President Marianne

User avatar
vhstapes
Member
Posts: 2286
Joined: November 16th, 2009, 1:54 am
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Re: President Marianne

Post by vhstapes »

We gotta get those numbers up! The right got to elect a meme for president, it's our turn now!!!


-Cyrus M.
\m/ Endor Region \m/

Data Tapes - 05 - The Unofficial NARP Defensive Shield Primer

rsersen
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1733
Joined: January 28th, 2017, 3:42 pm
Location: Hanover, PA
GEMP Username: rsersen
Contact:

Re: President Marianne

Post by rsersen »

Not only does she need to up her polling to 2%, but apparently the next debate also has a funding threshold that needs to be met:
Grassroots Fundraising Threshold. Candidates must submit a certification, executed by the Presidential candidate’s campaign Treasurer, demonstrating that the campaign has received donations from a minimum of (1) 130,000 unique donors; and (2) 400 unique donors per state in at least 20 U.S. states. For the September debate, qualifying donations must be received by 11:59 P.M. on August 28, 2019.
https://www.marianne2020.com/

She's currently ~30,000 donors short of that goal. Now is the time guys, let's be the change we want to see.
stubbly wrote:Echo Base Trooper is the Siri of SWCCG
Image

Image

User avatar
quickdraw3457
Multimedia and Special Projects Advocate
Posts: 26283
Joined: September 3rd, 2003, 5:10 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
GEMP Username: quickdraw

Re: President Marianne

Post by quickdraw3457 »

rsersen wrote:
Grassroots Fundraising Threshold. Candidates must submit a certification, executed by the Presidential candidate’s campaign Treasurer, demonstrating that the campaign has received donations from a minimum of (1) 130,000 unique donors; and (2) 400 unique donors per state in at least 20 U.S. states. For the September debate, qualifying donations must be received by 11:59 P.M. on August 28, 2019.
I'm not one for politics much but I have to say this seems really * up to me. It's like they're throwing all pretenses out the window and now just outright saying "whoever has more money still has a chance" instead of pretending it was actually based on the issues.
Matt C. - Pittsburgh, PA
multimedia@starwarsccg.org
Image
Hunter wrote:quickdraw is right

User avatar
Gergall
Rules Advocate
Posts: 21034
Joined: December 9th, 2002, 1:14 am
Location: Long Island, NY

Re: President Marianne

Post by Gergall »

Thanks for that link - looks like you don't need to average 2%, you just need to be able to show a few polls where you successfully did hit 2%. Each candidate can cherry-pick their own best polls.

That will still narrow the field quite a bit but we'll probably get more than just the top 6.
Greg Zinn
Image

User avatar
dorshe1
Member
Posts: 8422
Joined: June 13th, 2013, 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Holotable username: dorshe1
GEMP Username: dorshe1
Contact:

Re: President Marianne

Post by dorshe1 »

quickdraw3457 wrote:
rsersen wrote:
Grassroots Fundraising Threshold. Candidates must submit a certification, executed by the Presidential candidate’s campaign Treasurer, demonstrating that the campaign has received donations from a minimum of (1) 130,000 unique donors; and (2) 400 unique donors per state in at least 20 U.S. states. For the September debate, qualifying donations must be received by 11:59 P.M. on August 28, 2019.
I'm not one for politics much but I have to say this seems really * up to me. It's like they're throwing all pretenses out the window and now just outright saying "whoever has more money still has a chance" instead of pretending it was actually based on the issues.
Fundraising is the #1 indicator of a campaign''s health. Period. End of story. These requirements are an incredibly low threshold for a presidential election AND it shows that the campaign has widespread geographical support, which is needed to win the nomination.

They are not telling people they can't run, they are just pointing out that after at least 6 months you have not met certain criteria that show you have a serious chance to win the election so you can't be in the debate.

Thanks!
Image

User avatar
Cam Solusar
Member
Posts: 16871
Joined: November 23rd, 2002, 7:57 pm
Location: Sunny Southern California

Re: President Marianne

Post by Cam Solusar »

It seems like a 98% chakra alignment rating should overwhelm such crude material concepts as opinion polls and wealth.
Camden Y, Southern California
BrenDerlin wrote:These movies aren't called Star Battles, yo.

User avatar
BrenDerlin
Member
Posts: 3572
Joined: November 3rd, 2002, 12:34 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: President Marianne

Post by BrenDerlin »

quickdraw3457 wrote:
rsersen wrote:
Grassroots Fundraising Threshold. Candidates must submit a certification, executed by the Presidential candidate’s campaign Treasurer, demonstrating that the campaign has received donations from a minimum of (1) 130,000 unique donors; and (2) 400 unique donors per state in at least 20 U.S. states. For the September debate, qualifying donations must be received by 11:59 P.M. on August 28, 2019.
I'm not one for politics much but I have to say this seems really * up to me. It's like they're throwing all pretenses out the window and now just outright saying "whoever has more money still has a chance" instead of pretending it was actually based on the issues.
It's actually quite the opposite, since the requirement isn't based on total funds raised (which I agree would be really * up), but on the number of unique donors. Many of the candidates who are taking in tons of wall street/big pharma/etc. money are having trouble hitting that threshold, since it requires having a wider base of support instead of getting a lot of money from a few billionaires. The candidates who have refused big donor money and prioritized small-dollar donations are passing it easily, and it's meant to elevate candidates who connect more with the grassroots and less with these people.

It's meant to balance out polling, which filters for "likely voters" and is often conducted only through landlines (and thus often ends up favoring voters who are older, whiter, and more well-off).

On a semi-related note, the NYTimes just came out with an interactive map of where all these individual donors are located and I found it super fascinating: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... ising.html
WUBBA LUBBA DUB DUB!
Brad Eier wrote:i have no idea who matt thorton is, possibly the son of billy bob?

Meto
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 4749
Joined: August 21st, 2003, 2:57 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: President Marianne

Post by Meto »

BrenDerlin wrote:
quickdraw3457 wrote:
rsersen wrote:
Grassroots Fundraising Threshold. Candidates must submit a certification, executed by the Presidential candidate’s campaign Treasurer, demonstrating that the campaign has received donations from a minimum of (1) 130,000 unique donors; and (2) 400 unique donors per state in at least 20 U.S. states. For the September debate, qualifying donations must be received by 11:59 P.M. on August 28, 2019.
I'm not one for politics much but I have to say this seems really * up to me. It's like they're throwing all pretenses out the window and now just outright saying "whoever has more money still has a chance" instead of pretending it was actually based on the issues.
It's actually quite the opposite, since the requirement isn't based on total funds raised (which I agree would be really * up), but on the number of unique donors. Many of the candidates who are taking in tons of wall street/big pharma/etc. money are having trouble hitting that threshold, since it requires having a wider base of support instead of getting a lot of money from a few billionaires. The candidates who have refused big donor money and prioritized small-dollar donations are passing it easily, and it's meant to elevate candidates who connect more with the grassroots and less with these people.

It's meant to balance out polling, which filters for "likely voters" and is often conducted only through landlines (and thus often ends up favoring voters who are older, whiter, and more well-off).

On a semi-related note, the NYTimes just came out with an interactive map of where all these individual donors are located and I found it super fascinating: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... ising.html
If I were trying to find a metric that balances against the polls skewing older, whiter, and more well-off...I don't think I'd choose political donors.
"I was blackout drunk and shot Hunter."

User avatar
JarJarDrinks
Member
Posts: 26421
Joined: November 4th, 2003, 10:01 am

Re: President Marianne

Post by JarJarDrinks »

Meto wrote:
BrenDerlin wrote:
quickdraw3457 wrote:
rsersen wrote:
Grassroots Fundraising Threshold. Candidates must submit a certification, executed by the Presidential candidate’s campaign Treasurer, demonstrating that the campaign has received donations from a minimum of (1) 130,000 unique donors; and (2) 400 unique donors per state in at least 20 U.S. states. For the September debate, qualifying donations must be received by 11:59 P.M. on August 28, 2019.
I'm not one for politics much but I have to say this seems really * up to me. It's like they're throwing all pretenses out the window and now just outright saying "whoever has more money still has a chance" instead of pretending it was actually based on the issues.
It's actually quite the opposite, since the requirement isn't based on total funds raised (which I agree would be really * up), but on the number of unique donors. Many of the candidates who are taking in tons of wall street/big pharma/etc. money are having trouble hitting that threshold, since it requires having a wider base of support instead of getting a lot of money from a few billionaires. The candidates who have refused big donor money and prioritized small-dollar donations are passing it easily, and it's meant to elevate candidates who connect more with the grassroots and less with these people.

It's meant to balance out polling, which filters for "likely voters" and is often conducted only through landlines (and thus often ends up favoring voters who are older, whiter, and more well-off).

On a semi-related note, the NYTimes just came out with an interactive map of where all these individual donors are located and I found it super fascinating: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... ising.html
If I were trying to find a metric that balances against the polls skewing older, whiter, and more well-off...I don't think I'd choose political donors.
So what would u suggest? Number of Twitter followers?
dx_37 wrote:
October 2nd, 2019, 12:12 pm
I would be all for a reset if I get to be on the reset team
"Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking."
- Bill Maher

"How you play the game is important. But for me, it's about if you win or lose."
- Derek Jeter

Meto
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 4749
Joined: August 21st, 2003, 2:57 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: President Marianne

Post by Meto »

JarJarDrinks wrote:
Meto wrote:
BrenDerlin wrote:
quickdraw3457 wrote:
rsersen wrote:
Grassroots Fundraising Threshold. Candidates must submit a certification, executed by the Presidential candidate’s campaign Treasurer, demonstrating that the campaign has received donations from a minimum of (1) 130,000 unique donors; and (2) 400 unique donors per state in at least 20 U.S. states. For the September debate, qualifying donations must be received by 11:59 P.M. on August 28, 2019.
I'm not one for politics much but I have to say this seems really * up to me. It's like they're throwing all pretenses out the window and now just outright saying "whoever has more money still has a chance" instead of pretending it was actually based on the issues.
It's actually quite the opposite, since the requirement isn't based on total funds raised (which I agree would be really * up), but on the number of unique donors. Many of the candidates who are taking in tons of wall street/big pharma/etc. money are having trouble hitting that threshold, since it requires having a wider base of support instead of getting a lot of money from a few billionaires. The candidates who have refused big donor money and prioritized small-dollar donations are passing it easily, and it's meant to elevate candidates who connect more with the grassroots and less with these people.

It's meant to balance out polling, which filters for "likely voters" and is often conducted only through landlines (and thus often ends up favoring voters who are older, whiter, and more well-off).

On a semi-related note, the NYTimes just came out with an interactive map of where all these individual donors are located and I found it super fascinating: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... ising.html
If I were trying to find a metric that balances against the polls skewing older, whiter, and more well-off...I don't think I'd choose political donors.
So what would u suggest? Number of Twitter followers?
Unfortunately, Obama already had his two terms.
"I was blackout drunk and shot Hunter."

User avatar
Aglets
Retired Advocate
Posts: 19370
Joined: January 14th, 2004, 9:08 pm
Location: Bel Air, MD

Re: President Marianne

Post by Aglets »

The guy Dems spent 2 hours attacking the other night?

;)
Image
Rian Johnson wrote: I would be worried if everybody across the board was like "Yea, that was a good movie." It's much more exciting to me when you get a group of people who are coming up to you.....really really excited about it. And then there are other people who walk out literally saying that was the worst movie I've ever seen. Having those two extremes to me is the mark of the type of movie that I want to make.

User avatar
WiseMarsellus
Member
Posts: 17445
Joined: February 26th, 2007, 9:33 am

Re: President Marianne

Post by WiseMarsellus »

did we watch the same debate? the only occasion i recall democrats even lightly criticizing obama was in asking biden if he supported obama's pre-daca deportation policy. i can't remember another time that came up.

don't get me wrong, i dislike obama and if people were criticizing him i'm all for it. but what gave you the impression that happened?
tom kelly
Image Image Image Image
check out my youtube page for swccg video content, and my twitch for swccg live streams!

User avatar
dorshe1
Member
Posts: 8422
Joined: June 13th, 2013, 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Holotable username: dorshe1
GEMP Username: dorshe1
Contact:

Re: President Marianne

Post by dorshe1 »

WiseMarsellus wrote:did we watch the same debate? the only occasion i recall democrats even lightly criticizing obama was in asking biden if he supported obama's pre-daca deportation policy. i can't remember another time that came up.

don't get me wrong, i dislike obama and if people were criticizing him i'm all for it. but what gave you the impression that happened?
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/ ... en-1444825

Thanks!
Image

User avatar
WiseMarsellus
Member
Posts: 17445
Joined: February 26th, 2007, 9:33 am

Re: President Marianne

Post by WiseMarsellus »

that article is heavy on accusations of attacks against barrack obama and light on the actual details of those attacks. as far as i can tell it's just the one instance i cited
tom kelly
Image Image Image Image
check out my youtube page for swccg video content, and my twitch for swccg live streams!

User avatar
Aglets
Retired Advocate
Posts: 19370
Joined: January 14th, 2004, 9:08 pm
Location: Bel Air, MD

Re: President Marianne

Post by Aglets »

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/02/opin ... obama.html

It's not that they are attacking him by name. Just his policies.

Making it a crime to cross illegally.......fix the ACA vs blowing it up......etc.

The Times piece is a bit dramatic but i think the underlying point is valid.
Image
Rian Johnson wrote: I would be worried if everybody across the board was like "Yea, that was a good movie." It's much more exciting to me when you get a group of people who are coming up to you.....really really excited about it. And then there are other people who walk out literally saying that was the worst movie I've ever seen. Having those two extremes to me is the mark of the type of movie that I want to make.

User avatar
WiseMarsellus
Member
Posts: 17445
Joined: February 26th, 2007, 9:33 am

Re: President Marianne

Post by WiseMarsellus »

if pursuing different policies counts as attacking obama now, then ok. that seems a bit of a stretch in my eyes. also it's a bit dishonest to frame medicare for all as being anti-obama given that obama has endorsed it
tom kelly
Image Image Image Image
check out my youtube page for swccg video content, and my twitch for swccg live streams!

User avatar
BrenDerlin
Member
Posts: 3572
Joined: November 3rd, 2002, 12:34 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: President Marianne

Post by BrenDerlin »

Oh well. Turns out all orbs and crystals get you are a lot of ironic memes.

Has anyone started a "President Bernie Sanders" thread yet? Should I make a new one or just change the title of this one?

Cause idk how aware you all are of this but he's going to be our next President.
WUBBA LUBBA DUB DUB!
Brad Eier wrote:i have no idea who matt thorton is, possibly the son of billy bob?

rsersen
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1733
Joined: January 28th, 2017, 3:42 pm
Location: Hanover, PA
GEMP Username: rsersen
Contact:

Re: President Marianne

Post by rsersen »

BrenDerlin wrote:
January 10th, 2020, 2:53 pm
he's going to be our next President.
Well I'm sold. Not like a declarative statement made 10 months before an election has ever aged poorly.
stubbly wrote:Echo Base Trooper is the Siri of SWCCG
Image

Image

User avatar
Aglets
Retired Advocate
Posts: 19370
Joined: January 14th, 2004, 9:08 pm
Location: Bel Air, MD

Re: President Marianne

Post by Aglets »

Today is the day that love has lost.

:oops:
Image
Rian Johnson wrote: I would be worried if everybody across the board was like "Yea, that was a good movie." It's much more exciting to me when you get a group of people who are coming up to you.....really really excited about it. And then there are other people who walk out literally saying that was the worst movie I've ever seen. Having those two extremes to me is the mark of the type of movie that I want to make.

User avatar
Gergall
Rules Advocate
Posts: 21034
Joined: December 9th, 2002, 1:14 am
Location: Long Island, NY

Re: President Marianne

Post by Gergall »

BrenDerlin wrote:
January 10th, 2020, 2:53 pm
Oh well. Turns out all orbs and crystals get you are a lot of ironic memes.

Has anyone started a "President Bernie Sanders" thread yet? Should I make a new one or just change the title of this one?

Cause idk how aware you all are of this but he's going to be our next President.
Biden has a good lead and is doing well in the early states.

Does anyone know if, as a resident of NY, there is a way that I can safely and legally place a $100 bet on Biden?

I would like to set up a situation where if Bernie wins I won't mind losing the $100 and if Biden wins hey, at least I got some money.
Greg Zinn
Image

Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic”