-
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 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
- Thread starter aspiegamer
- Start date
- Status
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
"an astounding chain of lies tied together by lunatic asides"
I love this one. There has been a lot of inspired wordsmithing to describe Trump and his bullshittery, and this one is up there. I see you Joe Lapointe for the Observer. That shit was Nader tier.
http://observer.com/2017/08/donald-trump-phoenix-rally/
I love this one. There has been a lot of inspired wordsmithing to describe Trump and his bullshittery, and this one is up there. I see you Joe Lapointe for the Observer. That shit was Nader tier.
http://observer.com/2017/08/donald-trump-phoenix-rally/
BoogieWoogie
Banned
VendettaRed07
Member
I think Biden should run regardless of how far he goes just so it doesn't appear like the democratic establishment is trying to handpick a candidate again
Old guard competition will be good and help younger candidates better contrast themselves
IamDodongo
Member
I did not realize PPP was from Raleigh, NC.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Speaking of that, Vox put out a great short video that shows that SPLC graph of monuments, and the point in time they were constructed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WClgR6Q0aPE
I'd rather all the old guys stay out of it. They'll just reopen old wounds and overshadow younger candidates with more potential.
No one knows who Kamala Harris is.
Also, it's the same drop Warren is getting relative to Sanders, which should raise a very specific eyebrow.
Aaron Strife
Banned
The only Democrats to post a solid lead over Trump are Biden and Sanders who have universal name recognition. None of the other Democrats polled are nearly as well-known but Trump still doesn't manage anything higher than 40% against any of them.
I don't necessarily think Harris is the best candidate, but I also think the Biden/Sanders numbers are somewhat misleading. Similar to Clinton's approval ratings in 2013 (the same point in that election cycle we're in now), people tend to like candidates much more as a hypothetical than when they're actually running and the mud-slinging is in full force. Biden was a nonfactor in his 2008 run and Clinton treated Sanders with kids' gloves.
Biden and Bernie pulling the same number in that poll.
VendettaRed07
Member
If they really have more potential they won't be overshadowed
I don't think it'll reopen any old wounds really either. Other than younger candidates being able to say "look at all the terrible stuff you did/voted for that I didn't".
I think Obama doing that is one reason why he became so popular with young people. Had he not had an opponent with a bunch of history to attack and had to go against someone of a similar age without many blemishes it would have been much harder
Hooligan69
Member
Same here, let some young guns make their presence known and see how they compare to Bernie, who I hope is running. *dons flame suit*
VendettaRed07
Member
Which will start to become a pretty bad thing for her soon.
If she and Gillibrand want to run and win then they need to get out there and prove they want to be leaders and take charge
I get not wanting to become a target this far out but at the same time, if they are too worried about being targeted perhaps they should consider not running to begin with.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I don't know I agree with this. Nobody knew who Sanders was even in mid-late 2015. I mean, yes, he didn't win, but he had absolutely no institutional backing and still made a good run of it against the most coronated candidate since Gore. I don't think there's much need for anyone to play their hand too early, especially when the field is so open.
You aren't going to start seeing people make overt moves until after the midterms because running for president while running for reelection is kinda skeezy.
I don't agree with that. Bernie is such a Real Time whore.
No. They need to literally do the opposite of that because the GOP will tar/feather them well in advance if they sniff them out. (and people on the left are already using this tactic on Harris anyway)
Following Obama's playbook (lie about your interest in running until you actually announce) is by far the best thing to do here.
The desire for people to have a "leader" is bizarre to me- this is what life is like when you don't have the presidency!
Is there a dumber option?
I'm asking seriously because if there is you can expect him to do that instead.
VendettaRed07
Member
I think they may face a similar issue where if more people aren't aware of who they are, they won't have enough time to build themselves up. I sort of think this happened to Sanders; because it wasn't just he lost in areas in the south, he lost places he probably should have won in big numbers like Iowa and Massachusetts. if he had more of a national profile beforehand maybe he would have done better
True but Sanders is doing it. He's goin out and doing town halls talking about healthcare etc. he's also up for re-election in 2018.
I don't think they need to explicitly "run for president" as much as they just need to make themselves more visible. Obama at least had that massive convention speech where he made a name for himself. They don't really have anything right now
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I've repeatedly said I love Biden and would take him as president in 2020 regardless of his age. He should run (as should many other democrats). We need everyone legitimate to get a shot so none of this 'it was rigged!' garbage sticks around.
That said, I'm not sure if he can keep from making the gaffes he did back in 2006-2008. My goodness, some of those things he said would be picked apart by the media. I don't think he could win if he made those mistakes. However, if he avoided gaffes, I think he'd be a shoo-in. Respected, huge favorability numbers, etc. He'd be a fantastic counter to Trump's arrogance and brashness. Hillary tried to take on Trump head-to-head in a way that I don't think was incredibly effective. I feel like Biden could do a better job in that area.
I'm not sure I buy the "but he failed before in the primaries!!!" argument. I'm not really seeing how that's relevant now that he was in the public eye for 8 years as Vice President. Everybody knows him as "Uncle Joe" and the bromance between him and Obama. I think that pretty much eradicates much of the past complaint about him.
That said, I'm not sure if he can keep from making the gaffes he did back in 2006-2008. My goodness, some of those things he said would be picked apart by the media. I don't think he could win if he made those mistakes. However, if he avoided gaffes, I think he'd be a shoo-in. Respected, huge favorability numbers, etc. He'd be a fantastic counter to Trump's arrogance and brashness. Hillary tried to take on Trump head-to-head in a way that I don't think was incredibly effective. I feel like Biden could do a better job in that area.
I'm not sure I buy the "but he failed before in the primaries!!!" argument. I'm not really seeing how that's relevant now that he was in the public eye for 8 years as Vice President. Everybody knows him as "Uncle Joe" and the bromance between him and Obama. I think that pretty much eradicates much of the past complaint about him.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
This is true, but I think you're overestimating the extent to which it's true. If a an eldery Jewish socialist from Vermont with no prior national history can go toe-to-toe with Hillary Clinton for months with no national profile prior to running, I don't think the warm-up process needs to start this year. It can definitely wait until after the mid-terms.
What does need to happen is sorting out the cupboards, if you see what I mean - cutting ties with dirty donors early, making sure you vote in the way you want your profile to come across later, and so on.
Box of Kittens
Banned
I don't disagree with your overall point, but Obama was elected to the Senate in '04, the same year he gave the convention speech that made him a star.
whyamihere
Banned
Oh wow. The NRSC hired a mariachi band to follow Donnelly around at the kickoff of his bus tour. Way to be racist, guys!
https://twitter.com/jonadams3/status/900443218109661184
https://twitter.com/jonadams3/status/900443218109661184
Sirpopopop
Member
They have more than enough oppo on Bernie to drop him.
Stealing electricity in the 70s. The rape fantasy shit in the 70s. They'll astroturf him with the crime bill too. Not to mention Sierra Blanca.
That's more than enough to get a big dent of voters to go, "Both sides."
The key isn't making Trump look good, it's making Bernie look bad. People have been relatively soft on Bernie. Come next time around, they won't treat him with kid gloves. Expect that stuff to be hammered.
Edit: I expect some Bernie posters to come up with some counterpoints. That's cool. However, ask yourself how easy it is to get Democratic voters to not vote.
Ah, why did I think it was State Senator '04 then Senator Senator '06 lol.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Truly their maraca moment.
Hadn't he just been elected to the Senate in '04?
edit: I see this has been addressed. Also, is it weird for anyone else to think about Obama as a senator? It's like reading about a completely different person.
Yeah, I mixed up the timeline in my head.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
It's the GOP in Indiana. Nothing should be surprising here, and yet...
Cesare Borgia
Banned
Obama was running for senate in 2004, not 2006. Harris is fine.
I mostly agree with this, and it's something I've been thinking about more lately. He famously did not do well in '88 and '08, but now he'd be entering a primary with an extremely well-regarded track record as vice president (rather than just a senator from Delaware) with high approvals. I'm not even sure his usual gaffes would sink a campaign the way they may have at any point pre-Trump.
I do think his age is a serious impediment though, both pragmatically and symbolically (what does it when say when after a lot of intraparty hand wringing and soul searching about cultivating a new generation of leadership our nominee ends up being a 78-year-old former vice president?).
Futurevoid
Member
I see alot of "malarkey" getting called during the debates.
https://youtu.be/05VnURkqjXs?t=1018
EDIT: Watching this debate again is amusing. Only about 30 minutes in but the two big topics at the start were Iran and jobs. On Iran - can you stop them from getting a nuclear weapon? In 2017 we have the Iran nuclear deal which Iran is still in compliance with as per the Trump administration's state department and despite Trump's mouth vomiting about it.
On jobs - the question was to about whether they could get unemployment down below 6% and how long it would take. Well......
Yeah, her issue is more that others are deliberately pulling her out to target her pre-emptively more than anything she's specifically doing.
God I fucking hate Twitter. I have no idea what I'm supposed to be looking at. I can't tell who's saying what or if I'm supposed to be reading it top to bottom or bottom to top.
Kid Kamikaze10
Member
I know the donor thing is always gonna be an issue on the left, but I gotta ask.
How are candidates and local parties gonna be able to fund themselves instead? Not everyone is Bernie, and in this economy, not everyone wants to spend money on a politician.
In the face of people like the Mercers and Koch Bros, it just sounds like a financial ass kicking waiting to happen. In a lot of states.
How are candidates and local parties gonna be able to fund themselves instead? Not everyone is Bernie, and in this economy, not everyone wants to spend money on a politician.
In the face of people like the Mercers and Koch Bros, it just sounds like a financial ass kicking waiting to happen. In a lot of states.
balladofwindfishes
Member
I think the idea is that the government would fund campaigns and set caps on how much can be spent.
So maybe you can't afford 24/7 radio ads, so you budget a bit better.
Political advertisements (for big elections) cost a fortune because they know they can charge that much since many campaigns have near infinite amounts of money and always know where to get more if they need it.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
Interesting stuff but lmao at polling Blumenthal, I have heard literally never even considered the possibility of him running. He wouldn't even be that bad, but lol
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked