|
Oh I know I would go back in time and pay off James and Maria Reynolds so they move and Alexander Hamilton never has an affair with her and gets blackmailed and publishes the Reynolds Pamphlet and his son Philip never dies in a duel he challenged someone to over his honor. And through anonymous letters I'd try to reconcile Hamilton and Burr, and then I would ensure Philip meets and falls in love with Theodosia Burr so they marry and stay in New York and she doesn't die by being blown off the bow of a ship, and then history can be happy and Lin Manuel Miranda can't make me cry.
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 16:27 |
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:In terms of just general exposure, its hard for people to even think about DVR-ing them if they're lost in that sort of programming shuffle. It's also harder to capture the national narrative in the way that the RNC has for each of their debates. Being on Saturday/Sunday almost assures that instead of getting two or three whole news cycles out of it, you get some talk on the Sunday morning shows (which is preaching to the choir) and maybe a note on Monday morning as an after thought. Exactly. Even the most watched debates are only going to capture a fraction of the public, capturing the attention of the news cycle for as long as possible is far more important so your message can seep into the lives of people who don't actually care about this stuff that much (aka almost everyone).
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:04
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:The next three Dem debates are all hidden behind sports days. Almost like DWS et al didn't want anyone to watch Still a dumb argument, since it boils down to "DWS scheduled a debate on something that wasn't a Tuesday or Wednesday before February. CONSPIRACY!" There is a LOT of goddamn football on TV.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
Tempest_56 posted:Still a dumb argument, since it boils down to "DWS scheduled a debate on something that wasn't a Tuesday or Wednesday before February. CONSPIRACY!" There is a LOT of goddamn football on TV. Maybe if she'd only scheduled one of them I'd agree, but scheduling three of them, in a row, against fairly major events and on Saturday evenings, when even non-football fans aren't paying attention to TV is hilariously inept. And when taken in context of her insistence on only having six debates, it certainly does call to question her decision making.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
Who loving cares it's a dem debate and no one will watch anyways because it's not trump being outrageous
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:15
|
|
|
Bernie supporters probably care.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:18
|
|
|
zoux posted:Bernie supporters probably care. They'll be too busy angrily posting on castefootball.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:19
|
|
|
I have literally never heard anyone outside of these forums even mention Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and the fact that D&D does it so often and so conspiratorially it has to be abbreviated "DWS" makes you guys look so loving crazy I can't take any post that does it seriously.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:22
|
|
|
greatn posted:DWS is terrible. It is not in the Democratic party or Hillary Clinton's interest to not be seen by people. People tend to remember they don't like her, until they see her on TV and are like "wait, why didn't I like her again? Oh yeah I forgot the bad stuff Republicans say is bullshit". On the other hand I forget who DWS is until I see her again and remember how irritating she is in interviews. Kinda like that dude from The Young Turks. TYT reminds me of all the failed right-wing satire shows with how grating it is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:27
|
|
|
AmiYumi posted:I have literally never heard anyone outside of these forums even mention Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and the fact that D&D does it so often and so conspiratorially it has to be abbreviated "DWS" makes you guys look so loving crazy I can't take any post that does it seriously. You get that she's the chair of the DNC and a fairly important person in national politics right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
AmiYumi posted:I have literally never heard anyone outside of these forums even mention Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and the fact that D&D does it so often and so conspiratorially it has to be abbreviated "DWS" makes you guys look so loving crazy I can't take any post that does it seriously. That's because everyone here is a broken, alcoholic shell of a political wonk, and normal people generally don't care about the current leadership of the DNC. You're just figuring this out now?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
AmiYumi posted:I have literally never heard anyone outside of these forums even mention Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and the fact that D&D does it so often and so conspiratorially it has to be abbreviated "DWS" makes you guys look so loving crazy I can't take any post that does it seriously. It's a sort of wonk discussion, but she's ran the DNC terribly and I put our phoned-in efforts in the midterms and off years under her solely at her feet. On top of that she's certainly not encouraged anything that would be good for anyone other than Hillary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:On the other hand I forget who DWS is until I see her again and remember how irritating she is in interviews. Kinda like that dude from The Young Turks. TYT reminds me of all the failed right-wing satire shows with how grating it is. Isn't Cenk a reformed College Republican?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:The next three Dem debates are all hidden behind sports days. Almost like DWS et al didn't want anyone to watch The fewer people watch, the better for Hillary's opponents, since she's good at debating.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
Joementum posted:The fewer people watch, the better for Hillary's opponents, since she's good at debating. Was it Hillary that stood in for Palin during Biden's debate practice? I'm assuming theres no video because it'd have been leaked by now but that must have been amazing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:44
|
|
|
Thread for tonight's debates: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3750920
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Was it Hillary that stood in for Palin during Biden's debate practice? I think it was Jennifer Granholm.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:Kinda OT, but isn't that an R+11 seat? Why is there a Democratic primary? Did Susan Brooks get caught with a dead intern or something? Are there really two candidates who want to put themselves through a Congressional run? Or is this a case where you have a semi-serious flag-bearer and a crazy person, and the crazy person is forcing a primary? Not referring to Chicken's candidate specifically, but looks like the crazy people forcing primaries with incumbents is on the wane this cycle. quote:Republican Senate incumbents look to be largely free of tough primary challenges by Tea Party candidates that could complicate the party’s efforts to retain the uppwer chamber during the pivotal 2016 election. http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/259431-tea-party-skipping-senate-incumbent-challenges
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
Sorus posted:Thanks for that link and recommendation. His Twitter is better than his articles IMO because he links a lot of scholarly papers. Today he's doing the political science behind the rise of the Koch network
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:08
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:Luckily Matt Bevin won 100% of the vote so everyone can be condemned to die in penury. Oh wait. Luckily we're talking about a voter that voted for Bevin, not the whole state, or else you might have a point. Y'all insist on infantilizing a man who explicitly voted for Bevin, saying he's too dumb to know what he's doing. That's the enlightened, progressive position. Maybe we should tell black people to stop caring more about economic issues than police brutality, too, since we're mostly white and smart here, clearly we know better.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD posted:Dunno if this has already been posted. I knew CAP was a bad fake-liberal corporatist org, but AIPAC can literally complain about an article to them and they will censor it. This is from a few pages back this article is insane and makes me really, really mad. The influence the Israeli lobby can weird is not a good thing for politics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:13
|
|
|
AmiYumi posted:I have literally never heard anyone outside of these forums even mention Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and the fact that D&D does it so often and so conspiratorially it has to be abbreviated "DWS" makes you guys look so loving crazy I can't take any post that does it seriously. Or maybe it's a long loving name and just dropping "Debbie" doesn't distinguish precisely which Debbie you're speaking of. She doesn't have the name rec that Hillary does, and it isn't a simple context exercise when Debbie Stabenow is right there whereas it isn't really difficult to differentiate between the Human Rights Campaign and Hillary Rodham Clinton because nobody would say "the Hillary Rodham Clinton."
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
Also in other Senate news, they passed a defense bill explicitly banning Guantanamo detainees from being transferred to the States or other countries. And it looks like there's a push to create an anti-Obamacare bill even more extreme than what passed in the House last time. The only sticking point is how much Planned Parenthood gets shafted, with several moderate Republicans like Susan Collins against adding PP related amendments. EDIT: quote:Pentagon report expected as early as this week identifies prisons in Colorado, Kansas and South Carolina where Guantanamo detainees could possibly be housed so the Guantanamo prison could be shut down. That has raised the ire of lawmakers, especially those from the three states. http://news.yahoo.com/senate-bill-ban-guantanamo-bay-detainees-us-051120009.html Shageletic fucked around with this message at 16:24 on Nov 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
Do they think these guys are gonna break out of supermax? They'll probably just get terrorized by other inmates.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
greatn posted:Do they think these guys are gonna break out of supermax? They'll probably just get terrorized by other inmates. They think that by keeping them in Guantanamo they make the Bush policies seem more legitimate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
Here's my question: the ban on bringing the inmates has been attached to every military spending bill. What day does the current ban expire?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:38
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Also in other Senate news, they passed a defense bill explicitly banning Guantanamo detainees from being transferred to the States or other countries. And it looks like there's a push to create an anti-Obamacare bill even more extreme than what passed in the House last time. The only sticking point is how much Planned Parenthood gets shafted, with several moderate Republicans like Susan Collins against adding PP related amendments. If you can't transfer the detainees to the states Obama's plan is obvious. He intends to transfer them to DC. Why else would a bunch of contractors been working on the Capitol rotunda?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
greatn posted:Do they think these guys are gonna break out of supermax? They'll probably just get terrorized by other inmates. Yes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
greatn posted:Do they think these guys are gonna break out of supermax? They'll probably just get terrorized by other inmates. They've watched Superjail one too many times.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
Istvun posted:If you can't transfer the detainees to the states Obama's plan is obvious. He intends to transfer them to DC. Man, if this were possible due to drafting errors I'd laugh myself sick.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
Istvun posted:If you can't transfer the detainees to the states Obama's plan is obvious. He intends to transfer them to DC. Wasn't that one of the reasons for making the capital not a state?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
greatn posted:Do they think these guys are gonna break out of supermax? They'll probably just get terrorized by other inmates. That and they're terrified of terrorists staging mass prison breaks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Also in other Senate news, they passed a defense bill explicitly banning Guantanamo detainees from being transferred to the States or other countries. Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO) went so far as to claim Obama was breaking the law by having the Defense Dept even study the matter. So naturally I'm just waiting for Congress to file another lawsuit against him.  (Don't forget to note the obligatory jab at Hillary) Shageletic posted:And it looks like there's a push to create an anti-Obamacare bill even more extreme than what passed in the House last time. The only sticking point is how much Planned Parenthood gets shafted, with several moderate Republicans like Susan Collins against adding PP related amendments. Remember the fine print of that budget deal: Sure we got a budget passed but we still haven't passed any appropriations bills to spend that money. And those still need to be passed before Dec. 11, or we will still have a shutdown. So far as I'm aware, Republicans are still planning on sending a grab-bag of red meat to Obama through reconciliation (which is undoubtedly what you're hearing about here). No word on what the contingency plan is if he vetoes. greatn posted:Do they think these guys are gonna break out of supermax? They'll probably just get terrorized by other inmates. evilweasel's right, but I've always wondered why our criminals are safe in Supermax and terrorists aren't. Are Republican lawmakers sending our most dangerous criminals to a place they'll just break out of? And why aren't they doing anything about it? Walk the walk, guys! Send the Unabomber to Guantanamo! ComradeCosmobot fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Nov 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 17:00
|
|
|
He'll veto and bullshit and they'll begrudgingly pass a clean bill.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:The right of free speech doesn't exist on private property Nobody said whose yard the cross would be on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
Donald Trump certainly knows how to play to his insipid base. When asked about the change to Starbucks' cups for the holiday season, he responded with; Donald Trump posted:"I have one of the most successful Starbucks, in Trump Tower. Maybe we should boycott Starbucks? I don't know. Seriously, I don't care. That's the end of that lease, but who cares?" Trump told a crowd in Springfield, Illinois, on Monday. "If I become president, we're all going to be saying Merry Christmas again, that I can tell you. That I can tell you." Donald Trump posted:"I guarantee if I become president, we're going to be saying 'Merry Christmas' at every store," he had said. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
radical meme posted:I think it was Jennifer Granholm. Yeah, and she kept breaking character to complain that her script was too stupid, so the staffers had to assure her that no, this is really the way she talks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:Donald Trump certainly knows how to play to his insipid base. When asked about the change to Starbucks' cups for the holiday season, he responded with; How can he force private businesses to say Merry Christmas? I mean, he could, but that would make him a tyrant and a dictator. Which as well all know very well the right wing would never support since tyrants are always leftists, especially Hitler and Franco.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
AmiYumi posted:I have literally never heard anyone outside of these forums even mention Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and the fact that D&D does it so often and so conspiratorially it has to be abbreviated "DWS" makes you guys look so loving crazy I can't take any post that does it seriously. You're real ignorant, aren'tcha. Lol if you don't get DWS emails.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 16:27 |
|
|
Pyroxene Stigma posted:You're real ignorant, aren'tcha. I don't. My junk folder, however.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2015 17:09
|
|