Brontoforumus Archive

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:


This board has been fossilized.
You are reading an archive of Brontoforumus, a.k.a. The Worst Forums Ever, from 2008 to early 2014.  Registration and posting (for most members) has been disabled here to discourage spambots from taking over.  Old members can still log in to view boards, PMs, etc.

The new message board is at http://brontoforum.us.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 25

Author Topic: Primary Wars  (Read 43933 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #180 on: April 21, 2008, 11:55:54 PM »

Well.

They hate Muslims.

Also, many are racing enthusiasts.

In conclusion, the Republican voting base is a land of contrasts.
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #181 on: April 22, 2008, 12:09:01 AM »

Look, my point is this:

The Iraq war is polling at 33%.

The voting bloc you describe is 33% of the electorate.

I am not sure how you think elections work (and after 2000 I can't blame you for any confusion on the subject), but, unless a third of the electorate decides to vote Nader between now and November, or Clinton decides to run as the candidate for the Connecticut for Lieberman Party, 33% is not going to be enough to elect John McCain President.

As such, he is going to have to convince some of the 65% who disapprove of the war to vote for him.  He chips away another 8% on the "Do you think the United States should keep its military forces in Iraq until civil order is restored there" question, but that still leaves him 15 points behind the GTFO demographic.

He is going to have to convince that remaining 15% to vote for him.  There are a variety of ways he can do that, most of which involve sitting back and watching the Democrats implode, but "demonstrate you do not know what the fuck you are talking about with regard to your biggest campaign issue" is not one of them.

The war is McCain's biggest weakness.  It is also the thing his entire campaign is built around.  Guild's love of his folksy charm and fervent belief that he will do the exact opposite of everything he says he will notwithstanding, the McCain campaign is a house of cards; this one is the Democrats' to lose.

But so were the last two.

I'm not saying he can't win -- far from it.  I'm just saying that if he does, it will be in SPITE of his support for the war, not because of it.
Logged

Ted Belmont

  • Tested
  • Karma: 50
  • Posts: 3447
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #182 on: April 22, 2008, 01:34:56 PM »



From the eerily timely r stevens.
Logged

Guild

  • High-Bullshit
  • Tested
  • Karma: -2
  • Posts: 5136
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #183 on: April 22, 2008, 01:47:34 PM »

Thad, I hate to say it, but if it were between two candidates, and all other things were the same, the candidate who knew less about Muslims would probably win.

Er yes, well, I suppose if you strip away the fact that McCain's entire campaign consists of supporting a wildly unpopular war and running on his foreign policy credentials, then no, the fact that he doesn't actually know who the fuck we're fighting is probably not very relevant.

No way, a politician pandering to the people to get elected? I don't think that has precedent.

And for the record: The most attractive thing about McCain for me personally is his rebel demeanor. In a culture of politicians he'll play the game long enough to gain the power he'll need to fix my fucking party government.

Unless the democrats suddenly become fiscal conservatives. Then I'll just switch parties.
Logged

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #184 on: April 22, 2008, 02:19:32 PM »

If the Republicans are the small-government, low-spending party, then a Democrat would probably burn the fucking mints.

... via some kind of... Department of Monetary Ignition...

How far can I stretch this analogy?
Logged

Guild

  • High-Bullshit
  • Tested
  • Karma: -2
  • Posts: 5136
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #185 on: April 22, 2008, 03:25:17 PM »

I'm wondering what your point is.
Logged

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #186 on: April 22, 2008, 04:11:55 PM »

Many conservatives remember a time when the Republican party was the low-tax, low-spending, limited-government party that advocated privacy.

The current Bush administration strayed, to say the least.
Logged

SCD

  • Tested
  • Karma: 18
  • Posts: 1856
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #187 on: April 22, 2008, 04:28:36 PM »

On the war:  I would find it hard for a politician to make the call at this point regarding Iraq, when you have a General out there whose name should be on the Roll for Civilization 5.  Now that the Iraqis are calling the shots (and failing, for now...) this foreigner would strongly advocate one more year before troop reductions to no less than 75% for the following year.

A year from now, or a year from January when the next President takes office?

When General Petraus goes to congress next time in the spring.

I still retain my stance as while there is a lot of bad shit going on, it is not the same old shit, and it is getting to the point where the Iraqi government wants to exert sovereignty and call the shots. 

Throughout these abortions of battles against the militias, the Iraqi army is going to gain both a military tradition (that doesn't involve having their entire air force destroyed thrice in the last half century by their two western enemies), and a senior NCO corps from all the veterans.  Only then can there be real discipline and pride in the ranks. 

And no, you can have immense pride as a senior NCO in your army despite losing several wars:  Just ask the Germans.
Logged

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #188 on: April 22, 2008, 05:15:39 PM »

So, no surprises here. Early results show Hillary winnning with a MASSIVE 3% advantage (hurrrr). Awaiting final confirmation.

Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #189 on: April 22, 2008, 05:32:16 PM »

Er yes, well, I suppose if you strip away the fact that McCain's entire campaign consists of supporting a wildly unpopular war and running on his foreign policy credentials, then no, the fact that he doesn't actually know who the fuck we're fighting is probably not very relevant.

No way, a politician pandering to the people to get elected? I don't think that has precedent.

Who, exactly, is he pandering to with his support of the war?  Trying to win votes from the 33% of the population that is going to vote for him no matter what isn't going to win him the election.  Yes, he needs to make sure that 33% gets out and vote if he's going to have ANY shot at winning, but he also needs to avoid alienating the majority of the country by, for example, looking like he doesn't have a basic understanding of the central issue of his campaign.

Seriously, how many different ways do I need to phrase that basic point?

And are you, once again, deliberately misusing words just to confuse and irritate me?

And for the record: The most attractive thing about McCain for me personally is his rebel demeanor. In a culture of politicians he'll play the game long enough to gain the power he'll need to fix my fucking party government.

Guild,

Stop paying attention to the media portrayal of the man for one goddamn minute and look at his record.

He's not a maverick.

He's moderate on immigration, has his name on a campaign finance reform law from 6 years ago, and voted against the anti-gay marriage amendment.  Somehow, this makes him a maverick who breaks with his party all the time.

Never mind the fact that he's in lockstep with the Republican Party on abortion, healthcare, education, and, most importantly, bombing everything that moves.  Never mind that he has abandoned his principles on the religious right, Bush's tax cuts, and torture (TORTURE!) in order to win an election (something which, in your world, is somehow a positive trait).  No, he's a man of principle who doesn't care what his party or his base thinks of him.

Hey, I can't say I blame you -- I thought the same thing about him up until around 2005.  I guess the difference between you and me is that I've actually been paying attention for the last several years rather than just watching Chris Matthews jack off all over him.

Unless the democrats suddenly become fiscal conservatives. Then I'll just switch parties.

We are currently spending four thousand dollars a second on the war in Iraq.

Now, you can torture logic all you like about how McCain is actually against the war, or will be as soon as he enters office, or whatever nonsensical Rorschach attributes you want to place on him.  But seriously, the Republican Party as fiscally-conservative myth kind of has trouble standing up to ten seconds' look at the national debt.

THAT is Kazz's point.  With the Republican Party platform, as with John McCain's record, you are accepting a bunch of slogans and conventional wisdom instead of actually looking at the facts and analyzing them critically.

A year from now, or a year from January when the next President takes office?

When General Petraus goes to congress next time in the spring.

He's going to ask for another Friedman, SCD.  Like he does EVERY six months.

I still retain my stance as while there is a lot of bad shit going on, it is not the same old shit, and it is getting to the point where the Iraqi government wants to exert sovereignty and call the shots. 

Throughout these abortions of battles against the militias, the Iraqi army is going to gain both a military tradition (that doesn't involve having their entire air force destroyed thrice in the last half century by their two western enemies), and a senior NCO corps from all the veterans.  Only then can there be real discipline and pride in the ranks.

In other words, "The surge is working, we'll stand down as they stand up."

Fuck that.  So we're making progress?  That's swell.  We've been making progress for five years now.  (In fact, we even accomplished the mission in May of '03.  Man that was sweet.)  The "this is the crucial six months; we can start drawing our troops down after that" song and dance is wearing thin.

So what are you going to say when your deadline's up and Petraeus says we're making progress, we just need six more months?

And if you believe that we shouldn't listen to him when he says the same thing a year from now, well, why should we listen to him when he says it now?
Logged

Royal☭

  • Supreme Court Judge President
  • Tested
  • Karma: 88
  • Posts: 6301
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #190 on: April 22, 2008, 05:52:39 PM »

I would like to take a moment from this back and forth on McCain to send a personal thank you to Senator Clinton.


She is the quintessential Democratic.  With a fractured base and a large portion of the population yearning for a Democratic leader who could galvanize the base, she had the skill and poise to help lose this election in a way any Democrat would be proud of.

In the last 6 months, she's shown a tenacity and willingness to use mudslinging tactics that would make a Republican proud.  She went up against a candidate who could have easily walked in then and there and beaten whatever Republican candidate he was up against and take the White House with ease.  Then she gradually wore him down, using that indefatigable spirit to alienate Democrats on both side of the race, and convince independents that McCain is the salvation they were looking for.  It takes a tried and true Democrat to smash the party to ruination like that.


So 8 months from now, when John McCain is reading from the Great List of Liberals Wanted for Treason - ie those who voted for the Democrat - we can have her historic bid for the White House to thank for turning a chance for a strong party victory into a potential 8 more years of George W. Bush.


Thank you, Hillary Clinton, for all you've done for the cause of liberalism.

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #191 on: April 22, 2008, 06:10:33 PM »

If I weren't choosing the lesser of two evils, it wouldn't feel like an American election.

If it comes down to it, I probably will vote for Hillary.  But I will hate myself either way.
Logged

Brentai

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXYVlPgX_o
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65281
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #192 on: April 22, 2008, 07:10:59 PM »

To be fair, if Obama can't weather the Democratic smear machine, he probably can't weather the Republican one.
Logged

Classic

  • Happens more often than you'd think.
  • Tested
  • Karma: -58471
  • Posts: 7501
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #193 on: April 22, 2008, 07:25:24 PM »

Not that I do any actual research on the FOX propaganda machine, but I am given the impression that Obama is busy fighting both the Clinton (who is, according to Obama supporters, Republican-lite) and Republican smear campaigns.
Logged

SCD

  • Tested
  • Karma: 18
  • Posts: 1856
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #194 on: April 22, 2008, 08:12:11 PM »


A year from now, or a year from January when the next President takes office?

When General Petraus goes to congress next time in the spring.

He's going to ask for another Friedman, SCD.  Like he does EVERY six months.

I still retain my stance as while there is a lot of bad shit going on, it is not the same old shit, and it is getting to the point where the Iraqi government wants to exert sovereignty and call the shots. 

Throughout these abortions of battles against the militias, the Iraqi army is going to gain both a military tradition (that doesn't involve having their entire air force destroyed thrice in the last half century by their two western enemies), and a senior NCO corps from all the veterans.  Only then can there be real discipline and pride in the ranks.

In other words, "The surge is working, we'll stand down as they stand up."

Fuck that.  So we're making progress?  That's swell.  We've been making progress for five years now.  (In fact, we even accomplished the mission in May of '03.  Man that was sweet.)  The "this is the crucial six months; we can start drawing our troops down after that" song and dance is wearing thin.

So what are you going to say when your deadline's up and Petraeus says we're making progress, we just need six more months?

And if you believe that we shouldn't listen to him when he says the same thing a year from now, well, why should we listen to him when he says it now?

This is a valid point, not unlike much that you have to say.  However before I start, I need to point out that finding a soldier or officer who believes that the previous operation was a clusterfuck is like trying to look for a tree in a forest.  That is the nature of the dumb, dumb game that nations play. 

To answer the "trust your general" question, you should trust him this time, based on the trends that have occurred since 2006-7.  You should take anything said from either side of the aisle this summer with a grain of salt as I wouldn't be surprised if the Mehadis and the Iraqis go toe-to-toe this summer, then after all that, I stress that you pay attention to what is actually said in the report in April 2009, and not just the media-friendly summary which will do what it can to squeeze in the word "progress". 

Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #195 on: April 22, 2008, 08:56:06 PM »

To be fair, if Obama can't weather the Democratic smear machine, he probably can't weather the Republican one.

The problem is that the one feeds the other.  Hillary Clinton has no business praising John McCain's experience, patriotism, or foreign policy credentials over Barack Obama's.  We're going to have to listen to the right-wing smear machine saying "Even HILLARY CLINTON thinks John McCain would make a better President than Obama" until election day.

Reagan's Eleventh Commandment was "Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican."  The mere fact that Clinton is the one saying these things strengthens the Republicans who repeat them.

There ARE perfectly relevant things to question Obama on.  His experience, his network of support, his record, the question of whether he's at good at leading as he is at speaking, are all fair topics.  Asking if he "believes in the flag" or if his pastor really loves America are not.

That said, while Obama took a pummeling at the other night's debate, he's also shown his ability to react to a manufactured controversy with a truly inspiring speech.  As ridiculous as Guild's defense of "Gee, sonny, I don't know, let's ask an expert" as superior to "Um, ah, er..." is, he DOES, in a roundabout way, raise a valid point: we haven't yet seen if Obama's as good a speaker off-the-cuff as he is with a prepared speech.

To answer the "trust your general" question, you should trust him this time, based on the trends that have occurred since 2006-7.  You should take anything said from either side of the aisle this summer with a grain of salt as I wouldn't be surprised if the Mehadis and the Iraqis go toe-to-toe this summer, then after all that, I stress that you pay attention to what is actually said in the report in April 2009, and not just the media-friendly summary which will do what it can to squeeze in the word "progress".

John Kerry, back when he actually had balls, once asked, "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"  That's my sentiment at this point.

When this is all over, will it have been worth it?  I think it's too late for that.  Will we have a stable Iraq?  That's a pretty unlikely prospect too.  I think the unfortunate fact is that best-case scenario at this point is for Iraq to become another Iran.  That's certainly the way the democratically-elected government looks to be going.

And speaking of that government, it wants us out.  al-Maliki is doing everything he can to ignore the will of Parliament -- hardly surprising that Bush's surrogate would have contempt for the legislative branch -- but Parliament wants US troops out.

Where violence has decreased, it has happened largely because of the brutality of the militias, and because sects are beginning to split up geographically.  If the surge has helped the government get its shit together, then that's great, but how much longer is it going to take?

Realistically, I think you're right.  I think starting to draw down in two years is probably the best we can realistically hope for.  But if Congress demanded a drawdown tomorrow, I'd support it.  And then go to the doctor to see if he could diagnose the strange medical condition I had just developed with all those monkeys flying out of my butt.
Logged

Guild

  • High-Bullshit
  • Tested
  • Karma: -2
  • Posts: 5136
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #196 on: April 22, 2008, 08:58:25 PM »

Guild: Opinion.

Thad: Opinion. Insult. Also, your opinion is wrong.

Guild: Opinion.

Thad: Opinion. Also you get your opinions from outside sources.

Guild: ...
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #197 on: April 22, 2008, 10:06:12 PM »

:wrong:: I can't win an argument or support my opinion with facts, so I'm going to post a few vague lines of text and blame my inadequacies on Thad.  While I am at it, I will suggest that his detailed, sourced responses are equivalent to my three-sentence posts where I use words whose meanings I do not actually know.

:thad:: You are so right, Guild.  There is so much I can learn from you about John McCain.  He has only been my Senator for the past twenty-one years; please continue to enlighten me with your extensive knowledge of how once in office he will do the exact opposite of everything he has spent those twenty-one years doing.

:wrong:: I win at getting you to waste your time replying to me even though you knew perfectly well I was going to pull this same crap again!

:thad:: Why do I keep falling for that?
Logged

Brentai

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXYVlPgX_o
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65281
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #198 on: April 22, 2008, 10:22:43 PM »

Good point.

To be fair, then, if Clinton gets the nomination we're fucked.

EDIT: Oops, didn't see that whole page of Thad and Guild jerking off on each other.  Guess I should quote.

Not that I do any actual research on the FOX propaganda machine, but I am given the impression that Obama is busy fighting both the Clinton (who is, according to Obama supporters, Republican-lite) and Republican smear campaigns.
Logged

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: Primary Wars
« Reply #199 on: April 22, 2008, 10:24:08 PM »

I'm pretty sure that in every case of "If X, we're fucked" for the past few decades, X.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 25