• 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.
So then we really shouldn't call it gloom and doom like that thread is doing unless Trump wins reelection.

All Trump is doing by announcing this is:

- giving ammo to the democrats
- pissing off every business that was already planning on complying with deal anyway
- pissing off literally every foreign nation

Like, I'm pretty sure even some oil giants have seen the writing on the wall and started investing in alternative energy.

why bannon liked it
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
I'm not actually too worried about the climate stuff, us pulling out of this will have...not a ton of impact on what companies inside the country are actually going to do I don't think

But I'm royally pissed at the symbolism of it and its fucking terrible for international diplomacy. That's the part that's going to be damaging
 

jtb

Banned
re: 2016

Forget the "no positive vision" bullshit. Why should you be positive when you're facing an existential threat? The problem wasn't attacking Trump - it was how she attacked him.

Too many character-based attacks. Not enough policy-based attacks. Because the campaign wanted to win over GOP defectors, they tried to distinguish him from a generic GOP politician stance - which is insane because Paul Ryan is probably the one politician who's ideas are even worse and more unpopular than Donald Trump's. Also, don't you want coattails off of a historically unpopular candidate?!?

Plus, that vision of the GOP barely even exists any more.

It basically comes down to leaning too hard into the college-educated white demographic fantasy that Dems will finally win over the suburbs.
 
why bannon liked it
I get that Bannon types and Putin-Puppets like that, but in all likelihood that will just increase the odds of Putin's enemies getting more involved in fucking over Trump.

Like, I'm pretty sure the GOP doesn't want to see Dems have the IC, FBI, and Foreign Allies all firmly in the pro-democrat side.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage

Meh. He already announced and GOP is behind him full-step. The fact that it's a day after the election means nothing. Everyone knows his intentions. I mean, he just had a huge press conference about it.
 

Diablos

Member
So wait he's going to re enter the agreement at some point?? Why even back out? Of course the conditions will probably be a joke...
 

kirblar

Member
re: 2016

Forget the "no positive vision" bullshit. Why should you be positive when you're facing an existential threat? The problem wasn't attacking Trump - it was how she attacked him.

Too many character-based attacks. Not enough policy-based attacks. Because the campaign wanted to win over GOP defectors, they tried to distinguish him from a generic GOP politician stance - which is insane because Paul Ryan is probably the one politician who's ideas are even worse and more unpopular than Donald Trump's. Also, don't you want coattails off of a historically unpopular candidate?!?

Plus, that vision of the GOP barely even exists any more.

It basically comes down to leaning too hard into the college-educated white demographic fantasy that Dems will finally win over the suburbs.
Right strategy, wrong candidate, wrong messaging, and at the wrong point of the swinging reactionary pendulum to do much good w/ it. Those sunbelt GOP seats where Hillary overperformed are going to be real important in the next 2 congressional election cycles.

We just have to pray we can escape the next 2-3 years w/ as little damage as possible.
 

tuxfool

Banned
I'm not actually too worried about the climate stuff, us pulling out of this will have...not a ton of impact on what companies inside the country are actually going to do I don't think

But I'm royally pissed at the symbolism of it and its fucking terrible for international diplomacy. That's the part that's going to be damaging

Notably a lot of hard science comes from government sponsored programs. Particularly long term research that commercial ventures are not going to tackle.

Commercial ventures are great at taking the long term work and commercializing it, packaging it to make it feasible, but they usually need a starting point.
 

kirblar

Member
@gdebenedetti

More pre-2020 work from @MartinOMalley: the ex-gov just sent out a fundraising email for @Archie4Congress in SC (yes, an early state).
Oh look, it's the one guy even less likely to win a primary than Zuckerberg.
 

jtb

Banned
Right strategy, wrong candidate, wrong messaging, and at the wrong point of the swinging reactionary pendulum to do much good w/ it. Those sunbelt GOP seats where Hillary overperformed are going to be real important in the next 2 congressional election cycles.

We just have to pray we can escape the next 2-3 years w/ as little damage as possible.

Yup. Very clear path to flipping the House in 2018 even if we flip the Clinton/GOP districts only and lose no seats in an 06-style wave. No reason why we can't do it.

Weigel had a good piece/interview on Rohrabacher as one of those prototypical Clinton/GOP districts. He seems genuinely clueless.
 
Trump thinks doing this will make other countries laugh at us LESS? Man is he dumb.

He is deeply deeply insecure. He can't bring himself to criticize himself, so he projects his worse fears on to others.

When he says "the world is laughing at America" he speaking to his fear that everyone in the world is laughing him.

...and he's right. Everyone is laughing at him.
 
Any more news on the GA-06 early voting? The first-day numbers seemed a little ambiguous, so maybe some more data would help us chart trends or make predictions.
 

Emerson

May contain jokes =>
Except Trump won't pull out the US from the Paris deal until November 2020. Until then the companies will still have to comply and if Trump loses reelection there will be no point to companies trying to not comply because there won't be enough time in which we are actually out of the deal.

What I've read is that while he can't officially exit until then he's basically signaling to everyone else that we won't be complying anyway. And it's not exactly enforceable.
 
F0Xtx8S.png
 
Trump and Bannon want to get China to increase its commitment to greenhouse gas reduction. But the deal's already been made. Europe has already shown that it won't let itself be held hostage (see: Brexit) and China won't be strong-armed when it has the opportunity to shut the US out of new relationships. This was a horrible attempt at deal-making.
 

