|
Kro-Bar posted:I thought I saw someone ask him that and his response was some wishy-washy "I'll get it done because I'll be riding into the office on a huge mandate, blah blah blah" thing. His plan is literally "Convince everyone in the nation to agree with me and vote for my policies" He's a political genius e: like seriously why don't any of the other politicians try that Bob Ojeda fucked around with this message at 21:50 on Sep 8, 2015 |
#
¿
Sep 8, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 17:14 |
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:So as Jeb Bush starts attacking Trump for not being conservative for wanting to raise taxes on the rich, he had a clip from his extended interview with Colbert last night start to go viral on the right. The reason it is being passed around to much anger is he talks about gun control in Florida, addressing gun control nationwide, and comments on how he would deal with NRA resistance to mental health checks. His responses were completely empty claptrap, but it is still pissing people off. Maybe Jeb just hasn't paid any attention to anything that's happened with the Republican Party since his brother left office
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:Everyone keeps saying Jeb! is bad at politics, but I'm not sure I see it. To a Democrat or non-vile person he might be saying some rather insensitive things but I don't see how it's any worse than what Trump or Cruz is doing. It's not a question of insensitivity. The problem is that he comes off as awkward and distant, that he doesn't seem to have a coherent image or policy plan, and that he's really bad at framing proposals and arguments in ways that appeal to voters. Whether or not what Trump and Cruz say is worse, they're better at saying it. Take the anchor babies thing. The problem with that from a campaign perspective wasn't that it was racially insensitive - I mean, it was racially insensitive and a bad thing to say, but Trump has had success saying things that are equally objectionable. The problem from a political perspective is that it didn't make any loving sense for Jeb Bush to say it. It fucks up his image as someone who's moderate on immigration and electable, and to no benefit whatsoever because it's not going to convince anyone on the right that he's an immigration hardliner. It also comes off as an unplanned gaffe because it fits in so poorly with the rest of his rhetoric and because he fumbled apologizing for it. And that's the kind of thing that he does constantly. Also the guy just comes across as an awkward putz. Fried Chicken posted:Candidates drop when they I could see that happening. The Republican establishment isn't stupid - if Bush's numbers continue to be so low, I think his support is going to dry up, and at a certain point I think some Republican bigwigs are going to start having some words with him. They might not be able to force him to drop but they can certainly make his life harder. But I think it'll take a good long time for that to happen.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
zoux posted:I don't think Sam Rayburn could run this caucus. The real question is, could Thomas Brackett Reed?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Maarek posted:You need to look at the election through the eyes of someone who literally only cares about the election as a vehicle to get SCOTUS appointees to fight for their side on the social wedge issues that dominate our politics. Just as there are tons of diehard GOP supporters who do not give a gently caress about cutting capital gains taxes but will vote for that guy as long as he gives them a modern day Robert Bork to outlaw abortions, there are plenty of democrats who have very little interest in the (theoretical) economic platform of the party. What Sanders is saying does not resonate with them and they cannot imagine it broadly appealing to voters who they assume, like them, will think he is too far left to win the election. Ultimately what you are missing is the disconnect between what they say they support in regards to poverty and inequality and what they actually care about. Well there's a bunch of stuff in this post but one point I want to make is that getting SCOTUS appointments also matters for political & economic issues, not just for social issues. To take an obvious example, getting Citizens United overturned would be a good, important first step in limiting the influence of wealth in our politics and making it easier to promote policies and candidates with the kind of economic platform you're endorsing. Also social issues are important in themselves Also thinking that Bernie Sanders has issues with electability does not mean that you are radically uninterested in economic policy, jeez dude. Bob Ojeda fucked around with this message at 16:48 on Sep 14, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
Maarek posted:I think this is the most honest and apt description of this race I've ever seen. Don't Rock The Boat 2016. Sometimes if you rock the boat you fall out and drown. I don't like boats, is what I'm saying here. e: D_I posted:Check the demographics and electoral college, I don't believe any republican has an actual chance. I don't think this is actually well-founded. There's a slight Democratic advantage in that a close race would probably go to the Democratic candidate. But if the Republicans win the popular vote by any significant margin, they'll probably win the election. And I don't think we've reached the point where demographics make that impossible. I'm also not sure that we can count on the Republicans nominating Walker or Bush or Trump to bail us out. At the very least it's probably not best to rely on it. Bob Ojeda fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Sep 14, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Maarek posted:This is what I mean about the blocs within the party. There are people who think things are pretty much ok but need some tweaking and they are never going to get behind Sanders and I don't begrudge them for it. Well, to make an actual answer, I'd like to see some more change in the party. But I also view the stakes as really, really high. I mean, Scott Walker just announced his plan to eviscerate the unions. While I don't think he'll be the nominee, that's the kind of thing a Republican President would want to do. Or start another war in the Middle East, or appoint a SC Justice who would roll back Roe and entrench Citizens United. So I'd very much like to avoid those things, even if it means electing a president that I think is deeply imperfect. And I also think there are ways to move the party to the left outside of the presidential primary. So supporting Bernie feels like a much less apocalyptic concern to me. Of course there's still a good chance I'll vote for him in the primary. But his electability is an issue. JT Jag posted:This presupposes that Hillary is more electable. I'd agree that she was, if: I agree that this is a concern but I'm going to give it a couple more months before I start freaking out about it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:They've been calling Barack Obama a socialist for eight years. The word is starting to lose the impact it once had. I'm not sure this is necessarily true. It's one thing to call someone a socialist, but it might be a little more impactful when the person agrees with it, and it's not just insane hyperbolic partisan fearmongering. It might be true, but it also might not. Don't think we really know.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
