Support NeoGAF

[speculawyer]

The only talking point I didn't understand was implying Obama constantly avoids the term "radical islamic terrorism". He seems to talk about extremism and terrorism a lot, what is this about?

It is one of those right-wing echo chamber myths.

 

[cpp_is_king]

However, what is odd about that philosophy of no one can be certain that their answer is right, is that you also are heavily implying you are Republican. Which means that if you don't have evidence based reasons for being a Republican then you are doing so for other reasons which is rather odd.

I am neither a republican nor a democrat. About 1/3 of my views are consistent with those of republicans, another 1/3 are consistent with those of democrats, and the other 1/3 don't match up with anyone.

the difference is that I accept that I do not *know* whether I am correct (well, except about a few things which have a very significant amount of scientific evidence). It's just my best guess, and I completely respect the opinions of people who don't share the same views. Unlike many people, it seems.

 

[watershed]

Trump is going to have to eventually tone down the sideshow and rhetoric and actually offer reasonable solutions that republicans want to hear. Right now he is just riding the hype wave.

I don't think Trump is going to tone down his rhetoric at all and I don't think anyone supporting Trump wants him to. He is riding hype and filling the niche of the true "tell it like it is candidate." That's the basis of his support and a natural extension of his own personality. That rhetoric isn't going anywhere. But if he wants to remain viable over the coming months, he will have to roll out actual policies, I agree. I think he will do that and pair it with his over the top rhetoric. His tone is how he sells his hodge-podge of conservative and not-so-conservative positions/beliefs to an overwhelmingly conservative republican base. Without it, his vague positions would fall completely flat.

 

[RELAYER]

I'm hoping things will start changing in a decade or so when the GoPs base of old white bigots begins to die of old age and/or new minority voter finally reach voting age.

Lol.
As soon as all the evil white people die, rather than a utopia the only thing that will happen is that minority voters will themselves become conservatively minded.

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

One graph with no context or information about how to interpret it was posted. Anyone can cherry pick. You can cherry pick Kansas and whatever that graph was supposed to mean, and I can point out that the most liberal state in the country, California, has the highest average cost of living in the country causing it to be seen as a rich man's state.

I mean, you can cherry pick anything. Economics isn't an exact science, we're not talking about global warming or evolution/natural selection, where 99% of the worlds economists agree on what the best economic systems are. In the end, we're talking about opinions, and both sides will fit the empirical data to their own political views and find ways to justify it. There is not a broad consensus. And even if you can definitively tie what happened in Kansas to a piece of policy, things change based on geography, demographics, and many other factors which make it not so black and white.

I mean, I admit that you can't show me any data that would convince me one way or the other, because I don't believe economic theory si developed enough to answer the question. If it were, 99% of the economists in the world would have reached a consensus, just as scientists have with global warming, vaccines, and other pressing issues.

There's 1 study from the IMF about the effects of trickle down economics. Great, now where's the other 999 studies necessary to form a reasonable level of confidence that their study was correct?

Maybe in 100 years.

It's been what, 30 years, since trickle down? It's not working, else we would have seen something by now. Anything, really. Instead, the exact opposite of what they said would happen has happened.

 

[The Gaming Gamer]

Probably because Obama is smart enough and open-minded enough to acknowledge that most terrorist threats we have faced since 9/11 haven't been radical Islamic terrorists and thus speaking in such specific terms ignores any and all other types of terror and extremism this country currently faces.

Republicans know this too but it does seem that their supporters don't and they use this to their advantage.

That's what I assumed but I was surprised at the huge applause, there were some other examples but nothing really surprising (Donald Trump's PC comments haha).

 

[Relentless 757]

California, the most liberal state? What?

California is a major democratic state, pretty much a guaranteed victory in electoral college votes in the general election for whoever the Democratic nomination is.

 

[Jonm1010]

One graph with no context or information about how to interpret it was posted. Anyone can cherry pick. You can cherry pick Kansas and whatever that graph was supposed to mean, and I can point out that the most liberal state in the country, California, has the highest average cost of living in the country causing it to be seen as a rich man's state.

I mean, you can cherry pick anything. Economics isn't an exact science, we're not talking about global warming or evolution/natural selection, where 99% of the worlds economists agree on what the best economic systems are. In the end, we're talking about opinions, and both sides will fit the empirical data to their own political views and find ways to justify it. There is not a broad consensus. And even if you can definitively tie what happened in Kansas to a piece of policy, things change based on geography, demographics, and many other factors which make it not so black and white.

I mean, I admit that you can't show me any data that would convince me one way or the other, because I don't believe economic theory si developed enough to answer the question. If it were, 99% of the economists in the world would have reached a consensus, just as scientists have with global warming, vaccines, and other pressing issues.

There's 1 study from the IMF about the effects of trickle down economics. Great, now where's the other 999 studies necessary to form a reasonable level of confidence that their study was correct?

Maybe in 100 years.

As a one time economics major, I can tell you Economics is not as scientifically sound as many would like you to believe but it is much more scientifically founded then you are making it seem.

Here's a better challenge, prove to me a working model of encompassing supply side economics bearing the fruit its proponents claim should be beared?

The facts are it is very difficult to find such evidence. Evidence to support the thesis you laid out earlier.

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

It's just my best guess, and I completely respect the opinions of people who don't share the same views. Unlike many people, it seems.

Yah, you're right. There are a mega-ton of opinions that are not and should not be respected.

This is the thing that America especially has gotten so wrong over the years, that all opinions are valid, after all it is just an opinion. There are multiple sides to every issue, you should respect everything. Sorry, no.

 

[UnforgivenTwin]

Maybe yes, maybe no. I think the Fox moderators got the ball rolling on a summer and fall dedicated to completely tearing Trump down. Trump's major challenge is turning his lead in the polls into primary votes in Iowa, New Hampshire and beyond. There's a long time between now and then and this deluge from the GOP establishment is only going to intensify. Tonight was just the beginning and I don't think Trump's support is going to translate to votes when the time comes.

I was talking about going higher in the polls. Sorry I should have clarified.

 

[Lime_In_Da_Coconut]

California is a major democratic state, pretty much a guaranteed victory in electoral college votes in the general election for whoever the Democratic nomination is.

But in what universe is it "the most liberal?"

We still have the death penalty, ffs.

I am neither a republican nor a democrat. About 1/3 of my views are consistent with those of republicans, another 1/3 are consistent with those of democrats, and the other 1/3 don't match up with anyone.

the difference is that I accept that I do not *know* whether I am correct (well, except about a few things which have a very significant amount of scientific evidence). It's just my best guess, and I completely respect the opinions of people who don't share the same views. Unlike many people, it seems.

Yeah yeah, we're all rude idiots and you're perfect and superior.

We get it.

Move on.

 

[MIMIC]

I saw on FB that Rosie O'Donnell has "responded" to what Trump said in the debates. So I look up what he said, and almost died of laughter xD That was amazing.

 

[The Beard]

But in what universe is it "the most liberal?"

We still have the death penalty, ffs.



Yeah yeah, we're all rude idiots and you're perfect and superior.

We get it.

Move on.

If California isn't, then what state is? CA is sickeningly liberal.

 

[Black Mamba]

One graph with no context or information about how to interpret it was posted. Anyone can cherry pick. You can cherry pick Kansas and whatever that graph was supposed to mean, and I can point out that the most liberal state in the country, California, has the highest average cost of living in the country causing it to be seen as a rich man's state.

I mean, you can cherry pick anything. Economics isn't an exact science, we're not talking about global warming or evolution/natural selection, where 99% of the worlds economists agree on what the best economic systems are. In the end, we're talking about opinions, and both sides will fit the empirical data to their own political views and find ways to justify it. There is not a broad consensus. And even if you can definitively tie what happened in Kansas to a piece of policy, things change based on geography, demographics, and many other factors which make it not so black and white.

