|
Series DD Funding posted:Hillary Rodham Clinton   whatever7 posted:Has Hillary hinted her Iran/Israel policy? Let's guess: full-throated support for Israel, on the terms that they agree to continue pursuing a two-state solution. 
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 05:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:Rand Paul: "The War on Drugs has created a culture of violence and puts police in an impossible situation.”
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 05:45
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Has Hillary hinted her Iran/Israel policy?  She was Secretary of State for four years, she can distance herself from Obama on many issues if she wants to but she's going to have to own the current foreign policy direction.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 05:45
|
|
|
Quidam Viator posted:
I would imagine she is going to have to pick up where Obama left off for the most part, but otherwise will try to cozy back up with Israel as much as possible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 05:46
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Has Hillary hinted her Iran/Israel policy? She's issued a statement supporting Obama's nuclear deal with Iran.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 05:50
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:She's issued a statement supporting Obama's nuclear deal with Iran. That make her slightly more electable. I still think she is a Yankee hat wearing liar and rather throw away my vote than vote for her.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:Whereas if you wait 'til 2020, then use anti-hillary backlash to elect the Cotton/West ticket, you could be bathing in atomic hellfire in just five short years. 2020 is too far away, it will be impossible for the revolution to rebuild our ruined environment then. I need a President that will wipe out all life on earth in cleansing atomic conflagration no later than 2018 so the work of building utopia can begin before it's too late.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:2020 is too far away, it will be impossible for the revolution to rebuild our ruined environment then. well I suppose you could run an Incompetence-based ticket and hope they do it on accident there's no way you can accomplish this via a Pure Malice ticket within that kinda timeframe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 06:29
|
|
|
Has this been posted yet? It's peak Florida Republican  hand-wringing about the upcoming Jeb/Rubio slugfest.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 10:03
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:
She really doesn't. First term stuff, maybe, and I'm sure she'll get a few half-hearted barbs about the relations reset with Russia, but if Obama's recent less-than-complete-subservience toward Israel garners criticism it'll cost her nothing to say she's not Obama and doesn't always agree with his positions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 10:14
|
|
|
Dolash posted:She really doesn't. First term stuff, maybe, and I'm sure she'll get a few half-hearted barbs about the relations reset with Russia, but if Obama's recent less-than-complete-subservience toward Israel garners criticism it'll cost her nothing to say she's not Obama and doesn't always agree with his positions. If the Iran framework deal is in place this year there is no chance the next Democratic administration will break the agreement. Another thing to keep in mind is that the Clintons hate Bibi. Joementum fucked around with this message at 13:35 on Apr 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 12:41
|
|
|
Joementum posted:If the Iran framework deal is in place this year there is no chance the next Democratic administration will break the agreement. Headline was slightly confusing for a few moments.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 14:15
|
|
|
"We must do better than the Obama-Clinton foreign policy." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOzLLj-IxjM ... by electing a member of the Bush family, because when has that ever gone wrong?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 15:16
|
|
|
This is so disturbing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECwgWgpPwxc
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 15:28
|
|
|
ufarn posted:This is so disturbing Is he diabetic? He seems to always be thirsty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:Is he diabetic? He seems to always be thirsty. Maybe Florida doesn't agree with him.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
Watching Rand on Meet the Press (I know, I know) and I'm cracking up at how bad he is at basic interaction. Ex: He tried to laugh off the Today interview with a little self-deprecating humor, to connect to the common person of course, explaining that he needs his coffee, etc. to function normally and maybe he just woke up on the wrong side of the bed. Chuck jumped in and asked him if he wasn't a morning person. Rand was like in mid-chuckle at his 'joke' when you could actually see his body stiffen up as he realized being an rear end in a top hat in the mornings isn't considered very presidential and then he went on a rant about how much he loves the morning, how much he prefers it, and how he can prove it through his experience as a doctor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Republicans probably going to bring up Janet Reno again. A lot. Will Hilary's candidacy be able to withstand the pent-up frustrations of 25 years of the Republican Clinton Hate Machine? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:Will Hilary's candidacy be able to withstand the pent-up frustrations of 25 years of the Republican Clinton Hate Machine? Anytime anyone brings up anything from that time period, Hillary should just have Bill respond.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
Bro, do you even liberty? #LibertyNotHillary http://libertynothillary.com  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUAP_WMr2fw
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
So from an article I read it looks like her main reason for announcing now is because her donors were getting antsy and wanted to start writing checks. I think she wants to keep as low a profile as possible while also running for president.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
You can now buy used internal IDE drives from Rand Paul's campaign.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
baw posted:So from an article I read it looks like her main reason for announcing now is because her donors were getting antsy and wanted to start writing checks. I think she wants to keep as low a profile as possible while also running for president. Well, it's about time. She's been sucking the air out of the room for almost two years now. In fact, everyone else is so poorly positioned that if she wasn't going to run, she should have said so a year ago.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
Joementum posted:You can now buy used internal IDE drives from Rand Paul's campaign. The best part about this stupid crap is that if he is ever called out for it, he can deny responsibility and say that someone else did it without his knowledge; all the while raking in those fabulous bitcoins. Life is good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
Joementum posted:You can now buy used internal IDE drives from Rand Paul's campaign. This is absolutely genius and I am so happy I didn't throw away the dying hard drive I replaced Friday yet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
TheBalor posted:Well, it's about time. She's been sucking the air out of the room for almost two years now. In fact, everyone else is so poorly positioned that if she wasn't going to run, she should have said so a year ago. You don't clear the field this thoroughly without actively telling people behind the scenes that you are indeed running for President.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
