• 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 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why

Status
Not open for further replies.
The WaPo checking in a little late, but they somehow got a transcript of Trump's call with Duerte: Trump calls Kim Jong Un a ‘madman with nuclear weapons,’ according to transcript of Duterte call


Wapo said:
President Trump labeled North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un a “madman with nuclear weapons” during a private phone conversation with Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte last month, just days before stating publicly that he would be “honored” to meet with Kim.

In the April 29 call, Trump sought Duterte’s input on whether Kim is “stable or not stable” and expressed some satisfaction in North Korea’s recent failed missile tests, noting that “all his rockets are crashing. That’s the good news,” according to a transcript of the conversation made by the Philippines government on May 2 and obtained Tuesday by The Washington Post.

Wapo said:
Toward the end of the call, Trump switched topics to invite Duterte to the White House, calling him a “good man.”

“I will love to have you in the Oval Office,” Trump said. “Any time you want to come … Seriously, if you want to come over, just let us know. Just take care of yourself, and we will take care of North Korea.”
 
Because it's a stupid shot at me over a normal local race when the Sunbelt talk is about the future of the EC and gaining back the house.

You just compared Hillary Clinton 16-esque Demographics as Destiny to Global Warming, let's chill on calling something stupid.
 

Teggy

Member
This is sad



DAgud0SW0AEVwTU.jpg

As someone pointed out on Twitter, it looks an awful lot like the "and will never forget" was added after someone had already written out their nicely centered paragraph (like a certain president likes to do) and someone suggested they might want to say something a little less self centered.
 

Holmes

Member
Oh, and we just flipped our first seat since the election in a SE



this constituency went 51-44 for Trump last year
I believe this is the first time ever Wolfeboro is going to be represented by a Democrat, at least since a long time.

Two more specials tonight in New York too.
 

kirblar

Member
You just compared Hillary Clinton 16-esque Demographics as Destiny to Global Warming, let's chill on calling something stupid.
No, I compared economic changes that have been occurring due to technological advancement, globalization ,and free trade for the past 40 years to Global Warming.

You really don't see the difference?
 
how does one lose a rave

By finding out what 2CB is.

No, I compared economic changes that have been occurring due to technological advancement, globalization ,and free trade for the past 40 years to Global Warming.

You really don't see the difference?

And what's going to happen to those demographics when the Fox News machine responsible for feeding them their bullshit goes down (as we are starting to see in key ratings)?
 
No, I compared economic changes that have been occurring due to technological advancement, globalization ,and free trade for the past 40 years to Global Warming.

You really don't see the difference?

Okay I'll finally say what I deleted multiple times.

This is such a stupid post I actually can't believe you're serious in comparing political "destiny" to climate change. Nothing is constant in politics! How have you failed to grasp this over the past two years?

Honestly, I'm still laughing that you think mapping political outcomes three years from now is the same thing as HISTORICAL SCIENTIFIC DATA OF CLIMATE CHANGE. Politics isn't a science! Don't treat it like one!
 
if I'm looking up the right special elections, there's one for the senate and one for the assembly right? too bad the pickup chance is in the assembly, not the senate.

also on the subject of the New York state senate, can anyone explain to me why the New York Democrats don't just deny ballot access to the IDC in elections after what they pulled?
 

kirblar

Member
Okay I'll finally say what I deleted multiple times.

This is such a stupid post I actually can't believe you're serious in comparing political "destiny" to climate change. Nothing is constant in politics! How have you failed to grasp this over the past two years?

Honestly, I'm still laughing that you think mapping political outcomes three years from now is the same thing as HISTORICAL SCIENTIFIC DATA OF CLIMATE CHANGE. Politics isn't a science! Don't treat it like one!
ECONOMICS IS A SCIENCE! These changes are in large part a result of radical economic change because of mass technological progress over the past decades! We keep seeing the same thing happen everywhere. This isn't an accident. West Virginia, East Iowa, Upstate NY.

It's not destiny! There is not "permanent GOP/Dem majority" nationwide possible! The pendulum will always be swinging. The gameboard will always be changing. This is one of the lessons of 2010, also a lesson about the firewall getting breached.

