• 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.
F

FyreWulff

Member
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/01/politics/trump-michelle-obama-girls-education/index.html

Conservatism and misogyny continue to be inseperable.

While aspects of the initiative's programming will continue, employees have been told to stop using the "Let Girls Learn" name and were told that, as a program unto itself, "Let Girls Learn" was ending.

"Moving forward, we will not continue to use the 'Let Girls Learn' brand or maintain a stand-alone program," read an email sent to Peace Corps employees this week by the agency's acting director Sheila Crowley.
Click to expand...
 
N

numble

Member
Box of Kittens said:
You're basing this on, what, n=2? Dukakis was a fresh face. And a lot of what gave Gore and Hillary big profiles was their ties to the Bill Clinton administration. Should we bar former vice presidents from running? I'd rather put it up to the voters on a case-by-case basis. The problem was clearing the field for a flawed candidate, not that said candidate had run before.

I have no idea what to do about the invisible primary, or even that anything can be done realistically. I just don't see this as being the solution.
Click to expand...

We also need to recognize that Gore and Hillary still both won the popular vote, while fresh-faced Kerry and Dukakis didn't.
 
B

Bonen no Max'd

Banned
Box of Kittens said:
You're basing this on, what, n=2? Dukakis was a fresh face. And a lot of what gave Gore and Hillary big profiles was their ties to the Bill Clinton administration. Should we bar former vice presidents from running? I'd rather put it up to the voters on a case-by-case basis. The problem was clearing the field for a flawed candidate, not that said candidate had run before.

I have no idea what to do about the invisible primary, or even that anything can be done realistically. I just don't see this as being the solution.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if there's any problems with this idea since I just had it, but a cap on big money donations for the primary where any of the big money fundraising can go towards a GE fund for the winner is my first thought, but I have no idea how to solve the pressure for everyone to endorse the clear frontrunner.
 
B

Box of Kittens

Banned
BlastProcessing said:
That seems like a very bad idea. It would drastically lower the people willing to run and would make the Party machine even bigger kingmakers. Would Obama even have run in 2008 if this rule were in place? He was so young, would he have risked his one and only shot at being President running against Clinton?

The chilling effect would be profound and even if you got rid of Superdelegates entirely, pre-Primary endorsements would have massive power.

Such a rule would usher in a ton of Trump-esque hucksters with nothing to lose. National celebrity would become more important than ever. Experience and intelligence would be driven away. I would humbly ask you to come back with a step one that wouldn't almost immediately destroy the party and the country.
Click to expand...

Right, it could even increase the importance of the invisible primary. It's easier to clear the field if your potential opponents know they only get one shot.

It's really hard to know how this would play out in practice, but I just see a huge potential for unintended consequences.
 
B

Box of Kittens

Banned
Certainly the degree to which a politician being attacked is going to have an impact on how well they poll (it's why I think Bernie's numbers are somewhat soft, Republicans have never really had a reason to attack him). On the other hand a lot of what goes into a president's approval rating is simply the job they're doing (or perceptions thereof). That is to say, I don't think Obama's low approvals in 2014 were entirely a function of Republican attacks, nor that their improvement since then was entirely a function of Republicans focusing their attacks on Clinton. There's just naturally a lot of fluctuation in a president's approval rating. I don't really see any reason to think his numbers would be low had he not become president.
 
C

Cesare Borgia

Banned
kirblar said:
We're tying our hands because literally every time we've tried an also-ran candidate that wasn't a sitting president we've lost!

Dems want new hotness. Not old and busted. It's an issue this corrects for.
Click to expand...

It's hard to make definitive statements based in large part off Hillary Clinton and Al Gore losing. She was a bad candidate with significant baggage that very few candidates in either party have. And yea Al Gore lost, yea he was a bad politician/candidate...but I wouldn't write off running vice president's solely due to him either.

Fresh faces aren't always ideal. It made sense that Hillary (or Biden) would follow Obama, despite both being flawed in different ways. Sometimes you play the hand you're dealt.
 
O

Ogodei

Member
sangreal said:
Reagan did it

heck, Nixon lost the general election and managed to get re-nominated and elected. As did Grover Cleveland, obviously, and probably some others
Click to expand...

Nixon was really the last time a political party's had patience for that. As political campaigns became more polarizing, anybody with the stench of loser on them was never even entertained. Like, nobody seriously thought Gore should've tried again in 2004, and there were only the faintest rumors of Mitt considering running in 2016.

Although Romney, Hillary, and McCain were also proof that primary also-rans definitely have a shot at getting the nomination, as was the case with Reagan (who, unlike those other three, got it and won after a failed primary campaign).
 
O

Ogodei

Member
Bonen no Max'd said:
what if Trump needs to replace Thomas and wants to do it with a black man to keep that seat representative

so he looks to see who is available

and lo and behold
carsonposing.jpg
Click to expand...

Would be an even worse pick than Harriet Myers for W. Even McConnell wouldn't be ready to ram that through the Senate.

I'm sure there's a PoC, right-leaning justice somewhere in the appeals circuits.
 
B

Box of Kittens

Banned
Right. If you want a fresh face, why not ban candidates over 50? Or those who have held statewide/federal elected office for too many years? I'm not sure we should be altering the primary process to get a certain kind of candidate when that seems to go against the goal of getting the best nominee possible and our notions of what works are necessarily based on a small number of elections. After Bill Clinton was elected you could make the case based on then-recent history that the only Democrats who could win the presidency were Southerners.
 
C

Cesare Borgia

Banned
Macho Madness said:
Chaffetz rushing back to possibly pass AHCA: https://twitter.com/AlexNBCNews/status/859116253054726146

Best evidence so far that they have the votes.
Click to expand...

A guy seemingly running for governor rushing back to vote against Obamacare doesn't tell us anything. Literally nothing changed over the last week. The bill is still poison for moderates, and the senate will not pass it. Why would a moderate put their name down for a disastrous, unpopular bill that won't even become law?
 
K

kirblar

Member
Box of Kittens said:
Right. If you want a fresh face, why not ban candidates over 50? Or those who have held statewide/federal elected office for too many years? I'm not sure we should be altering the primary process to get a certain kind of candidate when that seems to go against the goal of getting the best nominee possible and our notions of what works are necessarily based on a small number of elections. After Bill Clinton was elected you could make the case based on then-recent history that the only Democrats who could win the presidency were Southerners.
Click to expand...
I'm totally down with an age cap too. Not just for the Dems though, for the actual office. Reagan/Trump is 2 too many presidents with deteriorating brains.
Macho Madness said:
Chaffetz rushing back to possibly pass AHCA: https://twitter.com/AlexNBCNews/status/859116253054726146

Best evidence so far that they have the votes.
Click to expand...
They don't have the votes. Stop with the chicken-littleing.
 
B

Box of Kittens

Banned
sangreal said:
Reagan did it

heck, Nixon lost the general election and managed to get re-nominated and elected. As did Grover Cleveland, obviously, and probably some others
Click to expand...

Off the top of my head, in addition to Nixon and Cleveland, as noted above.

Won the presidency after losing the general previously:

Thomas Jefferson
Andrew Jackson
William Henry Harrison (sort of, the 1836 election was weird)

Others who received the nomination again after losing the general:

William Jennings Bryan (nominated three times)
Tom Dewey
Adlai Stevenson

Not really intending to comment on the viability of such a candidate winning the nomination today. Just noting the historical examples.
 
K

Kevinroc

Member
Owzers said:
Ryan can just tell him they are in.
Click to expand...

“I want it to be good for sick people. It’s not in its final form right now," he said during an Oval Office interview Monday with Bloomberg News. "It will be every bit as good on pre-existing conditions as Obamacare."
Click to expand...

“And Obamacare just so you know, Obamacare’s terrible on preexisting conditions, you know why? Cause you’re not going to have it,” he said. “It’s folding. It’s gone.”
Click to expand...

You see crap like this in the same damn interview and what do you say? What does Ryan say?
 
A

AntraxSuicide

Banned
Bonen no Max'd said:
I'm not sure if there's any problems with this idea since I just had it, but a cap on big money donations for the primary where any of the big money fundraising can go towards a GE fund for the winner is my first thought, but I have no idea how to solve the pressure for everyone to endorse the clear frontrunner.
Click to expand...

Not much reason to not do this, but there is a good chance you see less donation in general. I'd be super hesitant to give to Dems as long as Kanye is running in the primary, for instance. You'd want at least some guarantee that the money you give isn't going to a shithead.

This also doesn't fix the invisible primary, but nothing will. You can't stop people from having preferences, and asking them to be quiet about it is like asking the news to not report on mass shootings (which would reduce them); it's unrealistic to get people to not talk about things.
 
D

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
BoogieWoogie said:
What if Chaffetz is rushing back to warn people that the hammer is dropping with the Intelligence Communities?
Click to expand...
Some aide is going to be walking down the hall to deliver important materials to Oversight and Chaffetz will come hobbling straight from the airport to slap the papers out of the dude's hand.
 
Vestal

Vestal

Junior Member
Box of Kittens said:
Off the top of my head, in addition to Nixon and Cleveland, as noted above.

Won the presidency after losing the general previously:

Thomas Jefferson
Andrew Jackson
William Henry Harrison (sort of, the 1836 election was weird)

Others who received the nomination again after losing the general:

William Jennings Bryan (nominated three times)
Tom Dewey
Adlai Stevenson

Not really intending to comment on the viability of such a candidate winning the nomination today. Just noting the historical examples.
Click to expand...

Technically John Adams would be included here as well. He did become Vice President by losing to Washington in the first Election, and later became President in 1796.
 
E

Ernest

Banned
Joe said:
New Yorker: How Trump Could Get Fired
This article from the New Yorker is really interesting, especially this section:

I wonder if Pence is shrewd and ambitious enough to mount a political coup. It wouldn't be as absurd as Trump getting elected in the first place.
Click to expand...
A Pence presidency following a Trump firing/impeachment would be a far more weakened administration than one that would be elected and/or takes power if Trump should die in office.
 
S

Snowman Prophet of Doom

Member
How weird is it to know that you are WAY smarter than the President of the United States, by several standard deviations' magnitude?

I would be surprised if there are many people on the planet as incapable of cogitation and introspection as Donald Trump, tbh. The man genuinely appears to have directed his intellectual energies toward every facet of thinking other than having a coherent worldview.
 
B

Box of Kittens

Banned
The federal gas tax has been stuck at 18.4 cents a gallon since 1993, meaning it's been effectively getting smaller due to inflation for over 20 years now. It honestly should be raised, but it's political suicide to do so. Which is why having the tax be a set amount per gallon is a problem in the first place.
 
S

StopMakingSense

Member
CA just did a major gas tax hike a month or so ago. Short of a little grumbling from some CA conservatives on FB, it's been basically forgotten. Also the infrastructure issues the rains this winter caused made it pretty digestible.

But thats CA.
 
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
63K
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