|
mcmagic posted:It was pretty awesome how hard Booker tried to have a "moment" last night only to be completely overshadowed by Michelle Obama and the rest of the speakers. Yeah, he was really trying to sell the "WE WILL RISE" line.
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:59 |
|
|
mcmagic posted:It was pretty awesome how hard Booker tried to have a "moment" last night only to be completely overshadowed by Michelle Obama and the rest of the speakers. i do not think anyone thinks he was overshadowed. it was 3 great speeches in one night, each for different reasons. Dude got everyone pumped up for Michelle and helped defang the berniebros through sheer energy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
Hillary will never be popular enough to win primary *wins primary* Hillary will never be popular enough to win the election *wins election* Hillary will never be popular enough to win re-election *re-elected* Hillary will never be popular enough to be fondly remembered *statue is built*
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Hillary will never be popular enough to win primary You should be much more worried about the 2018 bloodbath if she wins than her re-election.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I can't wait until the narrative turns into "well HRC won in 2020 but she'll be so unpopular in 2024 that [Generic Republican] will coast to victory!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Hillary will never be popular enough to win primary The only reason Hillary won the primary is because she didn't face legitimate opposition from another establishment candidate, and likely the only reason she'll win the election is because she is running against Trump. Keep lickin' those boots, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
Gio posted:Yeah it's really unreasonable to assume a candidate with record breaking negatives and is from the party that's already been in power the past eight years with will only serve one term. I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that democrats will be winning presidential elections for the foreseeable future just based on demographics.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
Gio posted:Yeah it's really unreasonable to assume a candidate with record breaking negatives and is from the party that's already been in power the past eight years with will only serve one term. Tell us more prophet of doom Gio posted:Keep lickin' those boots, though. They are salty from stomping on the haters so delicious
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:It was pretty awesome how hard Booker tried to have a "moment" last night only to be completely overshadowed by Michelle Obama and the rest of the speakers. Your weird hate boner for Booker is strange. Is he truly an enemy of Rutgers athletics?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Your weird hate boner for Booker is strange. Is he truly an enemy of Rutgers athletics? What's weird about it? He's an overrated fraud who's governing record as Mayor is terrible as senator is non existent and who's only real accomplishment is careerism and having a lot of twitter followers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:55
|
|
|
Missed last night due to work, anything interesting happen?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:What's weird about it? He's an overrated fraud who's governing record as Mayor is terrible as senator is non existent and who's only real accomplishment is careerism and having a lot of twitter followers. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Gio posted:The only reason Hillary won the primary is because she didn't face legitimate opposition from another establishment candidate, and likely the only reason she'll win the election is because she is running against Trump. if Kasich is your only definition of legitimate then I have some bad news buddy
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
Broken Cog posted:Missed last night due to work, anything interesting happen? Cory Booker, Michelle Obama, and Bernie tore the house down, Elizabeth Warren savaged trump, they lsot the gavel twice, and some bernie idiots kept booing and being morons.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
Broken Cog posted:Missed last night due to work, anything interesting happen? Philly Guido, Tiny Angry Accountant, GOATUS FLOATUS, Bernie saves the party, Silverman dunks the on the haters, young white men are trash
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that democrats will be winning presidential elections for the foreseeable future just based on demographics.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
You sure showed me with that emoji!
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:You sure showed me with that emoji! he p much did tho
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:01
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:You sure showed me with that emoji! That's an emoticon, not an emoji. God!
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:01
|
|
|
Gio posted:Yeah the map is in their favor but that doesn't mean HRC being a one-term president is some outlandish, impossible thing to happen. yes, but it is outlandish to consider it assured four years out which is what you are doing
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
Gio posted:Yeah the map is in their favor but that doesn't mean HRC being a one-term president is some outlandish, impossible thing to happen. Hmm, backtracking to "just asking questions".