Debirudog

Member
I'm not actually too worried about the climate stuff, us pulling out of this will have...not a ton of impact on what companies inside the country are actually going to do I don't think

But I'm royally pissed at the symbolism of it and its fucking terrible for international diplomacy. That's the part that's going to be damaging

This all the way.

It kills the trust that foreign countries have for the United States. I honestly think Trump did this in his innate hatred for Obama.
 

chadskin

Member
@AP: BREAKING: Philippine police chief says no evidence that casino attack is terrorism and no confirmed reports of gunshot wounds.

Good that Trump already condemned this horrific act of terrorism. Oops.
 
Nate Cohn‏Verified account @Nate_Cohn 17h17 hours ago
Replying to @Nate_Cohn
All considered, I don't know what to make of it. Clearly, Dems still have the enthusiasm edge. But higher turnout (arguably) cuts both ways

Nate Cohn‏Verified account @Nate_Cohn 17h17 hours ago
Replying to @Nate_Cohn
For instance, the ev in the general election--when Trump won by just 1.5--was D 26, R 46. Compared to that, rnd 2 looks quite good for Dems

Nate Cohn‏Verified account @Nate_Cohn 17h17 hours ago
Replying to @Nate_Cohn
Over all, early voters are D 35, R 43 by primary vt history. On it's face, more GOP than rnd 1. OTOH, this is clearly a very different ev

Nate Cohn‏Verified account @Nate_Cohn 17h17 hours ago
Replying to @Nate_Cohn
All of this makes it real tough to figure out how to "interpret" the early vote. I don't know whether it is "good" or "bad" for R or D.

Nate Cohn‏Verified account @Nate_Cohn 17h17 hours ago
Replying to @Nate_Cohn
So far, most of the voting is coming from reliable midterm voters, so it doesn't necessarily presage huge increases in turnout

Nate Cohn‏Verified account @Nate_Cohn 17h17 hours ago
Replying to @Nate_Cohn
It would *really* amaze me if this kept up. If it falls off, a sign of how many voters are ready to end this race. Either way: eye-popping

Nate Cohn‏Verified account @Nate_Cohn 18h18 hours ago
Huge early vote in GA-6. Astonishingly, it's slightly ahead of the general election so far. Nearly 25k votes already cast.

Found it.
 

kirblar

Member
Replying to @Nate_Cohn
For instance, the ev in the general election--when Trump won by just 1.5--was D 26, R 46. Compared to that, rnd 2 looks quite good for Dems

Nate Cohn‏Verified account @Nate_Cohn 17h17 hours ago
Replying to @Nate_Cohn
Over all, early voters are D 35, R 43 by primary vt history. On it's face, more GOP than rnd 1. OTOH, this is clearly a very different ev
This is really, really good.
 
Nate Cohn and other people annoy me a lot by pointing out tactics but not consequences.

Like, Cohn points out that pretending climate change is fake and putting Muslims in camps would be big vote winners.

........... But you would have to be a psychopath to actually pursue those policies.

And Cohn just goes and then just doesn't dwell on the implications and is just like "only doing stats!" and it's like >_>
 

kirblar

Member
Nate Cohn and other people annoy me a lot by pointing out tactics but not consequences.

Like, Cohn points out that pretending climate change is fake and putting Muslims in camps would be big vote winners.

........... But you would have to be a psychopath to actually pursue those policies.

And Cohn just goes and then just doesn't dwell on the implications and is just like "only doing stats!" and it's like >_>
Yes, that's what you do when doing analysis. You put your heart in an ice box and focus purely on the numbers.

Doing this doesn't mean they're heartless, it means they're actually doing their job.
 
Nate Cohn and other people annoy me a lot by pointing out tactics but not consequences.

Like, Cohn points out that pretending climate change is fake and putting Muslims in camps would be big vote winners.

........... But you would have to be a psychopath to actually pursue those policies.

And Cohn just goes and then just doesn't dwell on the implications and is just like "only doing stats!" and it's like >_>

His job isn't to worry about those consequences though. He's discussing statistics and how different strategies might impact them. It's an interesting discussion, and ultimately if you want to discuss consequences there are a whole lot of bloggers and writers who do that, and sometimes they reference his work.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
The reality is that in 3 years when the campaigns are in full swing, these moves will not have created jobs. The democrats need to focus on that full blast. Focus on how little the coal industry actually matters. How few coal jobs there actually are.
 

Blader

Member
The reality is that in 3 years when the campaigns are in full swing, these moves will not have created jobs. The democrats need to focus on that full blast. Focus on how little the coal industry actually matters. How few coal jobs there actually are.

Exactly. We need to hammer in 2019 and 2020 that for all of Trump's bluster and Rose Garden performances, nothing he has done is bringing back jobs or improving people's wages.
 

Gruco

Banned
It's unsurprising to me that Berniecrats and Times reporters seem to be the two groups with an almost pathological need to talk about how bad Hillary was, demand endless apologies, refuse to hear a basic accounting of what went wrong during the election, etc. As long as it can be all Hillary's fault, they can avoid having to take a serious look at their own roles as bad actors in 2016.
 
I still don't see what you get out of those "drops" since he will remain President tomorrow regardless.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Republican_party_scandals

The Culture of Corruption line was so good that Michelle Malkin wrote a conservative hit against Obama with the same title to try to take the sting out of it.

You post like nothing matters unless it's 3 months before an election. But that has never been the case and I don't think it ever will be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom