PoliGAF Thread of THE END and FIST POUNDS (NYT: Hillary drop out/endorse Saturday)

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DY_nasty

NeoGAF's official "was this shooting justified" consultant
Clinton is such a snake in the grass. If I'm Obama I do everything possible to keep her from getting on my ticket.
 
G

Gaborn

Member
Sharp said:
I said it would be a stopgap solution, and it would. It might help a little bit within four years, but it would (A) have detrimental effects on the Alaskan preservation, which means that as a Democrat Obama is not going to support it anyway, and (B) if the price of oil keeps rising elsewhere it might make less of a difference than it seems right now.
Click to expand...

You have no evidence it would have detrimental effects on Alaskan preservation. Again, look at Prudhoe bay, the same arguments were made and there has not been a significant negative affect there. You also can only speculate it may or may not make a major difference, but I know that as things stand right now it wouldn't HURT prices to have a larger supply of oil. If it keeps prices stable that's better than them rising even further, isn't?

Which is what Obama is doing. So it seems you agree with him then?
Click to expand...

Long term sure, but I saw nothing in his speech or his proposed policies for a short term solution within 4 years. Which is what we're discussing because it's what he said. He said we can't afford another 4 years of our addiction to oil, so I'm waiting for his short term solution.
 
S

Sharp

Member
Gaborn said:
You have no evidence it would have detrimental effects on Alaskan preservation. Again, look at Prudhoe bay, the same arguments were made and there has not been a significant negative affect there. You also can only speculate it may or may not make a major difference, but I know that as things stand right now it wouldn't HURT prices to have a larger supply of oil. If it keeps prices stable that's better than them rising even further, isn't?



Long term sure, but I saw nothing in his speech or his proposed policies for a short term solution within 4 years. Which is what we're discussing because it's what he said. He said we can't afford another 4 years of our addiction to oil, so I'm waiting for his short term solution.
Click to expand...
So you want Obama to give specific details on how he intends to accomplish the impossible? Those are some high expectations, even for one of us crazy Obama cultists on GAF. Note that he never actually said "I have a plan to make this man pay less for oil," he used him as an example of how our oil addiction was hurting us. So you are actually holding him to something he didn't even say. For the record, his plan will help lower the overall spending on oil even within the next four years, it's just that you decided to limit it specifically to the man he described.
 
V

ViperVisor

Member
capt.fcae7223ca9149e89a6008c32fc606cb.aptopix_obama_2008_primary_mndp114.jpg
 
G

Gaborn

Member
Sharp said:
So you want Obama to give specific details on how he intends to accomplish the impossible? Those are some high expectations, even for one of us crazy Obama cultists on GAF. Note that he never actually said "I have a plan to make this man pay less for oil," he used him as an example of how our oil addiction was hurting us. So you are actually holding him to something he didn't even say. For the record, his plan will help lower the overall spending on oil, it's just that you decided to limit it specifically to the man he described.
Click to expand...

No, I want him to mean what he says and say what he means. I don't want rhetorical devices, I want solutions to real, actual problems people face. Obama doesn't have to answer every problem in the world, no one can, but he should provide answers to the problems he talks about, otherwise it looks weak and ridiculous. His statement sounds totally out of touch, the man who can't afford our addiction to oil needs us to pass higher fuel standards. Really just FANTASTIC, if you have $20,000 to take advantage of it. You have to realize that he SOUNDS disconnected from the real world in that statement because it SOUNDS like he's taking a "let them eat cake" approach, if you can't afford oil the solution is to provide hybrids for you to buy! He should have dropped the rhetoric and spoken about his energy policy.
 
Z

Zen

Banned
I'd disagree with the Colbert Report being superior... but this isn't the palce for this conversation. Suffice to say taht which burns twice as bright lasts half as long, and Colbert Burned very brightly indeed, but the show and character have been running on fumes for a while now. Let's be honest though, his 'character' has slowly faded over time and he's pretty much just a zanyer less down to earth version of who he really is, a man that shares many of the same politcal viewpoints as Stewart. Frankly Stewart has better guests, better interviews, and better commentary.

In the end it is still a matter of taste, considering that they are both really good.
 
G

grandjedi6

Master of the Google Search
Sharp said:
It's true. The Colbert Report is vastly superior, and has been since its inception.
Click to expand...
Dude you are trying to compare Vanilla Ice Cream to Chocolate. Both are fucking awesome but whether one or the other is superior is dependent on personal tastes
 
J

jamesinclair

Banned
Cheebs said:
We have the first black nominee for president (or its equivalent) of a major party in all of the western world in history.

Think about it.
Click to expand...


Weve talked about this before.

You need to use Hillary math to get this result. Haiti, Bolivia and others are western countries, but magically excluded from these claims.
 
V

ViperVisor

Member
Zen said:
I'd disagree with the Colbert Report being superior... but this isn't the palce for this conversation. Suffice to say taht which burns twice and bright lasts half as long, and Colbert Burned very brightly indeed, but the show and character have been running on fumes for a while now.
Click to expand...

You must be suffering a case of Scrappy Doo-ism
 
K

kkaabboomm

Member
MSNBC said that they think Obama has/around 2219.5 delegates, beating even the 2210 number.

also, at 11pm, obama called clinton and left a message asking her to call him back
 
S

sangreal

Member
Gaborn said:
No, I want him to mean what he says and say what he means. I don't want rhetorical devices, I want solutions to real, actual problems people face. Obama doesn't have to answer every problem in the world, no one can, but he should provide answers to the problems he talks about, otherwise it looks weak and ridiculous. His statement sounds totally out of touch, the man who can't afford our addiction to oil needs us to pass higher fuel standards. Really just FANTASTIC, if you have $20,000 to take advantage of it. You have to realize that he SOUNDS disconnected from the real world in that statement because it SOUNDS like he's taking a "let them eat cake" approach, if you can't afford oil the solution is to provide hybrids for you to buy! He should have dropped the rhetoric and spoken about his energy policy.
Click to expand...
Poor people don't live in a vacuum. Higher fuel efficiency standards means lower demand for oil even if poor people can't afford fuel efficient cars.
 
T

Tamanon

Banned
:lol "Senator Obama called Hillary Clinton at 1107 and left a message congratuling her on winning South Dakota and telling her to call him back."
 
S

Sharp

Member
Gaborn said:
No, I want him to mean what he says and say what he means. I don't want rhetorical devices, I want solutions to real, actual problems people face. Obama doesn't have to answer every problem in the world, no one can, but he should provide answers to the problems he talks about, otherwise it looks weak and ridiculous. His statement sounds totally out of touch, the man who can't afford our addiction to oil needs us to pass higher fuel standards. Really just FANTASTIC, if you have $20,000 to take advantage of it. You have to realize that he SOUNDS disconnected from the real world in that statement because it SOUNDS like he's taking a "let them eat cake" approach, if you can't afford oil the solution is to provide hybrids for you to buy! He should have dropped the rhetoric and spoken about his energy policy.
Click to expand...
If you're just taking issue with his rhetoric, fine, but I hope you hold every candidate to these standards; unfortunately, I think you will find that speeches are not usually the place to look for specific energy policy details, but that you are likely to find personal anecdotes and inspiring, lifting tones, as those carry an audience better. I'm sure some people in the audience would have been thrilled to hear his energy policy, but I doubt that the majority of the crowd was there to hear him repeat what was on his website. What you want are town hall meetings. If you disagree fundamentally with the idea that candidates should make generalities in speeches, I suppose I can understand that, but you must in turn understand that this does not fit in well with winning an election.
grandjedi6 said:
Dude you are trying to compare Vanilla Ice Cream to Chocolate. Both are fucking awesome but whether one or the other is superior is dependent on personal tastes
Click to expand...
Vanilla ice cream is superior and so is the Colbert Report.
 
G

Gaborn

Member
sangreal said:
Poor people don't live in a vacuum. Higher fuel efficiency standards means lower demand for oil even if poor people can't afford fuel efficient cars.
Click to expand...

Yes, but what's the adoption rate for new cars? Most people aren't buying a car every few years, or even every 5 years. Sure some people can afford to get a new car every year or two, but that's not going to make much of a dent for about 10 years.

Sharp - I agree that rhetoric has some place at some times. I don't have a problem with Obama's message of hope and "yes we can" for example. I think he's a very positive candidate overall. I take specific issue though when a candidate brings up a person with a very specific problem and uses it to segue into a general policy that does little to nothing to help the person he's bringing up.
 
S

Sharp

Member
Gaborn said:
Yes, but what's the adoption rate for new cars? Most people aren't buying a car every few years, or even every 5 years. Sure some people can afford to get a new car every year or two, but that's not going to make much of a dent for about 10 years.
Click to expand...
Wow, your tag is a handy reference now! Now you'll never need to wonder what Obama's positions on something are again!
 
I

isamu

OMFG HOLY MOTHER OF MARY IN HEAVEN I CANT BELIEVE IT WTF WHERE ARE MY SEDATIVES AAAAHHH
Good shit tonight. Historical.
 
S

sangreal

Member
Gaborn said:
Yes, but what's the adoption rate for new cars? Most people aren't buying a car every few years, or even every 5 years. Sure some people can afford to get a new car every year or two, but that's not going to make much of a dent for about 10 years.
Click to expand...

Well, since you want to parse his every word, you'll note he didn't give a time frame. That man will benefit from a better energy policy regardless of when it pays dividends.
 
G

Gaborn

Member
sangreal said:
Well, since you want to parse his every word, you'll note he didn't give a time frame. That man will benefit from a better energy policy regardless of when it pays dividends.
Click to expand...

Actually, he did mention that we can't afford another 4 years of our addiction to oil. I eagerly await Obama's four year requirement to implement new cafe standards. Well, really, less than 4 years if he wants to end our addiction to oil.
 
R

RiskyChris

Banned
I take what I said back. The Daily Show continues to have awesome interviews from time to time, but everything else about the show I don't find entertaining.
 
S

sangreal

Member
Gaborn said:
Actually, he did mention that we can't afford another 4 years of our addiction to oil. I eagerly await Obama's four year requirement to implement new cafe standards. Well, really, less than 4 years if he wants to end our addiction to oil.
Click to expand...

Fine, I concede. Imaginary man made up for rhetorical purposes should not support the liar that is Obama
 
E

EMBee99

all that he wants is another baby
What.

A.

Political.

Stud.



My wife and I sat, watched, clapped, cried a bit, laughed, oohed, ahhed, and donated. What an awesome night.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Time: Person of the Year! (not doing Politics: HARD MODE)
40
1K
SJRB replied
WWE and Endeavor (UFC) announce 21 billion dollar deal.
40
3K
thefool replied
Big Business and Government: Grand conspiracy or ramblings of a mad man?
3
2K
Soodanim replied
A record of Segas reactions, mistakes, missteps, poor or misguided decisions, JUST in 1996.
2 3
138
19K
kvltus lvlzvs replied
  • Locked
2 in 10 Clinton Primary Voters Weren't Going To Vote For Obama (2008 Flashback)
16
4K
ModBot replied
Top Bottom