|
Caros posted:One is a vice president who doesn't play by the rules... the other, a no-nonsense supreme court justice out for Scalia's blood. They are... Biden and the Gins... Diamond and the Doily.
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 21:16 |
|
|
I can't wait for the fun of the Republican primary season, but what are the chances that we DON'T end up with Bush vs. Clinton? Seems like 10% or so to me - Bush will get the money and I think the general public will be surprised how intelligent he appears, compared to his brother. (or more accurately, compared to the caricature of his brother that we think of now)
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Diamond and the Doily. Joe on the Rocks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 05:45
|
|
|
OctoberBlues posted:I can't wait for the fun of the Republican primary season, but what are the chances that we DON'T end up with Bush vs. Clinton? Seems like 10% or so to me - Bush will get the money and I think the general public will be surprised how intelligent he appears, compared to his brother. (or more accurately, compared to the caricature of his brother that we think of now) Way more than ten percent, Bush in no way has his race sown up and there isn't actually a guarantee that Hillary will win hers either, even though she's probably 80 to 85 percent likely to at this point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 06:08
|
|
|
Hillary is going to glide in but the only way Jeb gets the nomination is if the RNC's donor overlords rigged the nomination process enough over the last four years to neutralize the riff-raff. I'm gonna guess they haven't done so adequately. Jeb hasn't run for poo poo since the inmates took over the asylum, and his only political job has been not burning a revenue-heavy state to the ground over eight relatively-easy years. That's high praise for a Republican in the General Election but not in 2015's best serial dramedy. I want President Biden with my whole being TheScott2K fucked around with this message at 06:25 on Feb 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 06:21
|
|
|
TheScott2K posted:I want President Biden with my whole being Good because it'll be the whole of your being he is groping and pressing himself against, in a public venue.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 06:31
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Good because it'll be the whole of your being he is groping and pressing himself against, in a public venue. The last perv could have gone worse
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 06:35
|
|
|
TheScott2K posted:Hillary is going to glide in but the only way Jeb gets the nomination is if the RNC's donor overlords rigged the nomination process enough over the last four years to neutralize the riff-raff. I'm gonna guess they haven't done so adequately. Jeb hasn't run for poo poo since the inmates took over the asylum, and his only political job has been not burning a revenue-heavy state to the ground over eight relatively-easy years. That's high praise for a Republican in the General Election but not in 2015's best serial dramedy. Nah, as of right now Jeb is the 2016 version of 2012 Romney. He's the only adult in the clown car and as a result he'll get the nod after all the other clowns get their moment in the spotlight. The only thing that could gently caress it up for him is another viable "reasonable Republicans" candidate. Romney's out, Christie isn't, so as long as no one else jumps in he's the defacto choice. Of course he could always gently caress it up by pulling a Huntsman and answering something in Spanish or acknowledging that immigrants are people too, not just disease vector jihadist moochers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 06:44
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Nah, as of right now Jeb is the 2016 version of 2012 Romney. He's the only adult in the clown car and as a result he'll get the nod after all the other clowns get their moment in the spotlight. The only thing that could gently caress it up for him is another viable "reasonable Republicans" candidate. Romney's out, Christie isn't, so as long as no one else jumps in he's the defacto choice. I could easily see Jeb Bush pulling several Huntsmans. He could end up in rough enough shape that the donor class decides to use the opportunity to kill Paultardism in its crib by letting him go national with his brand of idiotic. Hillary's better for Wall Street anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 07:04
|
|
|
To be fair Huntsman was out of it long before he came out as a chinese plant, partially because he'd been out of the country during the pre-primary jockeying, partially because Romney came in with the name recognition due to '08 and the media said to themselves "gently caress, I'm not covering TWO rich, handsome Mormon ex-governors. This is eating up valuable Crazy Person airtime". If he'd been positioned as strongly as Romney to begin with, I don't know that being a secret chinaman would have hurt him that much. With enough clout it's easy to spin that less as "Jon Huntsman/Jeb Bush is a Red Chinee/Messican", more "see, our candidate knows of the foreigners' sorcerous tongue! We need no longer fear their dastardly magic!" PupsOfWar fucked around with this message at 07:24 on Feb 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 07:11
|
|
|
TheScott2K posted:I could easily see Jeb Bush pulling several Huntsmans. He could end up in rough enough shape that the donor class decides to use the opportunity to kill Paultardism in its crib by letting him go national with his brand of idiotic. Hillary's better for Wall Street anyway. Giving Paul the nom would do the opposite of killing it though. It would give his ideas the veneer of credibility. Even if he lost in a landslide, there would suddenly be a huge audience that would take up his cause and would eventually get more people like him into office the same way Goldwater begot Reagan.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 10:47
|
|
|
HalPhilipWalker posted:Giving Paul the nom would do the opposite of killing it though. It would give his ideas the veneer of credibility. Even if he lost in a landslide, there would suddenly be a huge audience that would take up his cause and would eventually get more people like him into office the same way Goldwater begot Reagan. It's not like we can prevent libertarianism becoming mainstream. It was built to appeal to privileged idiots and it dovetails nicely with the policy goals of people who want to destroy social programs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 15:25
|
|
|
Preventing libertarianism from becoming mainsteam is stupid anyway. It already basically is in the sense that each individual part of it (Republican economic policies and Democratic social policies) is already mainstream. The fact that the Pauls are extremists doesn't do much to change the fact that their ideology is shared to some extent by a lot of people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
The GoP will have to default to libertarianism eventually once the social conservatives die out and they're left with nothing but being the gently caress The Poor party. They will need libertarian rhetoric to counter the populists. (Not that there aren't young social conservatives, but anti-gay, anti-weed and anti-abortion is not going to be an election-winning platform anymore. The parties may end up retrenching around different social issues, but it will take a while for the battle lines to be drawn) It's just a matter of timing. PupsOfWar fucked around with this message at 15:58 on Feb 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
I'm conformable putting my money on Jeb. He's got the biggest war chest now, and after forcing out Romney it looks like the decision makers are in his corner too. I find myself increasingly frustrated that the activist left is wasting time and energy tilting at the Warren Windmill and not out building up the Sanderistas
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
Trailer to seriously anti-gay documentary featuring possible 2016 candidates Rand Paul and Huckabee The documentary is titled "Light Wins: How To Overcome The Criminalization Of Christianity," https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=somJ-IjMjKU Including this line quote:Like a tank in Tiananmen Square," Porter says, as she walks down the middle of a dark street as a pair of headlights bear down upon her, "the homosexual agenda has been running over people since Anita Bryant's courageous stand in the 1970s." Mr Ice Cream Glove fucked around with this message at 16:14 on Feb 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
My dad, a CNBC-watching Bill Buckley Republican who tries not to discuss politics with me (though he did somehow vote for O in 2012) if at all possible, felt the need to ask me what's wrong with this Rand Paul guy when I was home last. I explained the Fed thing and he was like "yeah, no banks are gonna back that" (he worked in commodity trading), so I'm not sure where Paul will get his serious money from. Koch? Could they be his Sheldon A? Rygar201 posted:I'm conformable putting my money on Jeb. He's got the biggest war chest now, and after forcing out Romney it looks like the decision makers are in his corner too. You weren't around for the Kucinich experiment, were you? De Nomolos fucked around with this message at 16:54 on Feb 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Yes! Yes! Eat your own   
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
Personally I can see its going to be like last, ten candidates ranging from crazy to Michelle Bachmann, and every two weeks one of the leads in the polls and then gets eliminated.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
If only he was on the bill with Actual Socialist Cornel West and not Cornel Brooks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
this is all yalls fault for not votin Jesse Jackson in the '88 primaries
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
I've got plenty of professional acquaintences who would vote R if it didn't mean empowering a bunch of religious psychopaths. If the GOP was still viable after shedding the culture-warrior husk, they could expand further into the privileged idiot market. That would honestly take a New Deal Coalition style rebuilding effort, though, and I don't think the GOP has it in them at the moment. When they got clubbed in 2006, 2008, and 2012 they said the same delusional poo poo about needing to fix their "messaging," when they really needed to recognize that their platform is busted and they can only win elections that nobody can be bothered to vote in.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
I like that the entire list of speakers at this African-American issues conference are all black, but then in the dead center of the program is Lawrence O'Donnell, the whitest man in America, for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
Well I wasn't ready for that. Also I look forward to him trading on this in future. Perhaps he will speak Jive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:I've got plenty of professional acquaintences who would vote R if it didn't mean empowering a bunch of religious psychopaths. If the GOP was still viable after shedding the culture-warrior husk, they could expand further into the privileged idiot market. Republicans can win in strong D states (MA, MD, NJ). Democrats can't come within striking distance in strong R states (UT, AK, the rest of the Plains and Deep South). What does that say about GOP viability?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:Republicans can win in strong D states (MA, MD, NJ). Democrats can't come within striking distance in strong R states (UT, AK, the rest of the Plains and Deep South). What does that say about GOP viability? It says the Republicans ground game in local state races is a lot stronger than the Dems who have concentrated on national races to the exclusion of all else for too long and are now seeing the results of that myopia.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
GOP could ditch the religious culture war and make it a secular culture war, there's a lot of young people with really lovely social policy, but the rhetoric is less evangelical. "Gays are an abomination before the eyes of the lord" becomes "They can marry! What more do they want, why are they shoving their sexuality in our faces?", "Abortion is the extinguishing of a human soul!" becomes "why can't those sluts just keep their legs closed, and why can't men opt out of babies they don't want? Financial Abortions now!", they'll have to give up the crusade against weed, but you could perpetuate the culture war for a while yet by shifting it to holler at the PC Police and the dirty SJWs. Look at the reddit crowd: There's a lot of 18-35 year olds that identify with the left wing because they hate that their mom made them go to church just slightly more than they feel the call of FYGM
Bushiz fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Feb 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
QwertyAsher posted:There's a lot of 18-35 year olds that identify with the left wing because they hate that their mom made them go to church just slightly more than they feel the call of FYGM
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
quote:spunknik
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
Yes, Ben Carson could get 90% of the black vote! Just like Sarah Palin pulled 90%+ of the women's vote for McCain/Palin back in 2008. They will never be a viable national party again until they realize that tokenism does. not. work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
What the hell are "black credentials"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
AGirlWonder posted:What the hell are "black credentials"? -dark skin -
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:Yes, Ben Carson could get 90% of the black vote! Just like Sarah Palin pulled 90%+ of the women's vote for McCain/Palin back in 2008.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:Yes, Ben Carson could get 90% of the black vote! Just like Sarah Palin pulled 90%+ of the women's vote for McCain/Palin back in 2008. They will never realize that, because part and parcel of that realization is the idea of 'other people have needs/problems that a white person doesn't' and all that entails. These are people who will never admit racism is still a real thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:Yes, Ben Carson could get 90% of the black vote! Just like Sarah Palin pulled 90%+ of the women's vote for McCain/Palin back in 2008. Considering that they have the majority in both houses of Congress, as well as 31 out of 50 governorships, they're doing awfully well for not being a "viable national party".
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
I think they are viable right now, but until they prove they can sweep in a Presidential year I am not ready to say they have recovered their former strength. They need to jettison the religious right eventually, but I'm not sure when that process can start.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:Republicans can win in strong D states (MA, MD, NJ). Democrats can't come within striking distance in strong R states (UT, AK, the rest of the Plains and Deep South). What does that say about GOP viability? Blue Dog-run state Democratic parties are still strong enough to win in plenty of states that are deep-red at the national level. West Virginia, Kentucky, Arkansas, Montana, etc These are less important states than Pennsylvania or Massachusetts and in many cases you're just dealing with leftover dixiecrats in steady decline, but the point is that it this is not a phenomenon confined to the Democrats' backyard. There are still plenty of voters in the mushy middle who vote on aesthetic, gut feeling or immediate circumstances rather than party loyalty. Democrats can win in Republican strongholds if they assemble strong ground games and run candidates the people there will find appealing (generally rootin' tootin' fake populists who are willing to sell out minorities). Republicans can win in Democratic strongholds if they assemble strong ground games and run candidates the people there will find appealing (stern businessmen who are disciplined enough not to talk about how much they hate gays or women).
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:I think they are viable right now, but until they prove they can sweep in a Presidential year I am not ready to say they have recovered their former strength. They need to jettison the religious right eventually, but I'm not sure when that process can start. If you asked me if I wanted to be the party that does well in state-level races and congress, or the party that does well in the presidential contest, I don't think it's even close.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:Blue Dog-run state Democratic parties are still strong enough to win in plenty of states that are deep-red at the national level. Isn't Arkansas' state government completely controlled by the GOP now, and West Virginia looking to head the same way in 2016?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 21:16 |
|
|
If Texas ever became blue (big if) there would never be another GOP president
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2015 18:52
|
|