|
people itt forget that Trumps antimattering shield only works on him. Hence why the lady who tied herself to him lost the TN primary hard
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 14:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 23:57 |
|
|
LinYutang posted:So has Abdul
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 14:48
|
|
|
the tapes of damning evidence thing only works on your typical politicians because they put up a facade of being a perfect calculated everyman that completely falls apart when something is exposed. with Trump it didn't matter because he was already a crass blathering buffoon i feel like most people think of Biden as some sort of slightly flirty old man so i'm not sure what we've seen so far would do much to him gently caress Biden though. i wish he just stayed away so we can remember him as The Onion portrayed him, and not a potential ratfucking president
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 14:56
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:2020 is going to look like 1968 all over again nah its going to be '72 when all of the establishment stabs bernie in the back like they did to mcgovern
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:01
|
|
|
SKULL.GIF posted:everyone else who's tried the Trump route has gotten burned incredibly hard It's because the Trump route only works when you completely lack even the most basic sense of shame.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:09
|
|
|
Gillibrand going full populist because she was completely locked out of the donor base for not carrying water for a sexpest and cynically realizing the only path left to power for her is if she burns down their building is not something I would have entertained a few months ago. God drat 2020 could go from just being nuts to bugfuck crazy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:13
|
|
|
Gio posted:reminder that our current president was taped admitting to sexual assault. I believe it was Matt Taibbi who offered an explanation of this but I can't be sure (there was a guardian article about it as well) But this goes back to the old days before internet communication where the media class, traditional reporters etc wielded greater power over prospective politicians and would manufacture the "gaffe" as a way to eliminate those who they felt did not play nice within the politician - media dynamic. It was also manipulated by the politicians themselves to knee cap opponents. But it is all closely related to the trend in politics over the past 50 years of crafting careful "public personas" that were completely milquetoast and devoid of any real convictions. The internet has effectively destroyed this by making everyone's bio available at anytime so people can clearly see what people are about. That is why Trump, Sanders, Corbyn have become more popular. People see Trump for example, and even though he is a piece of poo poo, he is being completely consistent with the person he has always been. Compared to someone like Hillary Clinton, who was stuck playing the old persona game mentioned above, seems genuine even though completely unethical and dishonest. Wutang-Yutani CORP fucked around with this message at 15:28 on Aug 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:25
|
|
|
whoops
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:26
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Given how parents have been having kids later in life, have there been any under-26ers on Medicare yet? Considering that the oldest known pregnant mothers on record are 70, one of them 72 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pregnancy_over_age_50#Cases_of_pregnancy_over_age_50) that seems inevitable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Given how parents have been having kids later in life, have there been any under-26ers on Medicare yet? p sure that applies only to employer paid plans and not entitlements like Medicare. also some states exceed the federal minimum of 26. for example, in New York dependents can stay on parents insurance until 30
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:32
|
|
|
I think the dems learned their lesson with 1968 and you'll never see a clusterfuck like that out in the open again. 2016 was a prototype for the modern dem ratfuck and any parallels you can draw from 50 years ago to today was already demoed in the 2016 primary.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:47
|
|
|
Lambert posted:I don't think Biden forced anyone's hand. He was obviously put out there as a test balloon, to gauge whether Obama should switch to supporting gay marriage as well. he dropped it too early Obama wanted to hold off on the trial balloons for a couple more months so that he could time the actual coming-out in Sept or Oct Gio posted:reminder that our current president was taped admitting to sexual assault. gaffes mattered because the political establishment thought they did and would often throw their own candidates under a bus in response. they would withdraw support and endorsements, and if the person was already in office, they would pressure the person to resign. the same goes for corruption and sex scandals. if the person stands firm and doesn't give into the pressure, or if their party stands by them, the gaffe doesn't do poo poo. remember when Mark Sanford, then-governor of South Carolina, vanished for a week without telling anyone to go on an impromptu trip to Argentina to meet his mistress? and the only impact on his political career was a voluntary resignation from the presidency of the Republican Governor's Association? sometimes someone who's up for election has a gaffe or scandal and then loses, but that's often blamed on the gaffe when the truth is that they would have lost anyway. the only time I can think of when a scandal probably changed the result of an election recently was Roy "Childfucker" Moore
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:49
|
|
|
The best sex scandal will always be Obama getting a cakewalk to his senate seat because the republican candidate took his insanely hot wife (Jeri Ryan) to a swingers club and she got mad and divorced him. This came out because a judge unsealed the divorce proceedings (basically in order to torpedo this dude) The Republicans made him withdraw during the general and replaced him with Alan Keyes because Alan keyes had given a well received speech in Rockford IL and my local senator there thought he could spring board his career on keyes' Obama's career is built on hilariously good fortune and timing (and the one time he didn't have that he got obliterated by Bobby rush) , but I'm sure everyone's is mastershakeman fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Aug 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:52
|
|
|
Lactose Is Wack posted:I believe it was Matt Taibbi who offered an explanation of this but I can't be sure (there was a guardian article about it as well) I think that is part of the reason. The other part is that people care more about politics than pundits acknowledge. Not in the lanyard sense of caring about policy details, but of understanding what is at stake. Conservatives aren't going to pass up the opportunity to pack the supreme court for decades because Trump is personally an rear end in a top hat. So the part you said gets his base excited, and people who aren't necessarily his base go along because they know that even if he is personally an rear end in a top hat his intention to actually push the politics they want is there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:52
|
|
|
basic hitler posted:I think the dems learned their lesson 
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:55
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:the greater threat to bernie would be the other candidates combining to thwart him. I feel like all of the succdems are going to be too individually self-absorbed to do this. Nobody's going to take one for the "team"
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:58
|
|
|
I said a few months ago that Trump's going to break into national news coverage of the Dem primaries with presidential addresses to gently caress them over, and I still believe that will happen "I apologize for interrupting the FAKE NEWS loving Democrats who are INSULTING ME, but let me talk for 30 minutes about infrastructure..."
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:00
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I feel like all of the succdems are going to be too individually self-absorbed to do this. Nobody's going to take one for the "team" yeah its just going to be a replay of the 2016 GOP primary so i'm really looking forward to the rise of the neverbernie liberals on fox
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:00
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:yeah its just going to be a replay of the 2016 GOP primary so i'm really looking forward to the rise of the neverbernie liberals on fox Eh I think there's a chance one might step out of the circular firing squad and try to ride it out with Bernie, but yeah the others will tear each other apart
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:02
|
|
|
the lesson of 1968 was definitely learned, you will never see them gently caress up in that way ever again. of course dems will gently caress up in new ways, like i said, 2016 is the likely model for dealing with undesirable candidates with substantial followings
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:02
|
|
|
I look back on the 2016 GOP primary as the absolute funniest thing that I’ve ever witnessed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:03
|
|
|
the lesson of the '68 convention is that the daley family should be drawn and quartered
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:04
|
|
|
basic hitler posted:the lesson of 1968 was definitely learned, you will never see them gently caress up in that way ever again. If they follow that model they'll gently caress up. The only reason it worked was because Bernie didn't expect blow up. He's prepped now, and has been working with cnn for those Town Halls so shutting him out will be much harder than it was in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:05
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:I said a few months ago that Trump's going to break into national news coverage of the Dem primaries with presidential addresses to gently caress them over, and I still believe that will happen Yeah, he will absolutely be the shadow candidate of the primaries. Except he won't be talking about infrastructure, but will drop their nicknames at every available chance - "Crazy Bernie", "Pocahontas", probably "Old Joe" and "Kneelin' Kirsten" too
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:12
|
|
|
are the Dem primaries going to reach a decision point significantly before the GOP primaries will? it things happen to reach a point where Bernie is the clear Dem winner but GOP competition to Trump still exists, the lanyards are all gonna jump ship to support the "reasonable Republican"
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
If trump's not completely moronic he will likely try to signal boost some any-one-but-trump white noise centrist that the left absolutely will not go to the polls for, in a reversal of Clinton's attempt to signal boost trump for the easy win, signal boosting some lame Booker-type will ensure a second term. i'm not sure how he'd do that, but he's an idiot if he plays into helping a leftist populist (bernie) get the nod because he can play the poo poo-talking-get-people-fired-up game way better than donnie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:I think that is part of the reason. The other part is that people care more about politics than pundits acknowledge. Not in the lanyard sense of caring about policy details, but of understanding what is at stake. Conservatives aren't going to pass up the opportunity to pack the supreme court for decades because Trump is personally an rear end in a top hat. So the part you said gets his base excited, and people who aren't necessarily his base go along because they know that even if he is personally an rear end in a top hat his intention to actually push the politics they want is there. conservatives are actually competent is the issue. they understand power and how to wield it very very very very well. also re: gaffes, it only matters and does fatal damage if you're trying to save face. it's one thing to pay lip service and believe in nothing (democrats), it's another to nakedly not believe in anything. it's why the revelation that trump is a lying moron who's brain is rotting inside his skull isn't loving news; it's not exactly a loving secret that he's a huge idiot. the kayfabe that clinton cares about you though? lol, lemme tell you about a bridge in ny that's for sale.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:21
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:The best sex scandal will always be Obama getting a cakewalk to his senate seat because the republican candidate took his insanely hot wife (Jeri Ryan) to a swingers club and she got mad and divorced him. This came out because a judge unsealed the divorce proceedings (basically in order to torpedo this dude) My favorite will always be the South Carolina (I think) governor (I think) who just up and disappeared for a week because he wanted to hook up with his Argentinian mistress, and everyone assumed he'd vanished while hiking the Appalachian Trail. Though you're right that that's probably the most significant one of recent memory (with Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski a close second, though if Bill had actually been removed from office it would be first).
