Trump Thread II: The man make a tweet

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Trump Thread II: The man make a tweet

«‹›6022 »

nerdz: Oct 12, 2004; Complex, statistically improbable things are by their nature more difficult to explain than simple, statistically probable things.; Grimey Drawer

Let me understand here:

so if Ossoff wins, Trump is impeached and Bernie takes over, is that it?

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:50

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 13, 2024 19:15

boner confessor: Apr 25, 2013; by R. Guyovich

awesmoe posted:

please cite any poll local to ga06 that indicates support for left wing economic polices

its just common sense

suburbanites LOVE left wing radicalism. socialism can only be failed

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:50

Jaxyon: Mar 7, 2016; I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

Neeksy posted:

"If they can't get out of their house to vote-"

That's great for all the people who have free time on Tuesdays and aren't forced to work that day or they get a break that's too short to deal with the intentionally-long wait times at their location.

Old rich white people, the GOP bread-and-butter, have structural advantages in these kinds of off-season elections.

If polls here closed at 7 and I couldn't get out of work early I probably wouldn't be able to vote.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:50

Sinistral: Jan 2, 2013

Glazier posted:

Bernie got people out in record numbers for primaries that normally see a roomful of people. Democrats and Independents will come out if you give them a compelling message and vision more than "Look at the bad man!"

And how well did that work out for him?

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:51

skeleton warrior: Nov 12, 2016

Glazier posted:

Bernie got people out in record numbers for primaries that normally see a roomful of people. Democrats and Independents will come out if you give them a compelling message and vision more than "Look at the bad man!"

A) 2016 Democratic primary turnout was less than 2008 Democratic primary turnout, so I don't know where you're getting "normally see a room full of people" unless you mean when Obama ran unopposed in 2012;

B) Bernie's turnout still lost in enough primaries that it wasn't even close

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:51

Krispy Wafer: Jul 26, 2002; I shouted out "Free the exposed 67"
But they stood on my hair and told me I was fat; Grimey Drawer

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Bernie got fewer votes than Hillary.

Because of the same voters in places like DeKalb that aren't coming out in force for Ossoff. The Black vote went to Hillary and just like Republicans are too dependent on a shrinking White vote, Democrats are overly dependent on minority voters.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:51

Madkal: Feb 11, 2008; Fallen Rib

nerdz posted:

Let me understand here:

so if Ossoff wins, Trump is impeached and Bernie takes over, is that it?

Also Covok said he would shut up for 3 months.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:51

Slow News Day: Jul 4, 2007

awesmoe posted:

the, uh, problem with this race wasn't lack of funds

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

He raised almost 50% more than Handel and the vast majority of it came from out of state.

His fundraising was not the problem and was actually incredibly good.

So it takes a lot of pathetic, cringeworthy emails to raise lots of money?

I doubt it. Most of Ossoff's money came from out of state. The stupid emails have nothing to do with it. In fact they may have caused damage. If I got emails like that I would probably decide to not vote for the candidate even if it was Bernie.

How you communicate with your potential voters loving matters. If you guilt them into doing stuff or rely on clickbait tactics to get them to open your loving emails, don't be surprised when they don't show up to vote.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:51

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; Can't post for 5 hours!

enraged_camel posted:

So it takes a lot of pathetic, cringeworthy emails to raise lots of money?

I doubt it. Most of Ossoff's money came from out of state. The stupid emails have nothing to do with it. In fact they may have caused damage. If I got emails like that I would probably decide to not vote for the candidate even if it was Bernie.

How you communicate with your potential voters loving matters. If you guilt them into doing stuff or rely on clickbait tactics to get them to open your loving emails, don't be surprised when they don't show up to vote.

99.7% of the fundraising email recipients were not in GA-06.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:52

Bar Ran Dun: Jan 22, 2006

People think in stories. A D win would would be good for the changes in the narratives in people's head it would result in.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:53

axeil: Feb 14, 2006

enraged_camel posted:

If those Ossoff campaign emails are real, and Ossoff loses, he should line up his fundraising committee against the wall and shoot all of them in the loving head.

"Hm you know it's getting close to the election maybe I should help Ossoff out"

*checks email*

"Oh. They already lost. Welp then."

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:54

Slow News Day: Jul 4, 2007

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

99.7% of the fundraising email recipients were not in GA-06.

Think of it this way: he could probably have raised twice as much money if the emails didn't scream "I'm not a serious candidate!"

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:54

Finicums Wake: Mar 13, 2017; Can't post for 8 years!

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

You can blame Republicans for being lovely, but the Democrats are the ones that don't vote.

The overarching problem the Democratic Party has is that its voters don't bother to come out. The last two big Democratic elections were due to reduced Republican turnout.

Liberal candidates, moderate candidates, and conservative Democratic candidates all get the same results. Democrats turn out at proportionally lower rates and usually win due to have more voters in the aggregate that offsets the lower turnout.

The Dems don't spend their money on door to door campaigns, constantly registering voters (even during non-election years), etc. I bet Ossoff spent most of that 55 mil on tv commercials, way past their point of diminishing returns, and big consultant fees.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:54

C. Everett Koop: Aug 18, 2008

ISeeCuckedPeople posted:

I think at this points if Dems don't get out to vote they get what they deserve, even if that means losing abortion access or death due to the AHCA.

This is democracy. You can't stay home and cry about losing a election. You get the government you deserve and if you aren't wiling to stand up for your very livelihood than you are going to get hosed over from here to eternity and it will be that way until you die.

There is no white savior. We save ourselves or we die. Simple as that. We can't get saved by other people.

And if you're a Democrat. I warn you now. Do what is necessary and what you can get away with to survive. If you have no health insurance - lie, cheat, steal, rob, do anything to get the money you have to. That will be you're only hope.

Start by killing your friends and neighbors. If you aren't the last one standing then someone's got you in their crosshairs. Don't trust anyone it's kill or be killed. :black101:

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:55

Slow News Day: Jul 4, 2007

I mean one of the emails literally had a subject line that said "Accept defeat" lmao

And you guys are defending this. loving incredible.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:55

ISeeCuckedPeople: Feb 7, 2017; by Smythe

axeil posted:

"Hm you know it's getting close to the election maybe I should help Ossoff out"

*checks email*

"Oh. They already lost. Welp then."

Get over this stupid poo poo you have no loving clue how email marketing campaigns work at all.

You use over the top messages like that because 98% of people are loving stupid.

I work in this poo poo for a living. I had 10 fold conversion increases when I used language literally pulled from scam ads versus professional nice language. Shut up.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:55

Rookersh: Aug 19, 2010

Teriyaki Koinku posted:

*furiously jams square peg into round hole for Nth time*

"loving Democrats won't turn out on command like Republicans do as they're supposed to! Why!? Why!?"

If Dems can't vote, they don't exist as a party. Sorry to be the bummer here.

Voting happens through umbrella style voting. We all exist under here. We might not all agree, but we have to vote for each other.

In literally every election since Obama we haven't. Huge chunks of Dems are just deciding this isn't the candidate they like, so they'll stay home. If this continues, this is a one party country. A magical man will not suddenly will up several thousand Dem voters for a socialist candidate so we can all get universal healthcare and LGBT rights when it comes around. It's a tooth and nail struggle every single election, and needs to be viewed as such.

A candidate like Bernie or one the posters in this thread like won't win without us paving the way for them. Too much of this country is loving backwards and hateful, and needs to be introduced to these concepts slowly. A Bernie might not have won the primary in 2016, but a Bernie might have won the primary in 2020, or 2024, etc etc. It's only by layering on more and more liberal ideas and making them the norm can we finally push to a more socialist/socialized style of nation. Neoliberalism sucks, but it's a thing we have to accept and work through on our way to what we actually want because half this country still thinks anything left of neoliberalism is still "commie talk.".

Maybe I'm jaded here, but I work in a traditionally young industry ( coffee ), with a lot of younger types, with a few various people my age. And you want to know what came out on 2016 election day? The Bernie bros didn't vote for Clinton because they wanted their conscious to be clear. They've stated they won't vote in 2018/2020 until the Dem part starts running Socialists. gently caress them. The millennials that voted for Obama? They voted for Hillary, and she lost. They've since asked everyone to stop talking about politics and have left the politics scene because it's too heartbreaking. That's an entire generation we need to regain. The only people who actually voted and plan to continue to vote are the LGBT crowd, and people like me that are a little older. And as Invictus can tell you, I'm a loving jaded rear end in a top hat now, and think we will lose 2018 and 2020 because of the poo poo I just posted. At least I'm still going to vote though, unlike the rest of the former Democratic Party.

Why does this matter?

Because

Hollismason posted:

Oh wait. You mean the Democrat didn't win the district that's been Republican for 40 years. Instead they made it a really close race. Hrmmmmm. Obviously we should just dissolve the Democratic party and start over.

The gently caress is wrong with you people.

Because we all expected this to be tight, and as long as it was tight we could view it as a victory. Except it wasn't tight. Sure the number will end up being 1-2% off and we can crow about how the wave is growing. But the truth of the matter is that Ossoff actually had a win on his hands. He reached across the aisle and found moderate voters. He had the gains he needed in the two Republican districts. And then the Dem base never showed up to vote. We can point at voter suppression all we want, but that's a huge loving problem.

We didn't lose because of a "noble effort" we all knew was going to pan out badly. We didn't lose because Dems came out in droves, yet they just couldn't break that Georgia redneck mentality. We lost because the loving Dems never showed up in the first place, despite the moderates actually boosting us to the point this should have been a win. The wave was here, the wave existed. The wave never had the chance though because the party doesn't exist anymore.

Like realize the core of the Republican party isn't FYGM anymore. It's "I love watching liberals lose.". And all the money/news/everything that got put into Georgia built up an anger in Republicans that drew them out in record numbers. And they still would have lost to Ossoff if even 10% more Dems that exist in the district and said they were planning to vote actually did. That's loving shameful.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:56

boner confessor: Apr 25, 2013; by R. Guyovich

Finicums Wake posted:

The Dems don't spend their money on door to door campaigns, constantly registering voters (even during non-election years), etc. I bet Ossoff spent most of that 55 mil on tv commercials, way past their point of diminishing returns, and big consultant fees.

ossoff had a huge ground game. please shut up if you don't know what you're talking about thanks (he asked, knowing this is the trump thread)

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:56

Chard: Aug 24, 2010

i lust for death's sweet embrace

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:56

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; Can't post for 5 hours!

enraged_camel posted:

Think of it this way: he could probably have raised twice as much money if the emails didn't scream "I'm not a serious candidate!"

All data, from political and commercial campaigns, and personal experience fundraising in D.C. say this is the opposite of the case.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:56

skeleton warrior: Nov 12, 2016

Teriyaki Koinku posted:

*vast majority of Americans desperate for left-wing economic policies in multiple polls*

*Dems begrudgingly offer up weak centrist candidate*

*Meager Dem voter turn-out, GOP wins*

"loving party purists trying to tear us apart! Leftists and stupid voters are to blame! They don't understand their basic civic duty! "

1968: Democrats offer up leftist to "vast-majority of Americans desperate for let-wing policies", loses
1972: Democrats offer up biggest leftist they can find, lose by third biggest margin ever
1976: Democrats offer up centrist, win
1984: Democrats offer up leftist who promises to raise taxes on the rich, carry one state and D.C.
1988: Democrats offer up card-carrying member of ACLU, lose in landslide
1992: Democrats offer up centrist, win
1996: Democrats offer up centrist, win
2000: Democrats offer up centrist, win popular vote but lose electoral college
2004: Democrats offer up "most liberal member of the Senate", lose
2008: Democrats offer up centrist, win
2012: Democrats offer up centrist, win
2016: Democrats offer up centrist, win popular vote but lose electoral college

2017: idiot on the internet insists there's a majority-liberal voting bloc that can deliver victory, if only we chase it

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:57

TheBalor: Jun 18, 2001

Rookersh posted:

If Dems can't vote, they don't exist as a party. Sorry to be the bummer here.

Voting happens through umbrella style voting. We all exist under here. We might not all agree, but we have to vote for each other.

In literally every election since Obama we haven't. Huge chunks of Dems are just deciding this isn't the candidate they like, so they'll stay home. If this continues, this is a one party country. A magical man will not suddenly will up several thousand Dem voters for a socialist candidate so we can all get universal healthcare and LGBT rights when it comes around. It's a tooth and nail struggle every single election, and needs to be viewed as such.

A candidate like Bernie or one the posters in this thread like won't win without us paving the way for them. Too much of this country is loving backwards and hateful, and needs to be introduced to these concepts slowly. A Bernie might not have won the primary in 2016, but a Bernie might have won the primary in 2020, or 2024, etc etc. It's only by layering on more and more liberal ideas and making them the norm can we finally push to a more socialist/socialized style of nation. Neoliberalism sucks, but it's a thing we have to accept and work through on our way to what we actually want because half this country still thinks anything left of neoliberalism is still "commie talk.".

Maybe I'm jaded here, but I work in a traditionally young industry ( coffee ), with a lot of younger types, with a few various people my age. And you want to know what came out on 2016 election day? The Bernie bros didn't vote for Clinton because they wanted their conscious to be clear. They've stated they won't vote in 2018/2020 until the Dem part starts running Socialists. gently caress them. The millennials that voted for Obama? They voted for Hillary, and she lost. They've since asked everyone to stop talking about politics and have left the politics scene because it's too heartbreaking. That's an entire generation we need to regain. The only people who actually voted and plan to continue to vote are the LGBT crowd, and people like me that are a little older. And as Invictus can tell you, I'm a loving jaded rear end in a top hat now, and think we will lose 2018 and 2020 because of the poo poo I just posted. At least I'm still going to vote though, unlike the rest of the former Democratic Party.

Why does this matter?

Because

Because we all expected this to be tight, and as long as it was tight we could view it as a victory. Except it wasn't tight. Sure the number will end up being 1-2% off and we can crow about how the wave is growing. But the truth of the matter is that Ossoff actually had a win on his hands. He reached across the aisle and found moderate voters. He had the gains he needed in the two Republican districts. And then the Dem base never showed up to vote. We can point at voter suppression all we want, but that's a huge loving problem.

We didn't lose because of a "noble effort" we all knew was going to pan out badly. We didn't lose because Dems came out in droves, yet they just couldn't break that Georgia redneck mentality. We lost because the loving Dems never showed up in the first place, despite the moderates actually boosting us to the point this should have been a win. The wave was here, the wave existed. The wave never had the chance though because the party doesn't exist anymore.

Like realize the core of the Republican party isn't FYGM anymore. It's "I love watching liberals lose.". And all the money/news/everything that got put into Georgia built up an anger in Republicans that drew them out in record numbers. And they still would have lost to Ossoff if even 10% more Dems that exist in the district and said they were planning to vote actually did. That's loving shameful.

You realize the votes are still being counted...right?

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:58

Covok: May 27, 2013; Yet where is that woman now? Tell me, in what heave does she reside? None of them. Because no God bothered to listen or care. If that is what you think it means to be a God, then you and all your teachings are welcome to do as that poor women did. And vanish from these realms forever.

If all Trump can do is turn R+8 to R+1.2, then Republicans retain house and senate. This is bush all over again!

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:58

WhiskeyJuvenile: Feb 15, 2002; by Nyc_Tattoo

Fulchrum posted:

Honestly, South Carolina is way more interesting to me than Georgia. It had a +20 R lean and is at a virtual tie with 70% reporting.

R is 4% up with 88%

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:58

HannibalBarca: Sep 11, 2016; History shows, again and again, how nature points out the folly of man.

Finicums Wake posted:

The Dems don't spend their money on door to door campaigns, constantly registering voters (even during non-election years), etc. I bet Ossoff spent most of that 55 mil on tv commercials, way past their point of diminishing returns, and big consultant fees.

Ossoff had so much loving money he literally spent all of it on everything. No part of the Ossoff campaign was hurting for cash. the problem is that a big, visible D campaign in a district like this actually activates so many marginal/resentful R voters as to make it counterproductive at worst or only slightly useful at best.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:58

Star Man: Jun 1, 2008; There's a star maaaaaan
Over the rainbow

Am I crazy for being indifferent about special elections and more concerned about the actual 2018 midterm elections?

Not that I want Ossoff or Parnell to lose, but two House seats turning in an odd-numbered year is not the revolution we are looking for.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:59

Elotana: Dec 12, 2003; and i'm putting it all on the goddamn expense account

skeleton warrior posted:

1968: Democrats offer up leftist

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:59

Covok: May 27, 2013; Yet where is that woman now? Tell me, in what heave does she reside? None of them. Because no God bothered to listen or care. If that is what you think it means to be a God, then you and all your teachings are welcome to do as that poor women did. And vanish from these realms forever.

TheBalor posted:

You realize the votes are still being counted...right?

Dude, it's over. Every chance that Ossof had has expired. Handel will get a 1.2+ margin in the end.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 01:59

pumpinglemma: Apr 28, 2009; DD: Fondly regard abomination.

Why has this thread already descended into eating itself over Ossoff's inevitable and predictable loss when as of a few minutes ago Nate Silver is saying "I�m totally up in the air on this one right now and have no idea who will win"?

# ? Jun 21, 2017 02:00

Moatman: Mar 21, 2014; Because the goof is all mine.

pumpinglemma posted:

Why has this thread already descended into eating itself over Ossoff's inevitable and predictable loss when as of a few minutes ago Nate Silver is saying "I�m totally up in the air on this one right now and have no idea who will win"?

Because 90% of the thread was dropped on their heads as children

# ? Jun 21, 2017 02:00

Aves Maria!: Jul 26, 2008; Maybe I'll drown

Star Man posted:

Am I crazy for being indifferent about special elections and more concerned about the actual 2018 midterm elections?

Not that I want Ossoff or Parnell to lose, but two House seats turning in an odd-numbered year is not the revolution we are looking for.

No, you're being relatively rational.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 02:01

boner confessor: Apr 25, 2013; by R. Guyovich

pumpinglemma posted:

Why has this thread already descended into eating itself over Ossoff's inevitable and predictable loss when as of a few minutes ago Nate Silver is saying "I�m totally up in the air on this one right now and have no idea who will win"?

# ? Jun 21, 2017 02:02

Gynocentric Regime: Jun 9, 2010; by Cyrano4747

pumpinglemma posted:

Why has this thread already descended into eating itself over Ossoff's inevitable and predictable loss when as of a few minutes ago Nate Silver is saying "I�m totally up in the air on this one right now and have no idea who will win"?

The anthroponuclear interpretation of the multiple worlds theory.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 02:02

Endorph: Jul 22, 2009

pumpinglemma posted:

Why has this thread already descended into eating itself over Ossoff's inevitable and predictable loss when as of a few minutes ago Nate Silver is saying "I�m totally up in the air on this one right now and have no idea who will win"?

because nothing matters until an election, in which case it matters forever and will be the death of us and everyone we love, irregardless of result

# ? Jun 21, 2017 02:02

Willo567: Feb 5, 2015; Cheating helped me fail the test and stay on the show.

If I could side track for a bit, how do people in the thread deal with the poo poo show of a government we have now

Seriously, I can't get over it. It eats at my mind for most of the day, and I'm not sure if I can take it anymore

# ? Jun 21, 2017 02:02

Covok: May 27, 2013; Yet where is that woman now? Tell me, in what heave does she reside? None of them. Because no God bothered to listen or care. If that is what you think it means to be a God, then you and all your teachings are welcome to do as that poor women did. And vanish from these realms forever.

pumpinglemma posted:

Why has this thread already descended into eating itself over Ossoff's inevitable and predictable loss when as of a few minutes ago Nate Silver is saying "I�m totally up in the air on this one right now and have no idea who will win"?

Oh please, Nate ain't a trusted source on poo poo anymore since Nov 9th.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 02:02

Party Plane Jones: Jul 1, 2007; by Reene; Fun Shoe

https://twitter.com/kevincollier/status/877327579077722112

Whoops.

quote:

Georgia, for instance, where the special election between Democrat Jon Ossoff and Republican Karen Handel has become the most expensive House race in history, conducts no vote audit and relies on electronic voting machine manufactured by a company that no longer exists.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 02:02

TheBalor: Jun 18, 2001

Covok posted:

Dude, it's over. Every chance that Ossof had has expired. Handel will get a 1.2+ margin in the end.

Not according to Nate Silver, AKA the only person who seems to understand polling in politics? Also famous as the person the last iteration of this thread spent months jeering at for being stupid before Trump smashed their dreams.

It's either cackling triumphalism or black depression around here.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 02:03

Push El Burrito: May 9, 2006; Soiled Meat

But his e-mails...

# ? Jun 21, 2017 02:03

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 13, 2024 19:15

ThePeavstenator: Dec 18, 2012; Establish the Buns

Willo567 posted:

If I could side track for a bit, how do people in the thread deal with the poo poo show of a government we have now

Seriously, I can't get over it. It eats at my mind for most of the day, and I'm not sure if I can take it anymore

I'm white and I make software for a living.

# ? Jun 21, 2017 02:03

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Trump Thread II: The man make a tweet

«‹›6022 »