|
It's more about generating constant small scandals to change perceptions than it is about finding the smoking gun that takes her out of the race. No one is going to change their vote because of this email thing but 2 years worth of email-like-things may cause a conservative voter who would have stayed home otherwise to vote, or a democrat who would have voted to stay home.
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 06:53 |
|
|
Good Citizen posted:It's more about generating constant small scandals to change perceptions than it is about finding the smoking gun that takes her out of the race. No one is going to change their vote because of this email thing but 2 years worth of email-like-things may cause a conservative voter who would have stayed home otherwise to vote, or a democrat who would have voted to stay home. This would be a great strategy if only it hadn't been tried for literally a decade. A decade in the middle of which her husband was reelected in a landslide.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:This would be a great strategy if only it hadn't been tried for literally a decade. A decade in the middle of which her husband was reelected in a landslide. Yeah, luckily Republicans haven't successfully used a similar trick after the Clinton presidency. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:This would be a great strategy if only it hadn't been tried for literally a decade. A decade in the middle of which her husband was reelected in a landslide. Well it's not like they can change strategies now. They have an entire industry built up around this tactic. And honestly it hasn't been completely ineffective against Obama. It just wasn't effective enough to knock him out of a Potus election.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
remusclaw posted:
Japan and Germany had an outside force restructuring them that had no interest in preserving the status of the prior elites. Accelerationism could work in the US if we also had an outside power that would step in and enforce a new order after everything went to hell. Benevolent space aliens perhaps or an empowered UN. It would still only succeed at the cost of immense human suffering and misery in this generation. But given someone to play the part of outside enforcer it can work. You need that outsider because the damage done by accelerationism to the populace brings out the worst of humanity by making everyone desperate and extra tribal. It diminishes the ability of the people inside the bubble to fix the problems. McAlister fucked around with this message at 06:57 on Mar 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Yeah, luckily Republicans haven't successfully used a similar trick after the Clinton presidency. The thing is it only works for a limited amount of time. Against a boring guy nobody previously knew, it's fairly effective. Against a charismatic guy nobody previously knew it's not effective enough. However if you run the play relentlessly for almost a quarter of a loving century you're going to get nothing off it. At that point you've not only sapped all effectiveness from the tactic but made your target all but immune to actual scandals. Hillary is going to have to do some crazy poo poo on the level of the more interesting conspiracy theories about the Clintons in order for it to actually make an impact at this point. Congratulations Republicans, your attempts to strike her down have made her more powerful than you could ever imagine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
USPOL clickbait: Hillary in Nixon's shadow
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
That's fine, Nixon was elected twice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
The problem with accelerationism in the US is simple: when the poo poo hits the fan, do you think Americans are going to move towards a radical right-wing solution or a radical left-wing solution? Also, who do you think will replace America on the world stage and where are they on human rights?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:The problem with accelerationism in the US is simple: when the poo poo hits the fan, do you think Americans are going to move towards a radical right-wing solution or a radical left-wing solution? Also, who do you think will replace America on the world stage and where are they on human rights? Well to be fair, where are we on human rights? You can't turn a blind eye to the fact that America's been waging a war on its own black and poor and female citizens for, like, ever. It comes off dangerously nationalistic to think of America as some shining beacon that is single-handedly keeping the world from committing human rights abuses. But yeah, chances are we would fall hard right-wing and it would not be good. Accelerationism is for sociopaths. MLKQUOTEMACHINE fucked around with this message at 19:47 on Mar 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
nutranurse posted:Well to be fair, where are we on human rights? You can't turn a blind eye to the fact that America's been waging a war on its own black and poor and female citizens for, like, ever. It comes off dangerously nationalistic to think of America as some shining beacon that is single-handedly keeping the world from committing human rights abuses. In the context of a new world hegemon, I think the question of human rights is more about where are they on other countries human rights rather than their own human rights. Hypocrisy sucks, but a lack of hypocrisy isn't going to be awesome for everyone else.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
Gyges posted:In the context of a new world hegemon, I think the question of human rights is more about where are they on other countries human rights rather than their own human rights. Hypocrisy sucks, but a lack of hypocrisy isn't going to be awesome for everyone else. Why assume another global hegemon (read: who?) rather than a multipolar situation where military interventions are simply less common because no one will be willing to spend enough to build that capacity?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:Why assume another global hegemon (read: who?) rather than a multipolar situation where military interventions are simply less common because no one will be willing to spend enough to build that capacity? Even if a multipolar situation is the future it's quite unlikely that military interventions will become less common, given the last time we were in a multipolar world.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Even if a multipolar situation is the future it's quite unlikely that military interventions will become less common, given the last time we were in a multipolar world. Yeah the era of Great Powers certainly wasn't peaceful.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
The need of an outside force is a big flaw in accelerationism's reading of history. In the past there was a clear contest of narratives (free market west vs. communist east, segregationists vs. integrationists, etc) where the democratic process tries to find a third way. Without a prominent alternative politicians just double down on their existing policies. Which is why we need a fascist party offering a constitutional convention and drastic change. It will put the spurs to the establishment politicians toward needed reforms.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
Rand Paul: "Same-sex marriage offends me and others"
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
 Motherfucker loves Flamin' Hot Cheetos. Also it sounds more like he's advocating the old libertarian solution of not calling the legal parts of marriage "marriage" but "contracts between adults" and therefor sidestepping the issue entirely. Republicans fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Mar 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
I'm offended  Political Correctness gone mad!
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
You are formally on the wrong side of history in this battle, Rand, the entire country is gonna have legal same sex marriage within 5 years at this rate. All you're doing is hurting your libertarian cred. Not that you really have much anymore.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
but guys, we had a multi-polar situation a hundred years ago, and just think about how much more peaceful it was! You are seeing mass unrest and protests in Greece, Spain, and Portugal today, now compare that with what things were like in Europe in 1915!
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
McDowell posted:The need of an outside force is a big flaw in accelerationism's reading of history. In the past there was a clear contest of narratives (free market west vs. communist east, segregationists vs. integrationists, etc) where the democratic process tries to find a third way. My big problem with it is its ignoring of how people can make change if they actually try to build grass roots, yeah the system is against you, but its not Sissphyian to oppose it. People in general know the system is very sick and want it to change, and giving them the correct alternative really does change things for the better. Just look at how Neoliberals are being pushed in Chicago,neo Liberals can be put in their place within the party, and trying to only concentrate on getting the one true progressive(TM) elected president really doesn't accomplish the change necessary, the Dems will not have a Reagan like figure till the party as a whole has been changed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:You are formally on the wrong side of history in this battle, Rand, the entire country is gonna have legal same sex marriage within 5 years at this rate. All you're doing is hurting your libertarian cred. Not that you really have much anymore. Also, some people clearly just like being on the wrong side of history. edit: also some people like being offended. Samurai Sanders fucked around with this message at 22:57 on Mar 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
No no no, you guys are all wrong. Gay people don't offend him, it's just the fact that they are using a straight person word to describe their dirty, perverse "love", that's all. *Insert clip of Ron Paul in Bruno here*
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:You are formally on the wrong side of history in this battle, Rand, the entire country is gonna have legal same sex marriage within 5 years at this rate. All you're doing is hurting your libertarian cred. Not that you really have much anymore. He's trying with the libertarian standard "make it a civil contract relationshipwhich we can't call marriage because I'm a gigantic crybaby" thing, because when you've already drawn criticism for opposing the Civil Rights Act, arguing that we give separate but equal another shot sure seems like the bright thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:No no no, you guys are all wrong. Gay people don't offend him, it's just the fact that they are using a straight person word to describe their dirty, perverse "love", that's all. Man that scene was just great.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Grand Paul desires to have his cake and eat his cake and gently caress his cake
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
It's true, you cant even really depend on an outside power forcibly applying a fix to the acceleration issue can you. All you have to do is look at North Korea to find a situation where the powers most concerned think its more trouble than its worth to force change. With the kind of armament the U.S has I cant see anyone particularly willing to push things if we swing extreme right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
Huh, I always thought it was conservatives who were going on about how no one has a right to be offended.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
Republicans posted:
Wait, what is up with his Red Right Hand, there?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
Red Minjo posted:Wait, what is up with his Red Right Hand, there? Some kind of stage lighting
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Red Minjo posted:Wait, what is up with his Red Right Hand, there? There's something red that has a lot of light on it nearby.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Red Minjo posted:Wait, what is up with his Red Right Hand, there? It's a sign of arousal, like the red rear end of a baboon. Probably stage lights.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
You'll see him in your head, on the TV screen, and hey buddy, I'm warning you to turn it off
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
Red Minjo posted:Wait, what is up with his Red Right Hand, there? He is the anti-Hellboy, sent to destroy the BPRD.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
He is a big Nick Cave fan.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
CheesyDog posted:You'll see him in your head, on the TV screen, and hey buddy, I'm warning you to turn it off But the stacks of green paper in his red right hand would be filthy fiat currency?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:but guys, we had a multi-polar situation a hundred years ago, and just think about how much more peaceful it was! You are seeing mass unrest and protests in Greece, Spain, and Portugal today, now compare that with what things were like in Europe in 1915! I'd go with a comparison to 1918 over 1915; the institutional collapse between '15 and '18 is far too great to ignore. We aren't in a multi-polar world, we're in an American world with policies which continue the spirit of isolationism. Our Congress is returning to a pre-WW2 standard of operations, and we've changed our constitution to prevent a return to bipartisanship. Clinton for a third term; having Presidents govern with a third term potential in mind produces improved results over having Presidents govern with partisan Congresses and a resigned disposition towards abandoning power just before, during, or after redistricting
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:Why would this hurt his position with his voters, if they are as offended as him? Republicans basically know that they have to jettison the anti-gay marriage folks sooner or later, and I've seen the idea floated that Republicans will go the route of "gay marriage and weed while still being economically conservative". The guy most likely to try that first tl;dr: Rand went for the short-term win with long term-losses, even though he was in the best position to start shifting with how the wind is blowing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
fade5 posted:Part of why it might hurt his position is that 61% of Republicans under 30 favor same-sex marriage, and the Libertarian-type Republicans are more likely to support same-sex marriage than Religious-type Republicans, so it's kinda weird that Rand is going with this tactic. Could potentially be seen as a hedge to play to Rand's kentucky base, signaling that he's only flirting with a run for the idiot money while intending to stand for Senate in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 06:53 |
|
|
Quote of the day, “Strom Thurmond had four kids after he was 67. If you’re not willing to do that, we need immigration.” ~ Lindsey Graham.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 00:00
|
|
