• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT8| No, Donald. You don't.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah this is just pandering. There is no way in hell 38 states would approve this. Hell 25 would be difficult.
Pandering? You guys need to learn what that means.

and of course the GOP won't pass it but it draws a line in the sand and firmly puts them behind money in politics. I mean we've had tons of bills and proposed amendments that haven't pass but eventually do.

We shouldn't stop trying
 

Zornack

Member
Pandering? You guys need to learn what that means.

and of course the GOP won't pass it but it draws a line in the sand and firmly puts them behind money in politics. I mean we've had tons of bills and proposed amendments that haven't pass but eventually do.

We shouldn't stop trying

Or people who have no problem with CU can get behind this proposal with the knowledge that it has zero chance of passing.
 

Gotchaye

Member
Or people who have no problem with CU can get behind this proposal with the knowledge that it has zero chance of passing.

Sure, but this is true for almost everything unless Republicans lose the House. There's value in presenting legislation or holding votes on things that will never actually become law - it clarifies the differences between the parties and also commits Democrats to action on the issue if action does become possible.

Like, it's dumb that House Republicans voted to repeal Obamacare however many hundreds of times they did, but if you want to make sure people know that your party is against Obamacare and you want to get your Congressmen on record so that if you can elect a Republican president they don't chicken out, then you do want to do this at least once even if you know Obama will just veto it.

I'm sure it happens that you have people who hold a vote on legislation that they don't actually support because they gain from being seen to support it, but if you are a supporter of the policy this can still work out to your advantage. Just ask David Cameron.
 
Don't mind me. I'm just subscribing to the new thread. PoliGAF has essentially become my US politics news feed.

It's also taught me a lot of things I never knew about drag queens. Hi Adam!
 
Thank everything holy America mostly got Democracy right the first time. Seriously, other countries suck at this shit. Oldest democracy in world ftw.

Now we just need to get rid of the Senate.
 

pigeon

Banned
Or people who have no problem with CU can get behind this proposal with the knowledge that it has zero chance of passing.

I mean, what do you want her to do, lead an insurgency?

It is impossible to get rid of Citizens United except with a constitutional amendment or with SCOTUS overturning it. Both are, frankly, nearly politically impossible. So what do you expect?

The best thing to do is to clearly advocate for changing CU, even if the thing you're advocating for is not possible, because at least then you set clear expectations, can argue about your mandate, and can try to move the political window.

If this is not satisfactory for you, what could possibly be satisfactory?
 
Thank everything holy America mostly got Democracy right the first time. Seriously, other countries suck at this shit. Oldest democracy in world ftw.

Now we just need to get rid of the Senate.

I feel like our uniquely convoluted system (bicameral legislature included) is one of the reasons we've lasted this long, though.
 

Makai

Member
I mean, what do you want her to do, lead an insurgency?

It is impossible to get rid of Citizens United except with a constitutional amendment or with SCOTUS overturning it. Both are, frankly, nearly politically impossible. So what do you expect?

The best thing to do is to clearly advocate for changing CU, even if the thing you're advocating for is not possible, because at least then you set clear expectations, can argue about your mandate, and can try to move the political window.

If this is not satisfactory for you, what could possibly be satisfactory?
Sounds like you're feeling the Bern
 
I feel like our uniquely convoluted system (bicameral legislature included) is one of the reasons we've lasted this long, though.
No, we've lasted so long because of complete and total domestic stability for 250 years. No major conflicts affecting us in negative ways, no need to turn to strongman, no local wars beside civil war, tremendously great economy, etc. Also, strong leadership in troubling times, like Roosevelt during G.D. Canada almost had a communist revolution (march on Ottawa) and Roosevelt totally avoided that here because our government wasn't conservative.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one of the main complaints against Bernie was arguing for legislation he knew had no chance of passing?
 

pigeon

Banned
No, we've lasted so long because of complete and total domestic stability for 250 years. No major conflicts affecting us in negative ways, no need to turn to strongman, no local wars beside civil war, tremendously great economy, etc. Also, strong leadership in troubling times, like Roosevelt during G.D. Canada almost had a communist revolution (march on Ottawa) and Roosevelt totally avoided that here because our government wasn't conservative.