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
computer parts posted:if Kasich is your only definition of legitimate then I have some bad news buddy In the Democratic primary. The only establishment candidate she beat was O'Malley. I wouldn't have been shocked if she won even if she had more opposition than what she did, but she has had a very easy go of things so far.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Cory Booker, Michelle Obama, and Bernie tore the house down, Elizabeth Warren savaged trump, they lsot the gavel twice, and some bernie idiots kept booing and being morons. WoodrowSkillson posted:Cory Booker, Michelle Obama, and Bernie tore the house down, Elizabeth Warren savaged trump, they lsot the gavel twice, and some bernie idiots kept booing and being morons. Thanks for the summary, anything in particular that is worth watching?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:That's an emoticon, not an emoji. Do you have an actual counterpoint on Booker or would you rather post emoticons or say the same dumb line from 5 years ago about about Rutgers?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
I sat down and got caught up with all of the big speeches from Monday: * Michelle Obama's speech was powerful - her voice get very emotional at times and I could feel myself tearing up. * People chanting "we trusted you" during Elizabeth Warren's speech were just awful. I like her on the attack, so savage. * Cory Booker's "we did that" sounded like a fantastic positive spin on Barack Obama's "you didn't build that", combined with dunking on "rugged individualism" as being not nearly enough * Bernie Sanders' hand-off to Clinton was cathartic I love how positive the whole night was, and how often the word "love" was used. Even when they were bagging on Donald Trump, it never felt toxic like when I was watching Ted Cruz's speech last week.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
Gio posted:In the Democratic primary. The only establishment candidate she beat was O'Malley. I wouldn't have been shocked if she won even if she had more opposition than what she did, but she has had a very easy go of things so far. Presumably the same thing extends to the GOP though (Trump isn't a "legitimate" candidate) even just considering the Dems though, why do you think the establishment candidates didn't run? Because Hillary did run.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:06
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Hmm, backtracking to "just asking questions".
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:06
|
|
|
Gio posted:In the Democratic primary. The only establishment candidate she beat was O'Malley. I wouldn't have been shocked if she won even if she had more opposition than what she did, but she has had a very easy go of things so far. literally what the gently caress is your point "she didn't have any meaningful competition but it would not have mattered if she did but she didn't and this is important because..." also lol calling her fight with Sanders a "very easy go" of things.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:07
|
|
|
Gio posted:Typically, questions end in question marks. And typically "There is absolutely no way she wins in 2020" means that you're stating a certainty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that democrats will be winning presidential elections for the foreseeable future just based on demographics.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:We're not there yet, and the Republicans only need to pick off about 20%-25% of the minority vote to get to a majority. All they have to do is shut up about how much they hate minorities for a while to get to that fairly easy target, even though it's difficult to see them doing that any time soon. But it's not an impossible change for them to find something else to focus their ire on in the next ten years or so. The issue is that minority antipathy to the Republicans is generations deep. A few policy concessions is not going reverse that. Plus, white supremacy is so intrinsic to the GOP platform that any concession towards attracting minorities is just going to cause more internal strife. To get a significant minority appeal will either take a generation or actively putting forward a radical policy shift like the VRA was for democrats in the 60s.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:We're not there yet, and the Republicans only need to pick off about 20%-25% of the minority vote to get to a majority. While maintaining their racist base.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:We're not there yet, and the Republicans only need to pick off about 20%-25% of the minority vote to get to a majority. All they have to do is shut up about how much they hate minorities for a while to get to that fairly easy target, even though it's difficult to see them doing that any time soon. But it's not an impossible change for them to find something else to focus their ire on in the next ten years or so. In 2020 it's going to be 30% and probably 32% in 2024 and so on. It's not getting easier for them. And Trump's loss isn't going to make them rethink anything because the congressional party is only getting smaller more conservative after this election.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Presumably the same thing extends to the GOP though (Trump isn't a "legitimate" candidate)
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:14
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:literally what the gently caress is your point And lol, yeah it's been really hard running against a fringe candidate and a literal white supremacist. The fact that she's dead even in the polls with him is a testament to her strength as a candidate!!! Gio fucked around with this message at 15:22 on Jul 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
Gio posted:I think others didn't run for a myriad of reasons name them
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
Gio posted:It is a certainty. citation needed
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
Gio posted:It is a certainty. Oh so now you're backtracking on: Gio posted:Yeah the map is in their favor but that doesn't mean HRC being a one-term president is some outlandish, impossible thing to happen. Because this statement makes it sound like you're just saying the possibility is something worth considering.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:We're not there yet, and the Republicans only need to pick off about 20%-25% of the minority vote to get to a majority. All they have to do is shut up about how much they hate minorities for a while to get to that fairly easy target, even though it's difficult to see them doing that any time soon. But it's not an impossible change for them to find something else to focus their ire on in the next ten years or so. With old whites dying, the GOP will change by default. The GOP in 8 years might look very different than now, even if they drag people kicking and screaming. There will also be a sizable number of younger voters who barely remember the Bush years and there will be a push for the GOP to get in power to "try something new" or whatever, especially if there is some economic issues in the next decade. Say there is another financial crisis, or the saudis go on another adventure and yemen but it kicks of a regional conflict, etc. The dem strategy should be to use this time of demographic superiority to reverse the trend of GOP control of congress and the courts and to be set up to work with a GOP president after hillary.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:59 |
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:name them Oh, he's not wrong on this point. There's plenty of Dems who would have ran if Hillary hadn't. He's not right about 2020, though. Predicting the election now is absolutely folly. She will start with incumbency as an advantage, and also a demographic advantage -- assuming Republicans don't magically stop being crazy as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2016 15:18
|
|