But to win the game, you need to see where things are evolving to. Not where they've been. Change is constant, but it only goes one way.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
To be completely honest, I don't believe that anyone here would ever think about a race in Mississippi more than one in a swing state. I simply do not believe you.

okay well are there any legislature races in MS on the horizon? I can't think of any. We have a SoS race here in October. I would assume the D will run ahead of Hillary if trends continue.
 
To be completely honest, I don't believe that anyone here would ever think about a race in Mississippi more than one in a swing state. I simply do not believe you.

Depends actually if there is a possibility of maximizing the "southern blue line" into outvoting the rest of the state.

I mean we almost won tennessee's senate seat back in 2006.
 
ECONOMICS IS A SCIENCE! These changes are in large part a result of radical economic change because of mass technological progress over the past decades! We keep seeing the same thing happen everywhere. This isn't an accident. West Virginia, East Iowa, Upstate NY.

It's not destiny! There is not "permanent GOP/Dem majority" nationwide possible! The pendulum will always be swinging. The gameboard will always be changing. This is one of the lessons of 2010, also a lesson about the firewall getting breached.

But to win the game, you need to see where things are evolving to. Not where they've been. Change is constant, but it only goes one way.

Literally none of this addresses my point besides "economics is a science" which is not true, so, okay.

Again, we should be blessed none of you actually work in politics or campaigns.

I include myself because I'm also stupid.
 
okay well are there any legislature races in MS on the horizon? I can't think of any. We have a SoS race here in October. I would assume the D will run ahead of Hillary if trends continue.

"anyone" was a bit vague as we've specifically talked about this. But in general when people here usually talk about running in every race or something similar, I doubt heavily that they actually mean that. And that's fair! But I don't see any point in taking shots at people over something that they ultimately agree on, if not where they draw the line on which races they get passionate about.
 

kirblar

Member
Literally none of this addresses my point besides "economics is a science" which is not true, so, okay.

Again, we should be blessed none of you actually work in politics or campaigns.

I include myself because I'm also stupid.
What is your point? I'm not predicting outcomes. I'm looking at where we're likely to have the best odds of winning elections and actually gaining power and being able to implement our agenda! Regardless of who the nominee is!
 
if I'm looking up the right special elections, there's one for the senate and one for the assembly right? too bad the pickup chance is in the assembly, not the senate.

also on the subject of the New York state senate, can anyone explain to me why the New York Democrats don't just deny ballot access to the IDC in elections after what they pulled?
I honestly think the NY Dem establishment prefers the current situation. Cuomo can get what he wants, and if they don't want to do something that's too progressive they have an easy scapegoat.

NYDP is pretty corrupt I'm afraid, exactly why we need nonpartisan redistricting. Politicians that can draw their own maps are only interested in protecting themselves.
 
"anyone" was a bit vague as we've specifically talked about this. But in general when people here usually talk about running in every race or something similar, I doubt heavily that they actually mean that. And that's fair! But I don't see any point in taking shots at people over something that they ultimately agree on, if not where they draw the line on which races they get passionate about.

I don't think trying to win everywhere you can is a radical idea but idk. A lot of people today felt comfortable making declarations about strategy three years from now. That's silly.

What is your point? I'm not predicting outcomes. I'm looking at where we're likely to have the best odds of winning elections and actually gaining power and being able to implement our agenda! Regardless of who the nominee is!

You made declarations about 2020 and where to spend money when it's MAY OF TWO THOUSAND AND SEVENTEEN IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD and for all your preaching about the "science" (Jesus Christ) of economics, you, me, my mother, and Kellyanne Conway have literally no idea about what the environment will look like, so writing off any potential swing state, like you so gleefully seem to want to do? is very silly! I want to win races! I don't want to give up on places because I'm 2017 it seemed like a good idea.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Depends actually if there is a possibility of maximizing the "southern blue line" into outvoting the rest of the state.

I mean we almost won tennessee's senate seat back in 2006.

Mississippi is so racially polarizing. Then again so is the rest of the states surrounding. The only way your winning in our area is if the white population disappeared over night leaving just blacks left or realistically a coalition of blacks + a plurality of white. A lof of the whites millennials who would eventually make up a future coalition to make us blue (provided blacks continue voting D 90%) leave the states for liberal pastures or vote R like their parents and grandparents. Who knows if Gen Z will do the same.

