Anyone have an idea what's going on with this "unity ticket" thing? I assume that means Cruz with Kasich as vp on the ticket, but last I heard Kasich said he doesn't want to run as a vp and Rubio is throwing in the towel on politics in general. So what, they do like a Cruz/Jeb thing then? Because Eeyore is really gonna get everyone excited. Also hearing they're talking about running a third party candidate, which I assume would be just the GOP hitting the "self destruct" button right? They'd knowingly split the conservative vote and give it to Hillary, all to prevent the mere possibility of a trump win (not that I'm against that, because I think trump is a danger to America, but still...).
No way the GOP really splits the ticket. If they do, I would almost give them credit. But it ensures a democrat president. There's just no way they do that. Their party is lost. They were warned 50 years ago about this very thing, by the hard right Goldwater who is now considered a Democrat. They were warned in '08 when Palin, Newt, Huck, and Beck helped sink McCain with over the top rhetoric. They were warned the day after the elections in '12. Now their party is proper fucked. They either win the presidency with an outsider beholden to no one manning the helm, or they go third party and possibly loose majority in both houses. Losing seats is a possibility in either two scenarios actually. And honestly, how hard would it have been to alter a few simple talking positions? "Hey guys, let's shut up about the rape and the welfare queens, and maybe we pass a budget without the international shitshow. Also, this supreme court thing is super bad press." I mean seriously.
I'm not going to pretend to know what they're going to do, but with Rubio out and Kasich all but irrelevant I think they're pretty much fucked on stopping Trump. I just can't see Cruz winning a general election even if he did have the primary lead. How is he going to win over independents? His entire platform seems to be "I'm the most hardcore far right negotiate on nothing motherfucker there is". Apparently a Cruz/Kasich ticket isn't likely because of their 'egos'. So I've read anyway. About Trump though... as crazy as he can be is he actually perhaps a better alternative for the people who don't want to see a Republican win? I know, the guy can go way off the deep end in his speeches. He's done everything from blatant racism to advocating war crimes, but hear me out for a second. He probably has a better chance of working with democrats and getting shit done than any of the other guys that ran. The main problem with our government the last 8 years has been thoughtless whatever you say I go the opposite direction approach. Trump doesn't give a flying fuck about party ideologies or any of that shit. He even has a history of being liberal on some issues. What would Cruz do if he was elected president? The exact opposite of whatever democrats wanted to do. I'm sure Trump would clash with democrats plenty, but by comparison he actually is more open minded. Maybe if you're a democrat and your party doesn't win it's the best you could hope for. Or maybe he'll launch a bunch of nukes because it sounded cool at the time. Who knows...
The real power ticket and big middle finger to the establishment would be if there is a contested convention and Trump and Cruz unite to thwart the establishment. THAT would be chaos.
President Trump? Simpsons did it. http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/31502412/the-simpsons-predicted-president-trump-16-years-ago
Since it seems everyone hates Ted Cruz he hardly gets a peep, compared to all the other top candidates. He's had a much better mathematical chance compared to Kasich or any other Republican challenger to top trump for a while. Yet the media narrative focused on everyone but him. He might get more spotlight now depending on how much support he gets from the establishment.
Cruz won Texas. Unlikely Kasich picks up California, PA, or NY. It's kind of a foregone conclusion the guy is done before he started. He'd have to pick up every other state to compete. It is similar to Bernie supporters being pissed the media saying it is over for him. Well, it kind of is. He only lags 300 delegates with approximately 2000 still in play, but it is improbable he takes CA, NY, PA. Cruz also has to contend with being so unlikable the more exposure he gets the more he repulses people. It might be easier if he is never seen.
There were so many GOP candidates for so long. If it had been just Cruz and Trump all along, Cruz probably is easily the front runner. (The same could be said for Trump / Kasich.) It's not like Trump's been getting over 50% of the vote anywhere, and just anecdotally, it seems like the majority of voters are either Trump or someone else - I mean to say that it seems as Rubio, Carson, Bush et al drop out, most of their votes are going to Cruz or Kasich, not Trump.
I knew when this started having 27 candidates again was a bad idea. It was such a circus in 2012 that it was somehow magnified this year. I guess the RNC can limit the number of candidates.
At this point, after a lot of thought, I've come to the following conclusion (and hopefully there's someone at the RNC that has as well): The Republicans are conceding the Presidential election. Think about it for a minute. The neoconservative platform has not been popular since 1992, in fact, just once have the won the popular vote since then. McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012 were both unable to beat Obama during trying economic times (which usually spells disaster for a sitting President). Both McCain and Romney are dyed in the wool neoconservatives. The establishment of the RNC can say whatever they want, but their platform has continually lost at the Presidential level since '92. They were so aware of this, that they did an autopsy - which I posted a few pages back - the tenor of which is 'we have a good message, we just need better messengers.' But even the base no longer approves of the platform. They are splitting between authoritarianism (Trump) - or even further right wing policies (Cruz) pretty consistently at this point. Between Cruz and Trump, you generally have about 60-80% of voters in those primaries. I doubt this fact is lost on the RNC strategists. So they are in full damage control mode. And what is the damage they are seeking to control? The Senate and Supreme Court. Voters don't 'split' the ticket at the federal level nearly as much as they used to. During the '12 election, the Democrats picked up 2 seats. In the midterm, '14, the Republicans picked up 9 seats, and the majority. There are 24R seats up and 10D seats up this term. 3 from each party are retiring - including Marco Rubio. The R's hold a 54-44 majority (2 independents). So generally, what happens is folks vote the party ticket (at least federally). The winning party of the Presidential Election can generally count on picking up a couple of seats in the Senate. Unless the strategy becomes 'running away from your nominee' - then the opposing party can pick up more as this strategy rarely works. Further, you've heard some Senate Republicans say that they may take up the vote for the Supreme Court Nominee in the lame duck session. This is a pretty good sign that they are already hedging their bets, i.e. expecting to lose the top of the ticket, but hoping to hold the Senate, in which case Garland will be confirmed. So as I know all the above, I assure you the strategists in the RNC also know it. So at this point, it's probably more important to concede the Presidential ticket by whatever fuckery you can muster to keep Trump out - even if that means he runs a third party campaign. The reason is you need a top ticket guy that's going to get people out for the party that your Senators 'don't have to run away from' during their elections because you hold more seats that way. Hence, eating your own candidate in public. Once that happens, generally, they're trying to protect the down ticket. And that's all that's going on here. Now, the RNC will have A LOT to think about and do after the election, no question. But right now, they're trying to minimize the damage, and hopefully have something to work with when the election is over.
I'm surprised the Libertarian party hasn't jumped in and picked up steam. A guy like Gary Johnson would do quite well right now it feels like.
I can't see Libertarians ever holding many seats in congress, let alone winning a presidential election. Their platform is just so ridiculous. I have no idea how these people think these are good ideas. - They want to remove all public education. - They want to repeal income tax and get rid of the IRS. - They want to legalize all drugs, which isn't so bad until you start including things like Heroin in there. - They want to privatize things like the construction and repair of roads. They want to privatize nearly all infrastructure projects. Exactly who the fuck is going to pay for it all remains a mystery, but they think it's a really cool idea. - They are 'pro' environment, but want no government interference. Basically companies could pollute as much as they want. They justify this by saying social pressures will force them to adopt pristine environmental policies. The obvious problem here is that if it was that simple it would have already happened. - They want to remove the minimum wage and open the border to anyone 'who isn't a threat'. - They want health care to be 100% privatized. This is already stupid, but then they wanted to remove all regulations and oversight. Basically, a company could sell any drug it wants without even testing it because herpa derp free markets. - They want to remove all regulations in the banking industry. So if bankers want to gamble with the entire fucking economy they want to make it easier. - They want to get rid of social security. Seriously, their platform is so fucking retarded I'm shocked that people even know who they are. You'd think that a group of people with such ridiculous views would be isolated to some Podunk redneck club. Their ideas basically amount to complete anarchy. In the 0% chance they were ever actually able to implement the changes they want it would completely destroy this country in less than a decade. If they ever gained power I would emigrate immediately, and that's not a half assed statement like people pledge every time the party they don't like takes the presidency. I mean that in total sincerity. By the way, last I heard Gary Johnson already announced he was running for president in January. I don't see it amounting to anything even if he means to pursue it fully.
In essence, that's what is really going on right now. While I'm not particularly fond of that party, the reality is Sanders and Trump essentially represent the electorate that is dissatisfied with the two party system. Yes, I understand that they are both running in the two party system, but neither is really tied to either party. A current Libertarian would not fare very well at all right now, because of the other choices. If you had a typical election, like from 2000, when Nader ran, then yes, they could do well. But in the current climate, they would not even be able to crack the top 4. Trump and Sanders have both done very well with Independent voters and that's what you would expect to see vote for the Libertarians. I don't see a mass migration from either of those two candidates to the Libertarian party this cycle.
This is too funny. She raised $160,000 to make a series of videos about sexism in videos games (25x+ of what she claimed she needed). Forgetting about how ridiculous the topic is for a second, she has only produced 3 of the videos in 4 years and hasn't come anywhere near completing the project. These are short, simple youtube videos most people could probably make in less than a days work. In 2014 she made 3 youtube videos the entire year. Her 'non-profit' organization, feminist frequency, does absolutely nothing other than make videos. 3. In an entire year. How much money did she pull in that year? $450,000. Holy fucking shit. Since 2012 she's made a million, and that's not even including her $20,000 speaking fee. Now they're throwing more money at her for another video series. Wow. I just can't get over how funny this is. Considering how lucrative it is I'm half tempted at this point to throw a wig on and make a series of fucktarded videos about how everything is sexist. I used to just think Anita was a moron, but it looks more like she's not so much a complete moron as she is someone who takes advantage of morons. Various news sites have been heaping praise on her and talking about what a hero she is: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/16/t...video-game-threats-anita-sarkeesian.html?_r=0 I just love this idea that there is a 'campaign' and that gamers are deeply concerned about protecting their 'male dominated' gaming culture. I'm pretty sure everyone who isn't setting their money on fire for Anita knows this stupid shit isn't going to change games. The talk about the death threats she's received is great too. I've had 'death threats' thrown at me online and I'm pretty much a complete unknown. How these people are unaware that this is the work of trolls who are probably laughing their ass off at how seriously it's been taken is kind of amazing. I guess being a feminist is the new preacher where you can scam idiots out of money and be loved for it.
If I wanted to make a youtube comment post I would have written something pointless and snarky that has fuck all to do with anything.
If anyone is following the Gawker/Hulk case, this might be of interest. I've always thought that the Gawker staff were shit-eaters and bottom feeders, but this courtroom footage is just priceless. In the official deposition, this guy made a comment, on record and under oath, that they wouldn't pull down a 4-year-old being raped video, because it is newsworthy and therefore covered under the first amendment. This was in response to them ignoring, quite publicly, a court order to take down the Hulk sex tape. https://twitter.com/gawker/status/327537977922318337 Well, this video is of the Editor at Gawker being dismantled in court. Go to 4:21 for the start of the "good" parts. That, ladies and gentlemen, is the moment when you realized your flippant, on-the-record remarks about child rape just lost you $114 million. Dude deserves absolutely everything they have coming to them, if you ask me.
Gawker's existence was almost entirely justified on the sole basis of posting the John Fitzgerald story, which is probably still the funniest loser I've ever heard of. That being said, that site is so fucking awful. Why they think postings people's private sex videos (and apparently even a child rape video, seriously?) is protected under the first amendment is so fucking bizarre. I don't like or idolize Tucker Max, but I distinctly remember their response article when he challenged them to a bet. It was among the stupidest things I've ever read. He thinks his mommy stole his penis? Yeah, ok... Anyway, I hope this sets a strong precedent for the sites that post this stuff. I'm sure that it will, and I completely agree, the fuckers absolutely had this coming.
Anybody who would like to read a quick editorial on trickle down economics failing, a write up on red state economics.. Before anyone wants to butt in about it, by all means look at the budget crises happening in KS, OK, LA, MO, WI. Brownback’s 2013 tax plan would generate $323 million in new revenue. During its first full year in operation, the plan produced a $688 million loss. Meanwhile, Kansas’s job growth actually trailed that of its neighboring states.
Actually, here's what I think is really funny. I watched Anita's first Tropes against Women (or whatever it was called) video when it first came out. I got about halfway through it before I got bored; the stuff she was saying was all obvious 101-level stuff, and she wasn't a good presenter. It looked like something a college student put together for a term paper, which is what I thought it was. I pretty much forgot about it after that. My point is, if it wasn't for the colossal butt-hurt and the threats/trolling toward her and her videos from (male gamers? internet trolls? I honestly don't know how anyone could get riled up by those videos.) people she probably would've finished her series and that would've been the end of it. They'd go down with the countless multitudes of unremarkable youtube videos and be generally forgotten right along with them. But because people I guess are just so outrageously offended that she criticized video games they make "counterpoint" or "expose" or whatever that video you linked was and pretty much keep her in the limelight. Or the obsession with how she has or hasn't spent the money that she fundraised. If you sent her money expecting something she hasn't delivered on it's understandable you'd be pissed, but if you didn't then why give a shit? It's comical in its ridiculousness. Honestly, all the vitriol she gets reminds of kids in grade school who would pick on the people they had crushes on. Do you have a secret crush on her? It's ok to admit it, there's no judgment here.