Support NeoGAF

[Maledict]

Remember when Barry Goldwater lost in a blowout election and forced Republicans to put up the ultra liberal Richard Nixon in the next cycle?

To be fair, Richard Nixon was to the left of any major Republican Party leader since Reagan. Had Kennedy not fucked up the USA would have had a better healthcare system 40 years ago. Nixon was a deeply corrupt, unpleasant person, but in policy terms the Republican Party wouldn't let him in nowadays.

Lesson for Sanders fans there - Nixon offered healthcare reforms. Kennedy refused because it wasn't everything he wanted, which then killed healthcare reform for 40 years. Perfect can absolutely be the enemy of good.

 

[Mael]

but wouldn't it be a good thing if the Democratic party also imploded? they are a shit party. it's a great thing how Bernie is shaking things up.

I'm wondering how many people saying this kind of stuffs are closet Republicans.
Oh and btw the GoP is now the party of Trump as in he controls the party and has its resources, it didn't implode or anything it was just reshaped in Trump's image.
Having an imploded dem party against this?
Well I guess it's great if you don't live in a country that can be affected by US policies...

 

[TyrantII]

If there's one thing conservatives get its that you win power inside the system, not by trying to overthrow it.

.

It amazes me how many people cling to these ideas of revolution or third parties being possible. Did they ever pay attention in US History?

 

[Wilsongt]

I'm wondering how many people saying this kind of stuffs are closet Republicans.
Oh and btw the GoP is now the party of Trump as in he controls the party and has its resources, it didn't implode or anything it was just reshaped in Trump's image.
Having an imploded dem party against this?
Well I guess it's great if you don't live in a country that can be affected by US policies...

So... Basically nowhere?

 

[Quixzlizx]

.

It amazes me how many people cling to these ideas of revolution or third parties being possible. Did they ever pay attention in US History?

Well, the original post in this chain is EuroGAF, so...

I have a feeling Bernie's support on GAF is way more skewed towards non-Americans than Hillary's.

 

[Mael]

So... Basically nowhere?

I imagine if you live in a small house in...I'm drawing a blank actually...maybe North Korea?

 

[Manmademan]

.

It amazes me how many people cling to these ideas of revolution or third parties being possible. Did they ever pay attention in US History?

Of course they didn't. The American political system was expressly designed to PREVENT a "revolution" (I.e. the French revolution) from happening because the founding fathers wanted nothing to do with "mob rule".

 

[Maledict]

Well, the original post in this chain is EuroGAF, so...

I have a feeling Bernie's support on GAF is way more skewed towards non-Americans than Hillary's.

I've routinely been embarrassed by my fellow Euro's in this primary process, because they don't understand political context at all and also ignore our own looming right wing monstrosities in our elections. We tend to come across as smug a lot of the time unfortunately.

 

[Trouble]

but wouldn't it be a good thing if the Democratic party also imploded? they are a shit party. it's a great thing how Bernie is shaking things up.

If by 'good thing' you mean 'generation-long disaster'. SCOTUS matters.

 

[Clefargle]

but wouldn't it be a good thing if the Democratic party also imploded? they are a shit party. it's a great thing how Bernie is shaking things up.

The party may have plenty of internal problems, but it has been the ONLY viable vehicle for a liberal/progressive agenda for decades. Without the Democratic Party poor people and minorities would have had a significantly harder time making any progress over the years. If you want to burn it all down because it does nothing for you when there is no viable alternative for those that have been historically disenfranchised and oppressed in America. That just makes you fucking selfish.

 

[Wilsongt]

I imagine if you live in a small house in...I'm drawing a blank actually...maybe North Korea?

Nah, Trump will bomb you there.

 

[Cipherr]

Exactly the same, except I actually used to really respect the guy. Now I wish he'd just go away.



Yeah, I can't stand those Bernie or Bust people. Must be nice to have no real skin in the game.

Ahhh, they aren't going to like that. Ignoring the people that would be decimated by a super conservative SC justice or the overturning of laws important to minority groups is fine in their mind; being called out on it however is something they don't tend to enjoy.

Truth fucking hurts brah. Put up the vote Clinton made about the war all you want, she didn't personally send them, Bush did, and it was a mistake she also has long since agreed was a mistake. That shit won't ever approve you choosing in 2016 to make ANOTHER knowing mistake by fucking over millions of Americans by voting for that POS Trump.

Go ahead and make your protest vote, but you WILL be called out on it. Deal with it.

 

[Darryl M R]

What's Trump going to do to burn our country down? Kick out people who are illegally here and keep very religious people from third world countries from entering the country?
Given the increase of crime rate when either group enters a western country, we're more likely to enter an age of increased peace.

Geez people are really trying to convince themselves that Trump, a Republican, in office would be worse than Hillary.

Also I am not a fan of how Bernie supports refer to Hillary as HRC. The three letter acronym is used to dehumanize her.

 

[giga]

Geez people are really trying to convince themselves that Trump, a Republican, in office would be worse than Hillary.

Also I am not a fan of how Bernie supports refer to Hillary as HRC. The three letter acronym is used to dehumanize her.

Reminders of BHO from 2008.

 

[Macam]

Also I am not a fan of how Bernie supports refer to Hillary as HRC. The three letter acronym is used to dehumanize her.

Do you guys ever listen to yourselves? Just curious.

 

[Darryl M R]

Reminders of BHO from 2008.

I wasn't paying attention to see him get refereed to as his initials. It is a sleezy. And all it does is make people more empathetic and poisonous within their own echochamber.

Do you guys ever listen to yourselves? Just curious.

Sounds like you are confused by my post. Referring to a person not by their name but by their initials is a way to dehumanize that person especially when that individual does not go by the nickname of their initials. The psychology of removing human aspects from an individual, like their name, and referring to just them as letters is dehumanizing. I am not saying this is a crime against humanity it is just a sleezy thing to do.

 

[Macam]

This is just tea leaves and personal bias. I think that in four years it'll be really easy for Hillary to get reelected because of all the progressive stuff she'll have accomplished.

"This is just tea leaves and personal bias" <inserts tea leaves and bias>

 

[pigeon]

"This is just tea leaves and personal bias" <inserts tea leaves and bias>

That's literally the point I was making. Notice the "I think" at the beginning of the sentence, conventionally used to indicate that a statement is an opinion rather than a factual claim. Neither of us know what the future is going to look like, but at least I'm honest about it!

 

[LegendofLex]

but wouldn't it be a good thing if the Democratic party also imploded? they are a shit party. it's a great thing how Bernie is shaking things up.

The way our country's political system moves is determined largely by the degree of organization there is around particular aims.

It would be super unproductive to tear apart the most organized coalition there is for progressive values, especially when the group that's tearing it apart is by all accounts way, way less organized.

That's why the Sanders strategy was to try to rally progressives around him as a path-forger for the Democratic Party and not to run as an Independent.

 

[Blader]

Reminders of BHO from 2008.

barrack HUSSEIN obama

 

[psynergylover]

nvm, seems like it's just joke

 

[Mael]

Nah, Trump will bomb you there.

With Trump's knowledge of geography that's probably the safest place actually, the enemies will be bombed so bad the neighboring countries will be glassed while the actual enemies will be left standing.

 

[Macam]

Sounds like you are confused by my post. Referring to a person not by their name but by their initials is a way to dehumanize that person especially when that individual does not o by the nickname of their initials.

Nope, not confused as all.

There are two prominent Clintons, one former ex-president and one running. Using HRC isn't implicitly demeaning, any more than referring to her as Hillary is somehow implicitly more endearing and personable (and, arguably, it is). It's a perfectly valid abbreviation to make, especially if, say, you are typing on a mobile device.

If you said GWB, most people wouldn't inheritly interpret that to be some sort of dehumanizing attack on George W. Bush, just as a syntactic point of clarification. Ditto with Jeb.

Using Hussein as part of a reference to Obama is a different story, since it's absolutely clear who is being referred to by any part of his name, the context birth certificate controversy nonsense, and so on.

I can't believe I have to even explain this.

 

[RustyNails]

barrack HUSSEIN obama

Has it been proven that he's NOT a Muslim?

 

[Brinbe]

Some of the responses in this thread are fucking revolting. All these people crying about how the democratic party and wouldn't it be better if it died!? ARE YOU FUCKING INSANE!?

They're a shit party? Get over yourself. Look at how much progress has been made over the past eight years, with almost 100% GOP obstructionism and look at how much good this party has promoted and all the lives they've helped enrich. Tell that to those who now have affordable health care or can marry whom they want or any of the myriad of other great things accomplished.

Fucking infuriating to see this from people on the left. Let's throw minorities/the LGBT community/ and those who need the most help right under the fucking table just because Bernie f'n Sanders doesn't get to be the Dem nominee for President.

 

[Valhelm]

These are amazing. I'll pass them on to my Bernie or Bust friends who sincerely believe there's no serious difference between Clinton and the GOP.

 

[MIMIC]

Truth fucking hurts brah. Put up the vote Clinton made about the war all you want, she didn't personally send them, Bush did, and it was a mistake she also has long since agreed was a mistake. That shit won't ever approve you choosing in 2016 to make ANOTHER knowing mistake by fucking over millions of Americans by voting for that POS Trump.

Soooo....Hillary didn't personally send them, but the Bernie supporters personally elected Trump.

Is this real life?

Spoiler

But I guess if we're going to place blame, I'd put it squarely on the pilots who flew the planes over to Iraq

 

[Darryl M R]

Nope, not confused as all.

There are two prominent Clintons, one former ex-president and one running. Using HRC isn't implicitly demeaning, any more than referring to her as Hillary is somehow implicitly more endearing and personable (and, arguably, it is). It's a perfectly valid abbreviation to make, especially if, say, you are typing on a mobile device. And to bring in even more context the acronym usage happens on Reddit where most people have already typed out a lengthy message. I'm sure typing out Hillary or Clinton wouldn't be too troublesome for them.

If you said GWB, most people wouldn't inheritly interpret that to be some sort of dehumanizing attack on George W. Bush, just as a syntactic point of clarification. Ditto with Jeb.

Using Hussein as part of a reference to Obama is a different story, since it's absolutely clear who is being referred to by any part of his name, the context birth certificate controversy nonsense, and so on.

I can't believe I have to even explain this.

When HRC is already an establish acronym for the Human Rights Campaign, an organization that has been heavily mentioned in this cycle, using the acronym for Hillary Clinton makes zero sense when looking at convenience of typing.

If an individual does not go by their abbreviated name or initials you can legitimately ask why does an opposing party use it so much in reference to that person. When Sander's supporters constantly speak of Hillary as "the establishment" and "the machine" they already attempted to stripped her of her humanity and her autonomy. Calling her HRC is just another form of them refusing to see her as a person but instead as a vile snake-like obstacle in their way.

I can't believe I have to even explain this.

 

[Phased]

Some of the responses in this thread are fucking revolting. All these people crying about how the democratic party and wouldn't it be better if it died!? ARE YOU FUCKING INSANE!?

They're a shit party? Get over yourself. Look at how much progress has been made over the past eight years, with almost 100% GOP obstructionism and look at how much good this party has promoted and all the lives they've helped enrich. Tell that to those who now have affordable health care or can marry whom they want or any of the myriad of other great things accomplished.

Fucking infuriating to see this from people on the left. Let's throw minorities/the LGBT community/ and those who need the most help right under the fucking table just because Bernie f'n Sanders doesn't get to be the Dem nominee for President.

