|
De Nomolos posted:Til then, I hope that Law and Order candidate is Lindsey Graham. Dear god, the ads right themselves. I wonder if Dick Wolf will give up the :doinkdoink: sound effect. Also, running a Silent Majority candidate in The Year of Our Lord 2014 is loving stupid. For all the poo poo the media is bad it they will attack perceived racial attacks and blow them up on you pretty bad.
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
What, precisely, is the difference between the Tea Party and the Silent Majority? ... okay, 40 years. Huh. You know, the Tea Partiers do seem to be about 40 years older than Silent Majoritarians.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:Dear god, the ads right themselves. I wonder if Dick Wolf will give up the :doinkdoink: sound effect. I don't have nearly that much faith in the media, look at the pass they gave the Republicans for the past few years The sailer strategy could work. It would be incredibly toxic for this country, but if you care more about winning the race for the position than how you help or harm people that is no impediment
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Warcabbit posted:What, precisely, is the difference between the Tea Party and the Silent Majority? The Silent Majority was a reaction to hippies and privileged college kids spitting on their privilege by seizing colleges. The SM was largely working class and saw kids with better life chances than then pissing on their gift in the name of supporting communists in Vietnam or militant blacks who were given the "gift" of Affirmative Action as petulant babies. The SM phenomenon must not be confused with backlashes against Civil Rights in general, better associated with Dixiecrats and Goldwater. Nixons exploitation of this came after the peaceful King-led movement had died down in the media in favor of militants and the war in Vietnam was center-stage. SM-associated politicians still in many cases supported deficit spending and "big government" intervention in the economy (See: Scoop Jackson, Nixon, Rockefeller). While the Tea Party is a purist movement, the Silent Majority was a cynical exploitation of working class resentment against certain perceived "privileges." It would eventually be fused with more purist principals under Ronald Reagan's leadership, though he had long been of this ilk, just not as a GOP-standard bearer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
Do/did the "Silent Majority" and the "Moral Majority" overlap?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:Do/did the "Silent Majority" and the "Moral Majority" overlap? The Moral Majority didn't exist until the '80s, but the demographics do overlap.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
The internet has killed the idea of there being an actual silent majority in the modern day. The idea of the silent majority was that it was just trouble-makers getting attention in media that were disconnected from the actual American people. Now that the internet has democratized media to a certain extent, there is no silent anything. You can probably find your Slate Political Gabfest along with whatever weird naturist anti-vaxxer colon cleansing podcasts you want. We have topics trending on Twitter that get talked about by Wolf Blitzer on CNN. Talk radio also put a bullet in the "silent majority" thing even before the internet. In the modern day the only way a "silent majority" gets invoked is if somebody is trying to unskew polls. "The majority of the American people agree with me guys! I promise! There's just no evidence of it, but I know they do!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:The Moral Majority didn't exist until the '80s, but the demographics do overlap. 70s and yes. The Moral Majority was created as a means of keeping the people upset with integration politically active by creating another divisive issue using religious affiliation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/rick-perry-2016-campaign-113210.html It's happening. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
No COMMUNISTS! Both parties have been INFILTRATED BY THE ENEMY! Wake up AMERICA! Perry is another DESPOT and we must form another party to overthrow this takeover! This idiot use to be democrat before he became republican. Then he tried to force vaccines onto our children which has caused DEATH and STERILIZATION once given the shot! He continued to try to force this onto "We the People"! Th worst of two evils is an worse for of EVIL! Please anyone whom has an ear let them hear this..........Prepare for the worst and pray for the best! Both parties are DEMONS! If we do not form "THE FREEDOM LOVING" party of libertarianism with constitutional loving members we will all be SACRIFICED TO SATAN! Ron Paul WHERE ARE YOU? The hole is becoming a trap now what????? Sink or swim!!!! Enough of the DISEASED FEW RULING and time for THE SANE TO STAND UP AND YELL FREEDOM!
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 01:40
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/rick-perry-2016-campaign-113210.html Also Perry vs Cruz is gonna be a blast, they both loving hate each other. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
fade5 posted:Not only is this going to be funny because of Perry's rather forgetful moment last time, Perry's still got the whole "in-state tuition for illegal immigrants" problem from last time (which he can't fully pivot away from without destroying any potential Hispanic cred in the general). I think the one thing everyone in Texas regardless of politics can agree on is that Cruz is plague on politics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 15:21
|
|
|
comes along bort posted:No COMMUNISTS! Both parties have been INFILTRATED BY THE ENEMY! Wake up AMERICA! Perry is another DESPOT and we must form another party to overthrow this takeover! This idiot use to be democrat before he became republican. Then he tried to force vaccines onto our children which has caused DEATH and STERILIZATION once given the shot! He continued to try to force this onto "We the People"! Th worst of two evils is an worse for of EVIL! Please anyone whom has an ear let them hear this..........Prepare for the worst and pray for the best! Both parties are DEMONS! If we do not form "THE FREEDOM LOVING" party of libertarianism with constitutional loving members we will all be SACRIFICED TO SATAN! Ron Paul WHERE ARE YOU? The hole is becoming a trap now what????? Sink or swim!!!! Enough of the DISEASED FEW RULING and time for THE SANE TO STAND UP AND YELL FREEDOM! I'm invoking Poe's Law.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 15:56
|
|
|
fade5 posted:Not only is this going to be funny because of Perry's rather forgetful moment last time, Perry's still got the whole "in-state tuition for illegal immigrants" problem from last time (which he can't fully pivot away from without destroying any potential Hispanic cred in the general). Also, how will the decline in energy prices effect Perry?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:Also, how will the decline in energy prices effect Perry? Probably not a lot; he'll be out of office by the time you really feel the impact. It would probably be less effective to mention Texas in a year and a half compared with now if the price keeps dropping though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
fade5 posted:Not only is this going to be funny because of Perry's rather forgetful moment last time, Perry's still got the whole "in-state tuition for illegal immigrants" problem from last time (which he can't fully pivot away from without destroying any potential Hispanic cred in the general). Maybe Perry will campaing like Bush did in 2000 and gently caress up the flow of the GOP to the right. And everyone hates Cruz, well maybe not Mike Lee. Mooseontheloose posted:Also, how will the decline in energy prices effect Perry? He made gas cheap for us consumers!
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Probably not a lot; he'll be out of office by the time you really feel the impact. I mean isn't the whole Texas Miracle basically based off the fact that oil was so expensive?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:I mean isn't the whole Texas Miracle basically based off the fact that oil was so expensive?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Debate & Discussion > 2016 Presidential Primary: the hole is becoming a trap now what
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Debate & Discussion > 2016 Presidential Primary: the hole is becoming a trap now what Debate & Discussion > 2016 Presidential Primary: let it flare
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
Debate & Discussion > 2016 Presidential Primary: "Glasses Make You Smexy" Edition 
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
SirKibbles posted:I think the one thing everyone in Texas regardless of politics can agree on is that Cruz is plague on politics. Untrue - I had my students in my political science class do a small extra credit exercise on their favorite politician, and one of them picked Ted Cruz. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
Nameless_Steve posted:Debate & Discussion > 2016 Presidential Primary: "Glasses Make You Smexy" Edition That takes care of my nightmares for the foreseeable future...
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
Rob Portman will not run for President. The GOP field will surely miss the presence of this bland fiscal policy wonk.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
Alan Lichtman's 13 keys for determining the outcome of the next presidential election are always interesting. http://bangordailynews.com/2014/11/27/opinion/contributors/looking-at-prospects-for-2016-presidential-race-through-lichtmans-keys/ quote:Former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb’s decision to become the first of an expected dozen or more candidates forming presidential exploratory committees provides a good excuse to start considering 2016. As for Clinton losing the Democratic primary in 2016, good luck with that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 14:45
|
|
|
At what point did it really become clear Obama was running in 2008? I keep feeling like if there was going to be a Hillary challenger I'd sort of know who they were by now, but I realized that don't actually have any real basis for that belief because I apparently have the memory of a goldfish and can't remember the leadup to the primaries in 2008 well enough.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 14:48
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:At what point did it really become clear Obama was running in 2008? I keep feeling like if there was going to be a Hillary challenger I'd sort of know who they were by now, but I realized that don't actually have any real basis for that belief because I apparently have the memory of a goldfish and can't remember the leadup to the primaries in 2008 well enough. When was Obama's first official visit to a county bordering Iowa? There's your answer. Convention speech + Iowa bordering county visit = you're in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:At what point did it really become clear Obama was running in 2008? I keep feeling like if there was going to be a Hillary challenger I'd sort of know who they were by now, but I realized that don't actually have any real basis for that belief because I apparently have the memory of a goldfish and can't remember the leadup to the primaries in 2008 well enough. quote:Monday, October 23, 2006
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
With the bombshell that Rob Portman has decided not to lose the 2016 nomination, CNN finds someone named Willard Mitt Romney (I'll save you the Google, here's his Wikipedia article) leading with 20% in a crowded field. Ben Carson comes in second with 10%. Meanwhile, Hillary's lead over Warren narrows from 57% to a mere 55% 
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 15:10
|
|
|
Serious question, if Mittens runs again does that mean another family documentary?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 15:17
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:Serious question, if Mittens runs again does that mean another family documentary? Mitt fascinates me because even though the man still comes across as an emotionless weirdo in parts, he looks and sounds like an actual human being throughout the doc. Ann and his one deranged son look even worse, arguably, but Mitt and the rest of the family seem normal. If he runs again, the campaign team could do much worse than trotting that documentary out over and over again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
Yeah Mitt really is the Republicans' best option, I don't think he had much of a chance in 2008 post GW Bush and against superstar Obama but after 8 years of supposedly-terrible Obama and that puffy documentary he would have MORE of a shot, at least. I don't think any of those other guys in the CNN poll have much of a chance, I mean J Bush or Christie I can sort of imagine but it's hard.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Christie is far and away the best politician in the Republican field, and the most adept at tapping into the raw id that drives the modern republican party. Unfortunately or fortunately he's also a giant (lol fat) walking stereoytpe of the Yankee rear end in a top hat and I don't know how that will play outside of the northeast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:Alan Lichtman's 13 keys for determining the outcome of the next presidential election are always interesting. The GOP is going to try to make Ferguson protesters look like the Black Panthers, and maybe middle America believes them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Christie is far and away the best politician in the Republican field, and the most adept at tapping into the raw id that drives the modern republican party. Unfortunately or fortunately he's also a giant (lol fat) walking stereoytpe of the Yankee rear end in a top hat and I don't know how that will play outside of the northeast. Not to mention the fact he couldn't pass Romney's vetting process for VP.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:At what point did it really become clear Obama was running in 2008? I keep feeling like if there was going to be a Hillary challenger I'd sort of know who they were by now, but I realized that don't actually have any real basis for that belief because I apparently have the memory of a goldfish and can't remember the leadup to the primaries in 2008 well enough. I think the hat-in-the-ring moment was his speech in Springfield. Looking it up, that was 2/10/07. We've got about two months I guess. After that there were debates with John Edwards and Kucinich. Oh and wasn't Chris Dodd in there somewhere? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I think the hat-in-the-ring moment was his speech in Springfield. Looking it up, that was 2/10/07. We've got about two months I guess. Springfield was the official announcement but it was really cemented in December. Hillary actually declared later than Obama as I remember it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Naet posted:Mitt fascinates me because even though the man still comes across as an emotionless weirdo in parts, he looks and sounds like an actual human being throughout the doc. Ann and his one deranged son look even worse, arguably, but Mitt and the rest of the family seem normal. If he runs again, the campaign team could do much worse than trotting that documentary out over and over again. I think Romney being normal is his entire problem. He's too normal. He's aggressively normal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Springfield was the official announcement but it was really cemented in December. Hillary actually declared later than Obama as I remember it. Yeah but it's the unofficial declarations of intent that I'm most interested in. I just don't see anyone who can beat Hillary - granted, many people didn't think Obama could either but he was at least credible. I don't see the credible challengers here. I could see Warren playing that sort of role (though I don't think she'd be successful) but I've seen no indication she is actually interested in running. I don't see anyone else - Webb is really the only other 'serious' candidate and nobody's going to win the Democratic nomination attacking Hillary from the right.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 15:45 |
|
|
I mean he's [e: Christie's] clearly Nixonian-bordering-on-mobster and I think people will see that but after Bush winning in 2004 I'm forced to remain a touch agnostic about it. (I don't mean Bush was Nixonian I mean he was clearly in over his head and incompetent and at that point "I thought people would see that", too... the media is a little less pathetic than it was back then, though.) pangstrom fucked around with this message at 17:50 on Dec 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 17:38
|
|