|
Trabisnikof posted:How was it kept hidden if we all knew about it pretty much right after it happened? As I explained earlier, press was prohibited from pictures or filming. Lemming posted:It looks bad the same way that having a hair on your shirt looks bad. It doesn't matter and nobody cares. Again, why do you excuse it? It's either 'This is not bad you're dumb' or 'ok it's bad BUT...' gently caress that poo poo man, admitting without approval doesn't bleed you dry of your liberal blood. Clinton isn't going to personally kick you out of the democratic party.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 19:57 |
|
|
# ? Apr 28, 2024 04:08 |
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:As I explained earlier, press was prohibited from pictures or filming. Not turning something into a photo op doesn't make it a secret meeting and if you weren't concern trolling you'd realize that. Next you'll be posting about the "secret meetings" in the senate bathroom, why won't they let reporters photography in there if they have nothing to hide!
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:00 |
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:The reporter who initially discovered the meeting was told no filming or pictures. Information being spread doesn't negate the fact that it was initially tried to kept secret. A meeting that everyone knows about is not "secret" because it's not filmed. It looks bad to morons like you, I'm sick of the post-factual nonsense world where when something not-bad happens and idiots cry about it the analysis is "well that was a dumb move because it looks bad, look at all the idiots who say so" You know what's dumb and bad and should be tsk tsked? The idiots who don't know what they're talking about.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:00 |
|
Geostomp posted:If it has any hope of destroying those check cashing scammers that prey on poor areas, that alone would be enough reason to demand it. Last time it was proposed, check cashiers and payday loan places lobbied heavily against it.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:01 |
|
No Butt Stuff posted:Well, when she had demonstrably different ideas prior to their engagements, I think it's fair. I don't think it's fair that he'd get all the credit for all the ideas, but you can't deny his impact on some of it. They weren't really that different though. In fact some of the things she is said to have moved "left" on she had the same positions even in 2008. That was always my fear of Bernie getting in the race. That people would see Hillary's positions as not ones she really holds, but one she proposed because of Sanders. Even though the vast majority of them are consistent with her 2008 positions, or positions she stated before he got in the race.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:02 |
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:As I explained earlier, press was prohibited from pictures or filming. so really you're just mad that people don't agree with you thanks for this amazing contribution i dont really give a poo poo that bill met with AG lynch but it's funny because it's triggering the hell out of the alt-right
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:02 |
|
No Butt Stuff posted:Well, when she had demonstrably different ideas prior to their engagements, I think it's fair. I don't think it's fair that he'd get all the credit for all the ideas, but you can't deny his impact on some of it. Most of it they've agreed on since before he showed any hint of success in challenging her. So no, I think you actually can deny his impact on much of it. quote:Also, at this point I view Hillary as a woman the same way that OJ documentary portrayed OJ as black. It's a convenience thing. Tell us more about how Hillary isn't sufficiently genuine, I've never heard this before.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:04 |
|
I'm just glad Sanders got Clinton to finally move to the left and support improving children's access to healthcare. Edit: and Sanders getting Clinton to commit to being pro-choice is another huge get for him.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:06 |
|
Kalman posted:Most of it they've agreed on since before he showed any hint of success in challenging her. So no, I think you actually can deny his impact on much of it. Much not all, which is what I was attempting to say, but didn't really, I guess. I'm guessing you didn't watch the OJ documentary I'm referring to. The idea was the he transcended race, and then it was utilized by other people (and to a small extent, himself) as a type of leverage in his trial, but that for the most part he was thought of outside of the context of race, which was a huge thing. But yeah, I'm totally just being a dick about Hillary not being genuine.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:07 |
|
Trabisnikof posted:I'm just glad Sanders got Clinton to finally move to the left and support improving children's access to healthcare. I assume this is a reference to SCHIP, which she was instrumental in getting through congress, while Bernie was renaming post offices and being more partisan than Ted Cruz?
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:07 |
|
Goatman Sacks posted:I assume this is a reference to SCHIP, which she was instrumental in getting through congress, while Bernie was renaming post offices and being more partisan than Ted Cruz? It's just a knock at people giving Sanders credit for things Clinton has always supported. As always, I'm not calling Sanders bad names dont worry, Maple Grandpa is double plus good.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:09 |
|
Goatman Sacks posted:I assume this is a reference to SCHIP, which she was instrumental in getting through congress, while Bernie was renaming post offices and being more partisan than Ted Cruz? Or her entire legal career.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:10 |
|
Boon posted:^^^ Someone explain to me why we shouldn't have voting tests again? Because I'm reminded of that quote (paraphrasing) "the biggest argument against democracy is 5 minutes with the average voter." We should just be ruled by specialized committees and call it a day.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:10 |
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:so really you're just mad that people don't agree with you I was, but then your avatar perked me back up
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:10 |
|
Trabisnikof posted:It's just a knock at people giving Sanders credit for things Clinton has always supported. I think that a lot of posters seem to believe that if you say something sort of implicating that either Bernie or Hillary did a good thing, then you must be a complete fanatic for them and you should be shouted down. No shades of gray or anything possible here.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:10 |
|
No Butt Stuff posted:Much not all, which is what I was attempting to say, but didn't really, I guess. "It's a convenience thing." isn't a "she transcends gender". It's pretty plainly "she only uses the woman thing when it's convenient" which is a little inaccurate. (Besides, we have perfectly good evidence that Sanders is a dick to women when he wants their position stemming back thirty years all the way up to trying to take HELP from Murray despite having significantly less seniority than her.)
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:11 |
|
Kalman posted:"It's a convenience thing." isn't a "she transcends gender". It's pretty plainly "she only uses the woman thing when it's convenient" which is a little inaccurate. I'm doing a poor job explaining this, I think. Kalman posted:(Besides, we have perfectly good evidence that Sanders is a dick to women when he wants their position stemming back thirty years all the way up to trying to take HELP from Murray despite having significantly less seniority than her.) I had no idea about this, but I'm not necessarily surprised.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:13 |
|
gfsincere posted:Someone explain to me why we shouldn't have voting tests again? Because I'm reminded of that quote (paraphrasing) "the biggest argument against democracy is 5 minutes with the average voter." Sounds like Choose Your Own Adventure Time: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/voting_literacy.html
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:15 |
|
gfsincere posted:Someone explain to me why we shouldn't have voting tests again? Because I'm reminded of that quote (paraphrasing) "the biggest argument against democracy is 5 minutes with the average voter." Why take all that time and money setting up tests when we could just add a small tax for voting. To have a vote you should need to have some skin in the game, afterall.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:16 |
|
Business Gorillas posted:Why take all that time and money setting up tests when we could just add a small tax for voting. To have a vote you should need to have some skin in the game, afterall. I'm for land ownership, myself now, let me tell you my plan to make sure that we count some people differently in the census.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:17 |
|
theblackw0lf posted:You're right. And it's frustrating how few people know that. It's easy when you think Hilldawg is Literally Hitler and Literally George Bush combined.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:17 |
|
Oh I see we're going back into the Sanders is a secret racist/sexist derail again. Good luck, everyone!
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:18 |
|
I'm glad that voting test chat has come around again.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:18 |
|
Business Gorillas posted:Oh I see we're going back into the Sanders is a secret racist/sexist derail again. Good luck, everyone! Lolol no one said anything like that. Barely anyone even mentioned Sanders.... You're so easily triggered it is pretty amazing.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:19 |
|
gfsincere posted:Someone explain to me why we shouldn't have voting tests again? Because I'm reminded of that quote (paraphrasing) "the biggest argument against democracy is 5 minutes with the average voter." Hey, thanks for reminding me of something I wanted to post! So, remember the article How American Politics Became So Insane, and how it seemed pretty darn good? I certainly thought it was well-thought out (except that it tried to do the 'both sides are bad' bullshit angle instead of just admitting the Republicans are the problem) but Taibbi has a rebuttal that's pretty darn good! In Response to Trump, Another Dangerous Movement Appears Only posting first few paragraphs that don't get into the meat of the issue but tell you where he's going with it: quote:The "too much democracy" train rolls on.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:21 |
|
Business Gorillas posted:Oh I see we're going back into the Sanders is a secret racist/sexist derail again. Good luck, everyone! You are completely insane on any issues related to Bernie Sanders. Nobody was doing anything of the sort
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:21 |
|
Trabisnikof posted:Lolol no one said anything like that. Barely anyone even mentioned Sanders.... quote:(Besides, we have perfectly good evidence that Sanders is a dick to women when he wants their position stemming back thirty years all the way up to trying to take HELP from Murray despite having significantly less seniority than her.)
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:21 |
|
Yeah, that's not calling Sanders secret racist/sexist, but good try. Also are you denying the facts of that situation or do you think Sanders deserved HELP more? If so, why?
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:23 |
|
gfsincere posted:We should just be ruled by specialized committees and call it a day. Well, we could always institute some sort of group dedicated to a single focus, like some sort of college of individuals. Focused strictly on electoral issues. Boon fucked around with this message at 20:26 on Jul 1, 2016 |
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:24 |
|
It's the same people concern trolling every single loving time. Stop responding to them as if they actually want to talk in good faith.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:27 |
|
Trabisnikof posted:Yeah, that's not calling Sanders secret racist/sexist, but good try. I'm tired of getting dumpstered because of this thread so I'll be passing on this. Goon Bless and Goon Luck (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:27 |
|
^^^^^ Never give up, never surrender ^^^^^Shimrra Jamaane posted:It's the same people concern trolling every single loving time. Stop responding to them as if they actually want to talk in good faith. No discussions in USPol Circle up and grab the dick to your right and start jerking BetterToRuleInHell fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Jul 1, 2016 |
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:30 |
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:It's the same people concern trolling every single loving time. Stop responding to them as if they actually want to talk in good faith. Last I checked he didn't have an anime avatar. Makes you think. Edit: Remember when you were a Sanders supporter? those were the days of low information. Mr Hootington fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Jul 1, 2016 |
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:30 |
|
Business Gorillas posted:I'm tired of getting dumpstered because of this thread so I'll be passing on this. Goon Bless and Goon Luck Lol didn't realize asking you what your opinion on Sander's attempt to get the HELP chair was "dumpstering" but somehow I think your hiatus won't last long.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:32 |
|
Trabisnikof posted:Lol didn't realize asking you what your opinion on Sander's attempt to get the HELP chair was "dumpstering" but somehow I think your hiatus won't last long. Shimrra Jamaane posted:It's the same people concern trolling every single loving time. Stop responding to them as if they actually want to talk in good faith. USPol goons like throwing around the label concern trolling like GBS goons do with SJW e: word filter bests me
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:34 |
|
Jarmak posted:A meeting that everyone knows about is not "secret" because it's not filmed. I mean, you might be sick of it, but that's the world we live in. You're completely correct of course that the meeting is uninteresting, but Better is correct that it's bad optics. Optics are not about substance, they're about the climate of political commentary. Saying "this sucks" (which I agree with) doesn't change that it's still true.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:35 |
|
Remember Dubya's "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" photo op? What is the official narrative on that? I watched it when it was broadcast originally, Bush's harness-crotch-bulge and all, and he was celebrating the "end of all major combat operations in Iraq." Some (between 2 and 6?) months ago, a non-CNN non-Fox news television media outlet tried saying it was the carrier's mission that had been accomplished, which is what the administration tried saying immediately in the aftermath when it looked loving stupid and terrible for them and the media at the time wasn't buying it, even as they went along with the "Saddam must pay for his crimes, we will liberate Iraq!" official line. Are we really so far beyond 1984?
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:36 |
|
^^^^^ That media outlet was correct, it wasn't bad optics, anybody mentioning or mocking was a idiot, Bush didn't deserve the criticism ^^^^^botany posted:I mean, you might be sick of it, but that's the world we live in. You're completely correct of course that the meeting is uninteresting, but Better is correct that it's bad optics. Optics are not about substance, they're about the climate of political commentary. Saying "this sucks" (which I agree with) doesn't change that it's still true. No, don't get sucked into this, lest you discover you've been a dumb concern troll hater this entire time. BetterToRuleInHell fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Jul 1, 2016 |
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:37 |
|
botany posted:I mean, you might be sick of it, but that's the world we live in. You're completely correct of course that the meeting is uninteresting, but Better is correct that it's bad optics. Optics are not about substance, they're about the climate of political commentary. Saying "this sucks" (which I agree with) doesn't change that it's still true. That may be true but Bill Clinton is a master at politics. That pretty much leaves us with two interpretations. Either he forgot how the optics would look or he's signalling that Hillary isn't concerned at all about the FBI probe. My guess would be the second. Now Lynch has committed to following what the FBI recommends and everyone who knows jack all about the email thing knows the FBI is going to say there are no grounds for an indictment.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:38 |
|
|
# ? Apr 28, 2024 04:08 |
|
Tubgoat posted:Remember Dubya's "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" photo op? What is the official narrative on that? I watched it when it was broadcast originally, Bush's harness-crotch-bulge and all, and he was celebrating the "end of all major combat operations in Iraq." Some (between 2 and 6?) months ago, a non-CNN non-Fox news television media outlet tried saying it was the carrier's mission that had been accomplished, which is what the administration tried saying immediately in the aftermath when it looked loving stupid and terrible for them and the media at the time wasn't buying it, even as they went along with the "Saddam must pay for his crimes, we will liberate Iraq!" official line. The official line is that it was for the ship, the WH had no idea the banner would be there, and their advance team didn't want to ruin the fun and have it taken down.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2016 20:38 |