US Politics Thread |OT| THE DARKEST TIMELINE

[Brehvolution]

[Rufus]

It's based on a Kermit meme, they just switched out the head.

[studyguy]

I feel bad for Jeb!
Heard NPR this morning about him rolling around with his mom now... He had a sad little realization in the clip too.
Something like "Wow, well mom I don't normally draw this large a crowd..."
 

[Phoenix Dark]

His mom is blunt as fuck too. Imagine all the negative shit she says to him behind the scenes.

Jeb

[Mandark]

Man, I've got a hot take in my head about Trump basically being the new Bill Buckley, but none of my online spaces are populated with enough snooty conservatives to really rustle any jimmies.  What a waste.

[benjipwns]

BENJI, YOU OK?

IF YOU'RE OK PLEASE LET US KNOW WHO'S RUNNING ON THE LIBERTARIAN TICKET THIS YEAR

Gary Johnson unless the convention revolts against him, which it probably won't because you can generally trust in the convention to weed out the "child molestation isn't wrong if it's consensual", loser Republicans trying to get a second wind, various anarchists and just plain weirdos for the biggest name.

Except for 2008, which never happened. NEVER HAPPENED.

And except for 2004. There's still no proof Badnarik actually was nominated instead of everybody assuming he was when he said so. (Though I kinda like the guy.)

spoiler (click to show/hide)

From Wikipedia:

At the 2004 Libertarian National Convention, Badnarik gained substantial support following the candidates' debate (broadcast live on C-SPAN). In the closest presidential nomination race in the Libertarian Party's 32-year history, all three candidates polled within 12 votes of each other on the first ballot (Russo 258, Badnarik 256, Nolan 246). When the second ballot placed the candidates in the same order, Gary Nolan was eliminated and threw his support to Badnarik; Badnarik won the nomination on the third ballot 417 to 348, with None of the Above receiving six votes.

Nolan had been the "assumed" candidate. None of the Above was robbed.

Sidenote to this sidenote: At the LPC, if None of the Above wins so many times (I think twice, might be three times), all the existing candidates are barred and new ones have to be nominated.

[close]

Rand wasn't looking like he'd be competitive for Michigan anyhow, so I definitely get to vote for Bernie now. If I vote. Which I might. My mom's going to be working the polls now that she's retired, she wanted to for a while, and I kept telling her to do so before a Presidential election so you aren't thrown into the wolves. Luckily, Michigan has three elections before the general election this year!

[benjipwns]

I swear every four years Tom Friedman writes the same column about some movement to draft an independent candidate who will unify the country, because people are tired of bickering partisanship.

Friedman (and Brooks who sometimes writes the same column) got beat this cycle:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/why-mike-bloomberg-can-win-1454542034


http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/267403-luntz-bloomberg-can-win-the-presidency
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-richie/how-mike-bloomberg-could_b_9065804.html

[benjipwns]

Iowa Democratic Party officials are reviewing results from the Iowa caucuses and making updates where discrepancies have been found.

Party Chairwoman Andy McGuire the day after Monday's caucuses said no review would be conducted, and that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s narrow victory over Bernie Sanders was final.

But as errors are being discovered, the final tally is being changed, party officials confirmed to the Des Moines Register on Friday.

"Both the Sanders and Clinton campaigns have flagged a very small number of concerns for us, and we are looking at them all on a case-by-case basis," Iowa Democratic Party spokesman Sam Lau told the Register.

The latest development follows widespread questions among Iowa Democrats and national media about the accuracy of the counts reported on caucus night, which saw the second-highest number of participants and closest result in Democrats' caucus history.

The Register, too, has received numerous reports that the results announced at precincts Monday night don't match what the Iowa Democratic Party has posted on its official results website.

Just one example: Grinnell precinct No. 1.

At least three caucusgoers there (including Dan McCue and Zack Stewart) and the Grinnell College newspaper reported that Sanders won 19 county delegates and Clinton 7, but party officials said the final tally was Sanders 18 and Clinton 8.

“19-7 is right,” Pablo Silva, a Grinnell College professor who was precinct secretary, told the Register Friday. “It is complicated, but the issue comes down to a problem with the math that can be complicated in large precincts. Short version: On Monday night, the IDP felt we had not done it right, and they attempted to correct what they saw as errors. We’ve been in touch since then. They are acknowledging our results, but, as I write, will wait on the arrival of our paperwork.”

Lau confirmed those details.

Say what you will about the Republicans but they did a pretty good overhaul of their Presidential primary process this cycle. The Paul and Tea Party people running roughshod over the old processes in almost every state the last five years must have put quite the fright into them to separate and simplify stuff.

[Mandark]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity08

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_Elect

Then there was Lawrence Lessig and his plan to get elected, pass campaign finance reform, then immediately resign.  Which was a different kind of goofy, but still.

[benjipwns]

Bloomberg's always a good example of what you mentioned in my opinion, socially progressive fiscally moderate-to-conservative billionaire tycoon whose big personal issues are gun control and salt. Yeah, that's the kind of guy who the country is clamoring for. But in punditocracy he's kinda the king of the "important people" circle. Even Trump figured out to run on immigration/trade/jobs while working his wealth both ways "higher taxes/I'm awesome!" (As did Perot.)

Rudy had something similar going in GOP circles where they imagined all this crossover appeal because he was a R who won in NYC and pro-choice, pro-gays, etc. yet was tough on crime/terrorism. Colin Powell before him only with foreign policy instead of crime/terrorism. Sam Nunn an inverse.

Obama, Bill Clinton, and H.W. Bush were kinda these types of Presidents, although not candidates perhaps, with socially acceptable views (even if wink-wink) and otherwise not too much of a boat rocker. W. Bush by contrast had that whole born again thing going on and went to bed early. Reagan had his unacceptable rhetoric. Carter had his scolding and being his own chief of staff thing, he also didn't care for the gala circuit either.

[benjipwns]

Johm McCain had the same thing going for a little while too. There were people wanting a third party run in 2004 or being Kerry's running mate. (Including Kerry himself.) And then years later people like Brooks wanted him to pick Lieberman as his running mate as that kind of dream ticket.

Though McCain wasn't really ever the ideal candidate issue wise, he had, like Lieberman, just fit himself in with the media so much and took shots at his own party from time to time.

[Joe Molotov]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity08

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_Elect

Then there was Lawrence Lessig and his plan to get elected, pass campaign finance reform, then immediately resign.  Which was a different kind of goofy, but still.

I can't wait for our country to become the Twitch Plays Pokemon of Democracy.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

[close]

[benjipwns]

[Mupepe]

Written by drinkys cousin?

[thisismyusername]

Having to enroll at BJU. 

Look at it this way, you can say you enrolled in Blow Job Uni.

...On second thought, maybe that doesn't work in your particular case...

[HyperZoneWasAwesome]

(Image removed from quote.)

that's almost an inverted cross.

[Phoenix Dark]

Written by drinkys cousin?

When he's not riding his scooter, Mr. Erickson enjoys spending time with his family and testifying for his lord and savior, Jesus Christ.

[Human Snorenado]

Someone call Rubio's next of kin

[Great Rumbler]

Get legit shook by Christie, brehs.

[Madrun Badrun]

Holy shit that is brutal.  Since when can you boo in a debate btw?

[brawndolicious]

David Muir grabbing Jeb to cool it down. 

Holy shit that is brutal.  Since when can you boo in a debate btw?

That's actually been happening at a lot of Republican debates, mostly due to something Trump said. I guess that door can't be shut now but it's easy to see why it happened tonight. The funny thing is Rubio is their best shot at winning the general election but he just flopped around like he was being gutted by an Iron Chef.

[Take My Breh Away]

[Mupepe]

"Don't walk away from me, Bernie Sanders!" got me good

[Boogie]

Someone call Rubio's next of kin

Christie calling Rubio out on memorized rote answers, while cribbing his burn from The West Wing.

[Phoenix Dark]

I will say this though...Rubio ultimately makes a good point. Is Obama the most incompetent feckless president of all time or has he "changed" America and been effective at implementing his agenda? It can't be both. Name some presidents with more consequential legislative victories over the last 60 years. LBJ obviously, but after that I'm not sure anyone trumps Obama.

This entire fight for the nomination revolves entirely around shit that Obama has done. Obamacare, stimulus, Dodd Frank etc are mentioned at every debate.

[Purrp Skirrp]

[Atramental]

The tow truck union needs the extra work! 

[Samson Manhug]

Hillary supporters did the Bernie bro thing with Obama in 08, too:


http://www.salon.com/2008/04/14/obama_supporters/

[Mandark]

But there really was a huge amount of sexism directed towards Hillary by Obama supporters during that campaign, at least as I saw it.

What point are you trying to make with these posts?

[HyperZoneWasAwesome]

I will say this though...Rubio ultimately makes a good point. Is Obama the most incompetent feckless president of all time or has he "changed" America and been effective at implementing his agenda? It can't be both. Name some presidents with more consequential legislative victories over the last 60 years. LBJ obviously, but after that I'm not sure anyone trumps Obama.

This entire fight for the nomination revolves entirely around shit that Obama has done. Obamacare, stimulus, Dodd Frank etc are mentioned at every debate.

The cult of Reagan is stupid as shit, but the sea change to conservative politics during his reign is certainly not insignificant, and we're at year 13 and counting of W's "Operation Let's Make the Middle East Even More of a Fustercluck", which to date really does still drive a lot of our major foreign and domestic policy decisions.

[benjipwns]

[Phoenix Dark]

But there really was a huge amount of sexism directed towards Hillary by Obama supporters during that campaign, at least as I saw it.

What point are you trying to make with these posts?

Agreed. If anything I'd say there's a #duality between legitimate complaints about sexism and Hillary supporters' refusal to admit sexism isn't the only or biggest reason people really dislike her. GAF is full of people calling Hillary a bitch, she's called a cunt often on social media, etc. On the other hand every debate or event features her saying something that just boggles the mind with how asinine it is. Like Rubio, if you can throw her off her talking points things go poorly. Hence using 911 to justify her Wall St support, her defense of the Goldman Sachs speaking fees, the recent refusal to release transcripts of her paid speeches, etc. It's Romney-esque in terms of clumsy obliviousness.

I think Hillary is a weak politician who has spent her career following the winds of political opinion without actually getting anything done (as a senator). I get why people don't trust or like her. But she's smart and holds no illusions with how DC works or the hatred she inspires from republicans. And I'll be voting for her in November assuming she's not in jail 

[Madrun Badrun]

Did you just remember a specific post you made on neogaf nearly a decade ago, Mandark?

[Madrun Badrun]

what a mess

[Joe Molotov]

He had to take a little nap on the way out.

[Human Snorenado]

[helios]

That dude is a goddamn neurosurgeon

[Phoenix Dark]

Honestly when I saw it live I assumed he did it as some bullshit humility thing, ie let every one else go out on stage first.

[Atramental]

Whatever software was used for that gif, I need to get on that shit

Adobe After Effects, I assume.

[benjipwns]

Trump was the only one smart enough not to go out with a suspicious looking black man behind him.

[Joe Molotov]

Reminder that PD voted for this.

[Human Snorenado]

The L that keeps on giving

[benjipwns]

"I had no idea, like seriously no idea," laughed Leavitt. "We delivered it to the West End Grill and put it down and I'm taking photos of the cake. Then Claudia, who was also working on the cake with me, looks up and sees Rick Snyder on all the photos in the room, and so we put two and two together.

[benjipwns]

HILLARY DOOMED

Hillary and Bill Clinton are so dissatisfied with their campaign’s messaging and digital operations they are considering staffing and strategy changes after what’s expected to be a loss in Tuesday’s primary here, according to a half-dozen people with direct knowledge of the situation.

The Clintons -- stung by her narrow victory in Iowa -- had been planning to reassess staffing at the campaign’s Brooklyn headquarters after the first four primaries, but the Clintons have become increasingly caustic in their criticism of aides and demanded the reassessment sooner, a source told POLITICO.

“The Clintons are not happy, and have been letting all of us know that,” said one Democratic official who speaks regularly to both. “The idea is that we need a more forward-looking message, for the primary – but also for the general election too… There’s no sense of panic, but there is an urgency to fix these problems right now.”

Ultimately, the disorganization is the candidate’s own decision-making, which lurches from hands-off delegation in times of success to hands-around-the-throat micromanagement when things go south.

At the heart of problem this time, staffers, donors and Clinton-allied operatives say, was the Clinton’s decision not to appoint a single empowered chief strategist – a role the forceful but controversial Mark Penn played in 2008 – and disperse decision-making responsibility to a sprawling team with fuzzy lines of authority.

“There’s nobody sitting in the middle of this empowered to create a message and implement it,” said one former Obama 2008 aide. “They are kind of rudderless… occasionally Hillary grabs the rudder, but until recently she was that interested in [working on messaging]… Look, she going to be the nominee, but she’s not going to get any style points and if she isn’t careful she is going to be a wounded nominee. And they better worked this shit out fast because who ever the Republicans pick is going to be 29 times tougher than Bernie.”

The focus of their dissatisfaction in recent days is the campaign’s top pollster and strategist Joel Benenson, whom one Clinton insider described as being “on thin ice,” as the former first couple vented its frustrations about messaging following Clinton’s uncomfortably close 0.25 percent win in last week’s caucuses. Benenson, multiple staffers and operatives say, has been equally frustrated with the Clintons’ habit of tapping a rolling cast of about a dozen outside advisers – who often have the candidate’s ear outside the official channels of communication.

The result is a muddled all-the-above messaging strategy that emphasizes different messages – and mountains of arcane policy proposals – in stark contrast to Bernie Sanders’ punchy and relentless messaging on income inequality.

In President Obama’s two successful campaigns, access to the candidate was carefully monitored by campaign manager David Plouffe and other top advisers to ensure that the messaging and communications teams had coherent and cohesive short- and long-term plans. So far Clinton ’16 – which is supposed to be modeled on the Obama efforts – has functioned sloppily, with the Clintons absorbing off-the-books advice – even strategy memos – from family friends and advisers like Sidney Blumenthal, branding expert Gary Spence, ex-Virginia Rep. Don Beyer, current Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe and even Penn, who speaks exclusively to the former president, according to multiple sources.

In recent days, Hillary Clinton has tasked her campaign manager Robbie Mook – an expert at field organizing who commands the nearly unanimous loyalty of his staff – to expand his role from primary-and-caucus-state ground game logistics to messaging, with an additional emphasis on beefing up the campaign’s underperforming digital operation, which is seen as a key to challenging Sanders’ primacy with Democrats under 30.

Insiders said the problem remains her message. “The message is, she’s fighting. She’s fighting for you,” said one ally. “We have to drive that.”

The mention of Bill makes me wonder, seriously, has there been any genuine affection displayed between them in this campaign?

[Samson Manhug]

But there really was a huge amount of sexism directed towards Hillary by Obama supporters during that campaign, at least as I saw it.

What point are you trying to make with these posts?

I suppose my point is something you covered already in '08: That Clinton supporters cynically try to use the perception of sexism to paint her as a victim and make valid criticism of her out of bounds.

But maybe, like in '08, it's still not working as well as hoped?

CONCORD, N.H. — On the eve of the New Hampshire primary, Hillary Clinton’s quest to become the country’s first female president has encountered an unexpected problem: She is having trouble persuading women, young and old, to rally behind her cause.

The latest sign came Sunday, when a new CNN-WMUR survey here showed Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont beating Clinton among women by eight percentage points — which represents a big shift from the results last week in the Iowa caucuses, where Clinton won women by 11 points.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2016/02/07/8c73740c-c50a-11e5-a4aa-f25866ba0dc6_story.html

[Madrun Badrun]

Is it sexism to not want to vote for someone out of fear that will blow up the world after a bad period  of Russian aggression?

Does everyone just forget how Margaret Thatcher made the Scots do things they weren't into during a bad period  of economic downturn and almost caused them to secede a few decades later when they were still disgusted by what they had to do for the sake of the union?

spoiler (click to show/hide)

[close]

[brob]

That Clinton supporters cynically try to use the perception of sexism to paint her as a victim and make valid criticism of her out of bounds.

Which is in turn used to make valid criticism of the sexism out of bounds. You don't have to participate in this reactionary clown car race you know.

[Phoenix Dark]

That's ironic given how toxic the Clintons attempt to retain black support in 08 became. That movement, perhaps culminating with the South Carolina "fairy tale" comment by Bill, really hurt them. And we're kind of seeing a similar thing play out now with a couple prominent Clinton supporters slamming women who dare vote for Sanders.

I don't think women will abandon Hillary like black people did in 08 but even losing a few points could hurt her in the primaries....oh wait, she's running against Bernie Sanders. It doesn't matter, she's going to win handily.

[Mandark]

I suppose my point is something you covered already in '08: That Clinton supporters cynically try to use the perception of sexism to paint her as a victim and make valid criticism of her out of bounds.

First, if there are repeated instances of sexism/racism in a community and everyone's first response is to close ranks and dismiss it as a problem, you gotta re-examine some shit.

Second, on the subject of "making valid criticism of [a candidate] out of bounds" HOOOOOO BOY do Bernie fans deal poorly with their boy getting anything but gushing praise.  Basically everything is an orchestrated attempt by the plutocracy and its sheeple to suppress a revolution.

[Phoenix Dark]

Well we all know you're a member of the establishment so your criticisms of Bernie Sanders aren't surprising, Mandark.

[Atramental]

 

[benjipwns]

Well we all know you're a member of the establishment so your criticisms of Bernie Sanders aren't surprising, Mandark.

(Image removed from quote.)

Why won't she release all the transcripts and recordings of her Goldman Sachs ceremonies speeches?

[benjipwns]

spoiler (click to show/hide)

[close]

[benjipwns]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/02/sanderss-party-problem/460293/

When a party chooses its presidential candidate, it also chooses its party leader in the election. This year the Democrats face an unusual situation. Bernie Sanders isn’t just an outsider to the party establishment; he’s not even been a member of the party, and has long excoriated it in unsparing language. Although the media haven’t much focused on this history, the early signs suggest it could become a problem for Sanders in getting the nomination—and a problem for the party if he does get it.

NYBamBam • 7 hours ago
For over 20 years, the Clinton mafia and their allies have wiped out any Democratic candidate who did not espouse neoliberal values. Their success depended on 'the captured' New Deal/Great Society democrats, based in the idea that these voters had no where to go. By the time the economy collapsed, there was precious little to vote for except neoliberal, bait-and-switch Democrats or wingnut Republicans.

So we coalesed around Obama and blew the Clintons away in 2008. Unfortunately, Obama was a bait-and-switch Democrat too. A Clinton presidency, in all but name, who threw everyone in economic danger under a bus in the worst economic climate since the Great Depression, while saving the rich and the guilty.

Then the cheap seats had their say in 2010 and 2014, we showed them that 'captured voters' do have another option besides voting for that Ivy League, banker boy crap: we can just stay home on election day.

I think it says volumes about the state of the Democratic party that an outsider, who attacked the party leadership for decades is overthrowing Clinton's coronation by neoliberal leaders. It says we aren't voting for Ivy League, banker boy, New World Order Democrats any more. Those running for other offices should catch a clue quickly. Neoliberalism is dead and defeat awaits all those who peddle that Republican-lite, elitist crap.

Nopoisonforme  NYBamBam • 3 hours ago
Right on! Go Bernie!
What they don't realize though, and Bernie tries to say it, this is just the beginning. It will not stop with the 2016 general election for president. What Bernie has started will grow beyond their belief.

Nick Raven • 4 hours ago
Bernie is what the Democratic Party used to be. I am 65 a life long registered Democrat. If the party elite decide there is no room for Bernie, then I'll decide there is no room for me. You pundits have it backwards, the Democratic Party should accept Bernie. If the party looses many voters like me who have voted in every election since 72, and by the way never for a Republican, they will be a minority party.

John Armstrong • 5 hours ago
It may be hard for an academic even a very liberal one to truly understand the alienation that has happened to the working people of this country. In order to regain power the Democratic party abandoned us in the 1980's and 1990's. Clintonian triangulation brought it back to power but at an enormous cost. One person's free trade is another's unemployment. Entire regions have been decimated. Why? So we can buy cheap Chinese sneakers at a Walmart? To make sure the Walton's stay rich? My liberal friends say free trade is inevitable. If we look at all of the historical abuses of capitalism, child labor, eighty hour work weeks, unsafe factories, polluted environment, all of those things at one time or another were deemed inevitable by many.
With Sanders we dare to believe that the box you have put us in is made of cardboard, and it's time to break out.

baboo • 5 hours ago
What Sanders says is true. The Democratic party was taken over by corporatists - the DLC and the Clintons - in the 90s. This coup reconstructed Democratic politics around the trickle down voodoo economics espoused by Reagan. The author, Paul Starr, was a White House counselor to Bill Clinton and one of the architects of Democratic neoliberalism.

Under their leadership, Democrats abandoned the working class, and worked with the Republicans to destroy the achievements of the New Deal. Sanders represents the leader of the resistance, the old style Democratic politics of FDR - when the party was loved and dominated American politics. He certainly represents a threat to the way of doing business of most elected officials, but they are despised by the American public. Let's remember that Congress ranks below cockroaches according to the American public.

[Mandark]

Speaking of criticizing Bernie, is there a good explanation out there for how breaking up the larger banks would prevent another financial crisis?

Actual question, since the people I read on this subject are skeptical of TBTF as a useful framework (and it doesn't really jibe with how I learned to understand bank runs waaaay back in the day), I haven't really been exposed to the counterargument.

Anyone linking me to Matt Taibbi can get the fuck outta here though.

[Samson Manhug]

That Clinton supporters cynically try to use the perception of sexism to paint her as a victim and make valid criticism of her out of bounds.

Which is in turn used to make valid criticism of the sexism out of bounds. You don't have to participate in this reactionary clown car race you know.

A fair point. The author of that '08 piece (the woman, not Mandark) had a good point today as well:


https://twitter.com/rtraister

Thinking about it, I think the Bernie bro criticism upset me because:

a. I hadn't encountered it in real life
b. I didn't find it important to my goals (i.e. another progressive being elected)

Ironically, both of those things are common criticisms by feminists of patriarchy/positions of privilege.

I'm going to take the L on this one and acknowledge that anti-feminists and even misogynists do support Bernie Sanders, whether I like it or not. Going forward, I will not attempt to invalidate these observations, and I will be more careful not to dismiss feminists' claims because I don't consciously encounter them or because they don't align with my worldview.

[curly]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/02/sanderss-party-problem/460293/

 

The Democratic party tearing itself apart

[benjipwns]

Speaking of criticizing Bernie, is there a good explanation out there for how breaking up the larger banks would prevent another financial crisis?

Actual question, since the people I read on this subject are skeptical of TBTF as a useful framework (and it doesn't really jibe with how I learned to understand bank runs waaaay back in the day), I haven't really been exposed to the counterargument.

Anyone linking me to Matt Taibbi can get the fuck outta here though.

Monopoly capital accumulation in large organizations is the crisis of the last stage of capitalism. Maybe listen to some actual economists who know about economies and banks and Wall Street and capitalists and stuff instead of neoliberal banker boy shills?

http://robertreich.org/post/137109198285

If you haven’t yet seen “The Big Short” – directed and co-written by Adam McKay, based on the non-fiction prize-winning book by Michael Lewis about the housing and credit bubble that triggered the Great Recession — I recommend you do so.

...

Most importantly, the movie shows why Bernie Sanders’s plan to break up the biggest banks and reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act (separating investment from commercial banking) is necessary – and why Hillary Clinton’s more modest plan is inadequate.

More facts supporters can be found at: https://berniesanders.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Wall-St-Letter-1.pdf

spoiler (click to show/hide)

spoiler (click to show/hide)

"Political Revolution!!" arrow looks like a dick jizzing. He drew another arrow like this in one of his other videos.

[close]

[close]

[Madrun Badrun]

https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/44ph08/what_happened_to_marco_rubio_in_the_latest_gop/czrzf6y

[Steve Contra]

Since Bernie isn't actually going to break up the banks, how would he make incremental changes to strengthen the current system?