• 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 |OT10| Jill Stein Inflatable Love Doll

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why does Russia claim that they're the only group in Syria that is against all terrorists when they're mad that the U.S. accidentally bombed Hezbollah?

Uhh... Hezbollah hates ISIS, but Al-Nursa does too. Hezbollah's still definitely a terrorist organization even if they're an Iranian proxy group.
 

Bowdz

Member
Why does Russia claim that they're the only group in Syria that is against all terrorists when they're mad that the U.S. accidentally bombed Hezbollah?

Uhh... Hezbollah hates ISIS, but Al-Nursa does too. Hezbollah's still definitely a terrorist organization even if they're an Iranian proxy group.

Because they are Russia and they're trying to use any means necessary to solidify their position in Syria and to demonize the US and our allies.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I just call Conway brilliant and talented because that was what everyone in the media called her when she was hired. Like it was a talking point or something.
 
Put substance aside for a minute because you could fit into a Ford Explorer the amount of people who gives a shit about substance in an election. Elections are nothing but a series of performances, and in that sense Conway is a flawless actress.

This shit makes my blood boil, not because it's not true, but because it's making me lose faith in everything.

Like, why even bother with democracy at this point?
 
I would rather have not bombed Hezbollah just because we want to focus on ISIS and Hezbollah people are good at killing ISIS losers, but come the fuck on, Russia.

I just call Conway brilliant and talented because that was what everyone in the media called her when she was hired. Like it was a talking point or something.

Everyone associated with Todd Akin's campaign has to be brilliant. Kellyanne "Legitimate rape" Conway is no different.
 

Boke1879

Member
This shit makes my blood boil, not because it's not true, but because it's making me lose faith in everything.

Like, why even bother with democracy at this point?

Yea. If anything that's what pisses me off the most. Straight up bullshit or lies gets spewed constantly like it's nothing. Majority of the time it's with very little push back. When that happens. That shit get normalized.
 
I've (mostly) taken a few days off of PoliGaf. So, we good, fam? Or is there something I need to be panicking about? Cause, I'm back to work tomorrow, so I'll have lots of free time shoudl something require my panic.
 
I've (mostly) taken a few days off of PoliGaf. So, we good, fam? Or is there something I need to be panicking about? Cause, I'm back to work tomorrow, so I'll have lots of free time shoudl something require my panic.

The U.S. bombed Hezbollah and Assad forces by accident and now Russia is claiming that the U.S. has formed a secret alliance with ISIS.

So expect to see Trump and Dr. Jill Stein talking about this next week.
 
The U.S. bombed Hezbollah and Assad forces by accident and now Russia is claiming that the U.S. has formed a secret alliance with ISIS.

So expect to see Trump and Dr. Jill Stein to talk about this next week.

Why is this surprising to the Russians? Obama is the founder of ISIS and Hillary is the MVP of ISIS. This is known. Trump told us. And, surely, he is an honorable man. So are they all. All honorable men. I come not to disprove what Trumpet spoke, but come to speak what I do know.
 
I'll keep saying but the only difference between Conway and other Trumpers is she is soft spoken. She is like the crazy cat lady who sees you on the street and reminds you to eat your waffles.
 
Why does Russia claim that they're the only group in Syria that is against all terrorists when they're mad that the U.S. accidentally bombed Hezbollah?

Uhh... Hezbollah hates ISIS, but Al-Nursa does too. Hezbollah's still definitely a terrorist organization even if they're an Iranian proxy group.

They want Assad to win so they can keep their port and have an ally in the region. They do this by bombing and fighting every group against the regime. The US is backing some of these groups to fight ISIS. Russia cannot bomb them and even the Syrian Air Force had to fall back after getting too close to US operations. They want to pull this stunt to get US to back off and allow them to bomb those US supported groups.

For Russia the clock is ticking on the level of support they can afford to maintain and are hoping to end the conflict with Assad on top as soon as possible.
 

royalan

Member
Kind of driving the point home about how, if Hillary is going to attack Donald Trump, she needs to do it in a way that motivates her base?

There is a little thing called The Read. It's an incredibly popular (200k listens a week on Sound Cloud alone) pop culture podcast aimed solely at black millennials and hosted by Kid Fury and Crissle.

8nhzClV.jpg


Very popular with black people, particularly young black people, and they have been NOTHING BUT critical of Hillary this entire year. Until this week's episode, where they devoted an entire segment to praising her for two things: her HONY interview, and her #BasketofDeplorables comment. The general consensus was that Hillary was right, and about time somebody just kept it real and called out Trump AND his supporters. It was about 15 minutes of solid praise...until they got to the part where she apologized. Crissle really sums up for me how deflating that apology was. If anything, backing down was the thing that hurt her.

Anyway, it was a very good segment of the show, and summed my thoughts pretty well.

https://soundcloud.com/theread/fya#t=1:40:00

Hillary talk starts around 1:40:00
 
Kind of driving the point home about how, if Hillary is going to attack Donald Trump, she needs to do it in a way that motivates her base?

There is a little thing called The Read. It's an incredibly popular (200k listens a week on Sound Cloud alone) pop culture podcast aimed solely at black millennials and hosted by Kid Fury and Crissle.

8nhzClV.jpg


Very popular with black people, particularly young black people, and they have been NOTHING BUT critical of Hillary this entire year. Until this week's episode, where they devoted an entire segment to praising her for two things: her HONY interview, and her #BasketofDeplorables comment. The general consensus was that Hillary was right, and about time somebody just kept it real and called out Trump AND his supporters. It was about 15 minutes of solid praise...until they got to the part where she apologized. Crissle really sums up for me how deflating that apology was. If anything, backing down was the thing that hurt her.

Anyway, it was a very good segment of the show, and summed my thoughts pretty well.

https://soundcloud.com/theread/fya#t=1:40:00

Hillary talk starts around 1:40:00

She apologized for using the word half... Not for calling supporters deplorable.
 
Among Democrats, deep concern about Clinton’s Hispanic strategy


Lagging support among Hispanic voters for Hillary Clinton and congressional candidates in crucial races has stoked deep concern that the party and the presidential campaign are doing too little to galvanize a key constituency.

While Clinton holds a significant lead over Trump in every poll of Hispanic voters, less clear is whether these voters will turn out in numbers that Democrats are counting on to win. Clinton trails President Obama’s 2012 performance in several Latino-rich states including Florida, Nevada, Colorado and Arizona. In those same states, where Democrats’ goal of retaking the Senate hinge, some down-ballot Democrats remain unknown to many Hispanic voters.

That reality has prompted a flurry of criticism of Clinton’s and the party’s Hispanic strategies. Despite a uniquely favorable environment with Republican Donald Trump’s repeated attacks on undocumented immigrants, Democrats are increasingly worried that the opportunity is slipping away to meet a longstanding party goal of marshaling the nation’s growing Hispanic population into a permanent electoral force. The concerns are compounded by Trump’s recent surge in several battleground states.

“We’re not seeing the Democratic Party take advantage of this moment in time, really looking to leverage more engagement in a more strategic way with our community,” said Janet Murguia, president of the National Council of La Raza.

One top criticism is that Clinton waited until this month to launch a sustained campaign of traditional, Spanish-language ads in key markets. Previously, the campaign’s Hispanic strategy centered on reaching millennial voters through new media such as Facebook and YouTube. Its television outreach was produced primarily in English and aimed at bilingual households. According to critics, Clinton missed a chance to deploy a broader effort to target the Hispanic electorate like the one that Obama pioneered four years ago.

“This approach may end up being vindicated on Election Day,” said Fernand Amandi, a veteran strategist who led Obama’s research, messaging and paid media operation for the Hispanic vote in 2012. “I just find it to be more risky than replicating what we know worked, which is the sustained approach that the Obama campaign put in place.”

Clinton aides and her allies insist that they are facing a very different opponent than Obama’s, along with new challenges posed by a Hispanic electorate that grows younger and less reliant on traditional modes of communication with each passing cycle.

The dispute goes to the heart of a debate among Hispanic operatives about how much emphasis should be placed on newer ways of reaching younger Hispanics, who like millennials overall are more resistant to backing Clinton than older Latinos.

“A lot of it has evolved to include outreach that isn’t obvious to people who are used to doing it old-school,” said veteran Democratic strategist Maria Cardona. “The Clinton campaign and the DNC are very strategically focused on Latino millennials.”

Much of the upset is also focused on down-ballot House and Senate races. Even Clinton has said that any hope that Democrats can retake majorities rests on Hispanic turnout. Yet neither the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee nor the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee employ Hispanic outreach coordinators, according to Albert Morales, who held that job until March for the Democratic National Committee.

“The DSCC has never really had a robust or a Hispanic engagement effort that I ever coordinated with, and that’s saying a lot being at the DNC under three different chairman,” Morales said. “I couldn’t name one. If you were to ask me, name a Hispanic staffer who’s been at the DSCC, I couldn’t name it. That’s pretty sad.”

As a result, critics say, the party is failing to capi­tal­ize on anger at Trump in a way that would help down ballot candidates.

....

In contrast, Obama’s first Spanish language ads in 2012 were focused on health care and education, including Head Start and Pell Grants, which provide aid to poor students who attend college.

“Being part of the Bernie team for so long and seeing how the message of free college and raising the minimum wage resonated, I just don’t see that out there now that I’m working on these races where there’s a lot of Latinos,” Rocha said.

Obama also targeted the intricacies of the Latino community, according to Freddy Balsera, a Miami-based political consultant who crafted much of Obama’s Spanish-language advertising campaign in 2008.

“When we were talking to a Latino voter in Colorado, we were discussing issues that mattered to them there. We did the same thing in Florida and took it a step further by talking to South Florida Hispanics with an announcer who was more Cuban-sounding. It was a more Puerto Rican-sounding voice in Orlando,” Balsera said. “We really, really localized the message and understood there’s not a Pan-Hispanic community. And as such, there’s no universal pan-Hispanic messages.”

Veterans of Obama’s 2012 race said the campaign determined in early 2011 that they needed an aggressive strategy to turnout minority voters — especially Hispanics — in anticipation of a drop-off in support among white voters. It involved early, heavy advertising on Spanish language television, including one voiced in Spanish by Obama and others by Cristina Saralegui, who has been described as the “Spanish Oprah.” Those efforts were paired with targeted grassroots outreach and an aggressive field program.

Clinton aides said they began putting Latino organizers on the ground in May, both in Hispanic-rich battlegrounds and in other states with smaller but potentially pivotal Latino populations including Wisconsin, Iowa, Georgia, Ohio and Nebraska.

The effort includes programs targeting various groups within the Hispanic community, including undocumented immigrant children, or DREAMers and their families, small business owners, and a program targeted at Latino faith leaders.

Soon, the campaign plans to bus Puerto Rican supporters from New York into Pennsylvania, where they will canvass in towns and neighborhoods full of Puerto Rican transplants including Bethlehem, Lancaster and North Philadelphia. Also under consideration is flying Puerto Ricans from the island to door-knock in Florida .

But the campaign’s investment in the kind of targeted advertising that was pioneered in 2012 has been smaller and has come later. And the question of language has been a key spark in the debate.

Until recently, much of Clinton’s television advertising to Hispanic voters has been in English, a concerted decision aimed at reaching bilingual households.

....
 
So it just hit me that Christie is setting himself up for 2020. Trump is going to become a major influencer in the Republican party in the coming years with his endorsements and such. Palin followed the similar trend, but her endrosements weren't as big of a deal in the part. Trump is going to lose, but his rabid base will still be there. Come 2020, Trump will endorse Christie and his base will back him.
 

mo60

Member
So it just hit me that Christie is setting himself up for 2020. Trump is going to become a major influencer in the Republican party in the coming years with his endorsements and such. Palin followed the similar trend, but her endrosements weren't as big of a deal in the part. Trump is going to lose, but his rabid base will still be there. Come 2020, Trump will endorse Christie and his base will back him.

I don't think christie will get past the republican primary because of bridgegate. He may be a bit to toxic to the general electorate and maybe the republican base.
 
The point is she apologized at all. Nobody cares about the nuance that she was only apologizing about the half part. When you're explaining you're losing.

Agreed. I didn't wanna hear it, and it's not like the press let her take it back anyways. The narrative didn't exactly change much from what I could tell. (granted, she could've perhaps worded it better in the first place, but no apologies nonetheless).
 

Grief.exe

Member
And why do people think Conway is a "brilliant" surrogate? All she does is deflect and ignore questions. She never makes any substantive rebuttals whatsoever.

She's definitely one of the best bullshitters in the industry. Even in the Maher interview, she was just keeping pace with whatever he threw at her.
 
If pigeon were here, wouldn't he say this article is again comparing exit polling with pre-voting polls? How can they say she's lagging Obama's performance in Florida?

I'm not particularly interested in comparing current polling vs exit polling, more about not maximizing a demographic that's essentially Democratic in this election.

It's not just Florida though, it's her overall strategy to Hispanics that seems bizarre. Obama had a successful strategy, why change it? She's not short on cash and Latinos are key to Florida.

Although failing NYT focuses on Florida

P.S.: Someone needs to point me an article saying "you can't compare exit polls to current polls", I can't find anything.
 
I think the idea behind not comparing exits to pre-election polls is that exit polls (usually) mirror actual results, whereas all polling comes down to an educated guess.

In short you're taking a statement of "This is what actually happened in 2012" and comparing it to "This is what I think might happen in 2016." It's not a 1:1 comparison.

Not to mention in general Latino/Hispanic polling is poor and pollsters like Latino Decisions or Univision that look at Latinos specifically tend to be more accurate (and, as an aside, better for Democrats). I believe a pollster calculated recently that based on Clinton's Latino support she would win Florida by a little under 4 points, but I can't recall.
 

royalan

Member
Just saw a new anti-Trump ad from Hillary. Bunch of Republicans saying they're not voting for Trump. >.>

I'm sorry I'm getting them confused at this point.

Is this the "Republicans think Trump is dangerous" ad?

The "Republicans think Trump is a racist" ad?

The "Republicans think Trump should release his tax returns" ad?

Shit, at this point the RNC should just link to Hillary's youtube channel if they want to educate voters on their party.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I'm not particularly interested in comparing current polling vs exit polling, more about not maximizing a demographic that's essentially Democratic in this election.

It's not just Florida though, it's her overall strategy to Hispanics that seems bizarre. Obama had a successful strategy, why change it? She's not short on cash and Latinos are key to Florida.

Although failing NYT focuses on Florida

P.S.: Someone needs to point me an article saying "you can't compare exit polls to current polls", I can't find anything.

I just think it's problematic to compare results to works in progress. If you wrote the article in mid August, it would be about how Clinton's results are blowing obama's out of the water. It's tough to compare at her lowest point. If the article is to say the election ends as it is now, yes, I think she could lose Florida.
 

Gotchaye

Member
She apologized for using the word half... Not for calling supporters deplorable.

I didn't pay much attention to what Clinton people were saying on TV afterwards, but as I said in the OT thread, the actual statement the campaign released implies a lot more regret than was explicitly stated. Yes, there's only an explicit retraction of "half", but the rest of the statement looks like an attempt to pretend that it's only Trump himself that she was calling deplorable - there's no affirmation of or even reference to a significant fraction of his supporters being deplorable, and in fact the statement emphasizes that Trump is giving a loudspeaker to "fringe bigots with a few dozen followers", and then goes on to reiterate that "many of Trump’s supporters are hard-working Americans who just don’t feel like the economy or our political system are working for them."

So I don't think it even has to be that any apology from her muddles the rest of the message - the apology is just really muddled.
 
I think the idea behind not comparing exits to pre-election polls is that exit polls (usually) mirror actual results, whereas all polling comes down to an educated guess.

In short you're taking a statement of "This is what actually happened in 2012" and comparing it to "This is what I think might happen in 2016." It's not a 1:1 comparison.

That's part of the argument, the other part I think is the Upshot article showing more white voters in 2012 than what the exit polls showed. Problem? It doesn't apply to Florida, where even Upshot admits Hispanics cost Romney Florida.

So I still don't understand why we shouldn't compare exit-poll %s to current polls in Florida.

I just think it's problematic to compare results to works in progress. If you wrote the article in mid August, it would be about how Clinton's results are blowing obama's out of the water. It's tough to compare at her lowest point. If the article is to say the election ends as it is now, yes, I think she could lose Florida.

Fair enough, it's a half glass situation where the Clinton campaign can put some work in, but they are implications for the downballot vote (6 in 10 hispanics in Florida don't know who Murphy is).
 
I just think it's problematic to compare results to works in progress. If you wrote the article in mid August, it would be about how Clinton's results are blowing obama's out of the water. It's tough to compare at her lowest point. If the article is to say the election ends as it is now, yes, I think she could lose Florida.

still not convinced losing florida is plausible. Registration increases over 2012 make that one pretty unlikely.

