[Terez]

Carson? He'll be gone before Iowa. I personally would be surprised if he made it more than two weeks.

My best friend is at a Trump rally in Biloxi, MS. I'm trying to figure out why tf. The only reason I even know he's there is because he texted me to ask me to look something up on the internet because his cell net isn't working inside the coliseum. All I know is that the crowd went wild when Trump said "build the wall".

[worry]

You're absolutely right about what should happen with Carson, but I'm going to wager his ego won't let him do that.

[Terez]

You think he'll make it to Iowa?

I think he's already riding on pure ego. If he wants to have a chance, he has to run a serious ground game in the early states, and that takes a dedicated, talented staff. His staff is bailing; he's not going to be able to replace those people with anything functional. We're not talking about low-level staffers; we're talking about his campaign manager, his deputy campaign manager, and on down the chain of command. He also needs to run a serious ad game, and that takes money. Aside from the fact that donors will take their investments elsewhere now, his campaign is already spending more money than it takes in, which is another crippling factor. He's in the red.

[worry]

I don't think he'll "make it" in any functional sense. I just don't think he'll formally drop out.

[worry]

https://www.washingt...lfare-overhaul/

Jeb Bush wants to do away with FOOD STAMPS, just in case you thought he couldn't sink any lower.

[Terez]

I have a feeling the next three weeks are going to be interesting all around. Rubio has also been stepping up his Trump game.

http://www.theatlant...p-shift/423045/

[Tsundoku]

Never heard of this website before today, but it's interesting:

http://whosmorefullofshit.com/

[Terez]

lol, the Donald is 111% full of shit. Impressive.

[Tsundoku]

From what I can make out, the "pants on fire" stuff is worth bonus points.

Last updated 23 Mar 15 though? Tsk.

EDIT: yeah the "How are the scores determined" bit in the top right sorta spells it out.

EDIT2: if they could maintain their relevance past the next couple of years, I'd buy some of these t-shirts.

http://teaparty.amorphia-apparel.com/

This post has been edited by Tsundoku: 09 January 2016 - 10:51 AM

[Obdigore]

Pretty good speech. Regardless of what you think of his politics, I think we can all agree the man is a good orator.

Nikki Haleys response was uncomfortable and full of the typical lies always pedaled in these things, as opposed to what I thought was a pretty truthful speech by Obama.

[worry]

Wow. Apparently she said this with a straight face:

[EmperorMagus]

I saw this post on reddit about the current state of the republican party and why their primary candidates are so fractured. Because I have almost no knowledge of American history and reddit posts are generally BS, I thought I would ask the people here whether that post is accurate or not. If accurate, it really helps make sense of the current US political landscape.

[amphibian]

It's ok for the broad overview.

What this misses is more of the social dynamics, the slow rigging over time of electoral districts in local and state levels to favor Republicans, the influence of media corporations/owners, and the use of violence to "solve" problems (as in go to war, to view fighting as the proper endpoint of diplomacy etc).

I really don't know why unions became unpopular to the point most Republicans dislike them, but it's become a major component of Republican strategy to break union bargaining power whenever possible.

The neo-cons of the George W Bush administration all cut their milk teeth in the Reagan administration - and that was driven by certain college/think tank people pushing certain agendas alongside media people like Buckley.

Also, add in that the Republican party has somehow devised a way to make the tactics of rabble rousing demagogues "theirs" in a way that doesn't truly backfire on them. Huey Long or even General MacArthur would have fit in perfectly in this Republican primary. Both are famous rabble rousers with magnetic charisma and terrible ideas of governance.

[Obdigore]

It misses some major points, but yes that is about where it is right now.

I think he misses the tune that the current Republican candidates (and most American politicians) are reactionary and play to (and fan) the fears of the public to get votes.

It misses the fact that the Reagan presidency was the one that started massive deficit spending while claiming that they are going to fix the government spending 'problem' that was caused by Dems, and then continued through future GOP presidents.

Oddly, the party of 'small government' has presided over the largest Federal Government size increases since the New Deal years.

Essentially; the GOP is a party made up of a number of distinct voting blocs, who vote based on one or two reasons, and nothing else. The Big Business bloc, The Racist bloc, The 'Zygotes are people too' religious bloc, and then the largest bloc made of up low to no information voters who think it is 'that big bad government' that is keeping them poor, and not poor decisions, poor economic conditions, or poor anything else.

I honestly don't see a 'warhawks' bloc, they are thrown up under the 'big business' bloc because they are generally only warhawks to sell more munitions/equipment to the government.

[Terez]

EmperorMagus, on 14 January 2016 - 04:13 AM, said:

I saw this post on reddit about the current state of the republican party and why their primary candidates are so fractured. Because I have almost no knowledge of American history and reddit posts are generally BS, I thought I would ask the people here whether that post is accurate or not. If accurate, it really helps make sense of the current US political landscape.

The post is basically an oversimplified summary of this book. My copy has a different subtitle ("The Making of the Conservative Movement from the New Deal to Reagan"). Not sure why, but it's the same book. The summary is accurate enough. Even more simplified: the GOP is a tenuous alliance between business conservatives/neoliberals and social conservatives (religion and racism, basically), while the Democratic Party is a tenuous alliance between progressives and minority groups (especially racial minorities).

Edit: I should add that the neoliberals and the racists get along so well because the racists believe that social welfare programs primarily exist to benefit lazy minorities. The neoliberals and the religious folk are barely hanging together, though. Evangelical voters are primarily motivated by abortion, and to a lesser extent by things like gay marriage; there's a lot of cognitive dissonance when it comes to things like helping the poor, and that's what makes the alliance so tenuous. It could easily fall apart if the neoliberals were to soften up on religious issues.

This post has been edited by Terez: 14 January 2016 - 04:16 PM

[EmperorMagus]

So it's accurate about the stuff it actually talks about, but it doesn't talk about exactly how fucked up the whole party is. Looking at it from this POV, it is easy to understand why there are so many different candidates in the GOP race.

[EmperorMagus]

Raging Cajun Gator King, on 15 January 2016 - 03:27 AM, said:

Is it just me or is Jeb having a much better time tonight vs the past?

I've been listening to the shitshow in the background while playing a game. Don't think I've noticed Jeb Bush saying one funny or sensible thing.

[Obdigore]

No.

Jeb was a non-issue again.

It was a debate between 'LET JESUS BE OUR GUIDE' Cruz, and 'I AM THE EMBODIMENT OF CORPORATE OVERLORDS' Trump.

Everyone else was a non-factor.

[Tsundoku]

More of the kind of stuff we are getting:

http://www.news.com....0a691d7f86fd987

This one is about how South Carolina is pro-Trump, and the implications in the build up to the Rep nomination.

Is this sort of stuff on the money? Remember, it's simplified for us foreigners who don't want the nuts and bolts of your crazy system, but would like at least accurate broad strokes.

[Terez]

Tsundoku, on 16 January 2016 - 02:24 PM, said:

More of the kind of stuff we are getting:

http://www.news.com....0a691d7f86fd987

This one is about how South Carolina is pro-Trump, and the implications in the build up to the Rep nomination.

Is this sort of stuff on the money? Remember, it's simplified for us foreigners who don't want the nuts and bolts of your crazy system, but would like at least accurate broad strokes.

The only problem with this article is that it requires you to read between the lines. Three quotes:

Quote

"I'm sick of tired of paying for people sitting on their butt and not working. Trump values an honest day's work and he'll fix it," Chenoweth says.

Quote

“He tells it like it is — he isn’t a politician,” Mr Hudgins says.

Quote

Perhaps it is southern politeness, but the issue of immigration is one not mentioned when voters speak of their support for Trump.
Asked about it, they appear uncomfortable and remark on how he is not very politically correct.
They then note that Trump speaks his mind and says what people think.

That's the essence of Trump's appeal right there: good old-fashioned white working-class racism. They had to learn how to dog-whistle back in the 70s and they're still bitter about it. The more Trump's numbers rise in the polls, the more confident they become that the era of PC is over and they can actually elect this guy who "tells it like it is".