Author Topic: 2016 Election  (Read 218758 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28834
  • GREAT SCOTT!!
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #270 on: October 25, 2015, 04:25:22 pm »
He's basically the rich man's sand.

Offline Brandonazz

  • All Your Base Zero Wing
  • *****
  • Posts: 8912
  • Everything ends.
    • View Profile
    • My Internet Treasure Trove
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #271 on: October 26, 2015, 12:36:20 pm »
Pat, ravish me in the sand.

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28834
  • GREAT SCOTT!!
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #272 on: October 26, 2015, 06:40:53 pm »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeqkK1lIk4o" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeqkK1lIk4o</a>

Offline dndfreak

  • 1942 Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 3766
  • The GM
    • View Profile
    • PathLosers
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #273 on: October 26, 2015, 07:13:56 pm »
Pat is basically an ostrich.

Offline dndfreak

  • 1942 Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 3766
  • The GM
    • View Profile
    • PathLosers
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #274 on: October 26, 2015, 07:17:55 pm »

Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8054
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #275 on: October 26, 2015, 08:23:43 pm »
That's not a counterpoint, that's the story I was responding to in the first place.  I was saying that before he told the nine PAC's to go pound sand, he had close ties to one specifically.

It's a classic campaign move of creating an issue from the dynamics of the race.  If you're the underdog, you insist that your opponent should agree to more debates.  A recent counter to that is that if you're the clear leader you insist on every candidate being included in the debate, and the serious challenger gets drowned out by the crazies.  Complain about out of state endorsements and contributions as outsider interference when you couldn't get any yourself.  And if you don't need contributions because of the all the free press you generate by playing the media like a fiddle, bash the fundraising of everyone else.
Probably not a Goat, either.


Offline dndfreak

  • 1942 Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 3766
  • The GM
    • View Profile
    • PathLosers
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #276 on: October 26, 2015, 10:30:17 pm »
I fail to see how any of these tactics are underhanded. If it works, it works. Candidates can't dictate the rules of the game, but only how well they play.

You seemed to imply that trump maintained PAC ties after disavowing them, which would be an obvious issue. Making preparation in case you need funding is a logical measure, and so is dissolving those preparations once you confirm they are no longer necessary.

Condemning those who do need to rely on money from others is a perfectly reasonable approach. If Trump considered taking PAC money in the past, that only proves he's looked at the argument from both sides and decided the obligation to a PAC was not worth it. He'd have less ground to stand on if he dismissed PACs out of hand without considering the upside.

Look at this the same way you'd look at a debate between, say, a Christian and an Atheist. If either side dismisses the other out of hand, without really considering the other, neither is capable of presenting a valid argument. This is why so many people look up to men like Richard Dawkins, because they do the research and consider all sides before making their conclusions and forming their arguments. If Trump planned on relying on personal money from the beginning, dismissing PACs out of hand, this would make him unqualified to speak out against them.

I can't believe I'm actually defending Donald Trump for President.

Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8054
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #277 on: October 26, 2015, 11:01:56 pm »
I didn't mean to imply that they were underhanded, just that they were tactics.  What I'm trying to say is that Trump doesn't appear to me to be a champion for campaign finance reform, he's just using it as an opportunity to smack around his opponents.  As evidenced by the close ties his campaign had to one PAC before he reversed course.  A candidate taking a principled stand against against PAC's would look more like Sanders.
Probably not a Goat, either.


Offline Brandonazz

  • All Your Base Zero Wing
  • *****
  • Posts: 8912
  • Everything ends.
    • View Profile
    • My Internet Treasure Trove
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #278 on: October 27, 2015, 10:39:16 am »
*pours the sand*

Don't stop baby. Don't stop.

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28834
  • GREAT SCOTT!!
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #279 on: October 27, 2015, 07:38:59 pm »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdsJnnnwayw" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdsJnnnwayw</a>

Brandon for you I have all the sand in the sea.

Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8054
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #280 on: October 28, 2015, 02:41:49 pm »
Oh boy another debate!  JV debate at 6 eastern, actual debate at 8.
Probably not a Goat, either.


Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8054
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #281 on: October 28, 2015, 10:42:47 pm »
That sure was a debate I tell ya what.
Probably not a Goat, either.


Offline eropS

  • Out Run Speedster
  • *****
  • Posts: 5117
  • That's right, I went there
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #282 on: October 28, 2015, 11:31:15 pm »
Yeesh.

Trump had these moments of clarity, like when he slams the lobbying system, that make me want him as the gop candidate.

They're all insane, though. It's maddening
No, no, he did. In the everything else section, at least. Officially, this makes him king.

Offline Brandonazz

  • All Your Base Zero Wing
  • *****
  • Posts: 8912
  • Everything ends.
    • View Profile
    • My Internet Treasure Trove
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #283 on: October 29, 2015, 08:44:18 am »
I watched the Republican debate. They spent like a third of the debate trying to downplay the civility and policy-heavy content of the Democratic debates compared to their previous ones.

Then they did the 'the liberal media is conspiring against us with these questions' bit, Ted Cruz especially.

They were more civil this time, though, so I guess they learned their lesson. And they attacked the Democrats more, so they're realizing the threat that their huge field is starting to become to their own party.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2015, 08:46:51 am by Brandonazz »

Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8054
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #284 on: October 29, 2015, 03:08:00 pm »
Or they decided to beat on the moderators instead of each other and ran with it.  I don't know who that Santelli guy was, but he made Jim Kramer look level headed.
Probably not a Goat, either.