|
Montasque posted:I wonder what Cruz would do here, I suspect a lot of his delegates would want to push him forward but the reading I am getting is he wants nothing to do with this cycle anymore. Yeah, Cruz seems like he's read the situation as its best for him to just go into hiding until the die is cast and then be able to just be a smug rear end about however it plays out. Sticking his neck out to try and steal the nom is just a no-win play. Either it fails and he's the enemy of all the crazies and a national joke or it succeeds and he gets destroyed, also ending up the enemy of the crazies and a national joke. Ted has to just avoid saying anything publicly for 5 months and then start his 2018/2020 campaign on "I told you so/true conservative".
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 13:41 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
GOP actually had a really good shot of winning this election against Clinton with a fairly generic candidate. People loving hate Hillary Clinton.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Joementum posted:We have to ban ideas until we figure out what's going on. Panic bells, it's red alert There's something here from somewhere else
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
blue squares posted:You're reading it wrong. No, not people who have been arrested. People who are under investigation. If they try to buy a gun and are on a watchlist, the sale is delayed and the feds must engage in an investigation and either charge or remove from the watchlist. If they press charges then you're presumably not allowed to purchase firearms anyway. If they don't have enough evidence - and they almost certainly don't, simply because you probably wouldn't just be on a watchlist if they did - then you get to buy your firearm AND you get removed from the terror watchlist. I get that their proposal is technically "you can't buy a firearm if you're on a watchlist", and as soon as you try you're under investigation, but the proposal makes purchasing a firearm a way to force the feds' hand at a time of your choosing. Ultimately, the only people who are actually prohibited from purchasing firearms are those who would have been prohibited anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Mass shootings are so not American.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Goetta posted:GOP actually had a really good shot of winning this election against Clinton with a fairly generic candidate. People loving hate Hillary Clinton. There are no generic Republicans. It's a fiction. A product mascot that people expect to come to life like they're in a cereal commercial.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
Macro and Jeb are pretty generic Republicans
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:For some reason, you made me remember when Cruz ate his own booger at a debate: My god, with the top of head cut off by the frame he looks like some kind of unholy combination of the Frankenstein Monster and Grampa from the Munster's.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
So the no fly list gun ban still fails to do anything at gun shows, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
Bar Crow posted:There are no generic Republicans. It's a fiction. A product mascot that people expect to come to life like they're in a cereal commercial. There's no generic Republicans? Can you please explain Mitt Romney, John McCain and Bob Dole for me, then? Seriously though the GOP's presidential prospects have been startlingly generic for years. Dubya stood out, Reagan stood out, Nixon stood out, and then there's just ??? for the rest of the century
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:While people possessing at least tattered vestiges of sanity and shame are running from Trump as fast as they can, do not forget he's still got the screaming crazies solidly lined up behind him. Dumping him at the convention is the quickest thing I can think of that would lead to Chicago 1968-style chaos, only probably more heavily armed this time. Is there a (nonzero) level to which his support could fall that would actually make ratfuck better than notratfuck?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
Turned on Rush: Caller: Rush, I'm annoyed that Hillary said "we can't build a wall around the internet." We don't want to stop the internet. Rush: Well its just them trying to pretend these people are radicalized over the internet. They're not. They seek it out and they're radicalized by their imams and communities at home. Caller: Right. I just got annoyed that she said we want to shut down the internet. Rush: And you know who does want to shut down the internet? Hillary and Obama. Net neutrality. They want to control the internet like they want to control everything. That's what liberals do. Caller: Right. Ummm... ignoring all the insane stupidity... didn't this start because TRUMP wants to put some kind of unclear controls on the internet? And it ends with Rush and the caller mad at Hillary and Obama for doing what Trump wants to do? Montasque, I don't know how listening to this stuff doesn't rot your brain.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/KilloughCNN/status/743136740823695360 The power, the devastation is so important to me. But our nukes are so old, so tired. Weak!
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
TheTatteredKing posted:So the no fly list gun ban still fails to do anything at gun shows, right? Yeah, of course, there's no way the NRA will agree to regulate gun shows or private gun sales.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:00
|
|
|
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/trump-at-a-crossroads/486743/ This is a very accurate way to describe the 2016 GOP nomination process... quote:Will Ritter, who directed logistics for Romney’s 2012 campaign, was there, watching the proceedings with resignation. An ardent Trump opponent whose Virginia-based consulting firm worked on behalf of Marco Rubio in the primary, Ritter had long ago concluded that there was nothing to be done. Edit: another thing I've been noticing as well... quote:The core narrative of Trump’s speeches continues to be the story of his march to victory in the primaries. The way he came down the escalator a year ago, the way he proved the pundits wrong, the way he almost won Iowa and triumphed in New Hampshire and barreled through the rest of the states, even though the establishment tried to rig the system against him. He's definitely making a mental retreat back to the primaries as he starts realizing the rest of the world doesn't read loving Breitbart everyday. Intel&Sebastian fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Jun 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:00
|
|
|
Our nukes: old and busted Their nukes: new hotness
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:00
|
|
|
Kasich probably would have beat Hillary imo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:00
|
|
|
Perfectly Safe posted:If they try to buy a gun and are on a watchlist, the sale is delayed and the feds must engage in an investigation and either charge or remove from the watchlist. If they press charges then you're presumably not allowed to purchase firearms anyway. If they don't have enough evidence - and they almost certainly don't, simply because you probably wouldn't just be on a watchlist if they did - then you get to buy your firearm AND you get removed from the terror watchlist. I get that their proposal is technically "you can't buy a firearm if you're on a watchlist", and as soon as you try you're under investigation, but the proposal makes purchasing a firearm a way to force the feds' hand at a time of your choosing. Ultimately, the only people who are actually prohibited from purchasing firearms are those who would have been prohibited anyway. You have a right to a speedy trial, not a speedy investigation before charges are even made. The feds could draw out the process by months or years, especially since "Can this guy buy a gun?" is legit a lower priority than most of their other investigative work. Double-especially if the criteria for being firearms watchlisted is loosened enough that a meaningful fraction of purchases require FBI clearance, thereby creating a backlog to work through. At the extreme, they could use broad watchlisting parameters to slow the tempo of civilian firearms purchases enough that it drives some dealers out of business, which is a soft win for gun control.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
gently caress You And Diebold posted:https://twitter.com/KilloughCNN/status/743136740823695360 You know, the freakiest thing to me about Trump is the weird kindergarten teacher vocabulary.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Kasich probably would have beat Hillary imo. good ol 2 meals 1 state kasich
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Kasich probably would have beat Hillary imo. I think Rubio and Kasich probably win and the rest lose
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Turned on Rush: Man it's been so long since I've heard from someone who was actually anti-net-neutrality I kind of forgot they existed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Turned on Rush: The shooter's Imam was pro-Trump as well
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
gently caress You And Diebold posted:https://twitter.com/KilloughCNN/status/743136740823695360 Isn't he technically correct on this point? Last time I checked we haven't really been pushing new development on warhead deployment methods while Russia has for a while.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Kasich probably would have beat Hillary imo. He would have been a challenge, at the very least. His opinions are as toxic as any other Republican but he comes off as a reasonable and moderate guy and a lot more likable than Hillary. At the very least Kasich would easily nab white male demos to the same degree as Mitt without suffering in every other category like Trump does.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
Goetta posted:I think Rubio and Kasich probably win and the rest lose I think Jeb, Rubio, and Kasich all would have been perfectly viable generic Republicans to run against Hillary but they were all flawed enough that Hillary could have beat them. But it would have been the usual toss up election as opposed to like Ted Cruz vs. Anyone Not On A Sex Offenders Database.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Larry Hogan, governor of Maryland, is the third GOP gov to go #NeverTrump: https://twitter.com/OvettaWashPost/status/743144158794219525
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:For some reason, you made me remember when Cruz ate his own booger at a debate: This is gross man.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:You know, the freakiest thing to me about Trump is the weird kindergarten teacher vocabulary. he talks to his supporters like they're literally loving retarded. he's so patronizing and they just eat it up. i genuinely don't get it. Slate Action posted:Larry Hogan, governor of Maryland, is the third GOP gov to go #NeverTrump: was really hoping this was hulk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Mitt Romney posted:Isn't he technically correct on this point? Last time I checked we haven't really been pushing new development on warhead deployment methods while Russia has for a while. Our modern deployment methods all revolve around submarines. Once you have MIRVs that can hit any spot on the globe and have built bunkers deep enough to hold them there really isn't much of a need to innovate land-based nukes anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:You know, the freakiest thing to me about Trump is the weird kindergarten teacher vocabulary. "Did Liddle Marco make a poopy in his pants? Sad!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Goetta posted:I think Rubio and Kasich probably win and the rest lose Rubio would have crashed and burned in the debates eventually. All else being equal (i.e. disregarding Trump being a real actual nonfictional candidate who living people actually voted for in the real world), it's better for the GOP that it happened in the primary than in the general. Kasich was never subjected to a proper scrutiny phase, so it's almost impossible to know how the GE would have unfolded with him as the Republican nominee.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Mitt Romney posted:Isn't he technically correct on this point? Last time I checked we haven't really been pushing new development on warhead deployment methods while Russia has for a while. As far as the US is concerned, all uranium, plutonium, thorium, and other radioactive materials disappeared from the US sometime in the 70s or 80s and is purely the stuff of foreign powers and cold war fiction Carter wasn't just terrible at foreign policy and managing his own party, he also heavily blockaded nuclear, so, despite all his efforts to reverse climate change now, a great deal of the blame for our share of carbon emissions lies squarely on his shoulders.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Over the wall with em
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
gently caress You And Diebold posted:https://twitter.com/KilloughCNN/status/743136740823695360 Top, let's smash it. Seriously though wtf is wrong with Trump's vocab
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
Wages are still stagnant, costs for lots of stuff are up, and we just had a mega lovely jobs report. There is a lot stacked against the long-term incumbent party this year, especially one that nominated a pretty status quo candidate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
Chances are if you know about it, it isn't the top of the line in the military from what i understand about our nuclear subs
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
Goetta posted:Wages are still stagnant, costs for lots of stuff are up, and we just had a mega lovely jobs report. There is a lot stacked against the long-term incumbent party this year, especially one that nominated a pretty status quo candidate. Republicans have held congress for 6 years so yeah it looks bad for trump
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 13:41 |
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/trump-at-a-crossroads/486743/ I always figured Trump was going to have a hell of a time when the primary season was over but I really never imagined it would be this bad. He's so completely out of his element when he's not pitching to favorable audiences and the news media was only willing to be favorable to Trump as long as he was making a traditionally slow and largely ignored part of our political process interesting enough to watch. Now that they don't have to worry about him blackballing their ratings for the next six months Trump is going to find that the free advertising from all these news appearances isn't all it's cracked up to be.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2016 20:12
|
|