|
MIGF I don't understand your affected elite word salad talkin' but anybody can tell you that Hillary's running mate is going to love Jesus and not be regarded as a malicious rear end in a top hat by the entire world.
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:25 |
|
|
Vienna Circlejerk posted:MIGF I don't understand your affected elite word salad talkin' but anybody can tell you that Hillary's running mate is going to love Jesus and not be regarded as a malicious rear end in a top hat by the entire world. I hope someone phrased it a lot more kindly when they let Joe Lieberman know he's not on the list.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
Vienna Circlejerk posted:Hillary's running mate is going to love Jesus and not be regarded as a malicious rear end in a top hat by the entire world. We did have Dick Cheney as VP for eight years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 05:14
|
|
|
Dominus Vobiscum posted:We did have Dick Cheney as VP for eight years. He was Acting President for far longer than I had ever wanted to see in my life.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
Dominus Vobiscum posted:We did have Dick Cheney as VP for eight years. A different equation for a different time. And in 2000, most people didn't know who he was. And Gore had Lieberman so I mean really, rear end in a top hat VPs were all the rage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
Vienna Circlejerk posted:A different equation for a different time. And in 2000, most people didn't know who he was. And Gore had Lieberman so I mean really, rear end in a top hat VPs were all the rage. Being Secretary of Defense during Bush 1's presidency, particularly the gulf war, was a pretty major gig.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
If Hillary Clinton ever thinks Illinois is in play or picks Rahm Emmanuel as her VP, she deserves to suffer a historic landslide defeat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Being Secretary of Defense during Bush 1's presidency, particularly the gulf war, was a pretty major gig. Lot of people. A Lot Of People, figured that W was a drunk idiot-son, but looked forward to Rummy and Cheney as "Adults in the room" after all the liberal baby-boomer playtime of the Clinton administration.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Being Secretary of Defense during Bush 1's presidency, particularly the gulf war, was a pretty major gig. Yes, people knew his name as a Secretary of Defense, but nobody really knew who he was. Most people did not think, holy poo poo, this guy is evil, back in 2000, about a name they vaguely remembered from a war that had very little negative press about it almost 10 years beforehand.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
MIGF must be Mark Penn with the amount of absolutely idiotic notions floating in his head.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
joeburz posted:MIGF must be Mark Penn with the amount of absolutely idiotic notions floating in his head. Honestly, this is his best claim to be a bona fide beltway insider.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
joeburz posted:MIGF must be Mark Penn with the amount of absolutely idiotic notions floating in his head. Now he'll say his boss saw Mark Penn being incredibly skilled at...something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 06:29
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Now he'll say his boss saw Mark Penn being incredibly skilled at...something. Getting free air time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Now he'll say his boss saw Mark Penn being incredibly skilled at...something. Contributing to microsoft's decline. he came up with the horrible bing ads
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Serious question: Assume Rauner/whoever candidacy faces against Hillary/Emanuel. What are your election predictions? In the absence of a pick so catastrophically bad that it calls into question the candidate's competence(see: Palin, Sarah) VP noms have a negligible effect on electoral outcomes. So more or less the same outcome as a Hillary/* race, which is to say a Hillary-sized hole in whatever bible-thumping goober or dead-eyed apparatchik makes it through the Republican primary unless the GOP succeeds in precipitating another 2008-level crisis before the election. Besides, Hillary's probably going to pick someone who's a relative outsider to national politics. If Obama tapped Biden in part because it balanced out the young black guy who had just arrived on the scene with an old white guy who had been in D.C. forever, then Hillary's going to go with a young-ish(not so young as to make her appear too old in comparison) white guy. Woman/brown person or Woman/woman is going to turn off a lot of conservative-leaning winnable whites. Although I suppose a Latino VP pick would make sense, although no really great choices spring to mind.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 07:19
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:In the absence of a pick so catastrophically bad that it calls into question the candidate's competence(see: Palin, Sarah) VP noms have a negligible effect on electoral outcomes. So more or less the same outcome as a Hillary/* race, which is to say a Hillary-sized hole in whatever bible-thumping goober or dead-eyed apparatchik makes it through the Republican primary unless the GOP succeeds in precipitating another 2008-level crisis before the election. Really? There are no prominent Latino Dem politicians you can think of? Not even a pair of them? In Texas?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 07:21
|
|
|
skaboomizzy posted:Really? There are no prominent Latino Dem politicians you can think of? Not even a pair of them? In Texas? Can they bring in 2 bil by adding them to the ticket? E: You want a veep who can bring in the money you can't and say the poo poo you won't, while also being so reviled that they don't pose a threat to your power. Like, take Republican threats to their logical extreme. Obama impeached, Senate convicts, removed from office. President Biden: Is that something anyone really fears? No. Now take a president clinton. Clinton inpeached, senate convicts. President Emanual: Is that something anyone really fears? E2: Why did Clinton come to Chicago earlier this year? To size up Rahm's bank. Latino turnout can be increased 1% with a veep pick or you can do 24/7 Spanish ads on telemundo from 1 Jan 2015. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 07:51 on Oct 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 07:43
|
|
|
Emmanuel as a VP pick isn't even the craziest part of that scenario. Bruce Rauner is pro-choice and, therefore, not going to be the Republican nominee for President.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 08:21
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Emmanuel as a VP pick isn't even the craziest part of that scenario. Rauner is pro-choice in that he chooses not to answer any questions on choice. He is also on audio in favor of decreasing the minimum wage. When it comes down to decreasing the minimum wage vs. anti-choice, which issue has more Republican support?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 08:25
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:In the absence of a pick so catastrophically bad that it calls into question the candidate's competence(see: Palin, Sarah) VP noms have a negligible effect on electoral outcomes. So more or less the same outcome as a Hillary/* race, which is to say a Hillary-sized hole in whatever bible-thumping goober or dead-eyed apparatchik makes it through the Republican primary unless the GOP succeeds in precipitating another 2008-level crisis before the election. I still say Tammy Duckworth. Veteran who lost her legs in Iraq would counter the doubts of any winnable conservative leaning men (before anyone posts that woman mocking Kerry's purple heart, I said winnable. Jesus coming to life and running against Satan would be unable to convince her if he had a D next to his name). Plus, it'd get us one step closer to a cyborg president. My Imaginary GF posted:Can they bring in 2 bil by adding them to the ticket? Yeah, if there is one thing that the Clinton's have always been known for, its having no form of connections or way to get money.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 08:34
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:He is also on audio in favor of decreasing the minimum wage. When it comes down to decreasing the minimum wage vs. anti-choice, which issue has more Republican support? I see what you're trying to imply, and you're wrong. There are so many pro-life Christians who vote for the pro-life candidates that would stay home if the frontrunner was some pro-choice economist. The Republican party structure would love more time to focus on economic issues, but they know they have to beat the drum on religious wedge issues to keep that part of their base going. I know it's easy to see the Republicans as a monolith because we're all viewing them from a very left perspective, but they are a coalition of religious conservatives and economic conservatives, not a unified bloc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 08:38
|
|
|
AATREK CURES KIDS posted:I see what you're trying to imply, and you're wrong. There are so many pro-life Christians who vote for the pro-life candidates that would stay home if the frontrunner was some pro-choice economist. The Republican party structure would love more time to focus on economic issues, but they know they have to beat the drum on religious wedge issues to keep that part of their base going. I know it's easy to see the Republicans as a monolith because we're all viewing them from a very left perspective, but they are a coalition of religious conservatives and economic conservatives, not a unified bloc. I realize. Its like with Romney: any coalition can be bought for the right price. And re: the Clintons, their rep is that you're either with the Clintons or you're against the Clintons. How does a Cuban pick get them access to the non-Clinton patronage network?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 08:44
|
|
|
AATREK CURES KIDS posted:I see what you're trying to imply, and you're wrong. There are so many pro-life Christians who vote for the pro-life candidates that would stay home if the frontrunner was some pro-choice economist. The Republican party structure would love more time to focus on economic issues, but they know they have to beat the drum on religious wedge issues to keep that part of their base going. I know it's easy to see the Republicans as a monolith because we're all viewing them from a very left perspective, but they are a coalition of religious conservatives and economic conservatives, not a unified bloc. They're a unified bloc of authoritarians with different opinions on method and a willingness to "graciously" set those differences aside when it comes time to hit the polls. That's how you get the women-haters and libertarians to line up behind the likes of Ronpaul.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 08:51
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:He is also on audio in favor of decreasing the minimum wage. When it comes down to decreasing the minimum wage vs. anti-choice, which issue has more Republican support? Good point, there is a real dearth of Republican candidates who are both anti-choice and anti-minimum wage. Because it's para-world; cats bark, and black is white.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 08:55
|
|
|
You're right MIGF, the Republican reaction to Mitt Romney 2012 will be to nominate a pro-choice economic candidate. 70% of the GOP will find him appealing for reasons such as
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 09:00
|
|
|
Adar posted:You're right MIGF, the Republican reaction to Mitt Romney 2012 will be to nominate a pro-choice economic candidate. 70% of the GOP will find him appealing for reasons such as A shitload of bribe money.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 09:08
|
|
|
Yes money makes the Republican base forget about core issues. Mitt Romney knew this, that's why he's president and has his hands full with ISIS and Ebola. Again, it's para-world.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 09:12
|
|
|
I remember back in 2007 the Intrade (RIP) politics forum's longest thread was about the chances of scrappy young go-getter Duncan Hunter. That was less ridiculous than this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 09:14
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Yes money makes the Republican base forget about core issues. Mitt Romney knew this, that's why he's president and has his hands full with ISIS and Ebola. Again, it's para-world. Romney 2012: A core issue of Republican base turnout and not General turnout
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 09:15
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Romney 2012: A core issue of Republican base turnout and not General turnout I can't tell if I'm not understanding you or if you just wrote something incredibly stupid.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 09:22
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I can't tell if I'm not understanding you or if you just wrote something incredibly stupid. I'm saying you don't need to win the evangelicals to win the Republican primary. You can just pay them off to sit out the primary; what are they gonna do, vote Democrat in the general? Now, are there any extremely anti-choice Republican women you can add to balance this out with a better documented record of being less crazy than Palin?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 09:30
|
|
|
skaboomizzy posted:Really? There are no prominent Latino Dem politicians you can think of? Not even a pair of them? In Texas? Hey, you can have Julian Castro for VP, but don't you dare take Joaquin, he's currently doing an excellent job as my Representative. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 09:40
|
|
|
The Something Awful Forums>Discussion>Debate & Discussion: I can't tell if I'm not understanding you or if you just wrote something incredibly stupid
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 09:42
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:I'm saying you don't need to win the evangelicals to win the Republican primary. ahahhaha I guess I got my answer quote:You can just pay them off to sit out the primary; what are they gonna do, vote Democrat in the general? Problem is, they'll keep sitting, like they did for Romney. quote:Now, are there any extremely anti-choice Republican women you can add to balance this out with a better documented record of being less crazy than Palin? All of them, including Bachmann.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 09:46
|
|
|
fade5 posted:Hey, you can have Julian Castro for VP, but don't you dare take Joaquin, he's currently doing an excellent job as my Representative. I sorta want the pair of them to start engaging in Parent Trap hijinks, with them privately swapping jobs whenever they're left in a room together and not telling the country.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 09:56
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:I sorta want the pair of them to start engaging in Parent Trap hijinks, with them privately swapping jobs whenever they're left in a room together and not telling the country. They've done that, and it wasn't well received when it came out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 09:57
|
|
|
Vienna Circlejerk posted:MIGF I don't understand your affected elite word salad talkin' but anybody can tell you that Hillary's running mate is going to love Jesus and not be regarded as a malicious rear end in a top hat by the entire world. Oh good, so it's not just me? The last few weeks have been rather exhausting for me and when looking at his posts, I started to worry that the fatigue had made my reading comprehension drop to a grade school level.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 10:18
|
|
|
richardfun posted:Oh good, so it's not just me? The last few weeks have been rather exhausting for me and when looking at his posts, I started to worry that the fatigue had made my reading comprehension drop to a grade school level. No, not just you. It's confusing me too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 10:41
|
|
|
I'm not really a MIGF fan either, fortunately you don't actually have to read everyone's posts. He did push that Rauner narrative though and after considering it, I do think thats something worth paying attention to, if not for 16 then for 20.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 11:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:25 |
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:I'm not really a MIGF fan either, fortunately you don't actually have to read everyone's posts. He did push that Rauner narrative though and after considering it, I do think thats something worth paying attention to, if not for 16 then for 20. Nah. I can find multiple instances of him saying he's pro-choice just by googling "rauner abortion". How much do you think a paid oppo team can find? You can't hold that position and be the nominee. It's immediate veto, just like a pro-life Democrat would be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 12:07
|
|