Netphoria Message Board


Go Back   Netphoria Message Board > Archives > General Chat Archive
Register Netphoria's Amazon.com Link Members List Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-18-2014, 12:01 AM   #61
jczeroman
Registered User
 
jczeroman's Avatar
 
Location: In my house.
Posts: 14,464
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redbreegull View Post
I think you are severely underestimating how deeply the ideological lines have been dug. Most democrats are not only about gay marriage and abortion, income inequality and the evil of the 1% has become just as potent an issue. It will take far more than some idiot who wants to slash taxes to get young people on board with the GOP.
You say this about the same people who voted for Obama in 2012?

 
jczeroman is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 12:05 AM   #62
jczeroman
Registered User
 
jczeroman's Avatar
 
Location: In my house.
Posts: 14,464
Default

The reality is that independent voters are where the money is at. Paul's "libertarianism" is pretty toned down and as long as people like Ted Cruz are around he looks like a moderate. Without Ted Cruz, yes, he looks too much like Goldwater (at best!) and is therefore unelectable. But if he is crossing the isle and making friends with GOP leadership too, then they can put their machine to work on him and get him in.

 
jczeroman is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 12:08 AM   #63
Mayfuck
Banned
 
Location: i'm from japan also hollywood
Posts: 57,805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jczeroman View Post
That is true. The fawning over Obama from 2006-09 was sickening.
In retrospect, it really was.

 
Mayfuck is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 02:35 AM   #64
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jczeroman View Post
The reality is that independent voters are where the money is at. Paul's "libertarianism" is pretty toned down and as long as people like Ted Cruz are around he looks like a moderate. Without Ted Cruz, yes, he looks too much like Goldwater (at best!) and is therefore unelectable. But if he is crossing the isle and making friends with GOP leadership too, then they can put their machine to work on him and get him in.
most independent voters always vote republican

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 02:36 AM   #65
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

gah too drunk to post

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 11:04 AM   #66
MyOneAndOnly
Shut the fuck up!
 
MyOneAndOnly's Avatar
 
Location: "Okay, white power feminist" - yo soy el mejor
Posts: 23,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jczeroman View Post
The reality is that independent voters are where the money is at.
there are very very few "independent" voters. There may be many people who don't register with one of the parties, but those people mostly vote along party lines.

the idea that there's some kind of great american political "middle" that rationally evaluates candidates regardless of party affiliation and then votes accordingly is pure fiction.

Paul is preaching strictly to Paultards and teabaggers, which are nothing but a minority of the GOP

 
MyOneAndOnly is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 01:20 PM   #67
Order 66
Socialphobic
 
Order 66's Avatar
 
Posts: 11,831
Default

speaking from a strictly technical standpoint, independent voters usually fluctuate. like if X party is unpopular most of them will almost always identify as "independent"

that's why it was so lulzy last election when romney people kept trumpeting that they had the independent vote on lockdown

 
Order 66 is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 02:06 PM   #68
bignothing
Demi-God
 
bignothing's Avatar
 
Posts: 413
Default

I was pretty sure some of you would be libertarians with all that cop hate

Last edited by bignothing : 02-26-2014 at 11:04 PM.

 
bignothing is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 04:54 PM   #69
Trotskilicious
Banned
 
Trotskilicious's Avatar
 
Location: I believe in the transcendental qualities of friendship.
Posts: 39,439
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scottytheoneand View Post
there are very very few "independent" voters. There may be many people who don't register with one of the parties, but those people mostly vote along party lines.

the idea that there's some kind of great american political "middle" that rationally evaluates candidates regardless of party affiliation and then votes accordingly is pure fiction.

Paul is preaching strictly to Paultards and teabaggers, which are nothing but a minority of the GOP
simplistic analysis, as ever. thanks.

