chime in on the Berkeley protests against Coulter



http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58fb7006e4b00fa7de14bc3d?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

Funny I don't remember language even half this strong back when his supporters went nuts in Nevada
Click to expand...

Oh fuck right off Sanders, just fuck off. And the same to everyone else who defends the right to free speech of hate-mongering, far-right sociopaths. The right to free speech isn't, nor should it ever be absolute.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Oriel said:
And the same to everyone else who defends the right to free speech of hate-mongering, far-right sociopaths. The right to free speech isn't, nor should it ever be absolute.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is. The right to free speech being protected absolutely is beyond essential.

The right to free speech does not impose a duty on others to listen nor provide you with a platform. So I don't know why anyone would mention it in this case. Except that Sanders, like most Democrats and their fellow travelers, have internalized the fascist conception of the State.
 
D

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Bit of a wet blanket on the Senate Intel Committee's investigation...

The Daily Beast: Senate Trump-Russia Probe Has No Full-Time Staff, No Key Witnesses
More than three months after the committee announced that it had agreed on the scope of the investigation, the panel has not begun substantially investigating possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia, three individuals with ties to the committee told The Daily Beast.

The investigation does not have a single staffer dedicated to it full-time, and those staff members working on it part-time do not have significant investigative experience. The probe currently appears to be moving at a pace slower than prior Senate Intelligence Committee investigations, such as the CIA torture inquiry, which took years to accomplish.

No interviews have been conducted with key individuals suspected of being in the Trump-Russia orbit: not Michael Flynn, not Roger Stone, not Carter Page, not Paul Manafort, and not Jared Kushner, according to two sources familiar with the committee’s procedures.
Click to expand...
The committee previously announced that seven staffers had been assigned to review classified documents related to the Russia investigation. These are the majority and minority staff directors, joined by three Republican aides and two Democratic aides.

“We have devoted seven professional staff positions to this investigation. These are staffers who already had the clearance,” Burr said on March 29.

Of the seven staffers so far assigned to review classified documents related to the Russia investigation, none of them has prosecutorial or investigative experience, according to three sources with ties to the committee.

Most of them lack a background in Russia expertise. Not one of the seven is a lawyer.
Click to expand...
But of the seven staffers, none has been assigned full-time to the work of the Russia probe, according to four sources with ties to the committee. Every one of the seven staffers has other oversight responsibilities, and thus a dual-hatted role that prevents them from focusing singularly on the investigation.

Of the seven, two are the staff directors of the committee—an enormously demanding job even in the calmest of circumstances, which limits their involvement. One of the seven even attends law school part-time.
Click to expand...
The committee’s announcement that seven staffers were dedicated to this project was meant to instill faith in the inquiry. But left unsaid was that the list of seven staffers is also exclusionary: No one outside the list would have access to all the materials in the investigation. This is opposed to what occurred in the later stages of the CIA torture investigation, when all Senate Intelligence Committee staff with proper clearance had access to the materials.

In coming weeks, the committee will add two new staffers, one with decades of experience as a lawyer and expertise in intelligence law. But these two staffers will also have a dual-hatted role, and other responsibilities on the committee.
Click to expand...
That last bit is something, at least.
 
D

Diablos

Member
Bernie can you please stop pissing on the Democratic Party when it's already down

Swear to the political gods if he heads into 2018 throwing gas onto the fire
 
A

Abinash117

Member
excelsiorlef said:
Sanders decided to chime in on the Berkeley protests against Coulter



http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58fb7006e4b00fa7de14bc3d?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

Funny I don't remember language even half this strong back when his supporters went nuts in Nevada
Click to expand...

Doesn't seem too controversial. Pretty much saying don't threaten people with violence. I obviously support free speech and don't personally care if a racist speaks in a university nor do I care if students run them out of town.

However, I find the defense of freedom of speech using the argument of 'you should debate the other side' to be a terrible one. Ann Coulter isn't going there to debate; she is there to spread her worldview and that's it. Debate requires one side to seriously challenge the other person's belief, not throwing softball questions or agreeing to disagree.
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
Abinash117 said:
Doesn't seem too controversial. Pretty much saying don't threaten people with violence. I obviously support free speech and don't personally care if a racist speaks in a university nor do I care if students run them out of town.

