Too early? Someone has to emerge? Or maybe The Donald will start defining the Senate GOP in his image. Yikes!
-
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 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Begala literally said blow up the KGB.
There's like a million other ways to respond. The war language isn't good because war means something. Infringing on sovereignty isn't war.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Getting a good Utah Senate candidate for once (sorry Misty) is pleasantly surprising. Wilson has no chance of winning but giving the base someone to turn out for is always important, even if you have to go into the weeds a fair bit before finding any seat that can flip.
The GOP has very deliberately gotten Independence Party candidates to run only in swing districts so they can peel off more Democrats, who are likelier to vote third party. This happened in MN-3 in 2008 (the last time it was open) and MN-6 multiple times when Bachmann was the only factor keeping that seat competitive. I hate that people manage to fall for it every time.
The MN-3 candidate this year raised almost as much as Paulsen, but his haul is more impressive when you consider he's abided by a no PAC pledge. Their totals are pretty even (533k for Dean Phillips, 595k for Paulsen) but when you remove PAC money from that it becomes 525k for Phillips and just 246k for Paulsen, more than double. Anytime someone pledges to not take money from PACs I worry they're needlessly handicapping themselves, but it seems like Phillips can fend for himself at least.
Her fortunes were pretty closely tied to Clinton's - iirc they lost the district by about the same margin and there was a third party dumbass who probably sponged up her winning margin. Working on her campaign I think their idea was that she could flip GOP votes and that clearly didn't pan out.
The GOP has very deliberately gotten Independence Party candidates to run only in swing districts so they can peel off more Democrats, who are likelier to vote third party. This happened in MN-3 in 2008 (the last time it was open) and MN-6 multiple times when Bachmann was the only factor keeping that seat competitive. I hate that people manage to fall for it every time.
The MN-3 candidate this year raised almost as much as Paulsen, but his haul is more impressive when you consider he's abided by a no PAC pledge. Their totals are pretty even (533k for Dean Phillips, 595k for Paulsen) but when you remove PAC money from that it becomes 525k for Phillips and just 246k for Paulsen, more than double. Anytime someone pledges to not take money from PACs I worry they're needlessly handicapping themselves, but it seems like Phillips can fend for himself at least.
I mean obviously all four of them will have GOP challengers, but the later someone jumps into a cycle the harder it is to hit the ground running. If no one gets in until 2018 that lets Heitkamp, McCaskill, Donnelly and Tester enjoy free, positive coverage whenever they do something and without the specter of a tough challenger hanging over their heads.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
I disagree with that article's general premise that electronic warfare isn't warfare. It's like when older people argue that online communication isn't real, or that online harassment isn't harassment. It's an outdated way of thinking.
Roland_Gunner
Member
Its not war but interfering with an election is clear casus belli. Obviously we can't start a shooting war with a nuclear armed state but it isn't something we can walk away from either. Heer does a good job of balancing those two goals.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Doubt it, but I wonder if six years is enough time for everyone to forget or if the Democrats could still get mileage out of the abortion issue.
Vitter sailed to reelection in a wave year and thought that meant LA voters forgave him for his bizarre sex scandal. Not so!
I mean... then are we at war with Russia?
Poodlestrike
Banned
whyamihere
Banned
Definitely, but it's allowing the Dems to run up a cash advantage that becomes more precarious the longer they choose not to jump in the race.
Gardner is an exception, not a rule.
Abinash117
Member
Seems really stupid to me; but clearly I'm in the minority here.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Given that the KGB is an institution and not a location, I think it's pretty clear that that's mean figuratively.
This.
Greigor The Fellhand
Member
Pretty sure CAT is only assembled in America. I think most parts are made in china/mexico then shipped stateside.
This week is gonna be a hot mess
This week is gonna be a hot mess
StopMakingSense
Member
Nah, Putin will acquiesce if the tides change against him, happy he was able to get as much as he did for so little relative investment. Russia doesn't have the money to be isolated like that again.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Exactly. Unless there's an unknown factor here (there may well be) we aren't the aggressors here. But to act like it's not happening is ridiculous. I fully expect sanctions and response-in-kind are both on the table.
Nobody is actually talking about military warfare, which is what that article is trying to imply.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
Abinash117
Member
He's lashing out like this because he is isolated. Westerners imposed sanctions, OPEC crashed oil prices.
RumbleHumble
Banned
While McCain recovers, Democrats are pushing for hearings on Senate Healthcare bill:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/d...-healthcare-bill-during-delay/article/2628830
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/d...-healthcare-bill-during-delay/article/2628830
Poodlestrike
Banned
Good play. More exposure this thing gets the deader it is.
Aaron Strife
Banned
They won't get them, but it's good to keep the pressure up.
Johnson is trolling McConnell by saying he's undecided on the bill now based on McConnell's promises to the moderates that none of the bad parts will ever go into effect, lol. I'm starting to suspect McConnell may not be the genius everyone's hyped him up to be.
Beer Monkey
Member
Everything we can to avoid war?
AntraxSuicide
Banned
There certainly isn't an easy answer with Russia. The lay of the land, so to speak, is that a powerful nation (with the second strongest military in the world) is led by people who have no interest in negotiation. In fact, they blame negotiation with the world for the fall of the USSR and its pride.
Diplomacy has only pushed them to aggression because they'd rather go down shooting than negotiate. Any action taken against them could spark a full war. So I get why it's a hard situation. But to that end people need to remember that while we haven't had a war in the past 60-70 years that was justifiable or unavoidable, sometimes they do happen. It's scary but it's true.
Edit:
The only action that won't risk war is to lift our sanctions and halt any response to election influence and their military actions in neighboring states. Putin is against the wall and any response has a chance of him feeling trapped. Obviously though it's silly to allow these crimes to go unanswered.
Diplomacy has only pushed them to aggression because they'd rather go down shooting than negotiate. Any action taken against them could spark a full war. So I get why it's a hard situation. But to that end people need to remember that while we haven't had a war in the past 60-70 years that was justifiable or unavoidable, sometimes they do happen. It's scary but it's true.
Edit:
The only action that won't risk war is to lift our sanctions and halt any response to election influence and their military actions in neighboring states. Putin is against the wall and any response has a chance of him feeling trapped. Obviously though it's silly to allow these crimes to go unanswered.
Afghanistan was fine, Gulf War was fine.
Dude you sound like a rabid hawk, not sure how else to frame it.
When we retaliate, there are also consequences.
I mean, I don't have close to enough information here to make informed points. However, I would just note that our counterrattacks, whatever form they take, will not be without consequence either.
Of course not, but action has to be taken regardless. Even if Russia stopped meddling in America's elections and affairs, they are trying to destabilize Western civilization as a whole and invading former Soviet satellites. They are a danger to world peace and need to be dealt with
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
.................................................
26000 dead civilians in a war with no conceivable ending is not what I'd typically characterize as "fine"
Once I read that I knew we wouldn't see eye to eye.
I really hate doing this but every single time in history that nations decided to let anothers do as they wished in order to avoid a big war it just resulted in an even worse situation, as the other guy just continued to play its hand to obtain more and more advantages until war was inevitable. A hard stance (such as "warnings" in the form of hacks and improvements in the western cyber security and maybe better connection with media to avoid bots) is necessary! Economic sanctions should be put until he decides to play by normal rules!
Edit: afghanistan is a weird situation as it is a symbol of what happens when two superpowers decide to do proxy wars that end up destroying a country and then being left alone was too unstable. If there was no war, it would probably be a narco country with a really hard islamic culture that would be the bed for wahhabbist terrorists.
A government protecting the terrorists who killed ~4000 people on 9/11 is not "fine" to let exist.
Afghanistan got fucked in large part because of Iraq and the diversion of necessary resources.
Bin Laden led those attacks. And we put a bullet through his brain. When you are attacked, you retaliate.
Not all retaliation need be direct military (and in Russia's case, it cant' be.)
Frank the Great
Banned
Russia should be hit with economic sanctions in some form for the hacking.
Talk of anything further is crazy. A cyber counterattack is needless escalation and is not how modern nations resolve problems.
It's also crazy that Russia is getting away with it thanks to Trump. I mean, holy shit. History will look back and say WTF.
Talk of anything further is crazy. A cyber counterattack is needless escalation and is not how modern nations resolve problems.
It's also crazy that Russia is getting away with it thanks to Trump. I mean, holy shit. History will look back and say WTF.
Abinash117
Member
What does that mean?
Do you mean war as any type of retaliation or any retaliation that might lead to more physical type of war?
If conclusive evidence is provided that the Russians influence in the elections and hacked other systems, what should be the response?
There will consequences by not doing anything as well. No matter what you do there will be consequences.
LOL WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS.
Retaliation, "Just bc its what you do" is a fucking terrible answer for going to war. You better be able to show me, in a quantifiable way, that you are saving lives on aggregate. What did this war solve?
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
I hope you support an immediate invasion and occupation of the United States so that the terrorist-supporting government that frequently infringes upon sovereignty and kills thousands of civilians will be stopped.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked