Sellouts to the Left. Sellouts to the Right.


Off-Topic Discussions

451 to 500 of 522 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
To be honest, I'm so burned out by this election, I just want it to be over. I do care about who wins, but not nearly as much as I just want this crapfest to be over for another four years.

Part of the reason it IS such a crapfest is that so many voters won't be bothered to show up at the polls unless it's a Presidential election. That's the exact reason the Republicans have both Houses of Congress.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
I saw a tweet that said Bernie's continued support of Hillary in the face of the latest Wikileaks can only be explained by him either being bought off or fearing for his very life.

Or a trump presidency, which I'd imagine at his age is scarier than the loss of his life.


thejeff wrote:
Besides, for the moment, Republicans are doing well, other than the Presidential race. They control Congress and most of the states. They'll likely lose the Senate, but stand a good chance of winning it back in the mid-term. Any kind of split dooms it all.

You haven't seen the latest WikiLeaks, have you? This will drive more of the Sanders crowd to either kiss it off to stay home, or vote for Trump for both the values they share with the Trump crowd, or simply follow their urge to royally stick it up to the DNC establishment which is now clear did their best to rig the gaame against Sanders.

Trump has defied every analsyis which said by conventional assumptions that his candidacy could not be even considered serious, much less capture the nomination.

He IS the Republican nominee... Not presumptive...the actual real deal now. He is bringing out the angry white male vote in numbers that haven't been seen in decades... He's vindicating their point of view and giving them assurances that this time THEY MATTER. We have an electorate which has demonstrated that feelings trump not only logic, but fact. And the Democratic Party is ppoised to repeat 1968 AND David Dukakis. In this election. the true face of the American electorate is going to show itself... and it's not going to b e pretty.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Besides, for the moment, Republicans are doing well, other than the Presidential race. They control Congress and most of the states. They'll likely lose the Senate, but stand a good chance of winning it back in the mid-term. Any kind of split dooms it all.

You haven't seen the latest WikiLeaks, have you? This will drive more of the Sanders crowd to either kiss it off to stay home, or vote for Trump for both the values they share with the Trump crowd, or simply follow their urge to royally stick it up to the DNC establishment which is now clear did their best to rig the gaame against Sanders.

Trump has defied every analsyis which said by conventional assumptions that his candidacy could not be even considered serious, much less capture the nomination.

He IS the Republican nominee... Not presumptive...the actual real deal now. He is bringing out the angry white male vote in numbers that haven't been seen in decades... He's vindicating their point of view and giving them assurances that this time THEY MATTER. We have an electorate which has demonstrated that feelings trump not only logic, but fact. And the Democratic Party is ppoised to repeat 1968 AND David Dukakis. In this election. the true face of the American electorate is going to show itself... and it's not going to b e pretty.

Get back to me a week or so after the convention. We'll start to have a better idea then.

Angry white males have been one of the most reliable voting blocks for decades. There isn't as much turnout to gain there as you think. They're not the dominant force in American politics anymore. They've been the backbone of the Republican party and especially the Tea Party, but they're a smaller percentage of the country every year. Meanwhile Clinton and Trump between them are turning out Latino & Black voters and they're going almost entirely for Clinton. African Americans turned out the last two elections, but there's a lot of room for growth in Latinos.

The Wikileaks thing is likely to solidify the few hardcore supporters who haven't followed Sanders to supporting Clinton, but the vast majority have already made the jump and they're not going back - unless he pitches a fit about it. Which he won't.

It's not going to be 1968. If anything, the problem with the convention is likely to be that it's boring. :)


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Turin the Mad wrote:
It amuses me to see that both candidates' potential term of office being referred to as a regime. I think the Commie goblins of the boards would be proud. Or equally bemused. ;)

Looкs likэ I pickэd thэ wяoпg эlэctioп to quit dяiпkiпg vodkд.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Underestimating the general electorate's anger about rigged elections, untrustworthiness of candidates and so forth is what propelled Trump to the candidacy and will remain a thorn in Clinton's side through the election. That her party leadership attempted to rig things so blatantly in her favor is not going to help - only fear of Trump in the Oval Office counters that.

Were this against any sane Republican candidate, this would be a very different discussion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In the last 8 hours the DNC has had THREE people running it. Schultz's replacement was outed by the same Wikkileaks material which ousted her predecessor so now we're on Chairman Number 3.

Still think it's going to be boring? I will admit that it's highly unlikely that Sanders will be giving his own version of the Cruz speech during the convention. But the rifts...they be deep. And the 800 lb gorilla in the room remains... there's a hell of a lot of Democrats that don't like the presumptive standard bearer. That's a real crappy way to start a Presidential race.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Turin the Mad wrote:

Underestimating the general electorate's anger about rigged elections, untrustworthiness of candidates and so forth is what propelled Drumpf to the candidacy and will remain a thorn in Clinton's side through the election. That her party leadership attempted to rig things so blatantly in her favor is not going to help - only fear of Drumpf in the Oval Office counters that.

Were this against any sane Republican candidate, this would be a very different discussion.

Yeah, the public really stuck it to the establishment after all sorts of allegations of election fraud and general underhandedness in 2000.


Irontruth wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:

Underestimating the general electorate's anger about rigged elections, untrustworthiness of candidates and so forth is what propelled Drumpf to the candidacy and will remain a thorn in Clinton's side through the election. That her party leadership attempted to rig things so blatantly in her favor is not going to help - only fear of Drumpf in the Oval Office counters that.

Were this against any sane Republican candidate, this would be a very different discussion.

Yeah, the public really stuck it to the establishment after all sorts of allegations of election fraud and general underhandedness in 2000.

You don't think they wouldn't if such had come to light beforehand?

Edit: they are doing so as we speak after a fashion. Trump is one way of attempting to do so...


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Eh, you know I've been looking over this email leak stuff, and none of it is damning. None of it is even particularly shady, a few people came up with some bad ideas after Bernie had been bad mouthing them for months, those ideas were rightfully denied, the end. At this point I can only assume the people getting upset are simply looking for some conspiracy to explain why their preferred candidate lost.

It can't be that he ran a disorganized mess of a campaign (he did), it can't be that Clinton is a better politician with much more reasonable positions (she is), and it can't be that the majority of Democrats supported her over Bernie (they did). So it must be an evil conspiracy.

But hey, if people are gonna give up because the outsider with unreasonable promises lost to the long-time dedicated person who's spent a least a decade preparing for this by forming relationships, laying groundwork, and building up an organization (being a good politician) then i don't think the "revolution" was ever anything other than a flash-in-the-pan fad. Now they can go about their business of not having to put in any effort.

For all their many varied faults, the Tea Party at least realized that changing a party takes long term concerted effort. They're still working at it, and it's taken the better part of 6-8 years to fully come to fruition.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squeakmaan wrote:

Eh, you know I've been looking over this email leak stuff, and none of it is damning. None of it is even particularly shady, a few people came up with some bad ideas after Bernie had been bad mouthing them for months, those ideas were rightfully denied, the end. At this point I can only assume the people getting upset are simply looking for some conspiracy to explain why their preferred candidate lost.

It can't be that he ran a disorganized mess of a campaign (he did), it can't be that Clinton is a better politician with much more reasonable positions (she is), and it can't be that the majority of Democrats supported her over Bernie (they did). So it must be an evil conspiracy.

But hey, if people are gonna give up because the outsider with unreasonable promises lost to the long-time dedicated person who's spent a least a decade preparing for this by forming relationships, laying groundwork, and building up an organization (being a good politician) then i don't think the "revolution" was ever anything other than a flash-in-the-pan fad. Now they can go about their business of not having to put in any effort.

For all their many varied faults, the Tea Party at least realized that changing a party takes long term concerted effort. They're still working at it, and it's taken the better part of 6-8 years to fully come to fruition.

I agree, from what I've seen of the leaks. It definitely shows at least some bias on the part of the DNC, but not any actual election rigging/dirty tricks kind of stuff.

I voted for Bernie. I like many of his positions better than Clinton's. I was always more surprised that he got as far as he did than that he lost. His supporters were certainly enthusiastic, but it's easy to mistake that enthusiasm for widespread support. He held bigger rallies. Clinton got more votes.

I do hope that support can be harnessed and used to push the party farther left, even with Clinton in office. Public pressure. Primaries. State and local elections. Mid terms. Some way to keep that leftish energy from being wasted until the next presidential election.


Given that we have had TWO resignations over the WikkiLeaks material, Something has to be there... and a decent amount of it, even if it's just confirmation of what we had suspected all along.


thejeff wrote:


I do hope that support can be harnessed and used to push the party farther left, even with Clinton in office. Public pressure. Primaries. State and local elections. Mid...

The rice cooker presented for VP indicates otherwise.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Given that we have had TWO resignations over the WikkiLeaks material, Something has to be there... and a decent amount of it, even if it's just confirmation of what we had suspected all along.

Or they are doing what they feel is the right thing by getting out in front of this, to hopefully stop it from hanging on and damaging Clinton and the party further.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
thejeff wrote:
I do hope that support can be harnessed and used to push the party farther left, even with Clinton in office. Public pressure. Primaries. State and local elections. Mid...
The rice cooker presented for VP indicates otherwise.

Kaine isn't perfect, but he isn't dull. He seems to be a non-attention-seeking, self-effacing man who, like many people of faith, works hard and works intelligently to make the world a better place. I'm still reading up on him, but I admire him for what I've learned so far, even if I don't agree with all his positions.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
thejeff wrote:
I do hope that support can be harnessed and used to push the party farther left, even with Clinton in office. Public pressure. Primaries. State and local elections. Mid...
The rice cooker presented for VP indicates otherwise.
Kaine isn't perfect, but he isn't dull. He seems to be a non-attention-seeking, self-effacing man who, like many people of faith, works hard and works intelligently to make the world a better place. I'm still reading up on him, but I admire him for what I've learned so far, even if I don't agree with all his positions.

The only person I've found with whom I agree on all positions is me. And I'm not running for office.

You try to find the best fit, or (more often than I'd like) the least bad choice. It's like interviewing people for a position where you work: you can't hire the best possible candidate, you can only hire the best applicant for the job.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
The rice cooker presented for VP...

Sorry, what is the meaning behind this insult?


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
The rice cooker presented for VP...
Sorry, what is the meaning behind this insult?

Watch the John Oliver clip


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
The rice cooker presented for VP...
Sorry, what is the meaning behind this insult?

Look up the latest Jon Oliver show "Last Week Tonight" on either HBO or the YouTube Channel. Or click on the link in my earlier posting. And for all that, at least he's not the rice cooker with hate slogans hand painted all over it, that Trump's VP is.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
The rice cooker presented for VP...
Sorry, what is the meaning behind this insult?

John Oliver reference...he compared Kaine with getting a rice cooker as a christmas present...serviceable but kind of boring and not likely to cause any excitement.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
The rice cooker presented for VP...
Sorry, what is the meaning behind this insult?
John Oliver reference...he compared Kaine with getting a rice cooker as a christmas present...serviceable but kind of boring and not likely to cause any excitement.

Which is a pretty bad reason to slam a VP candidate. 2 minutes, 45 seconds of "well, he's boring" is a waste of bandwidth.


MMCJawa wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
The rice cooker presented for VP...
Sorry, what is the meaning behind this insult?
John Oliver reference...he compared Kaine with getting a rice cooker as a christmas present...serviceable but kind of boring and not likely to cause any excitement.

And Pence as the same make and model of rice cooker,only with hate slogans hand written on it.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I knew I forgot to watch something yesterday.


Turin the Mad wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
The rice cooker presented for VP...
Sorry, what is the meaning behind this insult?
John Oliver reference...he compared Kaine with getting a rice cooker as a christmas present...serviceable but kind of boring and not likely to cause any excitement.
Which is a pretty bad reason to slam a VP candidate. 2 minutes, 45 seconds of "well, he's boring" is a waste of bandwidth.
Agreed. Oliver & his writers sacrificed truth for a lame joke.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
And Pence as the same make and model of rice cooker,only with hate slogans hand written on it.

If Kaine is a boring white "rice cooker", Pence is a septic tank pump. Pence's most redeeming quality is he isn't quite as horrifying as Trump or Cruz.

And I refuse to call Kaine a rice cooker until we've seen a demonstration of how well he makes pancakes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Given that we have had TWO resignations over the WikkiLeaks material, Something has to be there... and a decent amount of it, even if it's just confirmation of what we had suspected all along.

In the world of politics that means absolutely nothing. People were angry, so they got blood, in what i consider a misguided attempt to appease the Bern-it-downs. Now that they've seen that frothing rage based on absolutely no evidence gets results, i see little reason they won't eventually morph into the exact same base of supporters that Trump has. Anger, without cause or reason.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Given that we have had TWO resignations over the WikkiLeaks material, Something has to be there... and a decent amount of it, even if it's just confirmation of what we had suspected all along.

"Where there's smoke, there's... a crowd of Republicans burning Hillary Clinton in effigy."

What are we going to call this scandal? I propose "Primaryghazi".


3 people marked this as a favorite.

When convention delegates boo Bernie Sanders because he mentions Hillary Clinton, it becomes clear that these people are simply sore losers. Bernie lost. Booing your candidate does not make things better for anyone. I'm a Sanders supporter, but I'm not going to desert all my allies who need a president who will work with them rather than against them for rights they still don't have.

Bernie is supporting Hillary. He's not stupid. I'm going to be not-stupid too and vote for her.

Liberty's Edge

Well, emailgate is taken... so maybe primarygate.

Hmm, has anyone trademarked or coined benghazigate?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Turin the Mad wrote:
That her party leadership attempted to rig things so blatantly in her favor is not going to help

No one rigged anything. You guys need to stop bandying this myth about. Here's Sanders' own former press secretary saying, this afternoon, that no one rigged anything, they just lost.

Jesus, guys, own it for once. You lost a primary. Almost everyone loses the primary. That's the point. It isn't a huge deal. Move on, we have bigger fish to fry.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Given that we have had TWO resignations over the WikkiLeaks material, Something has to be there... and a decent amount of it, even if it's just confirmation of what we had suspected all along.

There doesn't appear to be anything significant. A handful of people at the DNC had a favored candidate. Shock.


Scott Betts wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
That her party leadership attempted to rig things so blatantly in her favor is not going to help

No one rigged anything. You guys need to stop bandying this myth about. Here's Sanders' own former press secretary saying, this afternoon, that no one rigged anything, they just lost.

Jesus, guys, own it for once. You lost a primary. Almost everyone loses the primary. That's the point. It isn't a huge deal. Move on, we have bigger fish to fry.

Works for me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not to put words in anyone's mouth, or impugn their motives, but it's important to remember that Sanders is popular with under 30 voters who, given their age, have only had the experience of their candidate beating Clinton in the primary for the nomination in 2008, followed by his running as the president in 2012. If you're an under 30 voter who supported Obama, this is the first time you've experienced your favorite primary candidate not winning the nomination against Clinton. Not that that excuses blaming primary winner for actually winning, but, y'know.

Look, whatever, I voted for Nader in 2000 and--OW! Stop throwing things, it's not like I did it in Florida!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
The rice cooker presented for VP...
Sorry, what is the meaning behind this insult?
John Oliver reference...he compared Kaine with getting a rice cooker as a christmas present...serviceable but kind of boring and not likely to cause any excitement.
Which is a pretty bad reason to slam a VP candidate. 2 minutes, 45 seconds of "well, he's boring" is a waste of bandwidth.
Agreed. Oliver & his writers sacrificed truth for a lame joke.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
And Pence as the same make and model of rice cooker,only with hate slogans hand written on it.

If Kaine is a boring white "rice cooker", Pence is a septic tank pump. Pence's most redeeming quality is he isn't quite as horrifying as Trump or Cruz.

And I refuse to call Kaine a rice cooker until we've seen a demonstration of how well he makes pancakes.

Progressives were hoping for a VP that indicated that Clinton was moving away from the business as usual model for the party. They were hoping for a Warren, a Booker, or perhaps even a Sanders. The choice of Kaine was a choice made by someone who was ignoring them entirely.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hitdice wrote:
Look, whatever, I voted for Nader in 2000 and--OW! Stop throwing things, it's not like I did it in Florida!

Nader only got less than 98K votes in Florida in the 2000 election. Nader didn't cost Gore the election in Florida; the millions of Florida voters who preferred Gore but didn't get off their collective asses to vote is why Bush won.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
Look, whatever, I voted for Nader in 2000 and--OW! Stop throwing things, it's not like I did it in Florida!
Nader only got less than 98K votes in Florida in the 2000 election. Nader didn't cost Gore the election in Florida; the millions of Florida voters who preferred Gore but didn't get off their collective asses to vote is why Bush won.

Actually, Antonin Scalia is the reason Bush won.


Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
Look, whatever, I voted for Nader in 2000 and--OW! Stop throwing things, it's not like I did it in Florida!
Nader only got less than 98K votes in Florida in the 2000 election. Nader didn't cost Gore the election in Florida; the millions of Florida voters who preferred Gore but didn't get off their collective asses to vote is why Bush won.

And stupid people who didn't know how to follow a line to a hole punch.

I voted for Gore in 2000. It was my first Presidential election I could vote in.

I also lived in Florida in Palm Beach County at the time...and the ballot was NOT that difficult to understand. You'd have to be suffering from severe cognitive deficiency to not be able to follow a simple line to a dot. So dumb that your vote shouldn't count.

I didn't vote for Bush, but frankly, if people who couldn't read that thing were the reason he won, I don't care.

I'm weird though. I would rather someone I disagree with wins if he's voted in by informed, intelligent voters than someone I agree with who wins because droves of simpletons show up to cast their vote. My opinion doesn't matter as much as the collective will of intelligent, informed people. I'm so against the "get out and vote" movement I would campaign against it, if it weren't counterproductive to the cause. I don't want people who need a carrot and stick to do their civic duty watering down my vote or the votes of people who don't require such external motivations with their voluntary ignorance and/or laziness.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Turin the Mad wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
The rice cooker presented for VP...
Sorry, what is the meaning behind this insult?
John Oliver reference...he compared Kaine with getting a rice cooker as a christmas present...serviceable but kind of boring and not likely to cause any excitement.
Which is a pretty bad reason to slam a VP candidate. 2 minutes, 45 seconds of "well, he's boring" is a waste of bandwidth.
Agreed. Oliver & his writers sacrificed truth for a lame joke.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
And Pence as the same make and model of rice cooker,only with hate slogans hand written on it.

If Kaine is a boring white "rice cooker", Pence is a septic tank pump. Pence's most redeeming quality is he isn't quite as horrifying as Trump or Cruz.

And I refuse to call Kaine a rice cooker until we've seen a demonstration of how well he makes pancakes.

Progressives were hoping for a VP that indicated that Clinton was moving away from the business as usual model for the party. They were hoping for a Warren, a Booker, or perhaps even a Sanders. The choice of Kaine was a choice made by someone who was ignoring them entirely.

Then you haven't been paying attention, because Kaine has been quietly progressive for decades now.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
Look, whatever, I voted for Nader in 2000 and--OW! Stop throwing things, it's not like I did it in Florida!
Nader only got less than 98K votes in Florida in the 2000 election. Nader didn't cost Gore the election in Florida; the millions of Florida voters who preferred Gore but didn't get off their collective asses to vote is why Bush won.

And stupid people who didn't know how to follow a line to a hole punch.

I voted for Gore in 2000. It was my first Presidential election I could vote in.

I also lived in Florida in Palm Beach County at the time...and the ballot was NOT that difficult to understand. You'd have to be suffering from severe cognitive deficiency to not be able to follow a simple line to a dot. So dumb that your vote shouldn't count.

I didn't vote for Bush, but frankly, if people who couldn't read that thing were the reason he won, I don't care.

I care. Because of the consequences. These aren't neat little games where sportsmanship and character are all that really matters. People live or die because of the outcome.

Crafting a ballot that subtly guides even a small percentage of voters to your candidate matters.
Not as much in Florida that year as more egregious things like purging the voter rolls based on rough name matches. An awful lot of (mostly poor, mostly black) people showed up knowing they were registered and were turned away. Purged because their name was close to some felon's.
Or, my personal favorite, the Jews for Buchanon.


Very quietly, certainly. Tim Kaine is no blue dog, but he's pretty close to one. He's the sort of Democrat who wants abortion to be legal but also wants to "limit" it. And he supports the TPP, a position which is now officially To The Right Of The Party Platform.

He's a moderate. A bit more moderate than Clinton. It's disappointing, but it was a tactical choice, and I can certainly forgive Clinton choosing someone she agrees with on issues. What really concerns me is I'm not sure he's a strong enough candidate to go up against Mike Pence. He might be, but Pence is the man who very well might be our effective president if Trump wins. He needs a very strong adversary in the debates. Someone who strongly opposes his stances. Now, Pence makes it easy, but Kaine is someone who only barely supports stuff like gay marriage and more-or-less agrees with Kaine on the TPP.

I'm worried he won't be able to hold his own. The VP race really matters this year, so hopefully, he'll surprise me.

Liberty's Edge

Scott Betts wrote:
There doesn't appear to be anything significant. A handful of people at the DNC had a favored candidate. Shock.

I agree the bulk of the leaked communications are fairly harmless but there's some fairly damning stuff in there.

"Let's get this around without attribution" in regards to a news article about Sander's supporters turning violent.

"It might may no difference but for KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief. Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist."

If that isn't a targeted attempt to ruin Sander's campaign I don't know what is.


It's not about sportsmanship or anything like that. It's that I'm not so arrogant as to think my personal opinion matters more than the collective will of people with some intelligence to them. Or maybe I am arrogant because I think if you're too stupid to follow a line to a dot your opinion shouldn't matter.

Giving equal value to the votes of uninformed people is how people like Trump get nominated, despite public knowledge that he outlined no plan, has failed more businesses than he's grown, has no political experience, and if fact checked has lied more times than any politician in the race this year combined. No, people...willfully ignorant people...voted for him based on vague promises designed to cater to the lowest common denominator.

Excuse me if I think such a populace shouldn't have their votes weighted the same as people who take the seven seconds it takes to fact check articles or who could follow a line to a dot like a three year old could do. You really want the fate of the world determined by that subset? Not me, and if they agree with me about who should be elected, there's a good chance I'm wrong. I trust the input of millions of informed self-motivated voters over myself, hence the "If they win I'm okay."

This year, however, the simpletons on both sides seem to be rallying, as both sides literally chose the worst person they could among the qualified candidates.

But that's just my opinion.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Progressives were hoping for a VP that indicated that Clinton was moving away from the business as usual model for the party. They were hoping for a Warren, a Booker, or perhaps even a Sanders. The choice of Kaine was a choice made by someone who was ignoring them entirely.

I'm a little irritated that some on the far Left have elected themselves gatekeepers on who is sufficiently Progressive or not. :/

But ok:

  • Warren has said from the beginning she wasn't interested in the job, because she can do much more from within the Senate than as Veep. Also, if she was Veep, the Republican governor Charlie Baker would appoint a Repub replacement to her Senate seat. Whomever would be the DNC nominee for PotUS, she or he would need every single Dem in the Senate to get anything accomplished legislatively. And you know, confirm SCotUS, other judges, and other administrative appointees (Merrick Garland is far from the only appointee still waiting... and waiting... and waiting).
  • Booker would probably take the job. But again, the Republican governor Chris Christie would appoint a Repub replacement to his Senate seat.
  • Sanders wouldn't take the job. And again, he's far more important getting legislation and regulations passed in the Senate.
It's about thinking long term and big picture.

And Kaine, while not dull, is the kind of VP pick that conveys that Clinton doesn't need (or want) a flashy, maverick-y veep; she wants someone experienced and competent, which Kaine is.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thegreenteagamer wrote:

It's not about sportsmanship or anything like that. It's that I'm not so arrogant as to think my personal opinion matters more than the collective will of people with some intelligence to them. Or maybe I am arrogant because I think if you're too stupid to follow a line to a dot your opinion shouldn't matter.

Giving equal value to the votes of uninformed people is how people like Trump get nominated, despite public knowledge that he outlined no plan, has failed more businesses than he's grown, has no political experience, and if fact checked has lied more times than any politician in the race this year combined. No, people...willfully ignorant people...voted for him based on vague promises designed to cater to the lowest common denominator.

Excuse me if I think such a populace shouldn't have their votes weighted the same as people who take the seven seconds it takes to fact check articles or who could follow a line to a dot like a three year old could do. You really want the fate of the world determined by that subset? Not me, and if they agree with me about who should be elected, there's a good chance I'm wrong. I trust the input of millions of informed self-motivated voters over myself, hence the "If they win I'm okay."

This year, however, the simpletons on both sides seem to be rallying, as both sides literally chose the worst person they could among the qualified candidates.

But that's just my opinion.

First, I'll address the elephant in the room that deliberate attempts to codify what you're talking about have historically been done with bad motives. I know that's not what you're saying here, but I'd be remiss not to acknowledge that in such a conversation.

If we accept your premise that weeding out the uninformed votes is desirable, that's not what happened in that situation. The poor readers for one candidate got weeded out while the analogous voters for the other candidate did not. That's introducing a systemic bias and emphatically NOT meaning that the millions of informed self-motivated voters went one way over the other.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Progressives were hoping for a VP that indicated that Clinton was moving away from the business as usual model for the party. They were hoping for a Warren, a Booker, or perhaps even a Sanders. The choice of Kaine was a choice made by someone who was ignoring them entirely.

I'm a little irritated that some on the far Left have elected themselves gatekeepers on who is sufficiently Progressive or not. :/

But ok:

  • Warren has said from the beginning she wasn't interested in the job, because she can do much more from within the Senate than as Veep. Also, if she was Veep, the Republican governor Charlie Baker would appoint a Repub replacement to her Senate seat. Whomever would be the DNC nominee for PotUS, she or he would need every single Dem in the Senate to get anything accomplished legislatively. And you know, confirm SCotUS, other judges, and other administrative appointees (Merrick Garland is far from the only appointee still waiting... and waiting... and waiting).
  • Booker would probably take the job. But again, the Republican governor Chris Christie would appoint a Repub replacement to his Senate seat.
  • Sanders wouldn't take the job. And again, he's far more important getting legislation and regulations passed in the Senate.
It's about thinking long term and big picture.

And Kaine, while not dull, is the kind of VP pick that conveys that Clinton doesn't need (or want) a flashy, maverick-y veep; she wants someone experienced and competent, which Kaine is.

It also leaves the more decisive VP choices outside the ticket, where they can go full HAAM without besmirching Clinton's dignified gravitas.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Very quietly, certainly. Tim Kaine is no blue dog, but he's pretty close to one. He's the sort of Democrat who wants abortion to be legal but also wants to "limit" it. And he supports the TPP, a position which is now officially To The Right Of The Party Platform.

Kaine's positions are more nuanced than that. While he is raised Roman Catholic (as was I), he does clearly distinguish between his personal religious beliefs and the rights of others (in this case women). He has a very strong positive rating from Planned Parenthood, and has actually moved farther pro-Choice in recent years. He fought to end, successfully, the use of abstinence-only sex ed in schools in his state. He has repeatedly stated that he recognizes the best way to limit the necessity of abortion is by making sure kids have proper sex ed and all people access to affordable & available birth control (which is another big departure from the Vatican line).

Kaine started out against same-sex marriage, but even then was for the same civil benefits to same-sex couples, including non-discrimination in adoptions (against the official RC position) and employment. Yeah, it took him a while (too long IMO) to come around to accepting same-sex marriage, but Clinton evolved toward it as did Obama. I'm not going to keep kicking him after we're both on the same side, especially since he is publically siding with me/us over his Catholic faith.

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
And he supports the TPP, a position which is now officially To The Right Of The Party Platform.

He has expressed deep concerns over several parts of the TPP, especially the abilities it grants to corporations to legally fight the valid regulations of countries to protect their citizens. I'd also hope for stronger public opposition, but he seems cautious and reserved, and I feel that he could likely be persuaded by facts and evidence against it.

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

What really concerns me is I'm not sure he's a strong enough candidate to go up against Mike Pence. He might be, but Pence is the man who very well might be our effective president if Trump wins. He needs a very strong adversary in the debates. Someone who strongly opposes his stances. Now, Pence makes it easy, but Kaine is someone who only barely supports stuff like gay marriage and more-or-less agrees with Kaine on the TPP.

I'm worried he won't be able to hold his own. The VP race really matters this year, so hopefully, he'll surprise me.

Have you seen Pence in a debate? He's about as smart as Trump, but no where near as persuasive or quick thinking in front of a crowd. He's also saddled with all of Trump's positions & baggage. Unless he and the RNC do a 180°, he'll also be stuck trying to shovel the same fear, lies, and hatred. Kaine is smart, good with public speaking, experienced; he's also offering hope and positivity. He'll do better against Pence than Clinton will against Trump.


I know Kaine's feelings are complicated. I wish they weren't. I wish he took a stronger stand on these issues that are important to me.

Meanwhile: God, the Clinton versus Trump debate could so easily be disastrous. I'll be watching that between my fingers.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Feral wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
There doesn't appear to be anything significant. A handful of people at the DNC had a favored candidate. Shock.

I agree the bulk of the leaked communications are fairly harmless but there's some fairly damning stuff in there.

"Let's get this around without attribution" in regards to a news article about Sander's supporters turning violent.

"It might may no difference but for KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief. Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist."

If that isn't a targeted attempt to ruin Sander's campaign I don't know what is.

I don't see either of those things as damning, at all. Inappropriate, perhaps, but absolutely not indicative of fraud, widespread deceit, or even extreme bias.

If a treasure trove of internal communications are leaked and the most damning evidence that comes out of it is "We want to leak a story," and "We want someone to ask Sanders a question about religion," (that appears to have fizzled on the launch pad), it actually paints a picture of a remarkably cleanly run party.

Can you imagine what a similarly sourced and sized collection of RNC emails would look like, from this cycle?


Kobold Cleaver wrote:

I know Kaine's feelings are complicated. I wish they weren't. I wish he took a stronger stand on these issues that are important to me.

Meanwhile: God, the Clinton versus Trump debate could so easily be disastrous. I'll be watching that between my fingers.

God, tell me about it; I keep remembering the 2004 presidential debates, when every commentator out there agreed that Kerry won the debates decisively, but Bush won, y'know, the presidency.

I am feeling fear.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

We don't need to. It was all out in the open in with #NeverTrump. They actually fought to change primary/convention rules to prevent Trump from getting the nomination.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
I know Kaine's feelings are complicated. I wish they weren't. I wish he took a stronger stand on these issues that are important to me.

Well, I have the advantage (in this particular case, anyway) of growing up Catholic. I've watched plenty of Catholics respect the guidance of the Vatican, but quietly go against it because of common sense and their own spiritual inner voice. Kaine was taught by Jesuits, and that seems to have made a profound impact his thinking and spirituality.

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Meanwhile: God, the Clinton versus Trump debate could so easily be disastrous. I'll be watching that between my fingers.

It isn't a slam dunk by any means, but I'm not really worried about the Clinton vs. Trump debate (I think he'll only actually show up for one of them).

Ever since she first appeared in politics, the Republicans took a special hatred toward HRC, and they have attacked her constantly with any feeble or contrived excuse they can. She's endured this sh!t for 25 years, and it has tempered her into a harder, more focused, more determined opponent. I imagine she'll follow the Elizabeth Warren strategy of getting under his skin (rind? peel?) and irritate him into losing his composure, then doggedly hammer him on his hate, bullsh!t, and incompetence.

Now will the voters respond positively to her, and finally see through all the poo the monkeys have flung at her? That's what I'm worried about.

451 to 500 of 522 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Sellouts to the Left. Sellouts to the Right. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.