Necc0 posted:

I'm guessing you haven't seen the original


The perfectly placed Dean Scream is what sealed it imo

Slate Action posted:

Wisconsin went for Obama by 9.5% in 2012, Republicans aren't winning it in 2016 no matter who they run, barring a landslide.

MC Nietzche posted:

The only reason I think Cruz legit has a shot is because this is not 2012, the GOP does not have a clear 2nd place person to hand the nomination to the way they did with Romney. At best they have an establishment candidate in Jeb. However, even in 2012 Romney did not sweep the board, he won it through painful attrition. What I am afraid of is that Cruz actually manages to knock out a few of the challengers before the primary proper starts, and he actually manages to energize the base. He wins a couple of primaries, people weak on Bush move to join the Cruzmentum, and he wins the long game.

Was the Imagine speech ridiculous? To a leftist sure, but we're not who he's talking to, he's going to run a strong, sober God, Guns and Death to Taxes campaign, and he's going to be strong in the debates. Even with his strengths, he has a long road to walk and it is a very long shot, but I don't think it's impossible for him to clinch it if a few things go right for him and a few things go wrong for Bush. Cruz is not Santorum, or To my mind he's a way tougher and smarter contender than either of those guys, and Bush is going to have to battle the same anti-establishment forces that made those rear end-clowns frontrunners against Romney.

MC Nietzche posted:

Yeah, my analysis is completely discounting Perry because I fully expect him to embarrass himself once again in the debates. I mean, Perry was a lightweight even among the relatively fluffy field of 2012, which does not bode well for him.

As for Walker, I think that people in DnD tend to oversell him at Cruz's expense. The Koch's, above all else, want to avoid being humiliated. In my opinion, that's why they are spending 800 million dollars to basically start their own party. If they see their boy Walker get pantsed on national television, which I fully expect Cruz to do, I think that's going to take a lot of shine off the apple and all of a sudden that money is going to be going to Cruz. The Koch's could also double down on Walker, and try to drown Cruz in a supertanker of money, but the path of least resistance might just be shoving Walker down the memory hole.

uncurable mlady posted:

lol fuckin ted cruz will be lucky to make it to iowa if he's announcing in march, dude gotta be broke as a joke and unless he's planning to santorum it across Iowa I don't really see him having enough cash to really stay in the mix

SNAKES N CAKES posted:

There's your first establishment endorsement:

Malloreon posted:

Bleed American actually came out in mid July 2001. I know cause I bought it on release day. It was renamed "Jimmy Eat World" and re-released in October 2001.

Note that this album did actually come out on September 4th, 2001:

Those Who Tell The Truth Shall Die, Those Who Tell the Truth Shall Live Forever
by noted terrorists Explosions in the Sky.

The liner notes contain the words "This plane will crash tomorrow" leading to people misremembering the release date as 9/10/2001 and forcing the band to explain their artistic choices.

quote:

The string of coincidences surrounding the band, its artwork, and the destruction of the World Trade Center was surreal, and they came back to haunt them on the band's first European tour that December. James, the group's bassist, was detained at the Amsterdam airport, told he was a threat to security. James lied about the band's name until the officer asked why "this plane will crash tomorrow" was written on his guitar. Somehow, a copy of the disc got the band past that sticky hurdle.

Timby posted:

Secret Service protection only applies to "major" presidential / vice presidential candidates beginning four months from the general election. (So, basically after the national conventions.)

Quidam Viator posted:

Sorry for not getting this, but what specifically are those two maps meant to show?

Lockback posted:

Do undecided voters care about Israel? Does US-Israeli relations get people to the polls? I get that its a vector to attack Obama on, but it seems like kind of a weak thing to attack a candidate on during a presidential debate. Pumping up Israel seems like what you do when you are fundraising but its not really something you make an issue.

Joementum posted:

New CBS News poll.





The number of Republicans who know who Lindsey Graham is and hate him continues to surprise me. The negatives for Christie do not.

Sir Tonk posted:

I think we know where Drudge has decide to hitch his wagon.

Fried Chicken posted:

Reminder: "President Rand Paul" is an anagram of "A ripened turd's plan"

ReidRansom posted:

Perry has pending criminal charges still. Keep that in mind.

PupsOfWar posted:

Sandoval or Martinez would be good picks (not sure how that would jive with sandoval's presumed senate run)

Moderate mexican-americans with penetration in hispanic communities (the ones that matter, not elderly cubans), proven track-records of popular governance and cross-demographic appeal.

Gyges posted:

At this point Republicans are going to have to do a lot more than just put a Martinez on the ticket to net the Hispanic vote. poo poo, putting a Rubio on the ticket probably isn't even going to net the Cuban subsection.

Raskolnikov38 posted:

This now raises the question if the antiquities act is so worded that the president could make the entire planet a national park

Joementum posted:

The big mystery of the Rubio announcement is if he's going to stay in his Senate race. He said this (jokingly) during his NRA speech two days ago, "In just three days in Miami I will announce whether I will run for president, for re-election in the Senate or commissioner of the National Football League."

Nietzschean posted:

If the next president is smart, then something Obama did will be blamed and it will be repeated enough that it becomes true whether it is or not.

computer parts posted:

Yes, the GOP is well known for all standing together these days.

Frijolero posted:

I'll be voting Sanders in primary and Jill Stein in the final.

Shear Modulus posted:

There were much better protest-vote candidates in 2012 than Stein. Anderson, for example.

Chamale posted:

Agreed. I voted for them in 2012 despite disagreeing with their anti-nuclear energy stance. But since Stein is also anti-vaccine, I'm going to find another hopeless third party to vote for this time. Should I choose the Socialist Party or the Party for Socialism?

Hollismason posted:

Yeah if you want to see the Civil Rights act completely dismantled vote 3rd party, let a Republican become president and you count the minutes until we're hosed.

Getting a Republican President would be the worst possible thing especially if Walker is VP and Cruz is still running wild .

I don't vote Democrat because I agree with the Democrats, I vote Democrat because I am terrified of Republicans at this point.

Juvenalian.Satyr posted:

I don't think illegal abortion is on the table

Spaceman Future! posted:

How would that matter to any GOP candidate? Its not an issue this cycle

Titus Sardonicus posted:

Are people still arguing that the charges against Perry are purely political? Has he been officially indicted? I've only been following this story sort of obliquely.

Hellblazer187 posted:

I know people in programming who lament bringing in too many Indians to do for half the pay a college graduate from the United States would expect. I'd rather bring them here to work (and spend). An Indian in America earning half is better than an Indian in India earning a tenth and spending it all there.

Hellblazer187 posted:

That's missing the point. Of course I'd rather have American graduates earning good salaries. When the two economically feasible alternatives for a large tech company are "bring Indians in, pay half" or "send work to India, pay less than half," everyone is better off when they choose the first of those options. If there's a way to change things such that a third economically feasible option includes "pay American graduates full amount" then I would love to see those changes made. However, if the only change we make is to limit skilled worker visas, we now make it much more attractive for the company to ship the entire job to India if the work can be done remotely (as a lot of technical work can).

Joementum posted:

That's also a ludicrous position, unsupported by evidence.

quote:

In the survey, 61 percent said "honest" describes her only slightly well or not at all.

Nearly four in 10 Democrats, and more than six in 10 independents agreed that "honest" was not the best word for her.

...

Among Democrats, only 34 percent said they were excited by her candidacy while 36 percent described themselves as merely satisfied. Another 19 percent said they were neutral, and 9 percent were disappointed or angry.

Nessus posted:

I wonder who the new Perfect Liberal will be after Bernie eventually dies (I wish him no ill but we are all mortal) or if it will just become "We lost the last good man, sob"

icantfindaname posted:

So who else is looking forwards to 19 more months of slapfighting over strategic voting?

steinrokkan posted:

How can Carly Fiorina even consider running, her only achievement is being repeatedly named as the worst CEO of a major corporation.

Tatum Girlparts posted:

Remember when we thought this election would be more toned down?


Yea basically, she brings literally nothing but ways for the right to go 'ah HA we have a woman too'.

Sir Tonk posted:

Cubey posted:

The Greens are staunchly anti-nuclear and they are also supporters of various forms of woo like homeopathy and are firmly against GMOs and water flouridation.

By all means if someone agrees with these policies, then that person should go and vote for them (it's their right after all), but the Greens and their supporters are certainly worthy of criticism.

PupsOfWar posted:

if you want to Protest Vote, you can easily find some minor socialist party with social-justice/economic equality positioning that's as good or better than the Greens', but without all the weird paraphenalia inserted into the Green platform to placate elderly hippies.

Cubey posted:

You are right that there is no perfect candidate, but there are better options for those who wish to vote for a leftist candidate as well.; for example, the Democratic Socialists of America is a party that exists and that advocates a similar economic ideology without the baggage of new-age crazy to go along with it.

eternalname posted:

Any candidate is going to have views I disagree with, but when large portions of their platform betray a total lack of common sense, it's different than a difference of opinion on a policy issue.

eternalname posted:

Correct me if I'm wrong about any of these, but if I met anyone in real life who believed in homeopathy and was against flouride and vaccinations, I wouldn't trust them in any position of authority regardless of whatever other beliefs they held.

My Imaginary GF posted:

One of the key merits: Is this candidate viable?

Hint: Usually, a maximum of two per election applies.