• 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 Interim Thread of cunning stunts and desperate punts

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

laserbeam

Banned
Trakdown said:
Yeah, fuck people with opinions!

Nice of you to point out "Liberal" celebrities, btw. I guess you had nothing but love for Chuck Norris' banter.
Click to expand...

Personally I think all celebrities should shut the fuck up and keep their opinions to themselves and support the campaign like every other American. Just because they are in a TV show or a movie doesn't mean we need them spouting off.

capslock said:
No one asked for yours, but you're still sharing it, why can't she have that same right? It's her myspace page after all.
Click to expand...

Considering some of her opinion is based on misinformation She should fact check before running her mouth if she insists. Oh No Palin confirmed what NATO treaty would ditate if georgia was in NATO. ZOMG ZOMG
 
C

Clevinger

Member
laserbeam said:
Personally I think all celebrities should shut the fuck up and keep their opinions to themselves and support the campaign like every other American. Just because they are in a TV show or a movie doesn't mean we need them spouting off
Click to expand...

I think all forumers should shut the fuck up about politics. Keep their opinions to themselves. Just because you're on a forum doesn't mean we need you spouting off.

See how stupid that logic is?

laserbeam said:
Considering some of her opinion is based on misinformation She should fact check before running her mouth if she insists.
Click to expand...

Yeah, remember how you said not once, but twice after first being corrected that Obama exploited MLK's holiday by setting the date there?

Yeah...
 
P

polyh3dron

Banned
laserbeam said:
What would we do without Liberal Celebrities sharing their views when no one asked for it.
Click to expand...
Celebrities are not allowed to ever share their opinions with people, but laserbeam is allowed to.
laserbeam said:
Personally I think all celebrities should shut the fuck up and keep their opinions to themselves and support the campaign like every other American. Just because they are in a TV show or a movie doesn't mean we need them spouting off.
Click to expand...
"support the campaign like every other American"? What does that even mean? And we're all spouting off here and none of us to my knowledge is in a TV show or movie.
 
Bumblebeetuna

Bumblebeetuna

Member
The Blue Jihad said:
What agenda? They did her a favor. Everything they cut made her seem more like a vapid fool who's just regurgitating talking points. She repeated entire paragraphs for Christ's sake.
Click to expand...

Yeah, by cutting out basically everything she said about Russia and Georgia and making it seem as if she is just ready to send troops in tomorrow when in reality all she said is because of NATO, we would need to support Georgia if they joined. And support them by sanctions and diplomatic pressure, not war. She specifically says it doesn't have to be all out war but they edit it out and now you're seeing people go apeshit because omg she's starting shit with RUSSIA WTF :lol

Or when she tells Gibson that you can see Russia from Alaska but then they edit out her response when pressed on what that means, so it looks like Gibson asked her a serious question and her only response was "well dur you can see russia right there LOL".

Among other edits. And the whole Bush Doctrine bull, I'm sure they knew there are only about 7 different versions and explanations of the Bush Doctrine and that any person would seem confused when asked such a vague question about an issue with so many different meanings. She isn't repeating anything, Gibson just keeps asking the same questions. When someone asks if we have a right to attack someone who is about to attack us and the response is that the President should do whatever it takes to defend the country, that's a pretty obvious and straight forward yes imho. Yet he asks it like 3 more times.

Basically the whole thing paints her out to be some war mongering buffoon who doesn't know shit but if you read the unedited transcript she makes good points and says she hates war and wants to see it end. I would love to see the response in this thread if Obama did an interview that was as butchered as that one.
 
C

capslock

Is jealous of Matlock's emoticon
laserbeam said:
Personally I think all celebrities should shut the fuck up and keep their opinions to themselves and support the campaign like every other American. Just because they are in a TV show or a movie doesn't mean we need them spouting off.

Considering some of her opinion is based on misinformation She should fact check before running her mouth if she insists. Oh No Palin confirmed what NATO treaty would ditate if georgia was in NATO. ZOMG ZOMG
Click to expand...

True, facts are clearly very important when it comes to the McCain/Palin campaign.
 
D

Door2Dawn

Banned
laserbeam said:
Personally I think all celebrities should shut the fuck up and keep their opinions to themselves and support the campaign like every other American. Just because they are in a TV show or a movie doesn't mean we need them spouting off.



Considering some of her opinion is based on misinformation She should fact check before running her mouth if she insists. Oh No Palin confirmed what NATO treaty would ditate if georgia was in NATO. ZOMG ZOMG
Click to expand...
You can shut the fuck up too,if you want to play that game.
 
L

laserbeam

Banned
Clevinger said:
I think all forumers should shut the fuck up about politics. Keep their opinions to themselves. Just because you're on a forum doesn't mean we need you spouting off.

See how stupid that logic is?
Click to expand...

Not even comparable. When Joe Schmoe American discussing on a forum with other citizens who can interact with them gets screen time then youll have a point.

Last time I checked These Celebrities get to run their mouth with no debate. Everyone on this forum get to debate and respond to points. Celebrities lecture form their Million dollar mansions without any sort of ability to reply to them.
 
T

thefit

Member
MassiveAttack said:
Greatest interview exchange in the history of anything.
Click to expand...

Yeah and the MSM is tripping over itself to apologize for her shortcomings. I couldn't believe my ears last night as I listened as commentators, on PBS of all places, say she did fine and today the MSM across the board is making up excuses for her not having a clue what the Bush doctrine is pinning her obliviousness on the different interpretations of it. They think we are so stupid, that its not that she got it wrong, she didn't know WTF Char-LE was speaking of period.

They wan't her on their shows and/or networks so bad that they are willing to lie to the public and cover for for her even in the face of the most obvious. Sick.
 
M

MassiveAttack

Banned
Howdy neighbor! :lol

PalinImage1.jpg
mp_main_wide_Medvedev_Putin.jpg
 
G

gkryhewy

Member
laserbeam said:
Not even comparable. When Joe Schmoe American discussing on a forum with other citizens who can interact with them gets screen time then youll have a point.

Last time I checked These Celebrities get to run their mouth with no debate
Click to expand...

Kinda like the McCain campaign.

I know it must be frustrating that fucking PINK and Annie Lennox have more informed and well-articulated worldviews than your vice presidential nominee, but let's call a spade a spade.

Feel free to find a flaw in my avatar again in rebuttal.
 
N

NetMapel

Guilty White Male Mods Gave Me This Tag
Pakkidis said:
Trust me, the less Sarah Palin mentions Canada the better. We want nothing to do with her, shes is all yours! :)
Click to expand...
I read the hundreds of comments left on the article about Sarah Palin on CTV. Let me just say that I'm frighten the amount of Canadians who support her. About 40% of all the comments I read support her one way or another. Some went as far as saying it is sad that Palin isn't a Canadian so they could vote for her. Poor poor Canada :(
 
C

Clevinger

Member
laserbeam said:
Last time I checked These Celebrities get to run their mouth with no debate.
Click to expand...

You don't have to debate on the internet either, like the time you ignored the debate that corrected you about Obama exploiting MLK's holiday.

The only difference is less people hear your bullshit.
 
N

NetMapel

Guilty White Male Mods Gave Me This Tag
thefit said:
Yeah and the MSM is tripping over itself to apologize for her shortcomings. I couldn't believe my ears last night as I listened as commentators, on PBS of all places, say she did fine and today the MSM across the board is making up excuses for her not having a clue what the Bush doctrine is pinning her obliviousness on the different interpretations of it. They think we are so stupid, that its not that she got it wrong, she didn't know WTF Char-LE was speaking of period.

They wan't her on their shows and/or networks so bad that they are willing to lie to the public and cover for for her even in the face of the most obvious. Sick.
Click to expand...
It's sad indeed. The common population might not know about a lot of things, but I'd hope a VP candidate knows a whole lot more than the average joe. Stop justifying her shortcoming by saying "well duh, it's unlikely most Americans know this !" No kidding, guys... that's precisely why we're voting for a president and vice president because they're supposed to be better than a whole lot of us common people :p
 
T

Trakdown

Member
God, I wish I could interview this woman. Like shooting fish in a barrel.

Me: "What is your opinion of Kaiser Permanente?"
Sarah: "Well, Germany's one of our allies, so we have to respect the way he's done things."
 
M

MassiveAttack

Banned
Trakdown said:
God, I wish I could interview this woman. Like shooting fish in a barrel.

Me: "What is your opinion of Kaiser Permanente?"
Sarah: "Well, Germany's one of our allies, so we have to respect the way he's done things."
Click to expand...

:lol :lol :lol :lol
 
P

polyh3dron

Banned
Loudninja said:
New Obama ad

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/13/114646/112/634/597372
Click to expand...
old.

These voters Obama has to reach don't know what lobbyists are, they probably think they're hotel employees that work in the lobbies or something, or even worse they're people who think that Obama's campaign has just as many lobbyists in it without actually checking it out.

Again, if this is the Obama campaign's idea of hitting back, they're gonna lose.
 
M

maximum360

Member
MassiveAttack said:
Good point. If, as Palin keeps saying over and over and over again, that Russia is Alaska's "next door neighbor" and is so vital to Alaska's interests, how come she never went there? She didn't even own a US passport until 2007.
Click to expand...


I'm so hoping that the "Russia is right next to Alaska" nonsense becomes the basis of a SNL skit tonight. :D
 
D

Door2Dawn

Banned
GhaleonEB said:
Yeah, that's yesterday's update. But worth noting that it's a 2 point McCain lead, which is exactly what was expected at this point. All is not lost.
Click to expand...
Yes it is!!!!!


But seriously,Obama had 310 ev after his convention. Now its McCains turn.
 
N

numble

Member
Juice said:
Saw the http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/ update just now and went :( when I saw that it has Obama losing 266 to McCain 277 in electoral after marking Ohio light red :( :(
Click to expand...
Read the analysis instead of just looking at the numbers.

Conversely, the Obama campaign's focus on the ground game has come under criticism in some circles, even though almost by definition most of its effects will not be known until after the election. Suppose that, because of their ground efforts, the Obama campaign is 5 percent more efficient at turning out its vote than the McCain campaign on Election Day in the 22 states or so where it has concentrated its efforts. The implications of this would be absolutely enormous -- a net of 2-3 points in each and every swing state -- but we know zip, zilch, nada at this stage about their ultimate effect.

Besides all that, there is nothing particularly impressive about the Republican bounce. It has followed almost exactly the pattern that we predicted ahead of time when two typical convention bounces are taken and laid on top of one another:

...that is, first a sharp tick upward in Obama's numbers, peaking at about a 6-point bounce, and then an even sharper downtick, bringing McCain about 2 points ahead of where the numbers stood in the pre-convention period. The final phase has yet to occur, but was predicted to consist of gradual lessening of the net GOP bounce over a period of a couple of weeks, as the day-to-day banalities of the campaign tend to displace the emotional high of the convention from voters' memory banks.

This is not to suggest that the Obama campaign is sitting on some sort of latent electoral magic bullet. If there are still 2-3 points worth of "bounce" in the McCain numbers, that would suggest once things return to equilibrium, Obama will be 1-2 points ahead rather than McCain being up by the same margin -- better results for him, certainly, but hardly a commanding advantage.

The better question from my vantage point is why Obama's lead dwindled from a peak of 5-6 points in June to 0-2 points in the week or two immediately prior to the conventions. Even if McCain's convention bounce is entirely "real", he would still have gained more ground in the polls between June and the conventions than he did during the convention period itself.

I think the Obama campaign's messaging, with an exception here and there, has actually been fairly sharp of late. In contrast, I think they wasted a lot of time over the summer on things ranging from Obama having to play defense after he flip-flopped on FISA, to the European leg of his foreign trip, to the unnecessarily drawn out and ultimately anticlimactic VP rollout process. But since Obama had maintained a lead in the polls throughout that period, those things did not receive nearly so much scrutiny as Obama is getting now.
Click to expand...
 
M

Mandark

Small balls, big fun!
laserbeam said:
Considering some of her opinion is based on misinformation She should fact check before running her mouth if she insists. Oh No Palin confirmed what NATO treaty would ditate if georgia was in NATO. ZOMG ZOMG
Click to expand...

You watch the interview? It was a followup to the question of whether Georgia should be admitted into NATO, to which Palin said yes.

So she confirmed what NATO treated would dictate if *her preferred policy were enacted*.
 
P

Pakkidis

Member
NetMapel said:
I read the hundreds of comments left on the article about Sarah Palin on CTV. Let me just say that I'm frighten the amount of Canadians who support her. About 40% of all the comments I read support her one way or another. Some went as far as saying it is sad that Palin isn't a Canadian so they could vote for her. Poor poor Canada :(
Click to expand...

YOU TAKE THAT BACK..WE CANADIANS ARE SMART PEOPLE........*reads comments* Faints

Seriously, have we all lost our common sense. Canada always welcomes smart democrats ;)
 
J

Jonm1010

Banned
Bumblebeetuna said:
Yeah, by cutting out basically everything she said about Russia and Georgia and making it seem as if she is just ready to send troops in tomorrow when in reality all she said is because of NATO, we would need to support Georgia if they joined. And support them by sanctions and diplomatic pressure, not war. She specifically says it doesn't have to be all out war but they edit it out and now you're seeing people go apeshit because omg she's starting shit with RUSSIA WTF :lol

Or when she tells Gibson that you can see Russia from Alaska but then they edit out her response when pressed on what that means, so it looks like Gibson asked her a serious question and her only response was "well dur you can see russia right there LOL".

Among other edits. And the whole Bush Doctrine bull, I'm sure they knew there are only about 7 different versions and explanations of the Bush Doctrine and that any person would seem confused when asked such a vague question about an issue with so many different meanings. She isn't repeating anything, Gibson just keeps asking the same questions. When someone asks if we have a right to attack someone who is about to attack us and the response is that the President should do whatever it takes to defend the country, that's a pretty obvious and straight forward yes imho. Yet he asks it like 3 more times.

Basically the whole thing paints her out to be some war mongering buffoon who doesn't know shit but if you read the unedited transcript she makes good points and says she hates war and wants to see it end. I would love to see the response in this thread if Obama did an interview that was as butchered as that one.
Click to expand...

The Bush doctrine is an advocation and justification of preventive war over pre-emptive war and what historically follows the Just war doctrine. There, easy and done! She never answered the question of whether she believed in the doctrine or explained what it was, and the question was about the doctrine clause that allows for preventive war not pre-emptive, it was a yes no question. Instead she deflected and made a comment about something every nation and rational actor on the world stage says and that is about pre-emptive engagement. Quit acting like the girl that said just months ago that she has no interest and no thoughts on foreign policy is really some closet whiz that just got edited wrong. She didnt know the Bush Doctrine, she thinks Russia was completely unprovoked and all these questions came from a notorious soft ball journalist. Your defense is dishonest and flat out false in some areas. And Im reading the transcript as I type and there is nothing that she answers about the proximity of Alaska to Russia that gives that comment any legitimacy in fact she further makes her self look stupid.
 
K

kkaabboomm

Member
OuterWorldVoice said:
You can put lipstick on a mouse. And that's one sexy mouse.
Click to expand...
sexism, palin is not a mouse, why do you hate women, etc, etc, etc, you chose you words carefully so you know what you are saying, etc, etc, etc
 
L

laserbeam

Banned
Mandark said:
You watch the interview? It was a followup to the question of whether Georgia should be admitted into NATO, to which Palin said yes.

So she confirmed what NATO treated would dictate if *her preferred policy were enacted*.
Click to expand...
NATO has already confirmed Georgia will become a member. They are simply not getting special instant membership treatment.

Obama is very much in favor of Georgia as well. I guess evil Obama would go to war too with Russia if a NATO membership Georgia was invaded. Evil people with Agenda's.

Funny part is legally the United States MUST respond with force due to the treaty. Roosevelt's stacked Surpreme Court ruled that Treaties overrule the Constitution. So Democrat or Republican in office a NATO member attacked means we have to go to war or NATO implodes.
 
J

JoshuaJSlone

Member
thefro said:
And they're going to get 2/3rds of a Democratic controlled Congress to pass this... how exactly?
Click to expand...
I'd hope there aren't a large number of Democrats who would otherwise be for such a thing, but would vote against it just to spite the chances of one potential opposition candidate. Of course, the two party system makes them do stupid things.
 
P

polyh3dron

Banned
kkaabboomm said:
sexism, palin is not a mouse, why do you hate women, etc, etc, etc, you chose you words carefully so you know what you are saying, etc, etc, etc
Click to expand...
However, Palin did refer to herself as a dog. One would infer that this would mean that it is OK to make statements referring to her as such.
 
T

TheKingsCrown

Banned
laserbeam said:
NATO has already confirmed Georgia will become a member. They are simply not getting special instant membership treatment.

Obama is very much in favor of Georgia as well. I guess evil Obama would go to war too with Russia if a NATO membership Georgia was invaded. Evil people with Agenda's.

Funny part is legally the United States MUST respond with force due to the treaty. Roosevelt's stacked Surpreme Court ruled that Treaties overrule the Constitution. So Democrat or Republican in office a NATO member attacked means we have to go to war or NATO implodes.
Click to expand...
You don't fucking respond with force to Russia. That is in the best interests of NO ONE.
 
L

laserbeam

Banned
TheKingsCrown said:
You don't fucking respond with force to Russia. That is in the best interests of NO ONE.
Click to expand...
Oh I fully agree with you. Im just stating what the treaty the US entered into says and the fact the Supreme Court ruled that such treaties are the law of the land.

I have no desire to see us get into a War with Russia. I like my mushroom clouds limited to old Test Ground footage and video games.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
RNC suspending GOP Feb '16 debate with NBC (Because lol CNBC)
2 3 4 5
212
19K
OuterLimits replied
  • Locked
The Democratic National Committee Chair Debate |OT| - Dem One: A Politics Story
2
79
8K
kirblar replied
  • Locked
NYT: G.O.P. Urges Donald Trump to Broaden Outreach to Black Voters
2 3 4
178
21K
mckmas8808 replied
  • Locked
Hillary Clinton retweets Slate voter guide calling her most corrupt candidate
3
4K
ModBot replied
  • Locked
NYT: "Trump-Size Idea for a New President: Build Something Inspiring"
2
74
9K
jerry113 replied
Top Bottom