|
Uncle Wemus posted:Someone slap Joe's hand away and start jabbing him back. Why does he touch people? Because he's a bully, just like Trump. It is a physical challenge, an intimidation tactic. You are aggressively touching someone else because you are, in essence, daring them to react. They may back down, in which case the aggressor seen as powerful. They can't poke back, because he's a loving vice president and you'll get shot. So the only play is to either call it out or ignore it. It might work well when you're young, but at his age, nobody is intimidated by an old dude who can't remember his boss's name.
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2020 20:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 19:16 |
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:I get that it's easier to just attack imaginary arguments but you can at least try to pretend you aren't just trolling. He absolutely should be on the debate stage so that he can get publicly humiliated by Sanders just like Delaney. He should not be on the debate stage because he bought enough commercials.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2020 21:56
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:If Michelle Obama was running for president, yes? That seems to be the key difference here? Bloomberg isn't running in Nevada, and that's where the stage is. In fact, he's not trying to win at all. He's trying to strip enough delegates from Bernie to force a contested convention.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2020 22:10
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:
No, see, it should be this esoteric, completely made up set of parameters that specifically exist so that I can justify having Bloomberg on stage. That way, he can continue to pollute our democracy with endless bags of money because corruption is legal and good.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2020 22:12
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I love how the unique donor requirement is somehow so absurdly easy to meet that it's just a useless measure of how much cash you give to Facebook, yet so onerous that it's unfair to a poor struggling work-a-day billionaire like Bloomberg. Sir, are you suggesting that a rule is being written specifically to empower the ultrawealthy? How obscene! Such a thing never has, and never will happen. Rules, laws, regulations; these are divine principles, bestowed upon us by the great enlightenment brain-gods of rationalism and their prophets the Founding Fathers. The constitution cannot fail, the tyranny of the majority is real, and checks and balances WORK.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2020 22:56
|
|
|
snorch posted:IMHO campaign funds should be ok to buy pizza for the proletariat. Pizza is the most communist food. It comes evenly divided to be distributed as equally as possible among the people.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2020 01:03
|
|
|
Gyges posted:It would be kind of funny if Bloomberg takes the debate stage and immediately pulls a Steyer, agreeing with Bernie and desperately trying to be his friend. On the other hand, you probably do have to actually cut at least one billionare as an example to the others. Let that happen on camera, while Bernie warns the 1% "It could happen to YOU!" I cannot get out of my head that Steyer spent the first few debates talking about getting money out of politics as a billionaire who's only claim to being on the drat stage was using money on a political campaign. He has to be grifting, right? Nobody can be that clueless.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2020 01:49
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:I have more info from r/politics on that politico article: This could be a toe in the water. They wanted to see the public's reaction as to what would happen if they did this, so they leaked something to politico to stir the pot. First, they suggest the idea to gauge a reaction. Then, the media networks talk about it for days, normalizing the end of our democracy. After making it palatable through exposure, someone popular but seemingly impartial, like Obama, comes out and says he's wondering if changing the rules in the middle of an election would protect America, Jesus, and 9/11. Then Perez pitches it. At this point, if CNN and MSNBC have done their job, it seems reasonable, and soon our delusion of a democracy is over. However, the test must have failed. The retraction was immediate. I spoke to my boomer dad, and the thought just made him sad. He didn't even want to consider the possibility that the democrats could ever do something so terrible. People like me might leave the party entirely, and people like my dad would be so horrified they'd stop voting. People both ITT and otherwise have said it here, but the establishment just discovered that if they stole the nomination again it would end the party. Does that mean it is us, the voters who have power? And do we have this power by refusing to exercise it? Edit: I am severely intoxicated, so this may be nonsense. Cpt_Obvious fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Feb 1, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2020 04:25
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, don't dox my 20s. I cannot describe the amount of outright brainwashing that many Jews, myself included, undergo at a very young age to support Israel. In kindergarten, we were taught to sing the Israeli national anthem in Hebrew. Note that since nobody knew any actual Hebrew yet, we really learned several minutes of chanting a bunch of precise and weird syllables which we assumed meant something. To this day, I still have no loving clue what I was saying, but I still remember many of those seemingly random noises.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 00:08
|
|
|
Is anyone watching the Des Moines Register poll that's being streamed at 8 CST? https://features.desmoinesregister.com/news/politics/iowa-caucuses/final-iowa-poll-results/
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 02:14
|
|
|
Thoguh posted:No because someone will post the poll results on Twitter half a second after they are released so I'm not gonna watch an indeterminate amount of fart huffing first. Personally, I want to see Chris Cuomo eat a pile of poo poo live on television, but that's my prerogative.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 02:19
|
|
|
Two possibilities: 1. Their servers got swamped and it crashed. 2. They don't believe the numbers so they are double checking them, which may result in: 2A. Double checking the numbers and releasing them late. Possibly with biased language. 2B. "Adjusting the Poll" Altering the parameters of the poll so that it changes the numbers. Those are my guesses.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 03:18
|
|
|
DesMoines Register Public Statement. https://www.desmoinesregister.com/s...rns/4637168002/
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 03:25
|
|
|
Can I cut and paste the full statement here? If i Cite it? Or is that  ??
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 03:28
|
|
|
Here: https://www.desmoinesregister.com/s...rns/4637168002/ "Published 8:01 p.m. CT Feb. 1, 2020 | Updated 8:10 p.m. CT Feb. 1, 2020" Des Moines Register posted:Des Moines Register, partners cancel release of Iowa Poll over respondent concerns TLDR: We are not releasing the poll because a single "surveyor" complained. Edit: Added date and time. Removed quotation marks at the end. Cpt_Obvious fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Feb 2, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 03:37
|
|
|
Importantly: The decision to not post the poll was posted 10 minutes after the poll was to be released. I'd imagine that must have been a last minute decision. It is not a technical mishap. Question: Is it possible someone high up pulled the plug at the last minute?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 03:41
|
|
|
Lemming posted:It's possible the sun will rise tomorrow TBF I thought it was perfectly possible that their servers got swamped. Were they using YouTube to stream? Or some lovely smaller platform? If they were using some lovely CNN viewer thing, the feed could have just collapsed. It will be important to know whether any Pete billionaire backers had early release knowledge of the polls. Does anyone have a list of those, like, 38 billionaires that donated to him?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 03:48
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:the story is that the guy complained to buttigieg campaign, and the buttigieg campaign was throwing a fit (because the poll had them doing badly, probably) The existence of any dude has not been established. It was a "surveyor". Does that mean a supervisor? Edit: What did he do for a living? At least release how he was related to the campaign? WTF does "surveyor" mean? Witness? Supervisor? Cpt_Obvious fucked around with this message at 03:52 on Feb 2, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 03:50
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:no, a respondent complained about pete's name not being listed to the buttigieg campaign. the buttigieg campaign went from there Ok, so a Pete staffer says that literally anyone has complained. In fact, it is possible that a Pete staffer had actually made the complaint, but since he owns a house in Iowa or w/e the requirements for "surveyor" are, he could have made that complaint and simply omitted that information from the report. Something like: "Here we found that complainer. He is my friend Bob." And Bob could be all like: "Yeah I made the complaint. Claiming otherwise would be slander if you put it in print (or the other one. The one where you can't officially print it)." Again, did a big Pete donor have early access to the information? Apparently, AT&T has donated $85,533 to Pete's campaign. And AT&T owns CNN which is producing a broadcast of this poll. Turner, the previous owners of were bought by AT&T in June 2018, and there was a major shift of executives less than a year later, March 2019. I'm probably the last person who put this together, but there.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 04:19
|
|
|
Eminai posted:Again, the "surveyor" they're talking about is an employee of the polling company and is called that because they are one of many people conducting surveys. The DMR or the polling company or whoever is saying there was a consistent error in surveys that were conducted by one particular employee. So an employee of the polling company told the Pete campaign staffer that there may be an error with the poll. Why didn't the polling company employee tell CNN? Or the Des Moines Register? Why would they go and tell a Pete campaign staff and not a news outlet? The NYT? Wall Street Journal? gently caress, Buzzfeed? Edit: Why tell Pete?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 04:37
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:Pete knows people. AT&T, which owns CNN, paid Pete over 80k. They are giving him monetary support, could they also offer "Broadcasting Support"? Is that illegal to alter or withhold the polls?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 04:42
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:no. OK. Again. A staffer at a call center reported to Pete's campaign about a technical glitch. Why? Does the Pete campaign have any proof of this claim? An email they could censor?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 04:43
|
|
|
Gyges posted:No, a person who answer the phone for a strange number complained to Pete that the surveyor didn't offer Pete as a choice in the poll. The investigation into the allegation appears to have uncovered that a person who was conducting the surveys is a big, dumb idiot. Ok, but Pete's campaign is the only primary source we have, right? They have not produced a complaint in any form? There are no censored emails or recorded phone calls. Therefore, our primary source is Pete. And Pete's campaign was paid over 80K by CNN's parent company.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 04:48
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:Sounds like a pete supported got polled and claims that they left pete off one question and mispronounced his name on others. From what's going on it seems like they went to the Buttchug campaign to "warn" them and the campaign is perhaps using this to scuttled a poll that would hurt Pete. Right now, there is no supporter. They have supplied no proof. Why would CNN do anything that might merit "warning" Pete? They would not have rigged the polls against him, they have paid his campaign 80K. If they are giving monetary support, are they legally allowed to withhold the polls? Has the impartiality of CNN broken through in a much bigger way than just the last debate questions?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 04:51
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:if you think dmr/selzer/cnn are lying about this, there is no point in believing any of their polling at all so it's all pretty moot. Nobody is lying about anything. They pulled a poll because the person who is giving them money complained that there was a technical difficulty or mishap. That technical difficulty or mishap was not reported to CNN. If it was, CNN has made no such comment. So either CNN is omitting that they knew about the complaint, or it was never taken to CNN. Again, CNN has no reason to damage the poll against Pete, because they paid his campaign 80K. Besides, if they do omit this poll to help pete, does it count as monetary support? How much is their airtime worth? They were broadcasting it live, remember. With Fredo. Eminai posted:DMR and CNN both reported on something that happened to a poll that was being jointly run by DMR and CNN. They are primary sources. Can you post a source?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 04:58
|
|
|
I bet they'll release it on Tuesday. Or late, late Monday.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 04:59
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:if bernie doesn't win the caucus, looking forward to people claiming it was rigged even though it's literally the most open process imaginable. in which the vote counting is observed by campaign volunteers and reported to headquarters in every precinct, where every single person at the caucus can see exactly how many people are supporting each person, and the official result can be matched against the campaign's own counts. Ok. We'll see. Maybe we'll all finally see the light and vote moderate, right?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 05:03
|
|
|
Eminai posted:I can't verify the CNN part, but here's somebody from the thread linking to the DMR's reporting God, I got way too drunk way too fast and confused myself. Edit: loving cheers everyone, this could be it. And if it ain't, you're drunk.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 05:19
|
|
|
Fredo, come out and tell us what happened! Do reporting! Why must they cancel your show?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 06:04
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ChrisCuomo/status/1223786394172252161 Edit: It's 7 minutes before the cast was supposed to happen. I'm on EST. Cpt_Obvious fucked around with this message at 06:28 on Feb 2, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 06:10
|
|
|
Let it be true. For the love of god. Hillary did it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 06:36
|
|
|
GTFO of here with that nonsense. I'm still on a goddamn cloud after CNN shitcanned their own poll at Pete's direction. Seriously, I cannot summon a single gently caress for the wealthy conservative state of Texas. Yeah, they get 228 pledged delegates, but gently caress them. California gets 415 and is getting Berned to the ground.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 14:50
|
|
|
This is it guys. Are you ready for our next president, Tom Steyer?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 17:46
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:A number of sources are saying this DMR leak is correct now: Stop breaking my heart and post the sources.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 18:22
|
|
|
Dear Jesus, I know, I know, the Jew thing. Listen, if Pete and Biden poo poo the bed in Iowa I promise to stop touching myself. For, like, a while. Fellow Tribesman, Cpt_Obvious
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 19:00
|
|
|
Socialism is like being in the closet. Between societal pressures from outside sources and the internalization of those societal pressures, it was super taboo to talk about being gay. It was an insult: "gay", "queer", "f*****". But then something strange happened; people start identifying as LGBTQ. Merely accepting the label began to remove the stigma. Look, we've got a long way to go, but by refusing to deny one's place on a spectrum of preferences, "gay" stopped being an accusation and is slowly turning into a simple fact. It is my opinion that being progressive is, essentially, closeted socialism. "Communist", "socialist" and "pinko" currently exist as accusations the same way that "gay" once was. However, socialists are coming out of the closet, and one might be our next president. It is becoming common for people to self-identify as socialist, and to stand firm against its use as an accusation. PS: I am in no way attempting to diminish the struggles of the LGBTQ community, nor am I declaring an end to homophobia, transphobia, etc. I am comparing the method by which society becomes normalized to people and ideas they once believed aberrant. Cpt_Obvious fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Feb 2, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 19:51
|
|
|
Ford? Who the gently caress is Ford? What do you mean he dodged two assassination attempts and lost reelection to loving Carter?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 19:56
|
|
|
El Grillo posted:What was the polling like at this stage in 2016, out of interest? Close. Bernie over performed and resulted in a near tie in the actual vote. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-3195.html
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 21:41
|
|
|
Acute Grill posted:Ironically, the right declaring everything socialist until the word lost any meaning probably did quite a bit to rehabilitate the term. "Socialism means I won't go bankrupt from getting the flu, my boss has to at least pretend I'm a human being, and someone will finally fix the drat roads? I'm in." At this point, socialist has come to mean free stuff, and everyone loves free stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 21:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 19:16 |
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:hard to say if he "overperformed" due to caucus math, at my caucus site (and the neighboring one in the next room) every single o'malley caucuser went to bernie after they weren't viable Edit: w/e dude.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2020 22:05
|
|