Since the 2012 presidential election, Florida’s voter rolls have grown by 436,000 — and only 24 percent of that increase is from non-Hispanic white voters while non-whites grew by 76 percent, according to new voter registration numbers released in advance of the Aug. 30 primary.
Story Continued Below

The number of Hispanic voters leaped by 242,000, which was 55 percent of the increase. Latinos are now 15.4 percent of the voter rolls, up from 13.9 percent overall in 2012, when President Barack Obama narrowly carried Florida thanks to the outsized backing of minority voters.

http://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2016/08/increase-in-minority-voters-poses-problem-for-trump-in-florida-104717

Huge increase in nonwhite registration over 2012, but none of these would pass likely voter screens, I imagine.
 

royalan

Member
I didn't pay much attention to what Clinton people were saying on TV afterwards, but as I said in the OT thread, the actual statement the campaign released implies a lot more regret than was explicitly stated. Yes, there's only an explicit retraction of "half", but the rest of the statement looks like an attempt to pretend that it's only Trump himself that she was calling deplorable - there's no affirmation of or even reference to a significant fraction of his supporters being deplorable, and in fact the statement emphasizes that Trump is giving a loudspeaker to "fringe bigots with a few dozen followers", and then goes on to reiterate that "many of Trump’s supporters are hard-working Americans who just don’t feel like the economy or our political system are working for them."

So I don't think it even has to be that any apology from her muddles the rest of the message - the apology is just really muddled.

It was the kind of apology you give when you were caught in a lie. The kind of apology where muddling the original statement is kind of the point.

Only Hillary wasn't lying; the facts, polls, and Trumpites prove this every day. She should have stood her ground.
 
Preview of millenial speech?
3. Clinton targets millennials in Ohio

It's no secret Hillary Clinton has issues with younger voters, and she is looking to turn the tide.

On Monday, Clinton will travel to Ohio to make her case to millennials by retracing some of her early work as a lawyer.

Abby Philip of the Washington Post says trying to get younger voters to relate more to Clinton is the big goal.

"The focus of the speech is going to be about her early years -- what she did after she left college -- the focus on idealism and reminding young voters that she was kind of like them," said Phillip.

"And also like someone else, a young community organizer from Chicago, Barack Obama."

Will this humanize her? Make her seem more like a real person and less like a politician? Stay tuned.
 

royalan

Member
Preview of millenial speech?

This could be a good speech, because the main issue with millennials is that they don't know Hillary, and Hillary is shit at playing herself up.

The thing is that this has to be a part of a full-scale effort, and not just a box-checker. "Ok, I did the millennial speech. Time to go back to slamming Trump and appealing to Republicans."
 

Joeytj

Banned
Preview of millenial speech?

Ugh.

The big dangers are:

1) Will look like pandering if it's specifically mentioned as a "millennial" speech or something. She should just talk about her early years with everyone, not just millennials.

2) Trump will undoubtedly try to do something crazy in order to preempt her speech. Which, again, is why she should just incorporate this strategy into her overall campaign, not just a single speech.

Although this does seem like an overall attempt by her campaign to push the more positive aspects of Hillary's candidacy instead of just attack Trump.

EDIT:

This could be a good speech, because the main issue with millennials is that they don't know Hillary, and Hillary is shit at playing herself up.

That's another problem, yes. Or THE problem. Sadly, most millennials barely know Hillary as anything but Bernie's rival in the primaries. In fact, I've bumped into millennials who think she was the Republican in 2008 against Obama, completely forgetting about McCain!
 

Boke1879

Member
It may not work, but it doesn't hurt at all to try. I think she has a lot of material to work with. She's done a lot of great work. It may not help, but it's definitely a story that could and should be told.
 

Debirudog

Member
hmm, hopefully she'll also talk about the policies she's trying to implement right now and what she's done with Bernie to make her platform more appealing to the millenial crowd.

And hopefully they don't use that stupid logic that she used to be a young republican so she isn't a true progressive. I heard that once and it made my blood boil.
 
This could be a good speech, because the main issue with millennials is that they don't know Hillary, and Hillary is shit at playing herself up.

I'm inclined to agree.

There's a certain subset of millenial voter that bought into a very strange narrative during the primary that Clinton is some kind of bought and paid for corporate shill, and the Clinton foundation is a front to dole out political access in exchange for money.

It's a WILDLY off base interpretation of who she is, but it's not uncommon- those memes have been all over facebook since the primary was getting heated, and its one of the worst things about Sanders that he didn't put a stop to that narrative during his campaign.
 

Crayons

Banned
I think if Clinton tries really hard and really sounds like she's speaking from the heart, the speech will work.



The problem is it seems like whenever Clinton says anything people say it's too rehearsed, calculated, etc
 

Diablos

Member
Preview of millenial speech?
Yeah uh this probably won't hurt her but I don't see it doing any favors for her either. I can't believe how bad she's struggling with the demographic. It's reallllly bad.

I'm terrified that Trump may actually win this thing. I didn't really think it would happen until the past several weeks. Hillary please figure something out
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom