As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

The New GOP Thread: Taking Anti-Intellectualism to a Whole New Level

1141517192060

Posts

  • MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    PantsB wrote: »
    MKR wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    MKR wrote: »
    Remember how lots of people were going on about how McCain was a shoe-in with Obama and Clinton's fight splitting the party?

    Well yeah but only one was on the ballot. In NY-23 that's not the case.

    The two republicans are the two democrats in this scenario. I'm saying just because the party is split doesn't mean they will be at the end.

    Of course, they don't have an Obama rallying the troops, or a Clinton conceding in a classy way.
    And they aren't both Republicans, Hoffman has a different party endorsing him and the election is 8 days away.

    Well leave it to me to be mostly ignorant of the details of something that's a bit of a big deal.

    MKR on
  • HedgethornHedgethorn Associate Professor of Historical Hobby Horses In the Lions' DenRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    MKR wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    MKR wrote: »
    Remember how lots of people were going on about how McCain was a shoe-in with Obama and Clinton's fight splitting the party?

    Well yeah but only one was on the ballot. In NY-23 that's not the case.

    The two republicans are the two democrats in this scenario. I'm saying just because the party is split doesn't mean they will be at the end.

    Of course, they don't have an Obama rallying the troops, or a Clinton conceding in a classy way.

    Also, the Clinton/Obama fight ended five months before the general election, and it was two or three months before the most committed of her followers softened to Obama.

    There's one week left to heal the rifts in NY-23. I don't know that the (D) will win the seat, but I'm guessing that the Republican vote will be quite fractured.

    Hedgethorn on
  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    MKR wrote: »
    Remember how lots of people were going on about how McCain was a shoe-in with Obama and Clinton's fight splitting the party?

    Remember when lots of people thought it was going to be Hillary vs Giuliani?

    I don't remember that. I do remember the book that promised it would be Hillary vs. Condaleeza Rice, though :lol:.

    Pi-r8 on
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator mod
    edited October 2009
    I hope this "Conservative Party" thing takes off. Splits the right-wing vote, pulls the loons out of the GOP and gives the Republicans some turf in the middle ground to be a not-stupid party again.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • HedgethornHedgethorn Associate Professor of Historical Hobby Horses In the Lions' DenRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    MKR wrote: »
    Remember how lots of people were going on about how McCain was a shoe-in with Obama and Clinton's fight splitting the party?

    Remember when lots of people thought it was going to be Hillary vs Giuliani?

    I don't remember that. I do remember the book that promised it would be Hillary vs. Condaleeza Rice, though :lol:.

    Go find some reputable political blog and read posts from about August/September '07. After McCain's campaign nearly died in July of that year, Clinton v. Giuliani was a popular pick until pundits began to realize that the "Don't compete in any primary before Florida" wasn't a very good idea. Once Rudy's star started to burn out, though, no one had any clue who the Republican nominee was going to be.

    Edit: In November 2007, Rasmussen was doing three-way polling: Hillary vs. Giuliani and Hillary vs. Fred Thompson. :lol:

    Hedgethorn on
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I hope this "Conservative Party" thing takes off. Splits the right-wing vote, pulls the loons out of the GOP and gives the Republicans some turf in the middle ground to be a not-stupid party again.

    Alternately, the Conservative party can Perot every election in traditionally red areas, thereby increasing the size of the Blue Dog caucus. I'm not actually sure if I prefer this alternative.

    wwtMask on
    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    If the House Blue Dog Caucus were larger, Pelosi might start using it as an excuse for not getting votes.

    Captain Carrot on
  • PicardathonPicardathon Registered User
    edited October 2009
    Hedgethorn wrote: »
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    MKR wrote: »
    Remember how lots of people were going on about how McCain was a shoe-in with Obama and Clinton's fight splitting the party?

    Remember when lots of people thought it was going to be Hillary vs Giuliani?

    I don't remember that. I do remember the book that promised it would be Hillary vs. Condaleeza Rice, though :lol:.

    Go find some reputable political blog and read posts from about August/September '07. After McCain's campaign nearly died in July of that year, Clinton v. Giuliani was a popular pick until pundits began to realize that the "Don't compete in any primary before Florida" wasn't a very good idea. Once Rudy's star started to burn out, though, no one had any clue who the Republican nominee was going to be.

    Edit: In November 2007, Rasmussen was doing three-way polling: Hillary vs. Giuliani and Hillary vs. Fred Thompson. :lol:

    Fred Thompson was an excellent candidate before he actually began campaigning.

    Picardathon on
  • RustRust __BANNED USERS
    edited October 2009
    Hedgethorn wrote: »
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    MKR wrote: »
    Remember how lots of people were going on about how McCain was a shoe-in with Obama and Clinton's fight splitting the party?

    Remember when lots of people thought it was going to be Hillary vs Giuliani?

    I don't remember that. I do remember the book that promised it would be Hillary vs. Condaleeza Rice, though :lol:.

    Go find some reputable political blog and read posts from about August/September '07. After McCain's campaign nearly died in July of that year, Clinton v. Giuliani was a popular pick until pundits began to realize that the "Don't compete in any primary before Florida" wasn't a very good idea. Once Rudy's star started to burn out, though, no one had any clue who the Republican nominee was going to be.

    Edit: In November 2007, Rasmussen was doing three-way polling: Hillary vs. Giuliani and Hillary vs. Fred Thompson. :lol:

    Fred Thompson was an excellent candidate before he actually began campaigning.

    *stare*

    *stare*

    *stare*

    *stare*

    *stare*

    *stare*

    HOLY SHIT HE THREW A ROCK

    Rust on
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Rust wrote: »
    Hedgethorn wrote: »
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    MKR wrote: »
    Remember how lots of people were going on about how McCain was a shoe-in with Obama and Clinton's fight splitting the party?

    Remember when lots of people thought it was going to be Hillary vs Giuliani?

    I don't remember that. I do remember the book that promised it would be Hillary vs. Condaleeza Rice, though :lol:.

    Go find some reputable political blog and read posts from about August/September '07. After McCain's campaign nearly died in July of that year, Clinton v. Giuliani was a popular pick until pundits began to realize that the "Don't compete in any primary before Florida" wasn't a very good idea. Once Rudy's star started to burn out, though, no one had any clue who the Republican nominee was going to be.

    Edit: In November 2007, Rasmussen was doing three-way polling: Hillary vs. Giuliani and Hillary vs. Fred Thompson. :lol:

    Fred Thompson was an excellent candidate before he actually began campaigning.

    *stare*

    *stare*

    *stare*

    *stare*

    *stare*

    *stare*

    HOLY SHIT HE THREW A ROCK
    Fred Thompson was the guy from Law&Order
    You're thinking of someone else.

    Fencingsax on
  • KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    That was Mike Gravel, with the rock-throwing.

    And it was surrealistic genius.

    KalTorak on
  • BullioBullio Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I hope this "Conservative Party" thing takes off. Splits the right-wing vote, pulls the loons out of the GOP and gives the Republicans some turf in the middle ground to be a not-stupid party again.

    The Conservative Party is nothing new. They were somewhere near the bottom on the 2008 Presidential ballot. The recent notoriety is something new, though.

    My take on why primaries are closed. Party affiliation being required to vote not only ensures that members of that party are voting, but that people of opposing parties aren't. If primaries were open, what would stop all of the Dems in the disctrict or state from voting for the worst possible candidate in the Republican primary (and vice versa)? Instead of choosing a strong candidate that represents the views of the party and appears competent enough to lead, they can vote for a horrendous candidate on the other side that has no chance of winning while voting in some dude on their side that only has to strongly appeal to the base. I see this especially becoming a problem in states that heavily lean one way or another, as the less dominant side would never be able to get a strong candidate in place that has bipartisan appeal. Closed primaries force both sides to put up or shut up, so to speak.

    Bullio on
    steam_sig.png
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Bullio wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I hope this "Conservative Party" thing takes off. Splits the right-wing vote, pulls the loons out of the GOP and gives the Republicans some turf in the middle ground to be a not-stupid party again.

    The Conservative Party is nothing new. They were somewhere near the bottom on the 2008 Presidential ballot. The recent notoriety is something new, though.

    Well in New York its a bit different. The Conservative Party in NY doesn't have any national affiliations. NY allows third parties to cross endorse candidates, so in 2008 you could vote for John McCain - R, John McCain - Conservative, Barack Obama - D, and Barack Obama - Working Families. The Liberal Party in NY used to have a good deal of influence as well but doesn't have "ballot status" anymore.

    Its a good idea IMO, and would work as a decent way for 3rd parties to get some say. We had a ballot initiative to bring it back in IIRC 2007 in Massachusetts but it failed.

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • RustRust __BANNED USERS
    edited October 2009
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    Fred Thompson was the guy from Law&Order
    You're thinking of someone else.

    oh right, thompson was the guy who always looked like he was about to fall asleep at the podium

    Rust on
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Fencingsax wrote: »
    Rust wrote: »
    Hedgethorn wrote: »
    Pi-r8 wrote: »
    MKR wrote: »
    Remember how lots of people were going on about how McCain was a shoe-in with Obama and Clinton's fight splitting the party?

    Remember when lots of people thought it was going to be Hillary vs Giuliani?

    I don't remember that. I do remember the book that promised it would be Hillary vs. Condaleeza Rice, though :lol:.

    Go find some reputable political blog and read posts from about August/September '07. After McCain's campaign nearly died in July of that year, Clinton v. Giuliani was a popular pick until pundits began to realize that the "Don't compete in any primary before Florida" wasn't a very good idea. Once Rudy's star started to burn out, though, no one had any clue who the Republican nominee was going to be.

    Edit: In November 2007, Rasmussen was doing three-way polling: Hillary vs. Giuliani and Hillary vs. Fred Thompson. :lol:

    Fred Thompson was an excellent candidate before he actually began campaigning.

    *stare*

    *stare*

    *stare*

    *stare*

    *stare*

    *stare*

    HOLY SHIT HE THREW A ROCK
    Fred Thompson was the guy from Law&Order
    You're thinking of someone else.

    "Your average Russian doesn't take a dump without a plan."

    That guy.

    Synthesis on
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Synthesis wrote: »
    "Your average Russian doesn't take a dump without a plan."

    That guy.

    Sarah Palin slipped him that nugget. Know how she knows?

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    PantsB wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote: »
    "Your average Russian doesn't take a dump without a plan."

    That guy.

    Sarah Palin slipped him that nugget. Know how she knows?

    She can see Russian nuggets from the toilet-cam she installed in Putin's house?

    KalTorak on
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    PantsB wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote: »
    "Your average Russian doesn't take a dump without a plan."

    That guy.

    Sarah Palin slipped him that nugget. Know how she knows?

    I'm sure she was involved in the writing for that film anyway. It deals with Russians*! With weapons! And in cold places! Of course she's there.

    Sarah Palin--making bad writing even worse.

    *Technically Soviet citizens of Russian and other nationalities

    Synthesis on
  • HedgethornHedgethorn Associate Professor of Historical Hobby Horses In the Lions' DenRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Synthesis wrote: »
    "Your average Russian doesn't take a dump without a plan."

    That guy.

    I was always partial to "Let's stack 'em, pack 'em, and rack 'em."

    Edit: Which, coincidentally, was roughly Fred Thompson's foreign policy.

    Hedgethorn on
  • Gabriel_PittGabriel_Pitt (effective against Russian warships) Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    If Fred Thompson had been anything like his Law and Order character, he would've hat my vote.

    Stupid actors, acting like people they're not. It outta be a sin.

    Gabriel_Pitt on
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited October 2009
    Bullio wrote: »
    My take on why primaries are closed. Party affiliation being required to vote not only ensures that members of that party are voting, but that people of opposing parties aren't. If primaries were open, what would stop all of the Dems in the disctrict or state from voting for the worst possible candidate in the Republican primary (and vice versa)? Instead of choosing a strong candidate that represents the views of the party and appears competent enough to lead, they can vote for a horrendous candidate on the other side that has no chance of winning while voting in some dude on their side that only has to strongly appeal to the base. I see this especially becoming a problem in states that heavily lean one way or another, as the less dominant side would never be able to get a strong candidate in place that has bipartisan appeal. Closed primaries force both sides to put up or shut up, so to speak.

    This is a very real possibility, especially in presidential elections. If your candidate has already won, then why even bother voting in your party's primary? Fuck it, let's just go sabotage the other guy! Though it's a possibility in any open primary in which one party has a shoo-in candidate and the other has a tight race.

    That said, both open- and closed-primaries have pros and cons. The above is one such con. Overall, I think open primaries solve more problems than they cause, because the problems they address strike me as more prevalent than situations like the above.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    The newest RNC mailer

    DJM.Census.JPG

    SyphonBlue on
    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I was wondering why you posted that until I got to question 7.

    Couscous on
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I'm tempted to say that's a clever edit...but the way things are...

    Synthesis on
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Twitter is on that list.

    Henroid on
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    At least the attempt at push polling is somewhat subtle.

    Fencingsax on
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I love how it pretends to be the real census

    nexuscrawler on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Fox News is separate from CNN/MSNBC. Because CNN and MSNBC are the same.

    Couscous on
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    [x]Other Jesus__________________

    Henroid on
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Oh god I totally forgot

    I went to a town fair this weekend, and someone was wearing a t-shirt that said "I miss Reagan"

    SyphonBlue on
    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    Fox News is separate from CNN/MSNBC. Because CNN and MSNBC are the same.

    They should've just broken it down into "Liberal Media" and "The Alamo of Truth".

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."
  • MKRMKR Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    How can you not be sure of whether or not you voted in one of the most media whored elections in history?

    MKR on
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Bullio wrote: »
    My take on why primaries are closed. Party affiliation being required to vote not only ensures that members of that party are voting, but that people of opposing parties aren't. If primaries were open, what would stop all of the Dems in the disctrict or state from voting for the worst possible candidate in the Republican primary (and vice versa)? Instead of choosing a strong candidate that represents the views of the party and appears competent enough to lead, they can vote for a horrendous candidate on the other side that has no chance of winning while voting in some dude on their side that only has to strongly appeal to the base. I see this especially becoming a problem in states that heavily lean one way or another, as the less dominant side would never be able to get a strong candidate in place that has bipartisan appeal. Closed primaries force both sides to put up or shut up, so to speak.

    This is a very real possibility, especially in presidential elections. If your candidate has already won, then why even bother voting in your party's primary? Fuck it, let's just go sabotage the other guy! Though it's a possibility in any open primary in which one party has a shoo-in candidate and the other has a tight race.

    That said, both open- and closed-primaries have pros and cons. The above is one such con. Overall, I think open primaries solve more problems than they cause, because the problems they address strike me as more prevalent than situations like the above.

    I think it happens about as often as people using fake ID's to vote as someone else in the general. Wich is to say rarely and not in an organised way. 2008 was an outlier in that the lenght of the primary. Usualy the guy that wins New Hampshire/South Carolina is the main candidate. The speed with wich he is anoited, turns the whole thing into a steam-roller.

    Kipling217 on
    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Couscous wrote: »
    Fox News is separate from CNN/MSNBC. Because CNN and MSNBC are the same.

    They should've just broken it down into "Liberal Media" and "The Alamo of Truth".

    You really love that one don't you Jeffe? :lol:

    Henroid on
  • Edith UpwardsEdith Upwards Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    So, who's Santa Anna in this analogy? Nancy Grace?

    Edith Upwards on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    MKR wrote: »
    How can you not be sure of whether or not you voted in one of the most media whored elections in history?

    People with Alzheimer's are allowed to vote?
    They wouldn't pass the voting capacity test.

    Couscous on
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    MKR wrote: »
    How can you not be sure of whether or not you voted in one of the most media whored elections in history?

    People with Alzheimer's are allowed to vote?
    They wouldn't pass the voting capacity test.

    Give that the are allowed to run for, and hold, elected office, I can't see why not.
    All right, that was a low shot. I'm weak like that.

    Synthesis on
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Oh god I totally forgot

    I went to a town fair this weekend, and someone was wearing a t-shirt that said "I miss Reagan"

    Wait, was it this guy?
    john_hinkley_jr__image.jpg

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • RentRent I'm always right Fuckin' deal with itRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    I love going back and reading Bush-era conspiracy theories that never happened. I think my two favorite are:

    "Hilary Clinton is already in place to be the next President. After her will be Jeb Bush. End the Clinton-Bush dynasty now. Vote McCain."

    and

    "Mark my words, shortly before the 2008 election there will be another major terrorist attack on US soil, manufactured by the Bush administration. He will use the opportunity to suspend the elections and truly become a tyrant."

    I'd love to see the denial those people would put up when questioned about what happened to those theories. Either, "No that wasn't me" or "OBAMA IS PART OF IT."

    Speaking of, my friend hasn't gotten back to me about the contrails thing ever since the wiki article linking.

    All conspiracy theories about new world orders and cabals that secretly run the world are stupid for just being implausible, if nothing else. If a secret cabal could actually get enough power and influence to run the world such that leaders aren't elected but installed, I'm pretty sure said cabal could hide its existence well enough to thwart the probings of your average conspiracy theorist.

    The cabal actually hires people to go on about "secret cabals controlling the world" and generally acting crazy so you people will just reject the idea out of hand

    Don't you see you're all falling into the trap like the mindless masses you are

    Wake up sheeple

    Rent on
  • LionLion Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I think I could be more of a fan of closed primaries if more states allowed same day registration. As it stands, open primaries make it easier to get people involved. '08 was interesting in that I had relatives in Wisconsin that had voted completely Republican in previous elections that were completely disillusioned with the party and were very excited about voting to nominate Obama. If they'd had to jump through the hurdle of changing party affiliation at some date prior to voting, I don't think they would have gotten as involved or as excited as they did.

    Lion on
    PSN: WingedLion | XBL: Winged Lion
This discussion has been closed.