PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house

Status
Not open for further replies.
Crab said:
More Sanders primary voters voted Clinton than Clinton primary voters voted Obama. You cannot reasonably say that Sanders was even unwittingly pro-Russian when he went out of his way to promote greater Democratic unity than Clinton herself did 8 years ago.
Click to expand...

B does not mean it caused A

This is like textbook coloration does not mean causation.
 
pigeon said:
As previously discussed, "purity test" is just a slur you use to indicate that you think a particular platform demand is unreasonable, so the answer is "at whatever point I personally think the platform should end".
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the answer is when people try to actively hinder half a loaf because it's not the full loaf they wanted.

See also: The Affordable Care Act.

Saying" I advocate for policy X" can never be a purity test.

Saying "I oppose X/2 because it isn't X" always will be.

Not sure how it's a slur tbh but maybe you've seen people using it differently.
 
Ernest said:
Calling it now:

Trump will fire Mueller. And there will be ZERO consequences.
Click to expand...
You're probably basing this on the perception that GOP is doing nothing in face of crisis after crisis with Trump/Russia. Kinda like how GOP was shrugging its shoulders with the firing of Comey. However, this is different. This is Trump shutting down investigation without any reason. Firing of Comey resulted in Mueller taking over. Firing of Deputy AG/Mueller will result in a bigger cataclysm for Trump, besides the fact that Christopher Wray just got confirmed to lead the FBI and he can simply continue from where Mueller left off.

This will also result in a cacophony of voices calling for an independent Commission appointed by Congress, and the Congress being forced to reappoint Mueller or create a new independent special prosecutor. Besides, all the GOP "leaders" (Ryan, Mitch, Graham etc) have pointed to Mueller's investigation as to the reason why they have not appointed one yet.

There will be no shelter for GOP if Trump goes through this.
 
Don't really see what McConnell's playing at. Are Moran and Lee back on board? Paul and Collins weren't at the meeting and unless those two hop on board they can't win until they have McCain back.

Trump and the GOP have flip-flopped so much on what they're going to do it would be pretty shitty if they actually did manage to pull something out, but we'll see I guess.

Trump ticked down on Gallup again today, 36%. 35% was his previous low - can he beat that?
 
Gruco said:
Pretty sure the answer is when people try to actively hinder half a loaf because it's not the full loaf they wanted.

See also: The Affordable Care Act.

Saying" I advocate for policy X" can never be a purity test.

Saying "I oppose X/2 because it isn't X" always will be.

Not sure how it's a slur tbh but maybe you've seen people using it differently.
Click to expand...

Yeah, like 100% of the time people actually use it.

The actual conversations look like:

A: I want a candidate who supports policy X. It is a key policy for me.
B: What about policy X/2?
A: Whatever, that's not X, we should demand X.
B: Purity test!

In other words, the actual argument here is whether X is an important enough policy that demanding the candidate support it is reasonable, or whether it's not practical or political and we should settle for X/2. "Purity test" is used to suggest the people who prioritize X are being unreasonable, by the people who don't prioritize X. That's what makes it a slur.
 
He will definitely beat 35% when some catastrophe happens and he won't be able to do shit. Imagine if another Katrina happens and he's at the golf course?
 
Aaron Strife said:
Don't really see what McConnell's playing at. Are Moran and Lee back on board? Paul and Collins weren't at the meeting and unless those two hop on board they can't win until they have McCain back.

Trump and the GOP have flip-flopped so much on what they're going to do it would be pretty shitty if they actually did manage to pull something out, but we'll see I guess.

Trump ticked down on Gallup again today, 36%. 35% was his previous low - can he beat that?
Click to expand...

What's McConnell up to now?
 
Ernest said:
Calling it now:

Trump will fire Mueller. And there will be ZERO consequences.
Click to expand...

Oh, I for one agree that Trump will at least have to get talked down from doing it. But if he does, I seriously question if it will have NO consequences. We’re watching an intelligence and law enforcement community twisting itself over how to respond to a president who is totally pervaded by apparent corruption. We’ve already seen leaks that have harmed this presidency; that isn’t the same as a resignation or golden handcuffs but every moment the Republicans and the administration have to deal with this, they get distracted themselves. Do we really think the Trump administration would be this much of a wretched failure if not for these stories?

And if Mueller gets fired, do you really think no one will respond? I think that decision tears the government and the executive apart. That’s not a clean consequence but that’s definitely a consequence. It’s just a very negative, destructive one. By then, Bannon’s statement about the ‘deep state’ will have a tinge of truth because whatever else is being held back will probably make it to The Times the minute the firing is announced. The opposition might be motivated to basically walk out and leave a wrench in all of the machinery (that talk of slow walking nominees? imagine how bad that could get for the president’s nominees). Or will succeed in starting an independent counsel’s office for Mueller. Republicans might finally need to go into a hole to escape whatever would happen to them in the court of public opinion.
 
pigeon said:
Yeah, like 100% of the time people actually use it.

The actual conversations look like:

A: I want a candidate who supports policy X. It is a key policy for me.
B: What about policy X/2?
A: Whatever, that's not X, we should demand X.
B: Purity test!

In other words, the actual argument here is whether X is an important enough policy that demanding the candidate support it is reasonable, or whether it's not practical or political and we should settle for X/2. "Purity test" is used to suggest the people who prioritize X are being unreasonable, by the people who don't prioritize X. That's what makes it a slur.
Click to expand...

It's certainly not 100%. The term came up in the original ACA fight when people starting opposing it from the left. There were also plenty of people who opposed Hillary because X/2 was pointless or whatever.

Thinking on it some more, there's also stuff like "Opposed this 20 years ago and came on board too late, therefore doesn't count" which I would also say is a kind of purity test.

None of these are slurs.
 
Ernest said:
Calling it now:

Trump will fire Mueller. And there will be ZERO consequences.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by "zero consequences"? Firing Mueller will not kill the Russia investigation, if that's what you're worried about. If anything it'll make things look even worse for Trump and either someone new will be appointed to lead Mueller's team or Congress will be under immense pressure to appoint their own independent counsel. It would be terrible optics for Trump, since it would look like (and absolutely be considered) an abuse of power. Plus, in the unlikely event we ever get to the point where impeachment is on the table, he's just giving Dems more ammunition to push for it.

I absolutely believe Trump is dumb enough to do it though. Especially as the investigation expands and delves deeper into his finances.
 
Trump's "look at they did to poor Bernie" and the DNC email hack/release very much happened.

Sanders obviously wasn't actively involved personally- if he was going to be shilling for a foreign country it wouldn't be fucking Russia. But they sure did leverage him to the best they could.
 
kirblar said:
Yup. The public is always anti-establishment and votes against the President's party in midterms.

People are bad.
Click to expand...

I don't even mean just in terms of next year's elections, I just mean the idea of there ever being a permanent majority status for either party in either the legislative or executive branches is not going to happen. I cringed constantly last year when people, including many on GAF, kept going on about how the Republicans were doomed to be banned from the White House for decades and decades. I didn't expect Trump to win, but I also expected another Republican president as early as 2020.
 
What I mean is that, bad press aside, he never suffered any true consequences for firing Comey, and the same would happen with Mueller. Not saying that would kill the investigation, but just that no one in his party or elsewhere would rebuke or hold him accountable to that action.
 
Ernest said:
What I mean is that, bad press aside, he never suffered any true consequences for firing Comey, and the same would happen with Mueller. Not saying that would kill the investigation, but just that no one in his party or elsewhere would rebuke or hold him accountable to that action.
Click to expand...

lol wait what are you just forgetting that literally everything happening right now is because he fired comey or what
 
Sometimes you don't comment on a thing because it's too stupid to comment on. Bernie is not a Russian stooge, that's Stein's job. Doesn't mean he wasn't used by 'em, though.
 
Poodlestrike said:
Sometimes you don't comment on a thing because it's too stupid to comment on. Bernie is not a Russian stooge, that's Stein's job. Doesn't mean he wasn't used by 'em, though.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. I didn't comment on it because that's conspiracy theory tier talk. And this is from someone who don't care too much about Sanders.
 
Ernest said:
What I mean is that, bad press aside, he never suffered any true consequences for firing Comey, and the same would happen with Mueller. Not saying that would kill the investigation, but just that no one in his party or elsewhere would rebuke or hold him accountable to that action.
Click to expand...

No consequences for firing Comey other than the hiring of Mueller...
 
pigeon said:
I read PoliGAF every day, this is 100% false.

If it was ErasureAcer saying that about Hillary it would have 30 responses and that would be a way dumber idea.
Click to expand...

Hey guys, did Hilary collaborate with the Russians to get Trump elected by blocking Bernie from getting the nomination?!

The hottest take I can't wait to happen (please never let this happen)
 
balladofwindfishes said:
What's McConnell up to now?
Click to expand...