 
Trotskilicious is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 04:58 PM   #70
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Order 66 View Post
speaking from a strictly technical standpoint, independent voters usually fluctuate. like if X party is unpopular most of them will almost always identify as "independent"
I don't believe this is true. The total number of registered democrats is much higher than the number of registered republicans. General elections are almost always within a few percentage points of each other though, meaning that a large number of voters not registered with either major party almost always vote republican. So it's true that Romney had most independents on lockdown. it's because they are republican voters who don't want to identify with the party. I'm not sure what the breakdown was in more distant elections, but in both Obama elections you had far more registered repubs cross lines and vote for him than registered dems vote for McCain or Romney, but both elections were still fairly close in raw vote count, which strengthens my argument that the bulk of independent voters never vote democrat anyway and are not the golden snitch

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 08:41 PM   #71
Eulogy
huh
 
Posts: 62,456
Default

Rand Paul is a fucking moron who doesn't really think the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was Constitutional (an opinion i imagine he shares with jczeroman).

He might appeal to the same young idiots that Ron Paul appealed to (yes there were dumb young people that voted for Obama too, no need to point that fact out to me).

 
Eulogy is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 09:48 PM   #72
Trotskilicious
Banned
 
Trotskilicious's Avatar
 
Location: I believe in the transcendental qualities of friendship.
Posts: 39,439
Default

at least one major candidate will want to legalize weed

 
Trotskilicious is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 10:04 PM   #73
Order 66
Socialphobic
 
Order 66's Avatar
 
Posts: 11,831
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redbreegull View Post
I don't believe this is true. The total number of registered democrats is much higher than the number of registered republicans. General elections are almost always within a few percentage points of each other though, meaning that a large number of voters not registered with either major party almost always vote republican. So it's true that Romney had most independents on lockdown. it's because they are republican voters who don't want to identify with the party. I'm not sure what the breakdown was in more distant elections, but in both Obama elections you had far more registered repubs cross lines and vote for him than registered dems vote for McCain or Romney, but both elections were still fairly close in raw vote count, which strengthens my argument that the bulk of independent voters never vote democrat anyway and are not the golden snitch
i know, i'm just saying it fluctuates. for example take a time when democrats weren't popular. like, say, 2002, most "independents" were democrat because they didn't want to affiliate themselves with a brand that was "weak on terror", that didn't support the troops, ect . then come years like 2008 and '12 where the other side isn't popular, you see people sort of pussy footing around the fact that they're republican, hiding behind the "independent" affiliation.

i think we're saying the same thing. i'm just saying it moves around from time to time.. (i'm talking about poll samples though. i don't know how "registered" party affiliation plays out)

that also explains why the sampling can be very skewed toward one side and still be viable. for example the polls in 2012 predicting an obama win had like, 45% dems, 25% republicans and 30% independents -- and was still perfectly legit, simply because "democrats" were the more popular side to be on at that time. bandwagon effect

anyway, what i'm saying is there aren't many honest to god independents

Last edited by Order 66 : 02-18-2014 at 10:35 PM.

 
Order 66 is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 10:10 PM   #74
Order 66
Socialphobic
 
Order 66's Avatar
 
Posts: 11,831
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trotskilicious View Post
at least one major candidate will want to legalize weed
wouldnt be surprised if he folded pretty fast on that. or goes the obama "i want to decriminalize it but i really won't" route

 
Order 66 is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 10:16 PM   #75
Trotskilicious
Banned
 
Trotskilicious's Avatar
 
Location: I believe in the transcendental qualities of friendship.
Posts: 39,439
Default

lift blunts, clan in the front METHOD MAN '16

 
Trotskilicious is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 10:17 PM   #76
Future Boy
The Man of Tomorrow
 
Future Boy's Avatar
 
Posts: 26,965
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redbreegull View Post
and every pundit on tv, was completely certain romney had it in the bag.
uh..

edit: i guess you meant republican pundits,

Last edited by Future Boy : 02-18-2014 at 10:36 PM.

 
Future Boy is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 10:29 PM   #77
Trotskilicious
Banned
 
Trotskilicious's Avatar
 
Location: I believe in the transcendental qualities of friendship.
Posts: 39,439
Default

nate silver was the only person worth paying attention to

eventually we're just going to have nate pick the winner based on his statistical model

 
Trotskilicious is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 10:35 PM   #78
Future Boy
The Man of Tomorrow
 
Future Boy's Avatar
 
Posts: 26,965
Default

fuck nate silver

 
Future Boy is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 10:37 PM   #79
Eulogy
huh
 
Posts: 62,456
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Order 66 View Post
wouldnt be surprised if he folded pretty fast on that. or goes the obama "i want to decriminalize it but i really won't" route
i don't think he's ever endorsed legalization anyway. i think he said states should decide for themselves.

a few seconds of googling gave me this

Quote:
"I personally think that marijuana use is not healthy," Paul told the Las Vegas Sun in an interview published Wednesday. "People that use it chronically have a loss of IQ and a loss of ambition, but at the same time states have the right to make these decisions."
yeah ok.

 
Eulogy is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 10:38 PM   #80
Eulogy
huh
 
Posts: 62,456
Default

basically he's a wishy washy phony piece of shit who is trying to pander to both sides.

fuck him.

 
Eulogy is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 10:41 PM   #81
Eulogy
huh
 
Posts: 62,456
Default

do i need to say again that i know he's not the only one that does that

probably

 
Eulogy is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 10:42 PM   #82
Trotskilicious
Banned
 
Trotskilicious's Avatar
 
Location: I believe in the transcendental qualities of friendship.
Posts: 39,439
Default

little does he know i didn't have any ambition to begin with

 
Trotskilicious is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 10:43 PM   #83
Trotskilicious
Banned
 
Trotskilicious's Avatar
 
Location: I believe in the transcendental qualities of friendship.
Posts: 39,439
Default

and i don't think it reduces IQ, maybe while you're using it.

where's Dr. Bongwater to set the record straight.

 
Trotskilicious is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 11:20 PM   #84
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

there is some legitimate evidence which suggests, but does not prove, that chronic marijuana use before the age of about 18 can dampen brain development.

if you are talking about grown adults, there is not an iota of serious scientific evidence anywhere that it lowers IQ or makes you stupider in any quantifiable way

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 11:27 PM   #85
redbreegull
Just Hook it to My Veins!
 
redbreegull's Avatar
 
Location: N3t4Euh Haus
Posts: 32,749
Default

I mean if you read the studies paid for by the Reagan administration you will find "evidence" for that sort of thing, but the way they accrued this evidence was by doing shit like strapping down chimps and pumping weed smoke into their lungs through gas masks until they had brain damage from lack of oxygen...

 
redbreegull is offline
Old 02-18-2014, 11:36 PM   #86
Trotskilicious
Banned
 
Trotskilicious's Avatar
 
Location: I believe in the transcendental qualities of friendship.
Posts: 39,439
Default

i'm definitely stupider right now, and i'm loving it

 
Trotskilicious is offline
Old 02-19-2014, 01:38 PM   #87
Order 66
Socialphobic
 
Order 66's Avatar
 
Posts: 11,831
Default

its supposed to be "safe" but explain all those dead potheads, like willie nelson

 
Order 66 is offline
Old 02-19-2014, 03:51 PM   #88
Order 66
Socialphobic
 
Order 66's Avatar
 
Posts: 11,831
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trotskilicious View Post
nate silver was the only person worth paying attention to
erick erickson was pretty spot on too.. http://www.redstate.com/diary/Erick/...ay-obama-lost/

 
Order 66 is offline
Old 02-20-2014, 03:03 AM   #89
Trotskilicious
Banned
 
Trotskilicious's Avatar
 
Location: I believe in the transcendental qualities of friendship.
Posts: 39,439
Default

haahaha the only comment is great

 
Trotskilicious is offline
Old 02-20-2014, 08:41 PM   #90
TuralyonW3
Immortal
 
TuralyonW3's Avatar
 
Posts: 25,684
Default

No way in hell republicans win without a drastic change of approach

 
TuralyonW3 is offline
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is On
Google


Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How has the media covered the election? Nimrod's Son General Chat Archive 21 11-02-2008 10:50 PM
Colbert announces presidential pursuit KrazeeStacee General Chat Archive 23 10-17-2007 09:01 PM
Liberal Opposition is releasing the names of 129 Conservative candidates MrPantyFAce General Chat Archive 3 09-24-2007 10:15 PM
The presidential nominating process - a potential megaprimary and reform proposals BlueStar General Chat Archive 0 03-06-2007 02:37 PM
First presidential debate today at 3:00pm ET / noon PT BlueStar General Chat Archive 30 02-22-2007 12:29 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:40 AM.




Smashing Pumpkins, Alternative Music
& General Discussion Message Board and Forums
www.netphoria.org - Copyright © 1998-2022