Complete and total domestic stability EXCEPT FOR AN ENORMOUS CIVIL WAR OVER THE VERY STABILITY OF THE UNION.
 

pigeon

Banned
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one of the main complaints against Bernie was arguing for legislation he knew had no chance of passing?

There's a distinction between the right choice in a situation where there is no politically viable option and the right choice in a situation where there is one.
 

ampere

Member
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one of the main complaints against Bernie was arguing for legislation he knew had no chance of passing?

Yes? Are you referring to Hillary's anti-Citizen's United amendment?

That's definitely a political move, but it's not like she's reneging on appointing SC justices who would overturn it
 

Makai

Member
No, we've lasted so long because of complete and total domestic stability for 250 years. No major conflicts affecting us in negative ways, no need to turn to strongman, no local wars beside civil war, tremendously great economy, etc. Also, strong leadership in troubling times, like Roosevelt during G.D. Canada almost had a communist revolution (march on Ottawa) and Roosevelt totally avoided that here because our government wasn't conservative.
There were the two British land invasions, a civil war, nuclear weapons 100 miles away, and...
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Democracy seems bad. Like look at the south. People are dumb and shouldn't govern themselves. We should be run by technocrats. Solaris seems to be the best. Xenogears was right.
 
Complete and total domestic stability EXCEPT FOR AN ENORMOUS CIVIL WAR OVER THE VERY STABILITY OF THE UNION.
Yes, and Lincoln made sure that we stuck together. This is proof that authoritarianism and strongmen are good, right?

There were the two British land invasions, a civil war, nuclear weapons 100 miles away, and...
I don't count the revolution itself, and also, 1812 was meh. We all had tea after.

Alt-right says what
Alt-right believes in monarchy, not dictatorship, because of arguments of genetically superior classes of humans being more fit to rule. You're thinking of alt-left.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Also my least favorite new thing is how obvious homophobes and morons complain about how the left isn't going after radical islam for targeting LGBT people. Just stfu.
 

mo60

Member
It looks like Trump does not care about winning Ohio if he does something like this at the RNC.
SEd8uI0.png


Seating arrangement
x0SdOxK.jpg
 
It looks like Trump does not care about winning Ohio if he does something like this at the RNC.


Seating arrangement

CBS says that happens at all conventions one way or another.

Might have to do with the symbolism of which state pushes him past the majority.
 
What's the controversy with voter ID laws? Maybe I'm misunderstanding it, but I don't see a problem with it, in order to vote you have to show a state or federal ID, simple. Wouldn't that prevent voter fraud?


What's the process for getting an amendment ratified? I heard the reason we only got 27 and some in limbo for like 200 years or whatever, is because it's a pretty hard process.
 

Ether_Snake

安安安安安安安安安安安安安安安
This report on the BBC showing black people (even old innocent-looking moms) saying they have guns to protect themselves from the police, guns have no safety, they're loaded and a bullet is in the chamber, and saying guns don't kill people, police with guns do and they're at war. So now you got white and black people who don't want gun control.

What's the controversy with voter ID laws? Maybe I'm misunderstanding it, but I don't see a problem with it, in order to vote you have to show a state or federal ID, simple. Wouldn't that prevent voter fraud?



What's the process for getting an amendment ratified? I heard the reason we only got 27 and some in limbo for like 200 years or whatever, is because it's a pretty hard process.

The key word is introduce.
 

thefro

Member
This report on the BBC showing black people (even old innocent-looking moms) saying they have guns to protect themselves from the police, guns have no safety, they're loaded and a bullet is in the chamber, and saying guns don't kill people, police with guns do and they're at war. So now you got white and black people who don't want gun control.
60% of AAs still back gun control, nearly 20% higher than the national rate. I wouldn't put too much into isolated stories.
 

Wilsongt

Member
What's the controversy with voter ID laws? Maybe I'm misunderstanding it, but I don't see a problem with it, in order to vote you have to show a state or federal ID, simple. Wouldn't that prevent voter fraud?



What's the process for getting an amendment ratified? I heard the reason we only got 27 and some in limbo for like 200 years or whatever, is because it's a pretty hard process.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rHFOwlMCdto

Here. Let this British man explain why voter id laws are bullshit.
 
What's the controversy with voter ID laws? Maybe I'm misunderstanding it, but I don't see a problem with it, in order to vote you have to show a state or federal ID, simple. Wouldn't that prevent voter fraud?

Because they disproportionately effect the poor. IDs aren't free. If they are free, it's sometimes impossible for people to get to the place where they get them. Perhaps they don't have the required documentation to get the ID. They may lack transportation.

Plus, if there is absentee voting what good does requiring an ID have?

Here's an article from the ACLU explaining the issue
https://www.aclu.org/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet

Also, I like Chilis. What's wrong with Chilis? They have good foot at a decent price. Their bar is pretty good too?
Save
 
The key word is introduce.

That wasn't my question. She introduces it, and then what?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rHFOwlMCdto

Here. Let this British man explain why voter id laws are bullshit.

Because they disproportionately effect the poor. IDs aren't free. If they are free, it's sometimes impossible for people to get to the place where they get them. Perhaps they don't have the required documentation to get the ID. They may lack transportation.

Plus, if there is absentee voting what good does requiring an ID have?

Here's an article from the ACLU explaining the issue
https://www.aclu.org/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet

Will check those out, thanks.
 

DrForester

Kills Photobucket
What's the controversy with voter ID laws? Maybe I'm misunderstanding it, but I don't see a problem with it, in order to vote you have to show a state or federal ID, simple. Wouldn't that prevent voter fraud?

In theory, there is nothing wrong with Vote ID laws, it's what the Republicans also do in addition to it that's the problem. There are far too many hoops for people to jump through to get a ID card, more than is reasonable. They close down offices and make it difficult for people in certain areas (read, minority communities) to get the card. They've outright admitted their goal is to suppress votes.

If it were simple to get the ID, I don't think many would object to the idea of needing an ID.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
There's a distinction between the right choice in a situation where there is no politically viable option and the right choice in a situation where there is one.

While this is mostly true, don't forget that we could in the meantime push for guaranteed transparency for all Super Pac money, and why not throw in required disclosure all lobbying expenditures too.

Should be compatible with the current law and supreme court ruling.
 

Valhelm

contribute something
Chili's is actually a nice metaphor for the Donald Trump movement

Corporate false populism that sells shitty food to people who don't want to go to an actual Mexican place
 
Also my least favorite new thing is how obvious homophobes and morons complain about how the left isn't going after radical islam for targeting LGBT people. Just stfu.
Concern trolling sucks. Like when nutty conservatives say democrats put Planned parenthoods in minority neighborhoods to kill black people.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Why does Rasmussen even get included in averages? They're showing Obama disapprove +6. How can people build statistical models using obvious trash?
 

User1608

Banned
Also my least favorite new thing is how obvious homophobes and morons complain about how the left isn't going after radical islam for targeting LGBT people. Just stfu.
Sadly dealt with this too last night.://

And yeah, it's stupid as hell.
 

Paskil

Member
People thinking that Trump won't get a bump from the convention because Romney hardly did obviously don't understand that Trump puts on great conventions. The greatest conventions. Trump is going to get such a bump from the RNC, Diablosing won't be a word to adequately describe the level of panic that the forthcoming polls will inspire.
 

Wilsongt

Member
Donald J. Trump
Donald J. Trump – Verified account ‏@realDonaldTrump

Crooked Hillary, who embarrassed herself and the country with her e-mail lies, has been a DISASTER on foreign policy. Look what's happening!
6:13 AM - 16 Jul 2016

Yaaaaaas, Crooked Hillary causing terror attacks around the world. Queen!
 

itschris

Member
A newer article on the plans for the RNC:

Washington Post: Republican convention aims to make Trump ‘likable’ and heal GOP wounds

“He is a likeable person,” Priebus said of a candidate to whom he now speaks at least twice a day. “I think as people get to see the person that some of us have gotten to know, that’s going to help him in the general election, because I think people actually want to like him. They’re intrigued by him. They’re interested in him. And him becoming likeable will make him unstoppable.”

To that end, the convention producers plan to showcase the celebrity billionaire’s family. His wife, Melania, a Slovenia-born former fashion model who rarely speaks publicly on her husband’s behalf, will deliver prime-time remarks, as will Trump’s four oldest children from his first two marriages, Donald Jr., Ivanka, Eric and Tiffany.

Beyond his personal side, Trump hopes the convention projects an image of toughness and resolve to a nation on edge from a harrowing few months that have included terrorist attacks on the homeland and abroad, as well as the gunning down of five police officers in Dallas.

Several scheduled speakers could help reinforce Trump’s claim to be the law-and-order candidate. Among them are former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, two women state attorneys general and Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke, an African American Democrat who is an outspoken critic of the Black Lives Matter movement.

There also will be plenty of Clinton bashing. One evening will be dedicated in part to replaying the former secretary of state’s handling of the 2012 attacks on a U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya. Two survivors, Mark Geist and John Tiegen, will speak.

...

The lineup of Republican speakers is eclectic for a political convention and is intended to root Trump’s candidacy in a culture beyond the political establishment. They include Eileen Collins, the first woman to command a space shuttle mission; Antonio Sabato Jr., a former Calvin Klein underwear model and soap-opera actor; pro golfer Natalie Gulbis; and Dana White, president of the Ultimate Fighting Championship.

One of the biggest stars was to have been Tim Tebow, the deeply religious, Heisman Trophy-winning football quarterback. But anticipation turned into awkwardness. After Republican officials said Tebow would speak at the convention, he put out a video on Facebook saying that those were just “rumors” and that he would not be taking the stage.

In addition, Haskel Lookstein, a prominent New York rabbi who converted Ivanka Trump to Judaism, faced political backlash within his congregation once it was announced he would be speaking. He too decided to back out.

Reaching beyond the usual roster of speakers is partly a necessity, given how many party elders and rising stars declared themselves no-shows in Cleveland — including the GOP’s past two nominees, Mitt Romney and John McCain; its only two living former presidents, George W. Bush and George H.W. Bush; and a number of Republican senators whose reelection prospects have been endangered by the prospect of such a divisive figure at the top of the ticket. Ohio Gov. John Kasich will be in town but provocatively has indicated he would not step foot in Trump’s convention hall.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
People thinking that Trump won't get a bump from the convention because Romney hardly did obviously don't understand that Trump puts on great conventions. The greatest conventions. Trump is going to get such a bump from the RNC, Diablosing won't be a word to adequately describe the level of panic the forthcoming polls inspire.

Well, I think he will get a bump. Or his trend will continue, rather. Because everything is so compressed this cycle. You're looking at FBI + VP + convention in like a 2.5 week window. I think the next week or so is going to be tough to sit through as Morning Joe blasts out, "A new poll in PA from Quinnipiac shows Hillary down by SEVEN!!!"

More seriously, though, before the candidates were set, there was a lot written about how Trump would need to win 70%+ of the white male vote to have a shot. The interesting thing is that he's actually close enough to do that. Does it imply sampling is off in polling? Or could there really be that kind of support in the white male demographic?

I kind of wonder if he will underperform polling because he's not out in the field setting up infrastructure.

I kind of wish Hillary was nominated in 08. The climate was such that a Dem was going to win regardless. I get the sense Obama, were it his turn now, would be steamrolling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom