|
Lote posted:In the interview, she casually drops the fact that "all of recorded human history" is "about 5000 years." Somehow this, young earth creationist viewpoint is not even close the most ridiculous statement out of that interview. That's technically correct, though. Writing, and thus "recorded human history" started about 3000 BC. There's obviously a 100,000 years or so of human history that isn't recorded and has to be reconstructed through fossils and artifacts.
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 13:19 |
|
|
aBagorn posted:If you pay close attention you'll even find that he makes a Romney style gaffe I was also 8 in 92, but my grandfather took me to see him and I managed to force my way to the front, then at the end when everyone was rushing up to shake his hand I was being crushed against the security fence. He saw what was happening quickly and got secret service to back the people off and then gave me a hug. Campaign Clinton was pretty drat good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:Edit: There was a short talk a few pages ago about Bill Clinton vs H.W. Bush and I really think this clip kinda exemplifies the fact why Bill won. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ffbFvKlWqE If you pay attention they both give a non-answer, but Bill does it so much better. You can't even really fault them for giving a non answer because how has the nation debt personally affected them? is such a dumb goddamn question.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
That's part of why it's great. Bush grapples with the text of the dumb question, even after the moderator tries to help out by pointing out that she is actually talking about the recession. Clinton realizes what she is actually talking about but still explains it as if he's answering her question.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
Lote posted:In the interview, she casually drops the fact that "all of recorded human history" is "about 5000 years." Somehow this, young earth creationist viewpoint is not even close the most ridiculous statement out of that interview. She's off by about 2000 years but no, there really isn't that much written down. Babylon was about 6000 BC or so and most of their stuff hasn't survived. As to Rick's family, remember that they were underdogs in most every election yet somehow still managed to win (bar any extremely local, early, stuff.) He was probably telling them early on that he's had times like this before but always won in the end. By election day pretty much everyone knew that he had lost but there was a point early in the season when the race appeared to be tightening (he started behind, of course.) Then all of the other stuff, Foley, general Bush gently caress-ups, general Bush criminality, the economy, Iraq etc just kept coming and Casey pulled away again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
aBagorn posted:If you pay close attention you'll even find that he makes a Romney style gaffe The difference was that Obama made you feel like you were a part of something special. Clinton made you feel like you WERE special.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
ThirdPartyView posted:Peenworm used the son (I think a .gif of him getting twitchy-eyed) as his avatar for a while, didn't he? Peenworm called me an idiot once. I've always associated that with the end of my misguided libertarian/RON PAUL days and the start of my raging leftist days.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:You can't even really fault them for giving a non answer because how has the nation debt personally affected them? is such a dumb goddamn question. Yeah Bush's "mistake" was in trying to educate an ineducable woman and, by extension, an ineducable American people. Clinton pandered instead by realizing that she was trying to say "I'm emitting generalized concern and discomfort about money."
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Yeah Bush's "mistake" was in trying to educate an ineducable woman and, by extension, an ineducable American people. Clinton pandered instead by realizing that she was trying to say "I'm emitting generalized concern and discomfort about money." Would you say that Bush's intellect was underappreciated?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:That's technically correct, though. Writing, and thus "recorded human history" started about 3000 BC. There's obviously a 100,000 years or so of human history that isn't recorded and has to be reconstructed through fossils and artifacts. Hell, writing was developed as just another system of government control anyway 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 08:57
|
|
|
It was not a horrible question. It was just a way to ask "how can you relate to me?" Bush sounded irritated and grandfatherly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 09:06
|
|
|
It was really quite the upset that Daddy Bush was a one term president. President Clinton charmed an entire nation, or at least enough to win an election.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 09:15
|
|
|
Responding to an audience question like you are annoyed that anyone would ask it or take it as an implied insult to your character is an F- response. "How do you relate to my problems?" is a softball question.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 09:27
