|
Joementum posted:Everyone except Trump, Fiorina, Carson, and Cruz. If you don't mind - Why do you consider Huckabee to be in the sane pile? Your list seems to be pretty much "policitians" vs. "not politicians"...
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 03:33 |
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:If you don't mind - Why do you consider Huckabee to be in the sane pile? Sane doesn't mean "not evil".
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:That's something I've been wondering as an outsider, why does the Republican Party always put forward such embarrassing clowns? It seems like up until a few decades ago they were a more serious, respectable party. Even with Nixon I get the impression that he was knowledgeable and committed in his own way, though he might have been a bastard. Then Reagan got elected and it just kept getting worse and worse from that point. What happened? Who are these people talking about Harry Potter being satanic and 'legitimate rape' like it's the seventeenth century? They're insane and they're turning the US into a Third World laughing stock in the eyes of the rest of the developed world. I don't know how it's even possible for that kind of political regression to occur, it seems to flout what you'd normally expect. Here's a really good article and audio clip about the rise of evangelical capitalism that we see in the Tea Party today. http://www.npr.org/2015/03/30/396365659/how-one-nation-didnt-become-under-god-until-the-50s-religious-revival NPR posted:The New Deal had passed a large number of measures that were regulating business in some ways for the first time, and it [had] empowered labor unions and given them a voice in the affairs of business. Corporate leaders resented both of these moves and so they launched a massive campaign of public relations designed to sell the values of free enterprise. The problem was that their naked appeals to the merits of capitalism were largely dismissed by the public.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:If you don't mind - Why do you consider Huckabee to be in the sane pile? everything Huckabee does is with the mindset of making him money and getting screen time for himself, he is very sane
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Joementum posted:I'd add in Tim Pawlenty, Gary Johnson, and Rick Santorum. I'll grant you the first two, but Santorum? What makes you put him in the same category as Romney, Huntsman, Pawlenty and Johnson?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Montasque posted:Speaking of the MINORITY vote... R-republicans are racists guys. You hear that blacks & hispanics? You b-better not vote Trump ----------------
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:If you don't mind - Why do you consider Huckabee to be in the sane pile? richardfun posted:I'll grant you the first two, but Santorum? What makes you put him in the same category as Romney, Huntsman, Pawlenty and Johnson? Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum have truly vile ideaologies, but they honestly believe that poo poo and represent large groups of people who feel the same way. It's not like Trump or Cruz where they're putting on a show. Or like Cain or Bachmann who were just idiots. And, yes, being elected a Senator or Governor makes you a serious candidate for President.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
Narciss posted:R-republicans are racists guys. You hear that blacks & hispanics? You b-better not vote Trump 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Joementum posted:McCotter wrote a spy novel starring himself and his office staff rather than campaign.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Narciss posted:R-republicans are racists guys. You hear that blacks & hispanics? You b-better not vote Trump 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
Joementum posted:And, yes, being elected a Senator or Governor makes you a serious candidate for President. Something about this claim chafes me, but I can't seem to get a good metric on what I don't fully accept about it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum have truly vile ideaologies, but they honestly believe that poo poo and represent large groups of people who feel the same way. It's not like Trump or Cruz where they're putting on a show. Or like Cain or Bachmann who were just idiots. Where do you stand on Jindal, in that case?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
Vienna Circlejerk posted:Something about this claim chafes me, but I can't seem to get a good metric on what I don't fully accept about it. Are you suggesting that some governors might pale in comparison to others when it comes to seriousness?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
Politics Junkie considers non-politicians nonserious candidates, tens of RSF posters shocked
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
Gregoriev posted:Where do you stand on Jindal, in that case? He's not going to win* the nomination (Huckabee and Santorum won't either), but he's a serious candidate. His ideas are in line with those of the Republican party and its voters. (Unlike Trump, there is a small chance that any of those three could win, but they almost certainly won't.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Even Ronnie Reagan (PBUH) had the good sense to run for governor first, I don't see why Republicans think going straight from reality tv star to President is gonna work out great.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Vienna Circlejerk posted:Something about this claim chafes me, but I can't seem to get a good metric on what I don't fully accept about it. Well, there are always exceptions to the rule, like Paul LePage would not be a serious Presidential candidate, but it's a good rule of thumb.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Well, there are always exceptions to the rule, like Paul LePage would not be a serious Presidential candidate, but it's a good rule of thumb. For the record, Rhode Island doesn't count as a core constituent state for the Democrats, just a safe state, so it's another way Sanders is breaking the rules. JT Jag fucked around with this message at 19:07 on Sep 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
misdirectomy posted:Even Ronnie Reagan (PBUH) had the good sense to run for governor first, I don't see why Republicans think going straight from reality tv star to President is gonna work out great. Well, if Trump/Sanders win their nominations, it would work out great (even if they don't win the GE), in the sense that it proves that the party is beholden to its voters' whims, instead of the other way around. In this sense republican voters are less deciding on who is most likely to win the GE (nobody in the repub primary), and more deciding on breaking the notion that they need to lubricate the Politics Hole and slobber anyone the Kochs puts on a podium. This is an overall good for anyone interested in political parties that best represent their voters, even if you don't necessarily agree with the voters' choice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
Joementum posted:He's not going to win* the nomination (Huckabee and Santorum won't either), but he's a serious candidate. His ideas are in line with those of the Republican party and its voters. One of the many, many things that amaze me this election is how many serious election machines are presenting candidates that do not seem serious in the least. Like, Jindal has a logo and everything, but his campaign is DOA. Bush has this huge infrastructure donation pool and he can barely answer a handful of questions from the press without taking multiple takes to the face like a 1920s comedy routine. At some point we need a better word than "serious" because it's very difficult to see any of these jokers as that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Saying that being a Senator or Governor makes you a serious candidate for President sounds weird because every single candidate with those qualifications is in one way or another a Stupid rear end in a top hat
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Vienna Circlejerk posted:Something about this claim chafes me, but I can't seem to get a good metric on what I don't fully accept about it. Well, assuming they got elected and served the full term, they have years of executive or high level legislative experience. If you're looking at a resume for the Presidency, that's the sort of thing you would expect. While they might be madmen with little to no actual chance of winning, they do potentially have the professional qualifications to do the job, and if the nature of Republican politics didn't encourage them to embrace the madness and go whole hog on theocratic tyranny, they might be professional enough to do well by the American people. As it stands, they're all acting like lunatics because that's pretty much what's expected of them. Unless Kasich somehow gets the nod, I expect whomever wins the nomination to pull towards the center, to try and express a certain amount of temperance of deference to the government process, even if just to depress Democratic turnout by not seeming like a proto-supervillain. I'd expect Kasich to pull a McCain and go right, since he seems to be trying to be the not insane guy right now, so he'd have to try and motivate the freepers in the general. Edit: Trump does what Trump wills. I have no idea how or if his rhetoric would change in the general election.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
CheesyDog posted:Saying that being a Senator or Governor makes you a serious candidate for President sounds weird because every single candidate with those qualifications is in one way or another a Stupid rear end in a top hat It's a pretty smart way to ensure your establishment's longevity, by convincing your voters that it's impossible to successfully nominate any "nonserious" (aka: already involved in the politics game) republican candidates, when in reality it's pretty simple: vote for whoever you want, serious or nonserious, then throw a shitfit if the establishment tries to gently caress with delegates. Republicans have learned this and will vote en masse for Trump, Labour has learned this and has already voted en masse for Corbyn, and hopefully Democrats learn this as well. If there's anything I'd like people the world over to take away from politics by the end of 2015, it should be how useless all these crony-favoring hoops are to the actual election process. Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Sep 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
The hill is saying Trump beats Hillary in head to head polling. Let's loving do this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Well, there are always exceptions to the rule, like Paul LePage would not be a serious Presidential candidate, but it's a good rule of thumb. All the same, someone like Lindsey Graham, who has all the right credentials and yet is openly despised by his party (his approval/disapproval is -30 among Republicans and consistently polls 0% and has no support even in the state he's represented for over a decade) strikes me as far more of a vanity candidate than, say, Carson. Carson is at least the evangelical factional candidate (a powerful role held by 2012 runner-up Santorum and 2008 runner-up Huckabee). Lindsey Graham represents literally no one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:Sorry, what? Trump will drag us, kicking and screaming, onto the Golden Path, where we will enjoy Trump's Peace for five thousand years. We detest him and yet Trump himself still loves humanity, even though he is no longer a part of it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
NutritiousSnack posted:The hill is saying Trump beats Hillary in head to head polling.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:People are going to go "hey did you hear about this one poll where Trump is beating the Democrats head to head" for the next three months, as 30 polls that say the opposite come and go On the flip-side, every rep. primary poll tends to show the republican choices nosediving against the democrat choices, because the republican primary favors pandering to the republican base which is objectively smaller than the democrat base. The polls will likely be more interesting when the GE starts and the republican nominald trump pivots to the obvious moderate openings he opened in the primary.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:At some point we need a better word than "serious" because it's very difficult to see any of these jokers as that. Other posters meant "serious" as in "seriously thinking of running for president, not like Jindal or Perry" That's why putting Santorum in the serious category might have sounded weird at first.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:All the same, someone like Lindsey Graham, who has all the right credentials and yet is openly despised by his party (his approval/disapproval is -30 among Republicans and consistently polls 0% and has no support even in the state he's represented for over a decade) strikes me as far more of a vanity candidate than, say, Carson. Carson is at least the evangelical factional candidate (a powerful role held by 2012 runner-up Santorum and 2008 runner-up Huckabee). Lindsey Graham represents literally no one. Graham represents the war hawks, a powerful constituent group in the Republican party.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
The confusing part is the point where you consider Walker "orgasms on-stage at the idea of war, always looks like an idiot, gives garbage answers" more serious than Trump "energizes the republican base and the building across the street, dominates every debate despite strutting through minefields" because one is being paid by Koch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:All the same, someone like Lindsey Graham, who has all the right credentials and yet is openly despised by his party (his approval/disapproval is -30 among Republicans and consistently polls 0% and has no support even in the state he's represented for over a decade) strikes me as far more of a vanity candidate than, say, Carson. Carson is at least the evangelical factional candidate (a powerful role held by 2012 runner-up Santorum and 2008 runner-up Huckabee). Lindsey Graham represents literally no one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
NotJesus posted:Joe meant "serious" as in "serious person, not like those clowns Trump and Herman Cain" Correct. I was trying to make a distinction between candidates like Mitt Romney and Herman Cain. Rick Santorum will never win the nomination of the Republican party, but that doesn't make him a joke candidate like Cain, Bachmann, Carson, or Trump.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:The confusing part is the point where you consider Walker "orgasms on-stage at the idea of war, always looks like an idiot, gives garbage answers" more serious than Trump "energizes the republican base and the building across the street, dominates every debate despite strutting through minefields" because one is being paid by Koch. Not because he's getting paid by the Kochs. Because he got people to vote for him and was elected to a political office. Trump's never done that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
If he wasn't so self-centered I'd hope Trump's entire campaign was a Penn Gilette from Alpha House stunt. "Mr. Trump, congratulations on winning the Republican nomination. Your polls went up 3% last week. Thoughts?" "Did it? Really? Hah. I was on vacation last week. I didn't do anything and the numbers still went up." Trump stares straight into the camera. "America, I'm a former reality show star. I called Mexicans rapists. I insulted John McCain's war record. And now I'm the Republican nominee for this Presidential election. I haven't even held political office. How am I qualified to be President? This is a joke. This whole political process is a joke. You need to reassess your sad lives. What the hell were you thinking? Whatever, I'm done, enjoy the White House Hillary." Trump grins bemusedly, shakes his head and storms offstage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:People are going to go "hey did you hear about this one poll where Trump is beating the Democrats head to head" for the next three months, as 30 polls that say the opposite come and go I don't care about the actual facts, I just want the faint chance of it coming true because it's hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Vienna Circlejerk posted:Something about this claim chafes me, but I can't seem to get a good metric on what I don't fully accept about it. I seem to be the only person who actually got your joke. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Graham represents the war hawks, a powerful constituent group in the Republican party. I'd consider war hawk a second order classification, though. People are hawks because of 'X' belief, not for the sake of being a hawk itself, and those beliefs are all better served by other candidates at the moment who are all equally willing to tell other people to kill for them. Military industrial is more a lobbying group than a constituency
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:This statement is as true as it is irrelevant to the fact that there are plenty of Democrats that still don't like Hispanics, and if they all switched to voting Republican the Democrats would have a bad time of it. Democrats are already only winning the minority of white votes in presidential elections, presumably due to the definite switch in the parties platform endorsed xenophobia starting in the 50s and 60s. I am definitely not saying that every Democratic voter likes Hispanic, but the original word you used was "hate". That implies a strong enough emotion to override any others, and I have trouble seeing how any voter that outright hated Hispanics would then go out to vote for a party that would seek to benefit them. Outside of truly, truly low info voters. But I'd love to see the data on that, if you got any. I've only found stuff on the racism gap between democratic and republican voters regarding blacks: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-white-republicans-more-racist-than-white-democrats/
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 03:33 |
|
|
Piquai Souban posted:He can count on the vote of less than 10 satisfied Trump University students, assuming the rest don't vote. Donald Trump is completely ruining the reputation of get-rich-quick scams. Somebody alert Robert Kiyosaki and Armando Montelongo!
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 19:44
|
|