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:28
|
|
|
basic hitler posted:i'm not sure how he'd do that, but he's an idiot if he plays into helping a leftist populist (bernie) get the nod because he can play the poo poo-talking-get-people-fired-up game way better than donnie. He did a bit in 2016 for Bernie (after Bernie had safely lost the primary), clearly hoping that Bernie (or Bernie voters) would be a spoiler. (Neither were, but Hillary's campaign came conveniently pre-spoiled.) I'm not really convinced that Bernie's better at putting on the big show than Trump is, though he's the only one on the D side who can even compete on that field (save Oprah changing her mind about running or something similar). But I suppose we'll find out. (I hope we find out.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
that angry duck comic, except he's screaming DECORUM DECORUM DECORUM!!!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:are the Dem primaries going to reach a decision point significantly before the GOP primaries will? it things happen to reach a point where Bernie is the clear Dem winner but GOP competition to Trump still exists, the lanyards are all gonna jump ship to support the "reasonable Republican" There won't be GOP primaries. No major candidate will primary Trump. The Dem primaries, however, have a non-zero chance of going to the convention floor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:38
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:The under 26 thing was a hilarious handout to basically just middle class and above people , especially those with kids who were off doing unpaid internships. Not only did you need a parent to cover you, you needed them to have a company plan that they had enough money to pay the extra coverage. Have dead parents? Parents working lovely jobs? gently caress you Insurers also changed the model from flat rates for families no matter how many children + family-applied deductibles to premiums based on no. of children covered + deductibles applied to each individual family members. so I'm pretty sure they made lots more money coming up with the under-26 thing than they would have in its absence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:39
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/RAlexJimenez/status/1025382094594293762
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:40
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Given how parents have been having kids later in life, have there been any under-26ers on Medicare yet? medicare doesn't cover one's children (or spouse), but I'm sure there are fatally ill under-26ers receiving medicare.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:41
|
|
|
::is poor:: ::opens checking account:: ::writes check:: ::check bounces, because still poor:: "HOW DO WE FIX THIS THING?" - A Politician ::poors now allowed to bounce checks::
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
Lactose Is Wack posted:I believe it was Matt Taibbi who offered an explanation of this but I can't be sure (there was a guardian article about it as well) yup. he is seen as “real,” genuinely reflective of his base’s personality and what they think, and he’s seen as an outsider. his opponents are seen as robots spitting out sanitized talking points, which they almost always are. i think it’s wrong to assume trump has some special gift that makes him impervious to criticism. i think it’s a lot more plausible that your average voter doesnt give a gently caress about the gaffes and slip-ups that rile up the media and always online types.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:medicare doesn't cover one's children (or spouse), but I'm sure there are fatally ill under-26ers receiving medicare. Dialysis dependency is immediately qualifying criteria for Medicare enrollment and there are definitely people aged 1m-26y who are in ESRD/dialysis dependent. They aren't exactly fatally ill, but it's not a good look.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:::is poor:: It's just a prohibition on overdraft fees for debit card purchases and ATM withdrawals. It's not nothing, but it's not exactly radical change, either. (And there's probably a catch buried in there somewhere.) I'm a little surprised it's not "a tax credit for your first four overdraft fees in the year" or some drat thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:50
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:::is poor:: no worries Booker's proposal solves that by continuing to allow banks to charge overdraft fees on checks headline: "Banning overdraft fees: Cory Booker’s new idea to tackle big banks" article: "Booker’s newly proposed legislation ... would bar financial institutions from charging overdraft fees on debit card transactions and ATM withdrawals."
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 23:57 |
|
|
booker's proposal explicitly sets bail at 1 million dollars for misdemeanor check bouncing
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 16:53
|
|