Gyges posted:
Not in 2008 they didn't, or 2006. It's not some law that they are automatically going to get high turnout every election, they have to work at it just like the dems. They just tend to be better at it. DynamicSloth posted:
What makes you think that? There's no way she's going to be as good as Obama is on the issue. If you mean she won't scuttle the Iran deal, sure, but she might not press it too much if the republicans fight it, either. If you think she has to keep the same policy as Obama just because she was SoS, well no that isn't historically true at all. tsa fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Apr 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
Really not looking forward to spending the next year and a half defending Hillary from a "lesser of two evils" position. I am, however, definitely looking forward to watching the right wing go absolutely loving insane over her.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
Like if Colin Powell ran and won for some reason do you really think he would just mimic Bush policy? I doubt that very much, people can shift pretty easily in this regard.HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:Is he diabetic? He seems to always be thirsty. Dry mouth is an incredibly common side effect of a bunch of meds. tsa fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Apr 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Joementum posted:"We must do better than the Obama-Clinton foreign policy." Maybe I'm being naive, but how can a PAC for a candidate possibly have a live interview/statement from that candidate without there being any coordination?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
Rivensteel posted:Maybe I'm being naive, but how can a PAC for a candidate possibly have a live interview/statement from that candidate without there being any coordination? It's a regular PAC, with donation limits, not a Super PAC.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
tsa posted:Not in 2008 they didn't, or 2006. It's not some law that they are automatically going to get high turnout every election, they have to work at it just like the dems. They just tend to be better at it. Not necessarily true. Republicans really do vote at higher rates, naturally, than Democrats. Their base intersects with the voters most likely to turn out - older, whiter, richer. Democrats have an actual larger base of voters, but they are far less likely to turn out and they are disproportionately concentrated in fewer states. The GOP's turnout machine is generally considered to be a joke, although they've gotten better at it. They simply have far fewer marginal voters to turn out, so they don't really need to do a lot of GOTV.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Rivensteel posted:Maybe I'm being naive, but how can a PAC for a candidate possibly have a live interview/statement from that candidate without there being any coordination? Welcome to modern election laws. A candidate can literally show up at a SuperPAC fundraiser and encourage people to donate to it. Edit: But yes, this is a leadership PAC. That said, the laws on coordination for all PACs are hilariously loose. Concerned Citizen fucked around with this message at 18:30 on Apr 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
Rivensteel posted:Maybe I'm being naive, but how can a PAC for a candidate possibly have a live interview/statement from that candidate without there being any coordination? Well a statement is easy. If I run a PAC in 2012 and I like Obama, I'm definitely going to replay any speeches from him because he is a good speaker. I'm no expert on the law but I think coordination has to be a lot deeper than that to count. Even an interview could be done in a way that avoids it, though of course in practice there's probably at least a little something going on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
tsa posted:Like if Colin Powell ran and won for some reason do you really think he would just mimic Bush policy? I doubt that very much, people can shift pretty easily in this regard. That's very different. Colin Powell left the Sos position BECAUSE he was seen inside the administration as a detractor. Clinton left much more amiably and Kerry's role seems to be pretty similar to hers. Besides, why does she want to run from the Iran deal? Last I heard it was pretty popular and the Republican response has generally been seen as childish. You can broker a deal with Iran and still be an ally of Israel. Not being in Israel's pocket hasn't hurt Obama, nor did it really give Bill any grief.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
UV_Catastrophe posted:Really not looking forward to spending the next year and a half defending Hillary from a "lesser of two evils" position. So defend Hillary as the person who controls the balance of a divided Senate, all administrative agencies, and any Supreme Court replacements. She starts to look a lot less like a "lesser evil" in that light.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
ufarn posted:This is so disturbing He's a lizard person!
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Scott Walker looks like he's half-bake. Mark Rubio's thirst, hard to slake. Perry, faux-smart. Cruz, a wet fart. A Bush is the best? For gently caress's sake.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Lockback posted:That's very different. Colin Powell left the Sos position BECAUSE he was seen inside the administration as a detractor. Clinton left much more amiably and Kerry's role seems to be pretty similar to hers. OK we don't disagree then, I already said she won't scuttle the Iran deal. Concerned Citizen posted:Not necessarily true. Republicans really do vote at higher rates, naturally, than Democrats. Their base intersects with the voters most likely to turn out - older, whiter, richer. Democrats have an actual larger base of voters, but they are far less likely to turn out and they are disproportionately concentrated in fewer states. The GOP's turnout machine is generally considered to be a joke, although they've gotten better at it. They simply have far fewer marginal voters to turn out, so they don't really need to do a lot of GOTV. I've seen some things that suggest it but the studies always make a lot of dubious assumptions. I'm not even sure what "naturally higher" can even be shown convincingly, there's way too many variables going on. Ignoring that, the point is republican turnout isn't a guarantee like some are suggesting. The size of the base isn't a very convincing argument, that doesn't have to mean republicans have a higher propensity to vote, though it is a possible explanation. It could also be that republicans simply have a higher propensity given other variables which are confounding the relationship. Something like propensity score methods could be used, though they still don't guarantee you have isolated the effect to just Party vs. voting percent. tsa fucked around with this message at 18:40 on Apr 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
tsa posted:Not in 2008 they didn't, or 2006. It's not some law that they are automatically going to get high turnout every election, they have to work at it just like the dems. They just tend to be better at it. 2008 was the highest turnout since 1968. Republicans didn't lose because they didn't vote, they lost because more Democrats turned out. 2006 was essentially the same amount of turn out as 2002, so it's probably the exception. You don't have to beg old white people to vote. They're going to vote. All you have to do is convince them to vote for you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 18:40
|
|
