|
So is the Trump/ Russia stuff getting any kind of play?
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:40 |
|
|
# ? May 27, 2024 22:07 |
|
Endorph posted:i mean tbf someone was just pitching what her favorables would be if she did run??? it's just a common thing I've seen people do and it's not specific to her, over the summer people were constantly talking about VP picks as if the person would be forced to accept if they were chosen (e.g. Omg what if trump picks Bernie?????)
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:40 |
|
mcmagic posted:The question was, a woman I would prefer to see run and who I think would be doing better. There's a reason Republicans started their campaign against HRC 25 years ago. She at the time was an obvious potential "could be the first female president". Its about the last time they were honest aaaand here we are. In the meantime she's become the most qualified candidate in history and you want to pretend there are other women who could measure up. I'm sorry but there's literally no other woman with her qualifications no matter how badly you wish it to be true, its objective fact. She has to win so less qualified women can follow. If Jill stein wasn't a useless nutter there'd be a similar campaign started against her or any woman who had a real shot.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:40 |
|
Dr.Zeppelin posted:it's just a common thing I've seen people do and it's not specific to her, over the summer people were constantly talking about VP picks as if the person would be forced to accept if they were chosen (e.g. Omg what if trump picks Bernie?????)
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:41 |
|
RuanGacho posted:There's a reason Republicans started their campaign against HRC 25 years ago. You are completely missing the point of my argument here but whatever.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:41 |
|
"Jesse Jackson would have been up by 10 points." - mcmagic, 1988
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:41 |
|
Christ mcmagic... go post on /pol/ or something.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:42 |
|
Phone posted:Yeah, it is, you dumbass. I disagree. The GOP has more qualified people, just like the democrats have better people. poo poo, however, floats.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:42 |
|
mcmagic posted:By that logic it's really clear that Trump was the republican's best general election candidate, right? I mean technically, he is. No other candidate would've turned out the base as well and most of them would've been just as toxic to other parts of the electorate.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:42 |
|
Phone posted:You live in Florida and aren't actively trying to get out. OTOH, we'll hopefully secure this election. Woo?
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:43 |
|
Instant Sunrise posted:"Jesse Jackson would have been up by 10 points." - mcmagic, 1988 "Bernie Sanders would have been up by 10 points" - mcmagic, 2020
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:43 |
|
Endorph posted:i mean, in the sense that he was exactly what the republican party wanted, deep down in their heart of hearts, yeah. And they wanted the wrong person if the goal was winning the white house and having coattails down ballot. That's just a fact.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:43 |
|
Have the polls stopped dipping for Hilary following the FBI crying wolf yet?
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:43 |
|
ImpAtom posted:"Ties to Clinton" isn't a negative, says the person arguing Hillary Clinton shouldn't have run despite running the primary and has lead the general for almost the entire campaign because she is so unpopular. Given the Clinton's positions and roles for the last, oh, twenty-plus years, doesn't 'has ties to the Clintons' encompass like half of all national-level Dems anyway?
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:43 |
|
I know the last thing this thread needs is more Arzying but I'm sorry I can't help it. As a Transwoman I am terrified that, if Trump wins I might be out of a job. That a Trump presidensey would give people permission to make my life hell. To make sure I'm stuck living with my parents till I'm 60. I know everyone is saying the opposite but...gently caress.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:44 |
|
BigRed0427 posted:So is the Trump/ Russia stuff getting any kind of play? Nah
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:44 |
|
"Geraldine Ferraro would have been up by 14 points." - mcmagic, 1984
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:44 |
|
BarbarianElephant posted:I don't like the idea of "popular politician's wife = followup to politician." It's so... dynastic (sideways dynastic.) Hey, Debbie Dingell is doing great work for my district as the followup to her husband. And now that her husband is retired he's an amazing tweeter. https://twitter.com/JohnDingell/status/788939493130788864
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:44 |
|
mcmagic posted:And they wanted the wrong person if the goal was winning the white house and having coattails down ballot. That's just a fact. Wait, I thought Trump was within the margin of error and a real threat because Hillary is so bad, which is it?
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:44 |
|
Grouchio posted:Have the polls stopped dipping for Hilary following the FBI crying wolf yet? They never actually dipped. Her numbers have held steady for months without any real change, only Donald's have gone up and down based on his own scandals and poo poo.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:44 |
|
Grouchio posted:Have the polls stopped dipping for Hilary following the FBI crying wolf yet? They never did.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:44 |
|
Non Serviam posted:Before the other thread got closed, somebody suggested I was a troll for saying Obama is a war criminal. Well, the use of unmanned drones against civilian populations does qualify as that. Have you read this one? I think Obama's discussion of the drone issue here is very sensible. And it really cannot be forgotten what the alternatives were. Compared to Iraq or Vietnam, drone strikes are a massive improvement. Dr.Smasher posted:Christ mcmagic... go post on /pol/ or something. "mcmagic, I disagree - I think you're overstating Clinton's unfavourabilities and underestimating her strengths. For example, ..."
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:44 |
|
mcmagic posted:By that logic it's really clear that Trump was the republican's best general election candidate, right? Donald Trump had won in a similar situation to how Bernie had lost. They were both outsider candidates pushing against the Overton Window of the party. What does it say that Bernie's populism failed against the part of the nation most likely to support it? How does that make for a strong general election?
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:45 |
|
WampaLord posted:Wait, I thought Trump was within the margin of error and a real threat because Hillary is so bad, which is it? You really need to take a 100 level logic course.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:45 |
|
Cingulate posted:Why can't you people deal with dissent in a nuanced, civil way? Sorry, it's been going on for months and we've finally hit our breaking point. I admit it seems insane if this is the first mcmagic derail you've seen, but there have been literally dozens. mcmagic posted:You really need to take a 100 level logic course.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:46 |
|
Cingulate posted:http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/10/barack-obama-on-5-days-that-shaped-his-presidency.html We have dozens of times he just ignores it and posts the same stuff again, this has been going on for months.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:46 |
|
mcmagic posted:And they wanted the wrong person if the goal was winning the white house and having coattails down ballot. That's just a fact. And this right here is why you're full of poo poo mcmagic. You consistently and constantly assume that literally none of Hillary Clinton's support is due to her. You begin from the viewpoint of "anyone could get what Hillary Clinton does." You're hiding behind your Blue Dog Google Choice because what you're actually saying is "there's no way this woman could ever have gotten REAL support, they're just voting for her because she's a Democrat!"
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:46 |
|
ImpAtom posted:Okay. So... Hillary Clinton wins the democratic primary and then proceeds to win the general. This means nobody wants her to be president because ???? As far as 45-48% of Americans are concerned, Hillary Clinton is less deserving of the presidency of the united states than a failed businessman, serial sexual assaulter, and inveterate racist with an attention span no longer than five seconds. Of the list of options presented, she is the least unpalatable. Do not confuse this with popularity.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:46 |
|
ImpAtom posted:And this right here is why you're full of poo poo mcmagic. You consistently and constantly assume that literally none of Hillary Clinton's support is due to her. You begin from the viewpoint of "anyone could get what Hillary Clinton does." That is completely irrelevant to any point I've actually been making but sure.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:47 |
|
mcmagic posted:That is completely irrelevant to any point I've actually been making but sure.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:48 |
|
BigRed0427 posted:I know the last thing this thread needs is more Arzying but I'm sorry I can't help it.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:48 |
|
mcmagic posted:And they wanted the wrong person if the goal was winning the white house and having coattails down ballot. That's just a fact.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:48 |
|
Ze Pollack posted:As far as 45-48% of Americans are concerned, Hillary Clinton is less deserving of the presidency of the united states than a failed businessman, serial sexual assaulter, and inveterate racist with an attention span no longer than five seconds. And there is no particular proof that 45% of America would have felt differently about a different candidate. They certainly didn't feel that way about Barack Obama. mcmagic posted:That is completely irrelevant to any point I've actually been making but sure. No it isn't. You keep claiming anyone will do better, so clearly you don't think Clinton has any actual support beyond Generic Democrat.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:48 |
|
Cingulate posted:Why can't you people deal with dissent in a nuanced, civil way? Because this discussion has happened multiple times before and everyone is tired of telling mcmagic the same thing again. It's tiresome. Ze Pollack posted:As far as 45-48% of Americans are concerned, Hillary Clinton is less deserving of the presidency of the united states than a failed businessman, serial sexual assaulter, and inveterate racist with an attention span no longer than five seconds. Over half of Hillary's supporters say they're voting for her, rather than against Trump.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:48 |
|
Ze Pollack posted:As far as 45-48% of Americans are concerned, Hillary Clinton is less deserving of the presidency of the united states than a failed businessman, serial sexual assaulter, and inveterate racist with an attention span no longer than five seconds. It's wrong to confuse it with unpopularity too, though - I think the election's proven that Jesus Christ Himself could run against Donald Trump (or some hypothetical worse candidate, if one can exist) and so long as they had a D and R next to their names the numbers were going to be pretty much the same.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:49 |
|
Hi Pablo, welcome to USPOL.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:49 |
|
Ein Sexmonster posted:It isn't a fact though. Stop acting like your opinions and misinterpretation of data qualify as fact. So your argument is that Trump is a better general election candidate than John Kasich or Marco Rubio? I guess you could just be a moron.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:49 |
Jesus Christ HuffPo Link
|
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:49 |
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:If Bernie running as a progressive's wet dream couldn't even win the primary of the progressive party he is not a strong candidate As a supporter of the Bern, Hillary Clinton is the best person the democrats put forward this cycle. Bernie is great at pushing for progressive policies, and I'd really like to see that in the WH. But POTUS is more than guiding policy and Bernie is stubborn and has a hot head (much like his "bros"). The best place for Bernie in a democratic WH would be a cabinet position. But if the senate turns blue then the best place for him is to stay right where he is.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:50 |
|
|
# ? May 27, 2024 22:07 |
|
greatn posted:I like Gillibrand a lot. I hope she runs some time. She has been a lot more progressive as a senator than as a house member, presumably because of the district she represented. I do too. She's easily the most responsive of my congresspeople. Schumer and Maloney don't even give me the time of day.
|
# ? Nov 1, 2016 15:50 |