JT Jag posted:"Sanders is just being honest, good on him, I can respect that. That Hillary is a socialist too but she's scared to be honest about it." Do you have any evidence that's what people actually think, beyond Republicans using it as an attack on Hillary GlyphGryph posted:Yeah, there is a difference - it's not nearly as sticky when its true, because pointing out things someone gladly admits to just hands them control over shaping the narrative. Obama being a Kenyan Muslim was sticky because it was a big fight and became an ideological issue and mark of tribal membership. As long as the American people still hate the idea of socialism, or more specifically the word 'socialist', I think it would be an issue whether or not he admits it. There's only so much you can do to control the narrative at that point. I have no idea whether or not that's true, and I haven't really looked into it, but it does seem to be the conventional wisdom.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Rah! posted:Don't you get it? The candidate who has a record of supporting retarded loving garbage, who is in the pocket of wall street, who has a problem with being perceived as untrustworthy by Americans, who is losing support (while the other guy gains it), is clearly the best choice for running America! I hate to point this out, but the Democratic primary process does not actually decide who is going to run America
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
KittenofDoom posted:I'm sincerely asking this, but why does everyone assume that Bernie Sanders can't/won't win the nomination? I'm stuck in a liberal bubble in my city so my information feed is limited. Hillary Clinton has infinitely more institutional support, much more money, and is both familiar to and liked by most rank-and-file Democrats. That's a pretty difficult candidate to beat. Also Bernie Sanders does not look anything like what you would expect a typical candidate for the Democratic nomination to look like, and in fact has not been in the Democratic Party for most of his career. I don't think either of those are bad things, to be clear
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2015 07:42
|
|
|
Riosan posted:Funny you should mention that. That is an extremely unchill thing to say imo, this person does not deserve to be a leader in Surf City
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Cubanos are classic and delicious. Just like Marco Rubio imho
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
Couldn't watch the debate but re: Kasich I think he is probably, out of the remaining establishment candidates, the most competent and likable as a campaigner. And being the best establishment candidate isn't the worst place to be in a Republican primary.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2015 07:29
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:Also, a congressman that nobody cares about is boycotting Pope Francis's visit to Washington next week and calling his colleagues to do the same. Dude also claims to be a Catholic. So basically, he's a loving dickhead.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
Nolanar posted:This should happen. It's been too long since we've had an antipope. It seems fitting to have Santorum become Ameripope Peter II. There have actually been a number of anti-popes over the last 50 years or so. Mostly coming out of the sedevacantist movement which basically argued that Vatican II was heresy, therefore all popes since Vatican II have been heretics, therefore there haven't been any true popes and the papacy is vacant. And then the next step beyond that is to go ahead and elect a new pope to fill their shoes. It's just that almost no one actually cares about them so they mostly get ignored outside of like a handful of people in Kansas or whatever
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Citation seriously needed. But what about all the poor junior product managers making $500k a year in Silicon Valley
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:This is the Steve Sailer/Sean Trende mantra, that the lost because of "missing white voters" so pushing to really chase and get out the white vote will win. Hey, just curious, do you have any links or sources on this? The part about it being completely incorrect; I believe that's what Sailer says. not because I disagree with you, it's just be nice to have a more in-depth analysis
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113940/missing-white-voters-they-exist-not-enough-gop Thanks man
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:The trial of the former CEO of Massey Energy Co. is set to begin. Massey was the company that had the WV mine explosion in 2010 that killed 29 people. The CEO faces up to 30 years in prison. His defense team includes the lawyer that got pervert frenchman DSK off of his sexual assault charges. Oh, hey, I was just wondering what had happened with this. I hope they execute the fucker.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:In a thread about corrupted politics and political machinery people are aghast at the slightest accusation that democrats could possibly use their organization to promote their preferred candidate. The DNC and DWS are bastions of political purity. the DNC is definitely using its organization to help Clinton, and that is probably why there are so few debates. At the same time, the selection of the dates is not a dastardly plot to throw the NY primary to Clinton, and saying that we need to give Robby Wells and Willie Wilson a shot in the debates is extremely laffo
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 16:51
|
|
|
We need a more democratic process! Don't shut out Jeff Boss! Jet fuel can't melt steel beams! - Dalael
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Like I feel like I've made this point already, but I really want to emphasize here that Dalael tried to say we should have more debates by counting Harry Braun, Jeff Boss, Robby Wells, Willie Wilson, and Laurence Lessig as important candidates, and it's extremely funny to me
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
AfroLine posted:I got a ride home from one of the Republican girls in my sociology class (the nicer one) and we started talking about depression and stuff because she had a bad day and I asked her about it and then we got into religion bc she's a Christian and … She just sounds very on the fence about a lot of things and I want to help her, I gave her my number and told her to call me any time That's really good, AfroLine. I'm glad about this.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 17:14 |
|
|
alcyon posted:Just curious. Is the Trias politica not a cornerstone of the US system? It is on the federal level, but not necessarily on the state level.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 00:06
|
|