However, I find the defense of freedom of speech using the argument of 'you should debate the other side' to be a terrible one. Ann Coulter isn't going there to debate; she is there to spread her worldview and that's it. Debate requires one side to seriously challenge the other person's belief, not throwing softball questions or agreeing to disagree.
Click to expand...

Dude he also says don't boo or shout or basically protest...

Compare that statement compared to his one on the Nevada fiasco.
 
T

Tarydax

Banned
Diablos said:
Bernie can you please stop pissing on the Democratic Party when it's already down

Swear to the political gods if he heads into 2018 throwing gas onto the fire
Click to expand...

I don't think he's capable of not pissing on the Democratic Party. It's why Republicans like him at all. He's such an awful surrogate that he constantly hits his allies with friendly fire.

Lately, I find myself thinking that Hillary should have taken the gloves off when it became clear what Bernie's game was. Or get O'Malley do it and pull a Chris Christie.
 
D

Diablos

Member
Tarydax said:
I don't think he's capable of not pissing on the Democratic Party. It's why Republicans like him at all. He's such an awful surrogate that he constantly hits his allies with friendly fire.

Lately, I find myself thinking that Hillary and O'Malley should have taken the gloves off when it became clear what Bernie's game was. It probably would have been a bad strategy, but fuck, he's just so infuriating.
Click to expand...
I think we're stuck with Bernie's antics till he's dead.

This is a serious problem.

Bernie would have gone third party if the Dems really told him to gtfo. It would have been bad. Of course we lost anyway...
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Poodlestrike said:
The basic recurring pattern amongst Bernie and Bernistas is that's they're infinitely more comfortable taking a shank to their fellow liberals than they are speaking out at all against the actual opposition.
Click to expand...
I think the logic is they accept that Republicans/conservatives will always be terrible, whereas they hold Democrats/liberals to higher standards.

I'm well aware why this is extremely problematic. For one liberals in general seem to really underestimate how many people will actually vote Republican, even when presented with the worst possible option. I know I'm guilty of this, but all the dreaming of Trump finishing anywhere under 45% of the popular vote was foolish. But they've convinced themselves that any other Democrat would have crushed him in a 70/30 landslide and it's all Hillary and the DNC's fault for being uniquely terrible, when in reality we probably won't see another LBJ/Reagan-style victory for a long time. The country is far too polarized for that to happen again.
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
excelsiorlef said:
Yep
Click to expand...

Honestly, if I had to diagnose it, I'd say it's down to target fixation? They know, initially, that there's no way the Republicans (or anybody right of center) will listen to them, so they focus on people closer to them to fight against and try to convince. Over time, they sorta... forget that that farther-right wing exists and all their energy and vitriol filters down to the near-left, so when the occasion to interact with those further afield comes up, they tend to handle it... poorly. Weirdly, the far-right doesn't have that problem. Not sure why.

Aaron Strife said:
I think the logic is they accept that Republicans/conservatives will always be terrible, whereas they hold Democrats/liberals to higher standards.

I'm well aware why this is extremely problematic. For one liberals in general seem to really underestimate how many people will actually vote Republican, even when presented with the worst possible option. I know I'm guilty of this, but all the dreaming of Trump finishing anywhere under 45% of the popular vote was foolish. But they've convinced themselves that any other Democrat would have crushed him in a 70/30 landslide and it's all Hillary and the DNC's fault for being uniquely terrible, when in reality we probably won't see another LBJ/Reagan-style victory for a long time. The country is far too polarized for that to happen again.
Click to expand...

Ayup.

Actually heard an interesting thing on The Weeds a couple of weeks ago... calling the issue "polarization" isn't really correct. Polarization implies that people are forming up along consistent lines, and on the right at least, that's not at all the case. Their party affiliation and views may be totally mismatched, but that affiliation is becoming more and more absolute regardless. It's strange.
 
A

Abinash117

Member
excelsiorlef said:
Dude he also says don't boo or shout or basically protest...

Compare that statement compared to his one on the Nevada fiasco.
Click to expand...

Basically he is a politician?

The comment he gave about Ann Coulter is the most politician-like answer he could give. Ideally, yeah no one should be threatened with violence to give a speech about their beliefs because it is illegal anyway and your are going down a slippery slope, so of course politicians is going to give statements about 'all Americans have the right to speech with the fear of violence blah, blah'. Technically, you can protest but usually not to the point of physically preventing from coming( unless they pull the speech or whomever sponsors them to come decides to pull it themselves).

The statement about Nevada is him absolving responsibility. Many politicians would done the same thing, but many would denounce the actions. It was poor of him to absolve responsibility .


Poodlestrike said:
Honestly, if I had to diagnose it, I'd say it's down to target fixation? They know, initially, that there's no way the Republicans (or anybody right of center) will listen to them, so they focus on people closer to them to fight against and try to convince. Over time, they sorta... forget that that farther-right wing exists and all their energy and vitriol filters down to the near-left, so when the occasion to interact with those further afield comes up, they tend to handle it... poorly. Weirdly, the far-right doesn't have that problem. Not sure why.
Click to expand...

The left is about challenging authority. Right-wing has a tendency to accept authority(their authority). That doesn't mean they won't criticize their own, but they sight their sights on the opposition first.
 
C

Cipherr

Member
Diablos said:
Bernie can you please stop pissing on the Democratic Party when it's already down

Swear to the political gods if he heads into 2018 throwing gas onto the fire
Click to expand...

Pissing on the Democratic party is practically Bernies job. It's all he does and really wants to do. He can literally be relied on to do that for so long as he has access to a microphone. This is going to be the case regardless of which way the party lurches too. The guy just loves it.

The actual opposition... You know, the republicans in power currently trying to tear the country asunder? When addressing those guys Bernie applies his political sockem boppers and makes sure to measure his swings. Wouldn't want to be too hard on those guys....
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
Abinash117 said:
Basically he is a politician?

The comment he gave about Ann Coulter is the most politician-like answer he could give. Ideally, yeah no one should be threatened with violence to give a speech about their beliefs because it is illegal anyway and your are going down a slippery slope, so of course politicians is going to give statements about 'all Americans have the right to speech with the fear of violence blah, blah'. Technically, you can protest but usually not to the point of physically preventing from coming( unless they pull the speech or whomever sponsors them to come decides to pull it themselves).

The statement about Nevada is him absolving responsibility. Many politicians would done the same thing, but many would denounce the actions. It was poor of him to absolve responsibility .
Click to expand...

Funny how he gets to be a politician instead of a populist outsider when it's convenient. He also basically said protesting her is intellectually weak (because his condemnation wasn't just about letting her speak but also about not booing, no interrupting, not doing anything but politely disagreeing/debating)


Nevada was him going yeah violence sucks but the people who stole Nevada from me kinda had it coming.
 
P

Prof. Bathtub

Member
Poodlestrike said:
Weirdly, the far-right doesn't have that problem. Not sure why.
Click to expand...

I'd wager that's because ultraconservatives know that their support is more unshakable. Maybe because while the everyday working class or suburban Republican can say they want healthcare, their convictions of support are drawn on matters of religion/life & death (of embryos), plus the catch-all of Safety against terrorist attacks and criminals (which are mostly inflicted against the city-dwellers they hate so much.) A Democrat could never possibly provide those things, so fascist it is.
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
Prof. Bathtub said:
I'd wager that's because ultraconservatives know that their support is more unshakable. Maybe because while the everyday WWC Republican can say they want healthcare, their convictions of support are drawn on matters of religion/life & death (of embryos), plus the catch-all of Safety against terrorist attacks and criminals (which are mostly inflicted against the city-dwellers they hate so much.)
Click to expand...

Yeah, but why don't we see more far-right people (not just politicians but voters) focusing harder on their "RINOs" than they do the Democrats? Sure, they HATE them, but not nearly as much as they hate the dreaded Godless Socialist Babymurdering Gun-Stealing Democrats. Is it just a messaging thing, with Dems being unwilling to name the Republicans as the enemy the same way Rs name them? Or is it more that the Republicans immediately embraced their extremists?
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Poodlestrike said:
Yeah, but why don't we see more far-right people (not just politicians but voters) focusing harder on their "RINOs" than they do the Democrats? Sure, they HATE them, but not nearly as much as they hate the dreaded Godless Socialist Babymurdering Gun-Stealing Democrats. Is it just a messaging thing, with Dems being unwilling to name the Republicans as the enemy the same way Rs name them? Or is it more that the Republicans immediately embraced their extremists?
Click to expand...

Wait, this happened. It was the Tea Party. They literally primaried out the House Majority Leader!
 
C

Crocodile

Member
This tweet on my timeline seemed relevant to the current conversation :p

Poodlestrike said:
Yeah, but why don't we see more far-right people (not just politicians but voters) focusing harder on their "RINOs" than they do the Democrats? Sure, they HATE them, but not nearly as much as they hate the dreaded Godless Socialist Babymurdering Gun-Stealing Democrats. Is it just a messaging thing, with Dems being unwilling to name the Republicans as the enemy the same way Rs name them? Or is it more that the Republicans immediately embraced their extremists?
Click to expand...

I mean wasn't that what the Tea Party was all about? Knocking out the RINOS? The Republicans in Congress are on average more radical and "dumber" than they were in the past because of this no?
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
pigeon said:
Wait, this happened. It was the Tea Party. They literally primaried out the House Majority Leader!
Click to expand...

Yeah, but like I said: they never really seemed to lose sight of the Real Enemy. You never saw Tea Partiers throwing shade at RINOs and then turning around and saying "we'd love to work with the Dems."
 
A

Abinash117

Member
excelsiorlef said:
Funny how he gets to be a politician instead of a populist outsider when it's convenient. He also basically said protesting her is intellectually weak (because his condemnation wasn't just about letting her speak but also about not booing, no interrupting, not doing anything but politely disagreeing/debating)


Nevada was him going yeah violence sucks but the people who stole Nevada from me kinda had it coming.
Click to expand...

He has always been one. People just don't perceive him as one despite him being one for years. He is also kind of an outsider because he is an independent. He caucus with dems that doesn't mean he is one.
 
P

Prof. Bathtub

Member
Poodlestrike said:
Yeah, but why don't we see more far-right people (not just politicians but voters) focusing harder on their "RINOs" than they do the Democrats? Sure, they HATE them, but not nearly as much as they hate the dreaded Godless Socialist Babymurdering Gun-Stealing Democrats. Is it just a messaging thing, with Dems being unwilling to name the Republicans as the enemy the same way Rs name them? Or is it more that the Republicans immediately embraced their extremists?
Click to expand...

I guess I can't say. The "fall in line" adage is overused and frankly annoying, though as we have seen, Republicans slandered by their Leader for being weak or uncommitted still sucked up to him.
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
Abinash117 said:
He has always been one. People just don't perceive him as one despite him being one for years. He is also kind of an outsider because he is an independent. He caucus with dems that doesn't mean he is one.
Click to expand...

I'm aware but given that he claims to be not on I think pointing out how much of a hypocrite the guy is and how much more he gets away with saying than others do is wroth talking about.

He doesn't get do the politician thing when it suits him and not get called out for it.
 
T

Tarydax

Banned
The only way I can see Bernie's influence waning is if he crosses some kind of line.

I can't even imagine what that would look like. I used to think that him getting directly wailed on in the 2020 Dem debates would be enough to make people abandon him, but looking at my own support for him during the 2016 primaries, I gave him so much rope it lasted all the way until he went after Planned Parenthood. That cult of personality shit is real.

I should have dropped him even before it became clear he's a shit surrogate who can't debate his way out of a paper bag.
 
S

Slayven

Member
Tarydax said:
The only way I can see Bernie's influence waning is if he crosses some kind of line. I can't even imagine what that would look like. I used to think that him getting directly wailed on in the 2020 Dem debates would be enough to make people abandon him, but looking at my own support for him during the 2016 primaries, I gave him so much rope it lasted all the way until he went after Planned Parenthood. That cult of personality shit is real.

I should have dropped him even before it became clear he's a shit surrogate who can't debate his way out of a paper bag.
Click to expand...

Well he just just through abortion rights under the bus
 
S

sangreal

Member
Diablos said:
I think we're stuck with Bernie's antics till he's dead.

This is a serious problem.

Bernie would have gone third party if the Dems really told him to gtfo. It would have been bad. Of course we lost anyway...
Click to expand...

In hind-sight I think it would have been great. Then people might see him for what he is and he could be shunned to the annals of historical spoilers with Ralph Nader
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
The Democrats are spineless and worthless in opposing Trump & the GOP
8 9 10 11 12
571
62K
sugarhigh4242 replied
  • Locked
This week in Trump’s America: Week 2 by ThinkProgress
8
3K
stuminus3 replied
  • Locked
Hillary Clinton retweets Slate voter guide calling her most corrupt candidate
3
4K
ModBot replied
  • Locked
Blacklist 2014 - Hollywood's most liked scripts of the year
30
6K
Sho_Nuff82 replied
Top Bottom