The opposite is happening in Virginia and now Georgia where there are jobs that liberal whites in the north want to come down and work/live making those states purple.
 
I honestly think the NY Dem establishment prefers the current situation. Cuomo can get what he wants, and if they don't want to do something that's too progressive they have an easy scapegoat.

NYDP is pretty corrupt I'm afraid, exactly why we need nonpartisan redistricting. Politicians that can draw their own maps are only interested in protecting themselves.
I'd be interested to see if the Working Families Party tries to run anyone against the IDC members like they did in Connecticut when they thought the Democrat running was shitty so they had Gomes run (and win) instead.
 
I'd be interested to see if the Working Families Party tries to run anyone against the IDC members like they did in Connecticut when they thought the Democrat running was shitty so they had Gomes run (and win) instead.

They'll just be a better effort to primary them. Which is the best idea IMO.
 

kirblar

Member
I don't think trying to win everywhere you can is a radical idea but idk. A lot of people today felt comfortable making declarations about strategy three years from now. That's silly.
If things trend like they did the last few times a GOP pres tanked his numbers into the 6th Circle of Hell, we're likely going to be able to run candidates all over the place, even in places that are normally inhospitable for Democratic life! Because that's how the game works - our electorate is reactionary as f.
 
If things trend like they did the last few times a GOP pres tanked his numbers into the 6th Circle of Hell, we're likely going to be able to run candidates all over the place, even in places that are normally inhospitable for Democratic life! Because that's how the game works - our electorate is reactionary as f.

Yes, I agree with this.

Adore_Delano_Party.gif
 

Ernest

Banned
GOP Senate? Oh yes he will.
Not so sure about that - even a lot of GOPs don't like Lieberman, not to mention many of them want someone who's been in actual law enforcement, not just some prosecutor.
He's also been an elected official.
Then the fact that he works for a firm that represents Trump would be the 4th strike.
 
Not so sure about that - even a lot of GOPs don't like Lieberman, not to mention many of them want someone who's been in actual law enforcement, not just some prosecutor.
He's also been an elected official.
Then the fact that he works for a firm that represents Trump would be the 4th strike.

We have a Secretary of State who's an oil baron with no political experience that received a medal for being best friends with Russia.

They'll continue bowing to Trump.
 
I don't think trying to win everywhere you can is a radical idea but idk. A lot of people today felt comfortable making declarations about strategy three years from now. That's silly.



You made declarations about 2020 and where to spend money when it's MAY OF TWO THOUSAND AND SEVENTEEN IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD and for all your preaching about the "science" (Jesus Christ) of economics, you, me, my mother, and Kellyanne Conway have literally no idea about what the environment will look like, so writing off any potential swing state, like you so gleefully seem to want to do? is very silly! I want to win races! I don't want to give up on places because I'm 2017 it seemed like a good idea.

Again, define "everywhere you can." I do not think most people here would care about a race here, certainly not as much as other races. So again I don't see any reason to get worked up about someone "giving up" on certain places when most, including you I'd guess, would probably just shrug over a lost race in a lot of places.

And as a mathematician, I cringe hard at science gatekeeping. I could shit on any field except philosophy if I wanted to look like an asshole but it's not really a cool thing to do.

Mississippi is so racially polarizing. Then again so is the rest of the states surrounding. The only way your winning in our area is if the white population disappeared over night leaving just blacks left or realistically a coalition of blacks + a plurality of white. A lof of the whites millennials who would eventually make up a future coalition to make us blue (provided blacks continue voting D 90%) leave the states for liberal pastures or vote R like their parents and grandparents. Who knows if Gen Z will do the same.

The opposite is happening in Virginia and now Georgia where there are jobs that liberal whites in the north want to come down and work/live making those states purple.

The key to those two states are strong metro areas (DC and Atlanta respectively) that we don't have in MS. Maybe if you really got into North MS in Hernando and Itawamba counties as they're both insanely close to Memphis and Birmingham respectively? You'd need more future-proof industries in state to go with that. Young flight is severe.

Edit:and what we talked about before about which offices to shoot for and jump from. I think AG is great for us in the South. All Jim Hood has on his record is that he jails pedophiles and scam artists. That's not always possible in a legislative office.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom