• 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 Tears/Lapel Pins (ScratchingHisCheek-Gate)

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Triumph

Banned
APF said:
It's so sad to see you spin like this :( But your questions are answered by reading the article.
Click to expand...
The only thing that article tells me is that serial liar Hillary Clinton has claimed to pass 22 bills and in reality has only passed 19, and nearly half of those had to do with naming post offices and courthouses. It's sad to see you spin like this. :(
 
E

electricpirate

Member
siamesedreamer said:
You call it arrogance. I call it wanting to protect our interests.

Besides our moral duty to fix what we fucked, we have significant economic ties to the region that must be protected. I don't like gambling with downside risks.




I did.
Click to expand...

We will never secure the region militarily though, our troops can merely contain a lid on the violence. The idea being that if the violence is down, then we can make progress. But political process hasn't happened, and our no amount of troops will create a lasting peace in Iraq.

But as the conflicts in Basra demonstrated, political reconciliation isn't going to come from within Iraq, it's going to require the entire region. As fucked up as it is, we are going to need Iran and Syria as open parts of the process instead of secretive agents of division.

The longer our troops stay there, the less incentive for the Iraqis to reach these political concensus, or get it's military trained. And while our presence does provide short term gains in security, it also attracts Al Queda and deepens Iraqi divisions.

Our troops are going have to start coming home sooner or later, and the later we do it, the worse it's going to be for everyone involved.
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
Cheebs said:
The Hillary Clinton campaign will be holding a protest at 30 Rock in NYC tomorrow a 8.

To protest NBC News/MSNBC. :lol
Click to expand...
What are they protesting exactly?

Is being such a vocal complainer about media coverage normal for a major presidential candidate? I know a lot of other candidates couldn't get time on debates and such this year, but one of the front-runners? This meme that the media is just picking on her isn't something I've seen as a tactic before. It's really strange.
 
S

syllogism

Member
CHICAGO, IL—Senator Barack Obama’s campaign announced today that more than 442,000 contributors across the country gave more than $40 million in March. More than 218,000 donors contributed to the campaign for the first time, and the average contribution level was $96.

"Senator Obama has always said that this campaign would rise or fall on the willingness of the American people to become partners in an effort to change our politics and start a new chapter in our history," campaign manager David Plouffe said. "Today we’re seeing the American people’s extraordinary desire to change Washington, as tens of thousands of new contributors joined the more than a million Americans who have already taken ownership of this campaign for change. Many of our contributors are volunteering for the campaign, making our campaign the largest grassroots army in recent political history."

March Fundraising by the Numbers

Total Raised in March: More than $40 million

Contributors in March: More than 442,000

First-Time Contributors in March: More than 218,000

Average Contribution: $96

Total Contributors to Date: More than 1,276,000
Click to expand...

So that would be 42,4M
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
Wow. That's more than I was expecting. When they said the ~$30m figure that was being tossed around was inaccurate yesterday, I assumed that meant it was too high. The Wright issue combined with the lack of numerous states voting probably are the factors in the drop.
 
S

scorcho

testicles on a cold fall morning
siamesedreamer said:
You call it arrogance. I call it wanting to protect our interests.

Besides our moral duty to fix what we fucked, we have significant economic ties to the region that must be protected. I don't like gambling with downside risks.
Click to expand...
the arrogance (and by turn hubris) is in projecting exactly what Iraqis need/want and then selectively dismissing information that counter what you think is correct. that same logic got us into Iraq and permeates into nearly every single action we've taken there since we invaded. and it's something i will continue to call you out on because for all the shit you give other people you are just as much an ideologue blind to facts/reality/logic. well-fucking-done.

but if you now want to shift the argument away from moralistic claims (since i don't believe your sincerity in that argument anyhow), fine - let's do that. we've already damaged our national security by starting the conflict and attempting to turn Iraq into a giant honeypot to kill the likely limited number of terrorists that exist all around the world. disregarding how badly we've messed up the post-war rebuilding and security operation - our mere presence there contributes greater hostility and tension to the region and allows extremist groups to easily recruit disaffected Iraqis and foreign fighters who hate our presence. the conflict has dragged on both our hard and soft power and cost hundreds of billions of dollars. your argument parallels all the naysayers who said leaving Vietnam would lead to a spread of communism throughout South East Asia and destroy our influence in the region. what happened there?

last, and i truly mean this with all sincerity because your initial condescension bothered me - you have the rational acuity of a 10 year old.
 
C

Cheebs

Member
GhaleonEB said:
What are they protesting exactly?

Is being such a vocal complainer about media coverage normal for a major presidential candidate? I know a lot of other candidates couldn't get time on debates and such this year, but one of the front-runners? This meme that the media is just picking on her isn't something I've seen as a tactic before. It's really strange.
Click to expand...
It's a tactic republicans used all the time prior to Fox News.
 
C

Cheebs

Member
New Rassmussen number:
46-43.

Obama +2 since yesterday. First time this week on Rassmussen he has gone up at all. Obama's weird trend of doing well at the end of the week but bad at the start continues?
 
H

harSon

Banned
GaimeGuy said:
So what are the campaign totals, now?
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure, CNN used to do have a running total but they conveniently stopped updating the numbers once Obama's numbers started to surge.
 
Smiles and Cries

Smiles and Cries

Member
Cheebs said:
New Rassmussen number:
46-43.

Obama +2 since yesterday. First time this week on Rassmussen he has gone up at all. Obama's weird trend of doing well at the end of the week but bad at the start continues?
Click to expand...

that trend is for gallup though :/
 
C

Cheebs

Member
thefro said:
Obama is going to pass Bush's total 2004 fundraising numbers by the end of this month if this keeps up. :D
Click to expand...
Thats one thing I worry about. What if all his donors personally feel like they donated enough and don't donate much during the general?
 
Smiles and Cries

Smiles and Cries

Member
harSon said:
I'm not quite sure, CNN used to do have a running total but they conveniently stopped updating the numbers once Obama's numbers started to surge.
Click to expand...

when does Obama camp plan to protest at CNN CENTER 190 Marietta St Nw, Atlanta?
 
S

syllogism

Member
Clinton aide Howard Wolfson suggested that Hillary's tax returns will be out today or tomorrow:

"She said late last week that they would be out within a week and so you can count on that," he said.

Wolfson also said Clinton's fundraising totals would be out when the filings are due, around April 20.
Click to expand...

Wait what, do they mean March fundraising totals?
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
Cheebs said:
Thats one thing I worry about. What if all his donors personally feel like they donated enough and don't donate much during the general?
Click to expand...
Then he'll keep expanding the donor base. Over 200,000 new donors in March, when there wasn't a contest since the 4th and he had a huge negative news cycle. If he can do that, I think the general will be fine.
syllogism said:
Wait what, do they mean March fundraising totals?
Click to expand...
Yup. Sounds like Obama just blew her out of the water. They don't want her figure coming out in the shadow of $40m. Rumor was she raised about half that.
 
T

tanod

when is my burrito
syllogism said:
Wait what, do they mean March fundraising totals?
Click to expand...

Tax records on the 15th. Fundraising on the 20th. Pennsylvania on the 22nd.

The Clinton campaign is going to have a wonderful run up to the Pennsylvania primary. They're setting themselves up for some problems.

I'm waiting to see what the campaign debt is.

harSon said:
Apparently 12% of the people polled believe his is a Muslim (Ugh..) and 5% think he is a racist :lol
Click to expand...

That's actually a big improvement. His Muslim numbers have hovered around 25% for months.
 
E

electricpirate

Member
Cheebs said:
Thats one thing I worry about. What if all his donors personally feel like they donated enough and don't donate much during the general?
Click to expand...

The trend towards lots of smaller donors helps me thinks, pulling in another 218,000 new contributors while under major attack is impressive. I don't think the republicans can do anything worse than Wright, so we'll see.
 
A

APF

Member
Triumph said:
The only thing that article tells me is that serial liar Hillary Clinton has claimed to pass 22 bills and in reality has only passed 19
Click to expand...
Oh wow; that's major spin again, Triumph:

FactCheck.org said:
Clinton's campaign claims that 22 of the senator's solely sponsored bills have become public law, and the e-mail claims 20. We counted 19, three fewer than the campaign because it included several Clinton-sponsored provisions that were part of other major bills. (The measures were substantive, having to do with such issues as improving treatment for wounded service members, but they didn't fit the rules of this tally.)
Click to expand...

Ouch; that must hurt, having facts and context hit you in the face like that. It's ok though, Ralph still loves you. Oh wait...
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
THE ARGUMENT — George Stephanopoulos on "World News": "Sources with direct knowledge of the conversation between Sen. Clinton and Gov. Bill Richardson … prior to the governor's endorsement of Obama, say she told him flatly, 'He cannot win, Bill. He cannot win.' "

It gets a Drudge banner and is the cover of the N.Y. Post: " 'Obama can't win' - Hill made brazen claim to sway Barack backer."
Click to expand...
http://dyn.politico.com/playbook/

***PLAYBOOK EXCLUSIVE - PAUL HARVEY'S THE REST OF THE STORY: It turns out it was Governor Richardson who told the Clintons that he did not think Obama could win when he promised them he would not endorse Obama. According to a Clinton source with knowledge of the conversation, the governor said then that Obama was too inexperienced.
Click to expand...

hmmm
 
T

Triumph

Banned
APF said:
Oh wow; that's major spin again, Triumph:



Ouch; that must hurt, having facts and context hit you in the face like that. It's ok though, Ralph still loves you. Oh wait...
Click to expand...
But wait! You stopped quoting right when it got good!

FactCheck.org said:
Clinton's campaign claims that 22 of the senator's solely sponsored bills have become public law, and the e-mail claims 20. We counted 19, three fewer than the campaign because it included several Clinton-sponsored provisions that were part of other major bills. (The measures were substantive, having to do with such issues as improving treatment for wounded service members, but they didn't fit the rules of this tally.) Nine of her successful bills had to do with naming post offices or courthouses, but others involved building safety, unemployment assistance and support for family caregivers.
Click to expand...
It's clear from this that if we need a President to name a courthouse at 3 AM, Hillary is the candidate for you!
 
A

APF

Member
Smiles and Cries said:
APF you are turning FactCheck.org into a meme in this thread, and we don't have lefty here to dig up Obama slanted fact checks :(
Click to expand...
Why, are you saying they're biased? Or that reality is biased.


Triumph: Obama has similar bills; not seeing the origins of your glee here. Just admit you picked a bad fight and move on.
 
S

siamesedreamer

Banned
scorcho said:
your argument parallels all the naysayers who said leaving Vietnam would lead to a spread of communism throughout South East Asia and destroy our influence in the region.
Click to expand...

My argument parallels the people who've been there since day one - people like Michael Ware.
 
T

Triumph

Banned
PhoenixDark said:
http://dyn.politico.com/playbook/



hmmm
Click to expand...
Yes. Hmmm.

***PLAYBOOK EXCLUSIVE - PAUL HARVEY'S THE REST OF THE STORY: It turns out it was Governor Richardson who told the Clintons that he did not think Obama could win when he promised them he would not endorse Obama. According to a Clinton source with knowledge of the conversation, the governor said then that Obama was too inexperienced.
Click to expand...
Because when I want information on a topic that is damaging for the Clintons, I go to a Clinton source!
 
S

scorcho

testicles on a cold fall morning
siamesedreamer said:
My argument parallels the people who've been there since day one - people like Michael Ware.
Click to expand...
good to see you selectively respond to portions of posts once your logical fallacies are made transparent. i'll make it easy for you by keeping all (non) responses to you in 30 words or less
 
T

thefro

Member
This is so genius

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008804030466

BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- It was an unexpected showdown of surrogates for Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton here Wednesday, and it sure looked like Obama's representative whipped up the most excitement.

As former President Bill Clinton was extolling his wife's credentials, Obama's campaign office in Bloomington began giving away tickets to Sunday's Dave Matthews concert at Assembly Hall.
Advertisement

Jason Schechtman, 19, Deerfield, Ill., a student at IU, got his tickets about 8 p.m. after waiting more than three hours. He met folks in line who said they'd left the Clinton rally to wait for tickets.

"I was leaning toward Obama, but this sealed the deal for sure," he said. "The Obama campaign announced this right as (Bill Clinton) was about to speak, and it brought everyone from over there to over here."
Click to expand...

Pics from the craziness yesterday in Bloomington
e6bdc5ea586577fe.jpg

6622e23c9b9f4d73.jpg

446d03a892adc9bf.jpg

95a6eddf381ebe80.jpg


There's also allotments of tickets in Indianapolis and at Purdue given away today... people were lined up at 7 pm for those. :lol Line in Indianapolis stretches around Monument Circle.
 
B

bob_arctor

Tough_Smooth
scorcho said:
the arrogance (and by turn hubris) is in projecting exactly what Iraqis need/want and then selectively dismissing information that counter what you think is correct. that same logic got us into Iraq and permeates into nearly every single action we've taken there since we invaded. and it's something i will continue to call you out on because for all the shit you give other people you are just as much an ideologue blind to facts/reality/logic. well-fucking-done.

but if you now want to shift the argument away from moralistic claims (since i don't believe your sincerity in that argument anyhow), fine - let's do that. we've already damaged our national security by starting the conflict and attempting to turn Iraq into a giant honeypot to kill the likely limited number of terrorists that exist all around the world. disregarding how badly we've messed up the post-war rebuilding and security operation - our mere presence there contributes greater hostility and tension to the region and allows extremist groups to easily recruit disaffected Iraqis and foreign fighters who hate our presence. the conflict has dragged on both our hard and soft power and cost hundreds of billions of dollars. your argument parallels all the naysayers who said leaving Vietnam would lead to a spread of communism throughout South East Asia and destroy our influence in the region. what happened there?
Click to expand...

How many times will common sense be ignored I wonder? 5 years and counting...
 
S

syllogism

Member
Cheebs said:
on mydd they linked to a hillaryclinton.com event where they are protesting in front of 30 Rock.
Click to expand...
I think anyone can create those events so it's a bit silly to call it a "hillary campaign" event
 
A

APF

Member
Triumph said:
Yes, they are completely in line with your original post on the subject.
Click to expand...
No, my original post was a valid, informative article correcting the record on an important and substantive debate. Your posts were dumb (to use your characterization) derailments and trolling. Nice though, I see you've decided to "play" (again to use your characterization). Do you really think it's in your best interest to make me look good? to make me look like the rational and fair person here? If so, by all means continue to make an ass of yourself.
 
T

Triumph

Banned
APF said:
No, my original post was a valid, informative article correcting the record on an important and substantive debate. Your posts were dumb (to use your characterization) derailments and trolling. Nice though, I see you've decided to "play" (again to use your characterization). Do you really think it's in your best interest to make me look good? to make me look like the rational and fair person here? If so, by all means continue to make an ass of yourself.
Click to expand...
The funny thing is, nothing I am capable of saying or doing will change the opinion that anyone here has of you. I'm not sure why you continue posting in these threads- I suspect that you're a masochist of some sort.
 
S

siamesedreamer

Banned
scorcho said:
good to see you selectively respond to portions of posts once your logical fallacies are made transparent.
Click to expand...

I'm willing to concede there are arguments that can be made for our complete withdrawal and our washing of our hands of the whole debacle (most notably the costs). I don't necessarily agree with all of them, but they are what they are.

Now how about you? Are you willing to concede there are significant risks associated with such a move?

My purpose is not to get anyone to agree with me. I don't really care. The next president is going to do what ever they are going to do regardless of my posts on some random website. I'm playing more of the devil's advocate. This thing isn't as simple as many here would like to believe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

The Most Commonly Spoken Foreign Languages in Each State (Besides Spanish)
2 3
121
14K
Mr. Wedgewood replied
  • Locked
USA Today: Clinton in commanding position for 270 EC votes
2 3 4 5
228
38K
Already Torn replied
  • Locked
Gallup: LGBT Identification Up, Vermont Highest (5.3%), South Dakota Lowest (2.0%)
49
7K
poppabk replied
  • Locked
Is it known as the RMV or DMV in your state?
2
72
9K
Desi replied
  • Locked
Fivethirtyeight: The Rust Belt has been turning red for a while.
2
62
12K
Foffy replied
Top Bottom