I feel like this is all because of Trump. Trump can't take that they lost with this bill and keeps trying to will in into passing(it doesn't matter what bill it is, he needs to sign a bill to declare a victory). I think McConnell wanted this thing to be over and done with and try and focus on anything else.

The only saving grace is that Trump and the GOP are living in their own personal hell right now.
 
Aaron Strife said:
Don't really see what McConnell's playing at. Are Moran and Lee back on board? Paul and Collins weren't at the meeting and unless those two hop on board they can't win until they have McCain back.

Trump and the GOP have flip-flopped so much on what they're going to do it would be pretty shitty if they actually did manage to pull something out, but we'll see I guess.

Trump ticked down on Gallup again today, 36%. 35% was his previous low - can he beat that?
Click to expand...
Honestly? I don't think he will ever stop trying until it is voted on and passed. If they move on to other legislative items he'll still include amendments to try and repeal/water down the law. I don't see him giving up.
 
pigeon said:
In fairness, there don't seem to be a lot of PoliGAFfers stepping up and saying "you're an idiot, Bernie is obviously not a Russian stooge."
Click to expand...

I mean when this thread falls back into re-litigating the 2016 primary, I just try to ignore that plot line. It's pointless in July 2017. Also this current plot line is EXTRA stupid. If you REALLY want others to comment:

  • Did Sanders do a LOT of stupid shit during the primaries? Yes.
  • Did Sanders keep using inflammatory language long after it was clear he couldn't win the primary? Yes.
  • Did Trump & the Russians successfully co-opt a lot of Sanders language? Yes.
  • Was Sanders' language easier to co-opt than that of the average Democratic candidate? Yes.
  • Did Sanders want or try to get Trump elected? No.
  • Is Sanders happy Trump won? No.
  • Is Sanders an agent of Russia or another foreign entity? No.
  • Has Sanders ever had anything but the best interests of American citizens at heart? No.
 
Are people bitching about posts not being made now? For fucks sake
 
Crab said:
More Sanders primary voters voted Clinton than Clinton primary voters voted Obama. You cannot reasonably say that Sanders was even unwittingly pro-Russian when he went out of his way to promote greater Democratic unity than Clinton herself did 8 years ago.
Click to expand...

Clinton dropped out on June 8, 2008.

Bernie dropped out on July 12, 2016.

With that said, I'm not going to dignify the Bernie is a Russian stooge comment with any comment in response. It's not a serious inquiry.
 
The Bernie or Bust movement people were actually Patsies for Putin.

Bernie could have done more and done it earlier to discourage that.

Bernie isn't a Russian stooge. I'm not so sure he and his wife aren't guilty of impropriety regarding the college but that is an entirely different matter.
 
Jeff Stein‏Verified account
@JStein_Vox

A member of Congress told me Democrats big 2018 slogan, which is set to be released Monday. It's: "Better Skills, Better Jobs, Better Wages"
 
Got the Shakes said:
Jeff Stein‏Verified account
@JStein_Vox

A member of Congress told me Democrats big 2018 slogan, which is set to be released Monday. It's: "Better Skills, Better Jobs, Better Wages"
Click to expand...
Stealing a valid criticism: Why on earth is the last one not "Better America".

Hillary was right to steal the GOP playbook w/ imagery. KEEP STEALING IT.
 
Got the Shakes said:
Jeff Stein‏Verified account
@JStein_Vox

A member of Congress told me Democrats big 2018 slogan, which is set to be released Monday. It's: "Better Skills, Better Jobs, Better Wages"
Click to expand...

Hmm. This could possibly work, but you're missing the 800 pound gorilla in the room (the other one, the non-orange one).

Labor market's good right now, but the critique is that the quality of jobs has decreased.

Though i dislike this because it promotes that "Skills Gap" bullshit that executives and thought-piecers like to spout because corporate America doesn't want to pay a fair wage for in-demand fields.
 
BoogieWoogie said:
Before everyone rips it apart as shit, I actually think that isn't too bad a slogan.
Click to expand...
It's something that's halfway there but which badly needs a marketing team to do what the internet did in literal minutes and massively improve it.

"Contract with America" was a good slogan in '94.

Putting "America" in the slogan is a good thing! Who are you going to piss off with that- Cornell West and Jill Stein?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT1| From Russia with Love
395 396 397 398 399
20K
1M
UberTag replied
  • Poll
2017-2018 NCAA Men's Basketball Topic: UNC from Redemption to Redeemed
21
3K
Corrik replied
Top Bottom