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:It was not a horrible question. It was just a way to ask "how can you relate to me?" It was a pretty bad question, but any halfway decent politician should have just rolled with it like Clinton did. At the very least Bush could have given a boring explanation of how the Nation Debt isn't the problem she was thinking of. Only, you know, done in such a way so that your entire answer isn't an annoyed and out of touch rebuttal of what you clearly think is the dumbest loving question.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:Responding to an audience question like you are annoyed that anyone would ask it or take it as an implied insult to your character is an F- response. "How do you relate to my problems?" is a softball question. Yeah, he loving insults the person who asked the question like twice. It's hilarious. I watched that clip before, but seeing it after the most recent presidential election is real crazy. HW feels so similar to Romney. It's uncanny. Watch him squirm about even a tiny insinuation that he might be out of touch for having a lot of money. It was like a perfect storm of circumstances to put him on serious tilt. Weird question from a black woman that insinuates he's out of touch. He eventually just loving retreats to his black church anecdote like a loving coward, and then reiterates how he feels he's being attacked for being wealthy. How do you go that far in politics with such a lack of basic political skills. Clinton had better people skills for sure, but even if you were some kind of sociopathic politician robot you would understand that attacking the person who asked the question is insanity. That works fine if the person asking the question is some kind of moderator from the news media, but she was a civilian. ErIog fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Jul 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
ErIog posted:Yeah, he loving insults the person who asked the question like twice. It's hilarious. I watched that clip before, but seeing it after the most recent presidential election is real crazy. HW feels so similar to Romney. It's uncanny. I didn't quite see it that way. He's certainly a little defensive to start with but it was a poorly framed question, Bush got interupted like twice while trying to figure out what she was even talking about and Clinton got to sit back and read into what she was actually talking about and then reframe the entire discussion into "it's the economy stupid." Clinton handled it perfectly but he also had a better opportunity to do so. I'm definitely not seeing anywhere that Bush insulted the asker.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:It was not a horrible question. It was just a way to ask "how can you relate to me?" The lady started by asking about national debt and I can understand Bush's initial confusion. Had Clinton been the first to answer I bet he would have had a hard time with it too, but now he knew that the lady really meant recession by the time his turn came up. I think Bush could have answered the same question better in retrospect: the recession lost him his job.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
ErIog posted:That works fine if the person asking the question is some kind of moderator from the news media, but she was a civilian. I'm not sure if attacking the moderator would have worked back them. Remember, the whole idea of right wing victimhood and attacking and demonizing the liberal lamestream media had not been institutionalized from a decade or two of Rush and Beck and FOX the way it is now. It's only more recently that a candidate like Newt Gingrich could make attacking a moderator his "go to" debate play, and even then it was during GOP primary debates where that would play better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
SavageBastard posted:The difference was that Obama made you feel like you were a part of something special. Clinton made you feel like you WERE special. Absolutely. In other words, Obama was talking FOR you, while Clinton was talking TO you. Bill had the rhetorical prowess of Obama with the down home folksy charm of GWB. He really was a perfect storm.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
SavageBastard posted:I'm definitely not seeing anywhere that Bush insulted the asker. "insult" might not have been the right word. "shows tremendous disrespect for," might have been the better way to phrase it. She asks a strange question, he thinks he's being insulted and calls her out for it. That's the first time. Later he transitions into an anecdote about black people he's met before that has nothing to do with anything, and assumes she'd care about that because she's black. That's number two. Then in his closing remarks he calls her out yet again for insinuating he's out of touch because he has money. That would be the third. I just said "insult" because in that kind of setting where the people are usually trying to pander to the people in the discussion, Bush's responses to her seemed disrespectful to the point of being insulting. Also, that question sounds super weird now, but in the context of that time I think it probably shouldn't have been too hard to figure out. The GOP always bangs the national debt and balanced budget drum during every recession. The woman asking the question was asking a pretty logical thing in response to the discussion on that topic that had been started by the GOP's own messaging. The voter asked a confusing question because that messaging was confusing. The fact that Bush couldn't respond to an inquiry about a topic his own campaign had brought up is a shocking failure. Zwabu posted:I'm not sure if attacking the moderator would have worked back them. Remember, the whole idea of right wing victimhood and attacking and demonizing the liberal lamestream media had not been institutionalized from a decade or two of Rush and Beck and FOX the way it is now. There is something to be said for the change in media landscape over the past 30 years, but conservatives have been talking about the "liberal media" since the 60's. There's tapes of Nixon bitching about it. It wasn't so much Bush's style to be a blustery dick to a journalist moderator ala Newt Gingrich, but it wouldn't have been out of the question. The "liberal media" meme is part of the reason the deregulation and repeal of the fairness doctrine happened. If anything, with the availability of conservative id-stroking media and the fact that a handful of giant corporations control most of the news people consume, media has a far more conservative/pro-business bent now. ErIog fucked around with this message at 01:43 on Jul 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
Nixon didn't just tell the media he hated them on secret tapes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iucE78-C2Po
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Nixon didn't just tell the media he hated them on secret tapes. Hating the press was part of Nixon's DNA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RMSb-tS_OM&t=49s Deteriorata fucked around with this message at 01:52 on Jul 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
I can never get over how gorgeously menacing he is  So menacing, look at him. He just wants to run the country and purge filth, and you keep getting in there and trying to look at him while he's doing it. He can't abide humans and their human weakness.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 04:01
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:It was not a horrible question. It was just a way to ask "how can you relate to me?" Actually it was insanely stupid. Come on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 04:51
|
|
|
RICHUNCLEPENNYBAGS posted:Actually it was insanely stupid. Come on. / 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:I'm not sure if attacking the moderator would have worked back them. Remember, the whole idea of right wing victimhood and attacking and demonizing the liberal lamestream media had not been institutionalized from a decade or two of Rush and Beck and FOX the way it is now. It's only more recently that a candidate like Newt Gingrich could make attacking a moderator his "go to" debate play, and even then it was during GOP primary debates where that would play better. There's no way that would have flown. I mean both the moderator and the questioner interrupted the President to clarify the question and keep him on track. These days you ask your question and then the candidate says "what I actually want to talk about is this other thing" and everyone moves on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/07/27/cnn-poll-romney-tops-obama-but-loses-to-clinton/  quote:
Romney 2016! quote:Romney has said numerous times that he won't run for the White House again. But what if things changed and he ended up as the GOP nominee in 2016? The CNN poll indicates that 55% of Americans would support Clinton, with Romney at 42%. Oh Mr Ice Cream Glove fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Jul 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
Polls like this are almost meaningless, given that they would change pretty fast if we were in the middle of a presidential campaign season.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
Pfirti86 posted:Polls like this are almost meaningless, given that they would change pretty fast if we were in the middle of a presidential campaign season. Plus these sorts of shock polls tend to be outliers - the newsmedia only report interesting poll results when it's not horse-race time, so any sort of 50-50 result for this question wouldn't get reported.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
Pfirti86 posted:Polls like this are almost meaningless, given that they would change pretty fast if we were in the middle of a presidential campaign season. Polls like this are wholly meaningless, barring a repeal of the 22nd Amendment, it is the equivalent of "Who would win in a fight King Kong or Godzilla?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
Quick, some enterprising goon get out in front of this an start making "Miss me yet?  " Romney bumper stickers.DynamicSloth posted:Polls like this are wholly meaningless, barring a repeal of the 22nd Amendment, it is the equivalent of "Who would win in a fight King Kong or Godzilla?" Next time PPP asks for question ideas I'm going to submit Inequality Godzilla vs Mecca-Benghazi Shear Modulus fucked around with this message at 22:21 on Jul 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:Polls like this are wholly meaningless, barring a repeal of the 22nd Amendment, it is the equivalent of "Who would win in a fight King Kong or Godzilla?" Godzilla, obviously.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Ninjasaurus posted:Godzilla, obviously. When they made that movie, they actually filmed two different endings; in Japan Godzilla won, in the US King Kong won. E: I think they decided that to make things fair King Kong got some kind of electricity-based superpower, too, but I could be confusing that one with King Kong Vs. Giant Frankenstein's Monster.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:When they made that movie, they actually filmed two different endings; in Japan Godzilla won, in the US King Kong won. Actually, that "two different endings" story is just a rumor and has been debunked.  They had to increase Kong's size a lot in order for him to compete against Big G and give him Electro powers as well, IIRC.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
As much as I'd like to be devil's advocate, I really can't see Kong winning against Godzilla. I'm sure he'd be smarter and that would help, but the king was just a giant gorilla, whereas Godzilla was a magical mutant lizard-dinosaur thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Ninjasaurus posted:Actually, that "two different endings" story is just a rumor and has been debunked. Well drat, that two-endings story was in the official Godzilla guidebook I had as a kid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:Next time PPP asks for question ideas I'm going to submit Inequality Godzilla vs Mecca-Benghazi 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:Well drat, that two-endings story was in the official Godzilla guidebook I had as a kid. I remember reading that in one of my Godzilla books too as a kid. Ah, the ignorance of youth.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Ninjasaurus posted:Godzilla, obviously. 53% of America would disagree
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 13:19 |
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:53% of America would disagree Oh yeah? Well, goddrat America!!
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 22:41
|
|