Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2015/08/22 14:11:03
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
MrDwhitey wrote: So official investigations are slipshod and untrustworthy, but edited videos from a biased source are impeccable sources of truth.
Presumably the 5 million Benghazi investigations that turned up no real evidence of wrongdoing were similarly slipshod, as was the George Zimmerman trial that failed to convict, and the Darren Wilson grand jury that failed to indict.
For this thread, that's the equivalent of a tetris. 4 lines!
Again... take a look at the 6 minute mark of that video, then come back to me.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2015/08/22 14:52:00
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
MrDwhitey wrote: So official investigations are slipshod and untrustworthy, but edited videos from a biased source are impeccable sources of truth.
Presumably the 5 million Benghazi investigations that turned up no real evidence of wrongdoing were similarly slipshod, as was the George Zimmerman trial that failed to convict, and the Darren Wilson grand jury that failed to indict.
For this thread, that's the equivalent of a tetris. 4 lines!
Again... take a look at the 6 minute mark of that video, then come back to me.
I'm sorry, I started watching at the 6 minute mark like you said and I am not sure what you want me to see. Because it looks like she just didn't like her job.
2015/08/22 15:05:54
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
MrDwhitey wrote: So official investigations are slipshod and untrustworthy, but edited videos from a biased source are impeccable sources of truth.
Presumably the 5 million Benghazi investigations that turned up no real evidence of wrongdoing were similarly slipshod, as was the George Zimmerman trial that failed to convict, and the Darren Wilson grand jury that failed to indict.
For this thread, that's the equivalent of a tetris. 4 lines!
Again... take a look at the 6 minute mark of that video, then come back to me.
I'm sorry, I started watching at the 6 minute mark like you said and I am not sure what you want me to see. Because it looks like she just didn't like her job.
Okay then... *shrug*
Switching gears then... Trump's speech in AL yesterday:
That was one of the most rambling, multi-tangential speech I've seen in awhile...
It's amazeballs that folks are pining for him.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2015/08/22 16:05:22
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Am I the only one that thinks he refers to global economics like it was the 80s?
Suppose that would fit the narrative his voter base wants to hear. Inarticulate angry older white people who don't like things that look or sound different. Unfortunately they are also the most consistent voting block lol.
2015/08/22 16:06:56
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
I watched that entire pep rally and giggled like a school girl. At times laughing out loud. Convinced myself he has my vote regardless if he get nominated or not. Just for the entertainment and the Balls he has. Anyone else catch the reverse Jeb did on "Anchor Baby"?
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
2015/08/22 16:10:55
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
BrotherGecko wrote: Inarticulate angry older white people who don't like things that look or sound different. Unfortunately they are also the most consistent voting block lol.
Seriously? Older white people are THE most consistent voting block?
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2015/08/22 16:17:11
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
CptJake wrote: Older white people are THE most consistent voting block?
Well yeah. Though I suppose it depends on what we mean by consistent: if we mean voting the same way then that is questionable as I don't know how they vote, but if we mean they tend to vote in every election then that seems right. Older people most likely have more time on their hands and use it to wave their fists and scream at the air. Just ask Frazzled.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
2015/08/22 16:27:29
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
BrotherGecko wrote: Inarticulate angry older white people who don't like things that look or sound different. Unfortunately they are also the most consistent voting block lol.
Seriously? Older white people are THE most consistent voting block?
Yah they vote the most often, they are very consistent. Win them over and you have the voting block that is most likely to actually show to the polls. Unlikely the the younger "vote or die" voting block that just discuss how they are going to show up but never do.
2015/08/22 16:40:22
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
CptJake wrote: Older white people are THE most consistent voting block?
Well yeah. Though I suppose it depends on what we mean by consistent: if we mean voting the same way then that is questionable as I don't know how they vote, but if we mean they tend to vote in every election then that seems right. Older people most likely have more time on their hands and use it to wave their fists and scream at the air. Just ask Frazzled.
Grey Power!
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2015/08/22 18:25:44
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
CptJake wrote: Older white people are THE most consistent voting block?
Well yeah. Though I suppose it depends on what we mean by consistent: if we mean voting the same way then that is questionable as I don't know how they vote, but if we mean they tend to vote in every election then that seems right. Older people most likely have more time on their hands and use it to wave their fists and scream at the air. Just ask Frazzled.
Grey Power!
By the power of Grey Skull?
2015/08/22 21:03:43
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ease off.....we eventually be there ourselves and more likely vote the same way they do. Alzheimer and all that......gumming as we read over the candidates.....senior discount at Denny's to afterwards....
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
2015/08/22 21:39:29
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Co'tor Shas wrote: This thing keeps following everywhere I go. Watching my every move, waiting until there is a lapse of judgement, waiting for it's time to strike. It's like a bad internet horror story bu even scarier.
Spoiler:
But seriously, they are everywhere I go. And I don't even like her.
I ignore her attempts to get me to swing for her. Bernie for pres, and progressives for Senate and House t help avoid the road-blocks the Reps love to put up all the time.
"Your mumblings are awakening the sleeping Dragon, be wary when meddling the affairs of Dragons, for thou art tasty and go good with either ketchup or chocolate. "
Dragons fear nothing, if it acts up, we breath magic fire that turns them into marshmallow peeps. We leaguers only cry rivets!
2015/08/23 00:40:18
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Again... take a look at the 6 minute mark of that video, then come back to me.
So your argument is "Abortion is bad!"?
That's a fair argument, because abortion is bad, but it isn't an argument related to the present Planned Parenthood fiasco; that fiasco relates to what is done with the fetus after the abortion.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2015/08/24 01:52:05
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
dogma wrote: I guess I wonder if this may just all end up playing into Clinton's hands. If Clinton comes away clean from this, if the Republican candidates that remain overplay their hand, Clinton will be able to pull the beleaguered-for-no-reason female/progressive card. The degree to which Republicans are still harping about Benghazi has set her up for this pretty well. You'd think something like Benghazi would play against Clinton, but when Republican candidates bring it up, outside of their base, it just seems petty and small, but its one of the few issues that allows Clinton to say things like "I won't get in the mud with them" and actually seem forceful, resolved, and, well, experienced and Presidential.
Not just Benghazi, but Whitewater, the Lewinsky thing and so on, the Republicans have hunting for muck on the Clintons for something about the Clintons been slogging through the mud for more than two decades.
This thing will most likely wind up with no action taken, and then it’ll be a question of how the story is told. Among the Democratic faithful and Clinton fans it will be seen as yet another Republican smear attempt, while among the Republican faithful and Clinton haters it will be yet another bit of malfeasance that the Clintons have skirted away from.
Exactly which story ends up taking hold in the mainstream will be the big question. I don’t think we can answer that with certainty, but personally, given how trivial and convoluted this scandal is, I’d have to favour Clinton getting away from this with pretty minimal damage.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CptJake wrote: Unfortunately being decent =/= being effective.
Carter’s alleged ineffectiveness is based pretty much entirely on economic myths. First up, there’s the myth that a president can produce a good or a bad economy – it’s actually almost entirely out of their control.
But even if a president had some magical economic control, Carter actually had stronger jobs growth over his term in office than Reagan had. The only difference is that Carter hit recession in the lead up to election, while Reagan got his recession out of the way early in his first term.
But the narrative got sold anyway.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/08/24 01:56:56
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2015/08/24 02:16:55
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
pities2004 wrote: I'm Hispanic and would rather be castrated with a rusty spoon then vote for Hilary Clinton. ( Though it would be entertaining to see people address Hilary and Bill as President Clinton and President Clinton)
Oh oh, without you that only leaves 54,999,999 hispanic voters for Clinton
Automatically Appended Next Post:
dogma wrote: So your argument is "Abortion is bad!"?
That's a fair argument, because abortion is bad, but it isn't an argument related to the present Planned Parenthood fiasco; that fiasco relates to what is done with the fetus after the abortion.
It is related, though, in that the reason people are telling lies about Planned Parenthood is because they don’t like abortion.
Ouze wrote: The old "they're not finding what that dubiously edited video said they'd find" means "the investigations must be slipshod", eh?
"dubiously edited videos"? They released the full unedited videos man.
But, whateve. *shrugs*
And rag newspapers will always print a retraction to their bs stories. But the retraction will be hidden among the minor stories, and about 1/10 the size of the original story. It's the same thing here - publish a heavily edited version and let that play for weeks and whip up hysteria and outrage, then quietly release the full version and trust that no-one will go back and do the work to find out that the outrage they've already committed to is actually true.
And people will fall for it, because they basically don't care that they're getting lied to, if the lie suits their politics.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/08/24 03:15:12
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2015/08/24 19:02:19
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ouze wrote: The old "they're not finding what that dubiously edited video said they'd find" means "the investigations must be slipshod", eh?
"dubiously edited videos"? They released the full unedited videos man.
But, whateve. *shrugs*
And rag newspapers will always print a retraction to their bs stories. But the retraction will be hidden among the minor stories, and about 1/10 the size of the original story. It's the same thing here - publish a heavily edited version and let that play for weeks and whip up hysteria and outrage, then quietly release the full version and trust that no-one will go back and do the work to find out that the outrage they've already committed to is actually true.
And people will fall for it, because they basically don't care that they're getting lied to, if the lie suits their politics.
In most cases... that's true. In this case, that group released both the edited (easier viewing) and full (unedited) versions on the same day.
Washington (CNN)Vice President Joe Biden met privately with Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Saturday in his residence at the Naval Observatory, CNN has learned, another sign he is seriously deciding whether to jump into the Democratic presidential race.
Warren and Biden discussed economic policy during a meeting that lasted about two hours, a person familiar with the discussion told CNN, adding that the presidential campaign or Biden's future was not a particular focus of the discussion.
The meeting, confirmed by two people familiar with the session, is the biggest indication yet that Biden is feeling out influential Democrats before announcing his intentions.
Beloved by liberal Democrats, Warren decided to sit out a campaign of her own, but she has yet to formally endorse a candidate. In an interview on Friday, she told WBZ in Boston: "I don't think anyone has been anointed."
The vice president arrived in Washington shortly before lunchtime, even though his official schedule said he was planning to spend the weekend at his home in Delaware.
Kendra Barkoff, a Biden spokeswoman, declined to comment on the meeting. But an aide to Biden confirmed a meeting, telling CNN: "The vice president traveled last minute to Washington, D.C. for a private meeting and will be returning to Delaware."
Another source familiar with the meeting told CNN that Warren went to the meeting at Biden's request.
Biden is increasingly weighing whether to challenge Hillary Clinton and other Democratic candidates for the party's presidential nomination. A small team of advisers has spent weeks quietly putting together a campaign strategy and fundraising plan in case Biden decides to run. He had at least one meeting with them this week in Wilmington, one person familiar with the session told CNN.
He has told his associates he intends to make his decision in the next month, an announcement that could upend the fight for the Democratic presidential nomination.
With the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary six months away, Biden is the leading figure Democrats believe they could turn to if they needed to find an alternative to Clinton, whose favorability ratings have taken a deep hit as her email use while secretary of state is drawing deeper controversy.
Biden, 72, has a large and loyal collection of friends and advisers from more than four decades in Washington. Yet even inside his sprawling constellation, affectionately known as "Biden World," deep divisions exist over the wisdom of him making another bid for the presidency.
Mapping out the steps
Earlier this week, Biden met with top advisers at his home in Delaware to further map out the steps to mounting a third presidential bid, though people familiar with the confab say the vice president is no closer to deciding on a run.
Biden met with his political team in Wilmington, where he spent the last week out of sight following a vacation in South Carolina. Longtime political allies Mike Donilon and former Sen. Ted Kaufman were among the operatives advising Biden on a run, a person familiar with the meeting said.
The factors Biden continues to mull include a timeline for getting in the race, and a fundraising plan that could help him launch a come-from-behind campaign against Clinton.
Like many Democrats, Biden and his team are carefully eyeing the continued questions about Clinton's email use at the State Department. Developments this week, including allegations that classified information may have passed through her private account, have led to new anxiety within the Democratic Party about the frontrunner's viability.
Those jitters haven't necessarily led to widespread calls for Biden to join the race; at the White House, there is some concern a Biden candidacy could end poorly and damage the vice president's reputation.
But with polls showing Clinton's trustworthiness slipping, some top Democrats are looking elsewhere.
"Frankly when it became clear that he was giving the race serious consideration, I just raised my hand," Steve Schale, who ran President Obama's 2008 and 2012 campaigns in Florida, told CNN on Wednesday. Last week Schale joined "Draft Biden," the independent group encouraging the vice president to run.
Draft Biden, which began earlier this year as a bare-bones effort to rally support behind Biden, has recently morphed into a full-fledged organizing campaign, including robust fundraising efforts, that could provide a framework for Biden should he jump into the race.
Costs of running
Biden's advisers have told the vice president he must decide by Oct. 1 -- roughly a week after his self-proclaimed "end-of-summer" deadline. A top Biden adviser told CNN this week the vice president is expected to wait at least until mid-September to announce a decision.
If Biden does mount a run for president, the cost of flying him from event to event on Air Force Two would come under scrutiny, as political travel for sitting presidents running for re-election has for decades.
Current regulations enacted during the last presidential election stipulate a candidate must reimburse the government for a pro-rated share of an equivalent-sized charter plane.
Biden often flies in a C-32, the military analogue to a Boeing 757. The cost to charter a 757 is between $12,000 and $15,000 per hour, according to charter companies.
That's far less than the actual costs to fly Air Force Two, which comes retrofitted with secure communication and navigation equipment, and costs north of $100,000 to operate per hour.
Travelers who must reimburse the government for political trips include the candidate and any staff traveling on behalf of his campaign. Other passengers, including security personnel, aren't required to reimburse the government for their portion of the trip.
The goal of the regulations: to ensure the costs of an office-holder's travel requirements neither hinder nor help a candidacy.
If he runs, Biden could combine campaign trips with official travel to mitigate the costs, which presidents have done for decades. The formula breaking down campaign and official costs, however, has been kept secret by White Houses going back to the 1970s.
The distinction between official and political travel has also been blurry in the past. Official travel requires the president or vice president to be advancing or explaining the work of the administration -- and as vice president, much of Biden's campaign pitch would entail doing just that.
Clinton has traveled using a mix of commercial and private air, none of which is nearly as large as a Boeing 757. The Gulfstream G500 she flew to Martha's Vineyard in on Saturday costs between $7,000-$8,000 to charter per hour.
But she or her campaign must foot the bill for the entire flight, not only a pro-rated portion of it, or a percentage split with official travel. Unlike Air Force Two, the government assumes none of the costs.
In her first quarterly FEC filing from July, Clinton's campaign reported spending almost $134,000 on a single private jet service, Executive Fliteways.
As a former first lady, Clinton travels with a Secret Service detail, though its footprint appears far smaller than Biden's. The Secret Service is not reimbursed for any costs associated with political travel.
A few things...
1) Biden/Warren will need to jump in soon, or there won't be any money left... I seriously doubt HRC will *release* the funds if she's not the nominee.
2) Knowing crazy uncle Joe and you'd got to think he'd loath running against HRC... doesn't this strike you as "prankish"??
Joe: Hey, 'Liz... come down to the WH and we'll watch a movie.
Warren: We're only going to watch Mad Max???
Joe: Best. Prank. Ever!
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2015/08/24 19:05:44
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
In most cases... that's true. In this case, that group released both the edited (easier viewing) and full (unedited) versions on the same day.
The Center for Medical Progress would not have posted unedited film in the absence of the edited film. The only reason unedited film was posted was so supporters could point to it while saying "Look, this group is honest!", assuming no one would actually watch it or dig into the laws that were apparently being broken.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2015/08/24 20:27:22
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Jihadin wrote: Ease off.....we eventually be there ourselves and more likely vote the same way they do. Alzheimer and all that......gumming as we read over the candidates.....senior discount at Denny's to afterwards....
Old People. Vote early, and then have a discounted breakfast so you can get back to the home in time for Matlock reruns...
DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
2015/08/24 22:53:42
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
2015/08/25 00:32:30
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: The WH is shivving (or preparing to) the Clinton campaign.
Is anyone actually surprised by that? The Clinton and Obama camps weren't exactly the best of buddies, the prevailing attitude seems to have been better to have her in the tent whizzing out than outside the tent whizzing in.
2015/08/25 01:34:45
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: In most cases... that's true. In this case, that group released both the edited (easier viewing) and full (unedited) versions on the same day.
Reminds of the Hitchhiker’s Guide. "But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months." "Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything." "But the plans were on display ..." "On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them." "That's the display department." "With a flashlight." "Ah, well the lights had probably gone." "So had the stairs." "But look, you found the notice didn't you?" "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."
Making something available in a long and very boring format, and then putting that up next to the selectively edited version is just playing funny buggers. Of course the people who want the quick hit of outrage will just watch the edited version. And then it’s up to everyone else to sit through the whole, unedited version, to go back and explain to people who’ve already made their minds up how the version they watched was actually really misleading.
The only way to do that is to release a video that isn’t dubiously edited. But there’s lots of reasons that didn’t happen.
Anyhoo... is anyone excited for a Biden/Warren ticket?
Biden is, possibly. That’d be about it, though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Is anyone actually surprised by that? The Clinton and Obama camps weren't exactly the best of buddies, the prevailing attitude seems to have been better to have her in the tent whizzing out than outside the tent whizzing in.
I wouldn’t describe it as a shivving, or a product of any animosity between the camps. I mean, I’m under no illusion that they like each other, but I don’t think that’s what is driving this. It’s politics, everyone is a rival.
I guess its best thought of like a game of Diplomacy. In that game you’ll form your alliances pre-game, and commit to a mutual strategy. Britain and France will often ally to capture Germany, for instance. But after a few turns if your French ally isn’t doing what he should, perhaps he’s been unable to do anything against Germany and is losing ground to Italy, then it only makes sense to look for another ally, maybe instead switch to either Italy or Germany, to attack France. Your original ally might look at that as a betrayal, maybe, but it’s been brought on by them failing to live up to what was expected of them.
It’s perhaps a slightly too dramatic way of describing Biden looking at challenging Clinton for the nomination, but the underlying logic is there – Hillary’s run a middling to average campaign, and everything else is a product of that.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/08/25 01:55:02
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2015/08/25 03:33:09
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: In most cases... that's true. In this case, that group released both the edited (easier viewing) and full (unedited) versions on the same day.
Reminds of the Hitchhiker’s Guide.
"But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine months."
"Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or anything."
"But the plans were on display ..."
"On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."
"That's the display department."
"With a flashlight."
"Ah, well the lights had probably gone."
"So had the stairs."
"But look, you found the notice didn't you?"
"Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."
Making something available in a long and very boring format, and then putting that up next to the selectively edited version is just playing funny buggers. Of course the people who want the quick hit of outrage will just watch the edited version. And then it’s up to everyone else to sit through the whole, unedited version, to go back and explain to people who’ve already made their minds up how the version they watched was actually really misleading.
The only way to do that is to release a video that isn’t dubiously edited. But there’s lots of reasons that didn’t happen.
Exalted only because you used the Hitchhiker’s Guide.
Anyhoo... is anyone excited for a Biden/Warren ticket?
Biden is, possibly. That’d be about it, though.
Dunno man... makes you wonder if Biden/Obama knows something about the FBI's investigation over Emailgate™.
Biden has the name recognition to jump into this now. The only issue is that he's literally running for a third Obama term... which is why when he announces... it would be a genius stroke for him to also announce that Warren would be his VP pick. Warren represent that populist progressive that the young Democratic voters are trending to.
WILDWOOD, Mo (KSDK) -- You never know what you're going to get when you open up a container of butter. We received this interesting photo on Facebook from viewer Jan Castellano of Wildwood. This morning she opened up her new package of Earth Origins Organic Spread to find this 'image' in her butter.
Do you see anyone's face in the butter. Jan did.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/08/25 03:34:05
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2015/08/25 04:02:12
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Biden has the name recognition to jump into this now. The only issue is that he's literally running for a third Obama term... which is why when he announces... it would be a genius stroke for him to also announce that Warren would be his VP pick. Warren represent that populist progressive that the young Democratic voters are trending to.
It would be incredibly stupid for any Democrat to push for Warren to vacate her Senate seat.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2015/08/25 04:07:28
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: Exalted only because you used the Hitchhiker’s Guide.
It was kind of cheating, wasn’t it?
But I think my point is still solid – putting the unedited video up so people can wade through hours of crap is just a way to sidestep the accusations that are inevitable given the misleading editing in the main video. The only way to defeat those accusations is to not produce misleading editing.
To give another comparison, back when we debated Bowling for Columbine over and over again, people pointed out that the movie included lots of selective edits. The other side said there’s always editing etc, and there were no incorrect claims made, and if people assumed certain things that’s on them, not on Michael Moore. But at the end of the day there’s a really simple way to determine if something was misleading – people walked out of Bowling for Columbine thinking that Heston had gone to their convention just after Columbine and given the cold dead hands line, but he hadn’t – Moore just tricked people in to thinking that.
Similarly, most people who are claiming outrage over PP think that foetal tissue was harvested for profit, because that’s exactly what the video tricked people in to thinking.
Dunno man... makes you wonder if Biden/Obama knows something about the FBI's investigation over Emailgate™.
Clinton’s numbers are kind of crappy, but I don’t think it’s got much to do with the email thing, which I really doubt has any real traction. I think her numbers are underwhelming for the same reason they were underwhelming in 2008 – she isn’t very good at giving speeches that make people like her.
Look at it this way – if it was revealed in 2007 that the junior Senator from Illinois Barack Obama was receiving confidential emails on a private server in his home, do you think it would have done anything to derail his push for the presidency?
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
2015/08/25 05:37:45
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Has any non incumbent candidate ever announced a running mate before securing their party's nomination? I can't recall any.
Honestly, It would be Biden's only shot this late in the game. Hillary has a huge fundraising lead that wouldn't be able to be overcome, particularly with the donors she has locked up. She has a solid ground game in place and pretty much the cream of the democratic crop of party campaign workers in every state (except for possibly a handful of Biden/Obama operatives who have been holding out hope for his possible run). Biden would largely be appealing to the same voters Clinton does (blue collars, minorities, moderates) and although her favorablity ratings have slumped some generally, her favorablity is still >75% among Dems but he might be able to peel some votes away from her if the email controversy gets worse. But if Warren gets in with Biden from the get go, they would be able to peel voters from Sanders (he is old and a self identified socialist, he is not going to get the nomination).
What is interesting about Biden is he is the left's genuine Trump that people seem to like right now: he doesn't have much of a brain/mouth filter. However, where Trump's positions are all pretty much new now that he is running, and therefore suspect to credibility, Biden has been pretty consistent for, what, forty five years? Polling suggests people don't like Trump because of his positions, but because he doesn't seem to talk like a politician and is brash. Biden is just as brash ("this is a huge frakking deal", but he actually believes what he says.
Help me, Rhonda. HA!
2015/08/25 06:49:41
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
, but he actually believes what he says.