I mean, I admit that you can't show me any data that would convince me one way or the other, because I don't believe economic theory si developed enough to answer the question. If it were, 99% of the economists in the world would have reached a consensus, just as scientists have with global warming, vaccines, and other pressing issues.

There's 1 study from the IMF about the effects of trickle down economics. Great, now where's the other 999 studies necessary to form a reasonable level of confidence that their study was correct?

Maybe in 100 years.

There is no such thing as trickle down economics. Like, it literally does not exist in the field of economics. 99.99% of economists think it is a joke theory. Even hard right wing economists do not accept it as anything.

So yes, it is just like believing in no man-made global warming.

 

[OuterLimits]

As a rare conservative here, I thought Rubio and surprisingly Huckabee had a good night. Cruz, Kasich were decent. Bush was blah, as was Walker.

Trump was horrific and his poll numbers will likely drop quickly despite his loyal followers voting him winner on Drudge polls.

The only one who did worse today than Trump was Lindsey Graham who sounded awful and looked fucking constipated and in dire need of a bathroom. I was half expecting him to be gone after each commercial break.

Jindal and Fiorina were the only two that did a decent job at the kids table. She did well in interview with Chris Mathews on Harball as well. Perhaps she gets enough of a bump to be at the adult table next debate.

 

[Lime_In_Da_Coconut]

If California isn't, then what state is? CA is sickeningly liberal.

...Drive by anywhere south of LA and then say that.

Off the top of my head: Washington, Colorado, Oregon pretty much every New England state.

 

[cpp_is_king]

But in what universe is it "the most liberal?"

We still have the death penalty, ffs.

This universe? California is easily the most liberal state in the US.

 

[Fenderputty]

One graph with no context or information about how to interpret it was posted. Anyone can cherry pick. You can cherry pick Kansas and whatever that graph was supposed to mean, and I can point out that the most liberal state in the country, California, has the highest average cost of living in the country causing it to be seen as a rich man's state.

I mean, you can cherry pick anything. Economics isn't an exact science, we're not talking about global warming or evolution/natural selection, where 99% of the worlds economists agree on what the best economic systems are. In the end, we're talking about opinions, and both sides will fit the empirical data to their own political views and find ways to justify it. There is not a broad consensus. And even if you can definitively tie what happened in Kansas to a piece of policy, things change based on geography, demographics, and many other factors which make it not so black and white.

I mean, I admit that you can't show me any data that would convince me one way or the other, because I don't believe economic theory si developed enough to answer the question. If it were, 99% of the economists in the world would have reached a consensus, just as scientists have with global warming, vaccines, and other pressing issues.

There's 1 study from the IMF about the effects of trickle down economics. Great, now where's the other 999 studies necessary to form a reasonable level of confidence that their study was correct?

Maybe in 100 years.

You literally said we couldn't provide you ONE unbiased source and the IMF is that. The graph had context. The poster even gave it to you.

 

[Lime_In_Da_Coconut]

This universe? California is easily the most liberal state in the US.

In what measure? Whats your source?

You have to stop stating your opinions as facts. You were giving people a lot of shit for that here earlier.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/181505/mississippi-alabama-louisiana-conservative-states.aspx

CA is #6 according to Gallup

 

[Black Mamba]

...Drive by anywhere south of LA and then say that.

Off the top of my head: Washington, Colorado, Oregon pretty much every New England state.

San Diego isn't as conservative as people think it is. It was mostly due to the military presence and even that has changed, now. As someone who has lived there, I'd say it's decently liberal. Much more than the rest of the country.

 

[Mathunilx]

I don't think you're inferior at all and you shouldn't die in a fire but I highly question your priorities if you think attitudes in political discourse is the biggest problem in America right now.

I think you underestimate the importance of attitude in political discourse.
There are many issues that are extremely important right now and political discourse can make them worse or better which is why political discourse is rather important.

You don't get to just hide behind, it's my opinion bro. Liking five guys over in and out is an opinion. Stating that you know personhood begins at conception isn't an opinion, it is a factual statement. Stating that marriage equality is the equivalent of Dred Scott isn't an opinion. Saying that SCOTUS doesn't have the power to do what they are doing isn't an opinion. Those are factual statements that are either right or wrong. People keep hiding about this it's my opinion nonsense.

I will not think less of you if you say, hey guys I don't know about this issue. I will think less of you if you say, meh all that data sure is neat but I still have a different 'opinion'.

I get what you're saying, it's extremely frustrating when facts point to something and someone will dismiss it because it doesn't fit with their world views. That's when people us "it's my opinions". What I'm saying is that, sadly, that's how the human mind works. Seeing things that conflict with our world view will push us further into our little "bubble". So that's why I'm saying that, even though it's wrong to ignore facts or studies, the way to change other people's mind is not by crudely pointing out someone is wrong. it's by talking to that person and changing his mind little by little. Having someone who adheres to some kind of ideology change his world view won't happen on a forum, it will happen after years of new experiences with different people.

I mean, I admit that you can't show me any data that would convince me one way or the other, because I don't believe economic theory si developed enough to answer the question. If it were, 99% of the economists in the world would have reached a consensus, just as scientists have with global warming, vaccines, and other pressing issues.

There's 1 study from the IMF about the effects of trickle down economics. Great, now where's the other 999 studies necessary to form a reasonable level of confidence that their study was correct?

Maybe in 100 years.

Economic theory is very developed. Keynesian, liberal, Chicago school, austrian etc
We have enough empirical data to understand a lot of what's happening right now. The problem is that not enough people have the knowledge to understand the data and most people miss-represent it.

I feel like even if I were to take a study and explain the numbers and results, you still would not be willing to change your mind. Am I wrong in assuming so? I am basing this question on the sentence where you say "I don't believe economic theory is developed enough to answer the question". Believing is irrelevant, because that is not supported by facts.

 

[Knoxcore]

Trump won't go 3rd party, bet he is out by the end of the year.

That's what I'm thinking too. But what do I know? I was one of the people who said the McCain comments will end him. Couple weeks later and his poll numbers doubled. So here is to Clinton vs. Bush vs. Trump. May the best woman win.

 

[Ecotic]

If California isn't, then what state is? CA is sickeningly liberal.

California is the biggest basket of safe blue electoral votes, but I'd say most of New England, Washington State, maybe Maryland are more liberal.

 

[linkboy]

If California isn't, then what state is? CA is sickeningly liberal.

It's really not, its just that Sacramento, the Bay Atea, Los Angeles and San Diego make it so.

There's a huge disconnect between the major cities and the more rural counties, especially the further north you go.

 

[Jonm1010]

California is the biggest basket of safe blue electoral votes, but I'd say most of New England, Oregon, Washington State, maybe Maryland are more liberal.

California had more people vote for Romney then Texas did. Because the state is blue nationally people forget that it also has some very red areas as well.

I might also be mistaken but I think California has a fairly odd state constitution that actually gives more power and influence to minority parties them most other states.

 

[Patrol]

...Drive by anywhere south of LA and then say that.

Off the top of my head: Washington, Colorado, Oregon pretty much every New England state.

California is incredibly diverse, so there are portions where it's undoubtedly conservative. But you'll be hardpressed to find a more left-leaning demographic than in the Bay areas. It's one of the reasons many Northern Californians have attempted (futile, mind you) to divide the state into two.

 

[Relentless 757]

But in what universe is it "the most liberal?"

We still have the death penalty, ffs.

I don't know if it is the "most" liberal. It certainly is the most important in terms of the presidential race for Democrats.

According to a Gallup poll, Massachusetts is. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/181505/mississippi-alabama-louisiana-conservative-states.aspx)

 

[Fenderputty]

Sickeningly liberal. Lol

 

[cpp_is_king]

I feel like even if I were to take a study and explain the numbers and results, you still would not be willing to change your mind. Am I wrong in assuming so? I am basing this question on the sentence where you say "I don't believe economic theory is developed enough to answer the question". Believing is irrelevant, because that is not supported by facts.

Just to be clear, I would probably not be willing to change my mind that the problem remains unsolved after reading one study, yes. I might be able to agree that the problem is solved under some narrow set of assumptions made by the paper. I certainly would not be convinced that it is a future-proof model of economics that can be adapted to any geography, any culture, any demographic, and any political environment. Economic theory is based largely on empirical data and studying history, and you can't study the effects of things that haven't happened yet.

If we were talking about a mathematical paper I would certainly believe it, because each step can be derived from the previous step with no unknown variables.

 

[SmackCrackleNPop]

Oregon and Washington are more liberal. And northeast.

Pockets in CA are deeply blue and the rest is red but not enough people live in those areas.

even our conservatives are relatively liberal compared to a lot of the country.

 

[Omiee]

is there a link to the highlights of the debate?

 

[ivysaur12]

This universe? California is easily the most liberal state in the US.

It's a very liberal state, but it's not the most liberal. Not by a long shot.

California has a Cook PVI of D+9. Hawaii is D+20. Vermont is D+16. New York and Rhode Island are D+11. Massachusetts and Maryland are D+10.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

One graph with no context or information about how to interpret it was posted. Anyone can cherry pick. You can cherry pick Kansas and whatever that graph was supposed to mean, and I can point out that the most liberal state in the country, California, has the highest average cost of living in the country causing it to be seen as a rich man's state.

I'm not sure why I even bother, but:

I provided context and explained my reasoning in my first post, you asked me to clarify and I did in a later post

I'm not sure how that is even remotely comparable to talking about California (which is supposedly the most liberal state in America) without talking about what specific policies they have enacted which you want to disprove with data, and using a metric like cost of living which is not remotely as relevant a metric to use to judge efficacy of economic policy as is employment numbers.

And I'm not sure why I'm getting myself into this totally meaningless side debate, but literally within a few minutes of googling, you would find Gallup research that indicates that California is not the most liberal state in the country, as already shown by Lime_In_Da_Coconut:

In what measure? Whats your source?

You have to stop stating your opinions as facts. You were giving people a lot of shit for that here earlier.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/181505/mississippi-alabama-louisiana-conservative-states.aspx

CA is #6 according to Gallup

 

[Oddduck]

Biggest loser of the night was Rand Paul. He looked so tired and frustrated for the entire night.

I laughed when Paul tried to accuse Trump of being corrupt because he gave money to candidates to get favors. Then Trump struck back saying, "Yeah, and I also gave money to you".

 

[The Beard]

It's really not, its just that Sacramento, the Bay Atea, Los Angeles and San Diego make it so.

There's a huge disconnect between the major cities and the more rural counties, especially the further north you go.

That's how all states are though. Even Texas has Liberal cities.

 

[jwhit28]

As a rare conservative here, I thought Rubio and surprisingly Huckabee had a good night. Cruz, Kasich were decent. Bush was blah, as was Walker.

Trump was horrific and his poll numbers will likely drop quickly despite his loyal followers voting him winner on Drudge polls.

The only one who did worse today than Trump was Lindsey Graham who sounded awful and looked fucking constipated and in dire need of a bathroom. I was half expecting him to be gone after each commercial break.

Jindal and Fiorina were the only two that did a decent job at the kids table. She did well in interview with Chris Mathews on Harball as well. Perhaps she gets enough of a bump to be at the adult table next debate.

Personally do you feel good about any of these people being president? Even the conservatives I know seem to be down on the whole group. Who are you pulling for?

 

[danthefan]

Are there any good podcasts out there that would cover this debate/the election in general? Live in Europe so hard to watch them.

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

So that's why I'm saying that, even though it's wrong to ignore facts or studies, the way to change other people's mind is not by crudely pointing out someone is wrong. it's by talking to that person and changing his mind little by little. Having someone who adheres to some kind of ideology change his world view won't happen on a forum, it will happen after years of new experiences with different people.

You are assuming that all individuals are open to a change of perspective. Go to Rick Santorum and change his 'opinion' on personhood at conception. To the individuals saying that racism is a thing of the past. Marriage equality should be a states rights issue. Climate change, evolution, vaccines causing autism, etc. etc. A very large portion of this stuff is based in something that is impermeable to facts, reason, and evidence. If you are going to continually hold these views and hide behind, hey bro it's my opinion you have to respect it...well sorry no.

 

[cpp_is_king]

I'm not sure why I even bother, but:

I provided context and explained my reasoning in my first post, you asked me to clarify and I did.

I'm not sure how that is even remotely comparable to talking about California (which is supposedly the most liberal state in America) without talking about what specific policies they have enacted which you want to disprove with data, and using a metric like cost of living which is not remotely as relevant a metric to use to judge efficacy of economic policy as is employment numbers.

And I'm not sure why I'm getting myself into this totally meaningless side debate, but literally within one minute of googling, you would find Gallup research that indicates that California is not the most liberal state in the country. Not even in the top ten.

That was from 2013. In any case, in 2015 it's number 6. So everybody's wrong, /shrug

 

[Calamari41]

Oregon and Washington are more liberal. And northeast.

Pockets in CA are deeply blue and the rest is red but not enough people live in those areas.

even our conservatives are relatively liberal compared to a lot of the country.

The difference is that California conservatives aren't the same breed as the "God talks to me" types that you might find more commonly in the rest of the country.

In Orange County at least, it's more foreign policy and economics than social issues.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

That was from 2013. In any case, in 2015 it's number 6. So everybody's wrong, /shrug

You caught me before my edit.

 

[Averon]

When's the first Democratic debate?

 

[Lime_In_Da_Coconut]

That was from 2013. In any case, in 2015 it's number 6. So everybody's wrong, /shrug

Not everyone, just you.

 

[CharminUltra]

California is more diverse than you'd think, actually. Fucking Orange County.

Love it here, but the area is consevartive as fuck. Hello, Newport Beach, Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, Irvine, etc.

 

[Lime_In_Da_Coconut]

San Diego isn't as conservative as people think it is. It was mostly due to the military presence and even that has changed, now. As someone who has lived there, I'd say it's decently liberal. Much more than the rest of the country.

I was actually talking about Orange County.

Edit: Ridley knows what I'm talking about.

 

[cpp_is_king]

Not everyone, just you.

Funny, because I could've sworn you said this:

Off the top of my head: Washington, Colorado, Oregon pretty much every New England state.

 

[speculawyer]

Biggest loser of the night was Rand Paul. He looked so tired and frustrated for the entire night.

I laughed when Paul tried to accuse Trump of being corrupt because he gave money to candidates to get favors. Then Trump struck back saying, "Yeah, and I also gave money to you".

And 3 of Rand Paul's campaign people just got indicted. Lol

 

[Fenderputty]

As a rare conservative here, I thought Rubio and surprisingly Huckabee had a good night. Cruz, Kasich were decent. Bush was blah, as was Walker.

Trump was horrific and his poll numbers will likely drop quickly despite his loyal followers voting him winner on Drudge polls.

The only one who did worse today than Trump was Lindsey Graham who sounded awful and looked fucking constipated and in dire need of a bathroom. I was half expecting him to be gone after each commercial break.

Jindal and Fiorina were the only two that did a decent job at the kids table. She did well in interview with Chris Mathews on Harball as well. Perhaps she gets enough of a bump to be at the adult table next debate.

I agree with the majority of this. Except trump. He got railroaded and countered in the exact way he got his #'s. I wish there were more Kasichs on the right. Would be good for actual conversation

 

[hydrophilic attack]

Funny, because I could've sworn you said this:

Well done.

Now could you please elaborate on how cost-of-living data (which you have neglected to share) can be used to judge specific economic policy in California?

 

[Black Mamba]

I was actually talking about Orange County.

Edit: Ridley knows what I'm talking about.

Well, SD is south of LA and is the 3rd largest city!

Orange county is conservative, but it's not the same as Mississippi conservative. A lot of OC is simply rich dudes wanting to get more tax breaks and less gov't welfare cuz fuck it, they got theirs. They aren't that socially conservative and religious.