People who admit they aren't Democrats joined the party just to vote for their candidate who also admitted he isn't a Democrat and just joined to have a chance at the presidency.

They then act surprised when the party they are trying to hijack doesn't want anything to do with them.

 

[Mael]

I have no idea why people feel the need to post stuffs like HRC or something when you can't even tell what they're referring to.
I also greatly dislike the use of 1rst name in political discourse, I didn't know these people I'm not going to use their 1rst name like they're my pals from across the block.

 

[Blader]

Soooo....Hillary didn't personally send them, but the Bernie supporters personally elected Trump.

Well...if they vote for Trump they will have!

 

[Eidan]

FDR
JFK
HRC

What's the problem here?

 

[JustenP88]

"vitriol and pugnacity"? Good god, Democrats are really uncomfortable with the slightest bit of dissent, aren't they?

I've been predicting that Sanders would take the majority of the blame from Hillary supporters if she happens to find a way to lose in the general. Looks like I was right on the money about that.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Are you kidding me? This is one of the lowest, most revolting posts that I have ever seen. And of course, Hillary supporters are endorsing this nonsense.

Maybe Hillary supporters need to be reminded of the men that she sent to their deaths over in Iraq. A war that the region is still reeling from. A war that turned the region into a hotbed of terrorists. Those ISIS guys we keep hearing about in the news? Yeah, they were BORN out of our stupidity over there. They FED off of the war. It's a good thing Hillary knew that nothing good can come from war and not to be trigger-happy. OOPS.

And speaking of nothing good coming from war, of course we cannot forget about the men and women who are dedicated to protecting our country. But they weren't protecting anyone this time. They went into Iraq to settle a grudge Bush had with Saddam. And Hillary was just fine with that. And how costly was that grudge? Well, just a little over 4,000 U.S. lives. Lives that Hillary had no qualms throwing into the fire. Lives that the world were pleading not to be wasted. Lives that had no business over there in light of what we knew at the time.

Hillary actively voted for a war that lead to a new era of terrorism and got thousands of U.S. soldiers killed in the process

But who cares about that. Vote for Hillary, or else you're a homophobia and rapist sympathizer.

I don't really like those images either. They are mean and blunt in a way that probably isn't helpful.

Your opinion of Clinton based on the war is defensible and understandable. My view is that politics are far too complicated to place all of your weight on one issue. Those images are based on a future prediction, your stance is based on a past action. Both are obviously important, but which is more pertinent when selecting a leader?

Do we listen to someone who admits a past mistake? Is is fair to project a future based on a candidate and parties stated goals? Personally, I am more forward looking. I don't wish to minimize the loss of life that resulted in the invasion, but I think saying that it is solely responsible for a new wave of terrorism is simplistic, more simplistic than projecting what a Republican appointed Supreme Court would look like. The lives affected by that court have value as well.

As voters, it's our job to sift through these things and not in a facil "Turd Sandwitch Vs. Giant Douche" way. I think the best way to do that is to look at the landscape as dispassionately as possible.

 

[Supast4r]

Of course they didn't. The American political system was expressly designed to PREVENT a "revolution" (I.e. the French revolution) from happening because the founding fathers wanted nothing to do with "mob rule".

The American political system was also designed to NOT have parties either. If there were more than two parties, then US politics would be much better.

 

[Supast4r]

Has it been proven that he's NOT a Muslim?

What do you mean proven? He is openly Christian and his middle name has Hussein because he dad was straight up from Africa.

 

[Clefargle]

The American political system was also designed to NOT have parties either. If there were more than two parties, then US politics would be much better.

So whenever someone makes a party that gets enough votes, there will be three. Blowing up a party from the inside just because you want more than two is stupid. I mean, I want the republicans to blow up and splinter, but not because I want a third party to form and also I'm not voting in their process to try and burn it to the ground.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

The American political system was also designed to NOT have parties either. If there were more than two parties, then US politics would be much better.

It wasn't designed to specifically not have parties, it just wasn't designed with parties in mind, but they formed anyway because the system was actually pretty convenient for only two parties to form.

Most/All of the founders would eventually join political parties. A couple even helped start them.

 

[BlastProcessing]

The American political system was also designed to NOT have parties either. If there were more than two parties, then US politics would be much better.

Parties were formed while the American political system was still being designed. There wasn't some magic point where the Founding Fathers stood back and said "Ok guys we're done. We perfected this shit! NO MORE CHANGES."

 

[Hilbert]

The American political system was also designed to NOT have parties either. If there were more than two parties, then US politics would be much better.

Between First Past the post, electoral college, and house decides if no one makes it to 270, I am going to say you are incorrect with this. Maybe two parties weren't explicitly stated, but it was the natural consequence.

Besides there are more then two parties.

 

[giga]

What do you mean proven? He is openly Christian and his middle name has Hussein because he dad was straight up from Africa.

But do you have proof?

 

[O Canada Our Home and Native Land]

Turning to shaming democratic voters to vote for the democratic nominee is a sign how terrible your candidate is and how fubar this election has become. Manipulative pictures making your fellow liberals feel guilt because they have a different priorities and worries is great way start party unity.

 

[Darryl M R]

Turning to shaming democratic voters to vote for the democratic nominee is a sign how terrible your candidate is and how fubar this election has become. Manipulative pictures making your fellow liberals feel guilt because they have a different priorities and worries is great way start party unity.

C'mon Canada. Let us figure our politics out, we won't interrupt your election season.

 

[JustenP88]

The American political system was also designed to NOT have parties either. If there were more than two parties, then US politics would be much better.

A system in which you only have two relevant parties despite the fact that more people are registered as independent than D or R doesn't exactly sound like the type of system that can eliminate the possibility of "violent revolution."

That level of disillusion is obviously not good for discourse and it's tiring seeing people shouting down those who step out of line in defense of The Party. As if The Party is some sort of sentient, benevolent creature that only wants what's right for us.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Turning to shaming democratic voters to vote for the democratic nominee is a sign how terrible your candidate is and how fubar this election has become. Manipulative pictures making your fellow liberals feel guilt because they have a different priorities and worries is great way start party unity.

I agree Sanders should shift back to talking about issues instead of prosecuting every part of the process. It is very much harmful to party unity.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Soooo....Hillary didn't personally send them, but the Bernie supporters personally elected Trump.

Is this real life?

Spoiler

But I guess if we're going to place blame, I'd put it squarely on the pilots who flew the planes over to Iraq

Those posters are specifically aimed at people who say if Sanders is not the nominee, then they will vote for Trump over Clinton - not all Sanders supporters. So, for the people the posters are talking about....yes?

 

[Aaron Strife]

"What's the difference between electing Trump or Hillary?"

"What about the Supreme Court?"

There's never a fucking answer.

 

[Clefargle]

Turning to shaming democratic voters to vote for the democratic nominee is a sign how terrible your candidate is and how fubar this election has become. Manipulative pictures making your fellow liberals feel guilt because they have a different priorities and worries is great way start party unity.

If only we all had animated Canadian avatars like you we would undoubtedly understand. Seriously though, nice avatar.

 

[exmachina64]

"What's the difference between electing Trump or Hillary?"

"What about the Supreme Court?"

There's never a fucking answer.

The obvious answer is that they don't trust Hillary to nominate Supreme Court justices and don't feel like they'll suffer much under Trump.

 

[O Canada Our Home and Native Land]

I agree Sanders should shift back to talking about issues instead of prosecuting every part of the process. It is very much harmful to party unity.

That has been Bernie's platform from the beginning and that is how politics operates in this country. He and O'Malley complained about the lack of debates early on in primaries and then Bernie had to continuously ask for a debate before NY. He has been in constant conflict with DWS throughout the process. I don't see him shifting anything.