|
Radish posted:I wonder. He's so committed to his bipartisanship I have to question if it isn't something he fundamentally believes in rather than something he begrudgingly does to get things accomplished. Garland was such a lame choice; a really exciting Justice could have gotten people angry at Republicans holding him or her up but no one gave a poo poo about that guy enough to get rightfully enraged. Obama wants to maintain an air of impartiality and being above it all, and doesn't want to rock the boat or get people angry at him. Basically, he's a pussy.
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 20:28 |
|
|
People are going to miss that decency from Obama after Trump spends a few years in office giving meltdowns on Twitter
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
As soon as they decided to deadlock Garland, Obama should have retracted that and put up the leftist dream judge and said "hey guys this is who is being stopped" and pushed that everyday. Instead he basically gave up after pushing through the most boring compromise judge he could. I don't really give a poo poo how much Garland's feelings would be hurt by having his nomination retracted or how the optics of that would look, it just doesn't matter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:People are going to miss that decency from Obama after Trump spends a few years in office giving meltdowns on Twitter Who? Not the people who voted for Trump.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Maybe Obama isn't a pussy and he actually is just a centrist who's happy with how things turned out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
zegermans posted:Maybe Obama isn't a pussy and he actually is just a centrist who's happy with how things turned out. There is that, too. In which case he just sucks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:People are going to miss that decency from Obama after Trump spends a few years in office giving meltdowns on Twitter gently caress no, they're going to be pissed Obama didn't bully Lieberman into resigning/committing suicide.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
zegermans posted:Maybe Obama isn't a pussy and he actually is just a centrist who's happy with how things turned out. Centrists are by definition cowards
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Because God forbid we expect a political party to be able to keep disciple among its members
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
There's plenty of evidence that Obama is pretty sympathetic to the arguement of society getting more polarized and insane, so his whole schtick has been trying to not act as a lightning rod. Just look at his recent New Yorker profile. The Jeremiah Wright debacle was a learning point for him, along with the Henry Gates imbruglio, where him saying that an old college professor shouldn't be arrested on his front porch led to him losing 10 points among white people. Obama was dancing a really delicate wire act through his presidency, and while he made plenty of mistakes I fully believe in the balancing act he had to make, more than anyone else in his position would have had to. The last 8 years brought a brief respite from insanity in the executive branch, and vigirous regulatory action that actually helped a lot of people, and we're sure as poo poo going to miss that in the next 4-8 years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
porfiria posted:It's unclear to me how much of Democratic fecklessness is due to stupidity/greed/ideological badness and how much is due to this being a country of stupid libertarian racists. Was Bill Clinton's triangulation irresponsible cynicism or a simple acknowledgement of political reality? It's because they've seen the various levels of government swing conservative for the last fifty years, and rather than fight back with a leftist message, the Dems prefer to be Johnny-come-lately and say what the GOP does about free markets, crime and the drug war, which just gives credence to the Republican model of America. And why vote for a Democrat Republican when you can put an X next to the real thing? They'd rather fight for Republican votes than motivate their (theoretical at this point) working class base, and are driving away both. Mister Facetious fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Dec 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
And if you bring up running to the Left on issues they bring up the Dixiecrats and the racist compromises that needed to be made to pass the New Deal, or George McGovern! As if America is stuck in 1933 meets 1972 and this country will forever be that. Meanwhile they think it's a good idea to run candidates who won't admit to voting for ac member of their party for v president, as if "moderate" or Republican voters would believe that
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
HannibalBarca posted:I was mocking both, which I think is eminently fair considering that taking Brooklyn's word on the polls looked sorta dumb already after the primaries. But people like me didn't have any loving contact with Brooklyn. We were acting on the best information we had access to and acting like folks like me are worthy of mocking for doing so is post hoc bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
The really sad thing is, the only reason Bernie seems 'radical' is because of the Democrats chasing center-right votes. Bernie would best be described as 'boring' and 'garden variety' in virtually any other Western nation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
zegermans posted:Maybe Obama isn't a pussy and he actually is just a centrist who's happy with how things turned out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
I doubt Obama is happy with things turned out but I bet he thought being the sensible negotiator was going to turn out a lot differently.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
Mister Fister posted:The really sad thing is, the only reason Bernie seems 'radical' is because of the Democrats chasing center-right votes. Bernie would best be described as 'boring' and 'garden variety' in virtually any other Western nation. That said, multiparty systems will give more of a voice to legit radicals, even though they've yet to really make a massive impact politically. Well, the left wing variants at least, the far right is doing pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
Bill Mitchell was right except it was Hillary's ground game that was in our hearts
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
Radish posted:I doubt Obama is happy with things turned out but I bet he thought being the sensible negotiator was going to turn out a lot differently. The new ta nehisi Coates article nailed it. The same optimism that made it possible for Obama to run and to win doomed his political agenda because he simply could not comprehend the true extent of white hostility he was facing. If he could have he would never have run.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The new ta nehisi Coates article nailed it. The same optimism that made it possible for Obama to run and to win doomed his political agenda because he simply could not comprehend the true extent of white hostility he was facing. If he could have he would never have run. Yeah Republicans like to use Obama as an example of racism being dead but his presidency literally proved the opposite. VV No kidding 
Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Dec 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The new ta nehisi Coates article nailed it. The same optimism that made it possible for Obama to run and to win doomed his political agenda because he simply could not comprehend the true extent of white hostility he was facing. If he could have he would never have run. No one can depress the poo poo out of me like good ole Ta Nehisi....
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:I live in California and in the couple days running up to the election I noticed at least two "sign parties" on the side of roads or highways with people waving Trump signs and encouraging honks. These people showed day after day for about a week running up to voting day. I never saw a single such thing for Clinton. ... which is why she won California by 15 when Obama won by 9 in '08 and 10 in '12.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
If we want to do the blame game properly, we can start with the fact that there was nothing really magical about Obama winning Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio in 2008 and 2012. He did his homework and campaigned in these states frequently. Hillary did not. The only thing Obama doomed us to is a more progressive party, and even then that had a lot more to do with timing than his personal faults.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:... which is why she won California by 15 when Obama won by 9 in '08 and 10 in '12. It was really just a comment about the enthusiasm gap. The idea that in California of all places I could see Trump supporters lining the roads with nary a Hildawg in sight is just  How the state voted is immaterial because everyone knew what was gonna happen. But it's showcase of the symptoms we're hearing about in regards to the Clinton campaign. Her campaign only cared about votes in the swingiest states, and totally neglected every spot they considered safe. Trump supporters felt energized everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
I'm pretty convinced someone at some point successfully hypnotized into thinking she now existed in an alternate universe where only the popular vote mattered
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:It was really just a comment about the enthusiasm gap. The idea that in California of all places I could see Trump supporters lining the roads with nary a Hildawg in sight is just sure but the enthusiasm in California didn't help him any so that's not a basis to explain Michigan etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:I'm pretty convinced someone at some point successfully hypnotized into thinking she now existed in an alternate universe where only the popular vote mattered No, they learned the electoral lesson of 2008 when Obama schooled them and vowed to be scientific about it next time. Rather, they thought they learned that lesson. They had no loving idea of their electoral weaknesses as it turned out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:sure but the enthusiasm in California didn't help him any so that's not a basis to explain Michigan etc. I mean yeah some guy holding a sign in San Diego doesn't directly influence anyone in Detroit. But what I'm saying is that it's a sign of how people felt about their candidates. It's symptom, not a cause. For those who weren't already in a die hard for one camp on the other the enthusiasm divide was crazy. People believed that Trump cared about them more or less the same no matter where they lived. That is a good feeling. Clinton on the other hand was just emanating the vibe"I only care about you if you are strategically important". And that factor is something that I believe affected numbers in every state.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:Her campaign only cared about votes in the swingiest states, and totally neglected every spot they considered safe. I dunno about that. The rust belt is pretty swingy, yet they chose to ignore those states and tried to flip insane longshots like Texas, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico. Maybe they were trying to drum up Hispanic support in those states? But it certainly didn't work. Clinton didn't give a poo poo about the people, and was too obvious about it. That's why she lost.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:I mean yeah some guy holding a sign in San Diego doesn't directly influence anyone in Detroit. But what I'm saying is that it's a sign of how people felt about their candidates. It's symptom, not a cause. For those who weren't already in a die hard for one camp on the other the enthusiasm divide was crazy. People believed that Trump cared about them more or less the same no matter where they lived. That is a good feeling. Clinton on the other hand was just emanating the vibe"I only care about you if you are strategically important". And that factor is something that I believe affected numbers in every state. again, Clinton did better in California, both by her own percentage and also by margin over the Republican, than Obama did. or are California voters uniquely not affected by an enthusiasm gap while Michigan voters are?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:I dunno about that. The rust belt is pretty swingy, yet they chose to ignore those states and tried to flip insane longshots like Texas, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico. Maybe they were trying to drum up Hispanic support in those states? But it certainly didn't work. She won two of those states haha (not that they were ever long shots in the first place).
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:again, Clinton did better in California, both by her own percentage and also by margin over the Republican, than Obama did. Isn't California doing comparatively well economically?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
While the Clinton campaign (in retrospect) was an embarrassing mess and I think the Democratic Party should move to embrace a genuine intersectional working class movement, the incompetence on display in Michigan as reported in the Politico article was also similarly displayed by most (if not all) polling firms surveying the Rust Belt. In other words, the Clinton people were not uniquely awful and were making rational choices based on bad data. For reasons that we are still trying to figure out, the numbers people missed Trump support in the Midwest. Even the Trump polling operation thought they would lose Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:I dunno about that. The rust belt is pretty swingy, yet they chose to ignore those states and tried to flip insane longshots like Texas, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico. Maybe they were trying to drum up Hispanic support in those states? But it certainly didn't work. Nevada and Arizona are legit swing states, Obama campaigned for them in 2008 and 2012 Texas, Georgia, and Arizona were the longshots that were campaigned in at the cost of the Rust Belt firewall
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:again, Clinton did better in California, both by her own percentage and also by margin over the Republican, than Obama did. maybe it was due to poo poo like this https://twitter.com/jimtankersley/status/797492671631790084/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw That's a shitload of media buys to be making in a safe, solid blue state.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
Oh Snapple! posted:maybe it was due to poo poo like this they were just trying to make sure that trump didn't win the popular vote while clinton won the electoral vote! (a thing actually believed by parts of the dnc and the Clinton campaign)
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:But on the plus side, when it all goes to rack and ruin, you can be all smug about the fact you didn't vote Trump and so have absolutely no culpability for what happens. Enjoy the moral high ground. The ice caps are melting. Any sort of high ground is good to have.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:again, Clinton did better in California, both by her own percentage and also by margin over the Republican, than Obama did.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
Edible Hat posted:While the Clinton campaign (in retrospect) was an embarrassing mess and I think the Democratic Party should move to embrace a genuine intersectional working class movement, the incompetence on display in Michigan as reported in the Politico article was also similarly displayed by most (if not all) polling firms surveying the Rust Belt. In other words, the Clinton people were not uniquely awful and were making rational choices based on bad data. For reasons that we are still trying to figure out, the numbers people missed Trump support in the Midwest. Even the Trump polling operation thought they would lose Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. "Let's avoid states with precarious support to trick the opposition into not campaigning there" is nth level chess poo poo that cannot be blamed on bad information.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 20:28 |
|
|
MizPiz posted:"Let's avoid states with precarious support to trick the opposition into not campaigning there" is nth level chess poo poo that cannot be blamed on bad information. https://twitter.com/hamsandcastle/status/809093567205507073
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:52
|
|