|
Repeat after me. The White House switches parties every eight years. That's pretty much it.
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 11:41 |
|
|
And Carter. There are exceptions but that is pretty much the pattern.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
He would make his wig a Senator.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:what was the email thing anyway the post kept running news articles on how hitlery's emails were going to have grave consequences for her presidency but they never even hinted at what was in the emails or whatever and I wasn't going to go do research because gently caress the post That was a story literally only the media cared about. Slow news cycle I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
One moderately serious question though. A number of news sources have claimed that secret service or White House officials have documented more threats to Obama per day/per month than during other presidential administrations. There is of course a question as to the exact difference in magnitude or if the difference even really exists, but for the sake of the argument lets assume that the Obama administration has had more death threats per unit time than other administrations. http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...86a0_story.html quote:Brian Leary, a spokesman for the Secret Service, said the agency has adjusted to the fact that most threats against the president now occur online. Lets assume Hilary wins the White House. Would a Hilary Presidency have more or less death threats per unit time than the Obama Presidency? Ie would a Hilary Presidency shake the crazy tree and attract the focus/attention/ire of the mentally unstable? (and no not Republicans, dipshits; schizophrenics and the like)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Harald posted:the population of the US is constantly growing. Assuming that the fraction of crazy fuckballs in the US population doesn't change, that means the number of people who would write death threats to the Prez is also increasing every year. That is a really good point, so lets say in both the Obama and hypothetical Hillary administration the frequency of threats are normalized for respective population size.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
While true that Hillary's campaign functionaries are militant, functionally how is the 2016 Democratic Primary really any different from the Republican Primary that anointed George W. Bush. In both cases, the nominees were a foregone conclusion. The Republican primary was just more entertaining because you had idiots coming out of the woodwork who wanted to run for their party's nomination to increase their "standing" in the party or because they were delusional narcissists who truly thought they could win. Also I've come to the conclusion that for some people, running for President is a lifelong goal. I don't think they really expect to win, it just a thing some rich people do like climbing Mount Everest. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2015 13:20
|
|
|
At this point I'll put my money on Republican for the next 8 years purely because I think the every eight years white house flip hypothesis has some merit; but I reserve the right to change my guess when the Republican Primary is concluded. I haven't been looking but I don't see a dark horse break out republican and for the last ... eh 24 years there has been no strong republican candidate (for some value of "strong"). Yes this means I think George W Bush's election success was primarily name recognition and due to the American voters flipping the white house every 8 years rather than any intrinsic quality George W Bush had. Place your bets everyone, lets see where the ball lands this time.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 11:41 |
|
|
Idiot Kicker posted:I don't have or want the cable news channels, but how is everyone reacting to the Cuba stuff? I know the right loves to pretend it's 1959 so I bet it's pretty funny Conan O'brien already did a show from Cuba. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjfogiltO80
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2015 15:52
|
|