ADVERTISEMENT

Political Thread: Non-obscene version

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by truth_seeker:
Lol no chance in hell rand even gets the nomination
"No way a black 1st term senator will beat the Clinton machine for the nomination"


Signed,

Both Democrats and Republicans in '08



However, Joe Biden did say Obama was "clean" and spoke well.
 
Hope you guys that are all in on Rand haven't brought up Obama's lack of experience even once or hist not being 'one of us'.
 
I hope you clowns who said Obama's lack of experience wouldn't matter don't say a word about Rand not having experience LOLZ

Find a few more threads to post it in Catdaddy I'm not sure everyone got the message
 
Originally posted by CatDaddy4daWin:
Hope you guys that are all in on Rand haven't brought up Obama's lack of experience even once or hist not being 'one of us'.
And what experience does Shillary have? Other than killing off our soldiers in Bengazi.

Or Elizabeth Warren? What makes her so "valuable"?

The problem with you dems is that you think you are above reproach. Your candidates are garbage yet you can't see it.
 
Originally posted by qwesley:


Originally posted by Willy4UK:

Your candidates are garbage yet you can't see it.
They "ordain" their candidates and bully competitors from even running. Even money catdaddy was one of the fainters in 2008.
Which is even more astonishing that the dems were able to revive the corpse of John Kerry to run in 2004
 
Solid start for Rand not being the open wound pussy the GOP has trotted out earlier.

Great response to the abortion questions.

"Here's the deal-we always seen to have the debate waaaaay over here on what are the exact details of exemptions, or when it starts," said Paul, waving his hands to the left. "Why don't we ask the DNC: Is it okay to kill a seven-pound baby in the uterus? You go back and you ask Debbie Wasserman Schultz if she's OK with killing a seven-pound baby that is not born yet. Ask her when life begins, and you ask Debbie when it's okay to protect life. When you get an answer from Debbie, get back to me."
 
Originally posted by BernieSadori:
Solid start for Rand not being the open wound pussy the GOP has trotted out earlier.

Great response to the abortion questions.
Social issues. No way around them. Well, I'll stick the fiscal side Rand wants to reform. Not gonna agree with everything, but it really shows how simple Americans are. Throw them social issues and man they eat that shit up like chocolate ice cream. While, the questions that need to be asked are "What are you going to do to reduce the deficit? or "When will you audit the Fed Reserve"? "How will you dismantle the NSA"? etc etc etc.... But no, someone wanted to ask him about abortion. GD do people make me want to slap them.
 
WELP, Rand Paul just fried himself with an interview with Savannah Guthrie. Can't say he was wrong in what he said, but the media will show this over and over and over.
 
Originally posted by Deeeefense:
The general consensus seems to be that it isn't perfect but it's the best option available and has good potential of slowing or preventing Iran from going nuclear.
There's absolutely NO WAY the deal prevents Iran from going nuclear, it's only good for 10 years. Slowing down the program? Probably. But the main sticking points are A.) Iran's demands that sanctions be lifted immediately and we've only agreed to gradual lifting of the sanctions and B.) Shipping the nuclear fuel to another country, likely Russia, which they have not agreed to.

Best care scenario, it delays the program for 10 years and we all know that is likely not to happen as we know of Iran's tendency to cheat. Then we have an arms race developing all around the Middle East as the Gulf Arab states start nuking up.

NOT A GOOD DEAL.
 
Not from the Onion: UMich student group cancels American Sniper showing due to it being racist, instead show Paddington Bear.

Footnote - Harbaugh's response is awesome:

Michigan Football will watch "American Sniper"! Proud of Chris Kyle & Proud to be an American & if that offends anybody then so be it!
 
Originally posted by Willy4UK:

Originally posted by BernieSadori:
Solid start for Rand not being the open wound pussy the GOP has trotted out earlier.

Great response to the abortion questions.
Social issues. No way around them. Well, I'll stick the fiscal side Rand wants to reform. Not gonna agree with everything, but it really shows how simple Americans are. Throw them social issues and man they eat that shit up like chocolate ice cream. While, the questions that need to be asked are "What are you going to do to reduce the deficit? or "When will you audit the Fed Reserve"? "How will you dismantle the NSA"? etc etc etc.... But no, someone wanted to ask him about abortion. GD do people make me want to slap them.
Social issues elected Obama in 2012 for sure. The vast majority of americans hated everything Obama had done. But he was for abortion. Happened in 2008 also, although there was a lot of Bush backlash that made it difficult for any GOP candidate in that election regardless.

The worst part is, the most damaging social issue (abortion) is already well settled law. So why even take a position other than "the law is settled, so my personal opinions really aren't relevant"? The problem is, any GOP candidate will have to battle the lunatic fringe (Cruz, etc) in the primary, where THEY will make it an issue. This makes it nearly impossible to get out of the primary without beating a bible and taking hardline stances on abortion. This destroys any chance in the general, when the liberal driven media starts their "war against women" garbage.

Like Ive posted before, the GOP eat their own in the primary. I really think Rand would've had a better chance as a 3rd party. He wouldn't win. But he wouldn't be drug down into the mire of the primary. The ONLY reason Im glad he didn't, is because that would've basically guaranteed a Hillary presidency.
 
Great points Bigblue- Totally agree.

I also stated awhile back that if the Republicans disband from the religious right and focused on what they do best which is small government and economy issues that there would never be another Dem elected again.

Amazing to me how the Republicans have let the evangelical side pollute the party. That shit worked in the 1980s but it won't work now.
 
Originally posted by bigblueinsanity:

Social issues elected Obama in 2012 for sure. The vast majority of americans hated everything Obama had done. But he was for abortion. Happened in 2008 also, although there was a lot of Bush backlash that made it difficult for any GOP candidate in that election regardless.

The worst part is, the most damaging social issue (abortion) is already well settled law. So why even take a position other than "the law is settled, so my personal opinions really aren't relevant"? The problem is, any GOP candidate will have to battle the lunatic fringe (Cruz, etc) in the primary, where THEY will make it an issue. This makes it nearly impossible to get out of the primary without beating a bible and taking hardline stances on abortion. This destroys any chance in the general, when the liberal driven media starts their "war against women" garbage.

Like Ive posted before, the GOP eat their own in the primary. I really think Rand would've had a better chance as a 3rd party. He wouldn't win. But he wouldn't be drug down into the mire of the primary. The ONLY reason Im glad he didn't, is because that would've basically guaranteed a Hillary presidency.
Great points Bigblue-totally agree.

I also said awhile back that if the Republican party disbanded from the lunatic evangelicals, that a Dem would never be elected again.

It amazes me how the Republicans have let the evangelicals dominate the party. It worked in the 1980s, but it won't work now. The sooner the GOP cuts its dependency on bible thumpers, this party will rebound very nicely.
 
Originally posted by KyFaninNC:
WELP, Rand Paul just fried himself with an interview with Savannah Guthrie. Can't say he was wrong in what he said, but the media will show this over and over and over.
rolleyes.r191677.gif
good lord


And on the DWS response to Rand's comment, she said two interesting things:

1) She is, in fact, OK with aborting a 7 pound, fully formed fetus

and

2) *paraphrased* 'The government needs to stay out of women's health decisions.' Interesting how progressives go full libertarian when the government is meddling in something they want. She also seemed to have no problem with the government intervening in women's healthcare with Obamacare.

I don't think Rand is some intellectual giant, but he is smart enough and ideologically sophisticated enough relative to most of his peers that you will see this happen a lot. Rand makes a cogent, interesting point which will be followed by throwing handfuls of talking points at the wall; many of which will contradict each other. Most politicians are not very smart at all
 
Originally posted by Willy4UK:
It amazes me how the Republicans have let the evangelicals dominate the party. It worked in the 1980s, but it won't work now. The sooner the GOP cuts its dependency on bible thumpers, this party will rebound very nicely.
because even though it's not helping them win national races (Senate and WH), it's helping them dominate both congressional races and statehouses.
 
Originally posted by TransyCat09:

She also seemed to have no problem with the government intervening in women's healthcare with Obamacare.
apples and oranges. One is outlawing therapeutic options, the other is requiring that they at least be available. Only the former directly impacts patients' autonomy.
 
Originally posted by jamo0001:


Originally posted by Willy4UK:
It amazes me how the Republicans have let the evangelicals dominate the party. It worked in the 1980s, but it won't work now. The sooner the GOP cuts its dependency on bible thumpers, this party will rebound very nicely.
because even though it's not helping them win national races (Senate and WH), it's helping them dominate both congressional races and statehouses.
and that's why "Citzen dipshit A" thinks everybody else's "congress person" is horrible except the one that Citizen dipshit A votes for.
 
Originally posted by jamo0001:

Originally posted by TransyCat09:

She also seemed to have no problem with the government intervening in women's healthcare with Obamacare.
apples and oranges. One is outlawing therapeutic options, the other is requiring that they at least be available. Only the former directly impacts patients' autonomy.
What was previously unavailable, as in actually forbidden by law, that Obamacare made available or required to be available? And who is outlawing anything? I don't think Rand was advocating for the outlawing of anything other than perhaps very late term abortions (hence the 7lb example).

Someone not being to afford something doesn't mean it is "unavailable." And having insurance cover something doesn't make it affordable.

And doesn't autonomy include the ability to purchase or not purchase a product without repercussions?
 
Originally posted by TransyCat09:

Originally posted by jamo0001:

Originally posted by TransyCat09:

She also seemed to have no problem with the government intervening in women's healthcare with Obamacare.
apples and oranges. One is outlawing therapeutic options, the other is requiring that they at least be available. Only the former directly impacts patients' autonomy.
What was previously unavailable, as in actually forbidden by law, that Obamacare made available or required to be available? And who is outlawing anything? I don't think Rand was advocating for the outlawing of anything other than perhaps very late term abortions (hence the 7lb example).

Someone not being to afford something doesn't mean it is "unavailable." And having insurance cover something doesn't make it affordable.

And doesn't autonomy include the ability to purchase or not purchase a product without repercussions?
so you're comparing insurance industry machinations that might/might not expand availability...
...to banning a procedure outright.

again, apples and oranges.

and i'm talking about "patient autonomy" in the medical ethics sense. Consumer autonomy is a whole different ballgame and isn't in play when we're talking abortion.
 
From The Hill:

The Clinton Foundation reportedly accepted millions of dollars from a Colombian oil company head before then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton decided to support a trade deal with Colombia despite worries of human rights violations.

The report centers on donations from Frank Giustra and the oil company that he founded, Pacific Rubiales. In a Wall Street Journal
story from 2008, Giustra is described as a "friend and traveling companion" of former President Clinton who donated more than $130 million to Clinton's philanthropies. He's also a Clinton Foundation board member and has participated in projects and benefits for the foundation.

Ordained
 
Originally posted by qwesley:
From The Hill:

The Clinton Foundation reportedly accepted millions of dollars from a Colombian oil company head before then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton decided to support a trade deal with Colombia despite worries of human rights violations.

The report centers on donations from Frank Giustra and the oil company that he founded, Pacific Rubiales. In a Wall Street Journal
story from 2008, Giustra is described as a "friend and traveling companion" of former President Clinton who donated more than $130 million to Clinton's philanthropies. He's also a Clinton Foundation board member and has participated in projects and benefits for the foundation.
The Clintons are involved with enough scandals in any given week to end the career of any republican politician. Yet the media will sweep this under the rug, along with lord knows how many more.
 
Originally posted by bcw1029:

Best care scenario, it delays the program for 10 years
The best case scenario for a massive bombing attack would be delaying the program 3 - 4 years, nothwithstanding the costs and negative repercussions.

pick your poison.
 
The Chipmunk sliding in the most recent polls:

"Clinton's lead is wilting against
leading Republican presidential candidates," Quinnipiac said in its
write-up of the survey. "In head-to-head matchups, every Republican
candidate effectively ties her in Colorado and almost all Republicans
effectively tie her in Iowa."

I think she has a real credibility and trust problem and it's hard to see how it gets better for her.





Business Week
 
Originally posted by Deeeefense:

Originally posted by bcw1029:

Best care scenario, it delays the program for 10 years
The best case scenario for a massive bombing attack would be delaying the program 3 - 4 years, nothwithstanding the costs and negative repercussions.

pick your poison.
Wrong, while I would not suggest doing it, Isreal could wipe them out regardless of what some on here have said. Agree with the negative repercussions though.
 
Originally posted by Deeeefense:
The general consensus seems to be that it isn't perfect but it's the best option available and has good potential of slowing or preventing Iran from going nuclear.
No....it's a desperate attempt to get "any plan, any agreement" on the table to place Israel in an awkward position - neuter the air strike option.
 
Originally posted by AlbanyWildCat:

Bibi cries all over the world to anyone who will listen that Israel is in grave danger... he's been doing it now for many, many years
Might have something to do with this
 
Originally posted by Catfan in Tn.:
Hillary to announce her Presidential run this weekend.
I always thought Nixon and LBJ were the biggest crooks,liars I had ever seen in DC. The Clintons have now surpassed them both. Clintons have no shame, lie like a dog, do anything for money,and so untrustworthy it is pitiful. How anyone could vote for Hilary for POTUS amazes me. But I know some will just because she is a democrat. This country is in a sad state of affairs.
 
Hillary is having wet dreams thinking about the GOP trotting out (Ann) Rand Paul to run against her. Pretty much confirms the GOP hates women by even considering a guy like Paul. Then of course Cruz is out there lobbing hand grenades at gays while Jeb Bush sits back thinking of how this can even be a race. Maybe the Arizona pastor that wants to execute gays will get invited to speak at the GOP convention?

This campaign is going to be more about laughing at the GOP than it is an actual political contest. How can they appeal to an irrational uneducated rabid Faux News audience without alienating the rest of the normal country? Not possible. It's circus clowns riding unicycles time and with Sarah hovering around like an STD and Karl Rove throwing stink bombs from the periphery the opportunities to laugh out loud at this freak show is going to be at an all-time high. Buckle up, folks. Ringling Brothers is trying to pick a winner from this mixed can of nuts and the ballot box is getting stuffed by a sub 80 IQ wielding fan club that drove home from their weddings in 4 wheel drives while shooting stop signs with automatic weapons and thumping bibles at the dinner table. When they're not refusing to sell pizzas to anybody that isn't caucasian enough for them they enjoy building bunkers in the back yard and lighting off fireworks at each other. Let the fun begin!
 
Hillary is incapable of a wet dream. All dried up, I'm sure.

If Rand isn't a threat then why so many attacks? Why not leave him be and pray he gets the nomination?

Was Bob Dole too old?

Still not positive Hillary gets the nomination.
 
it's obvious tat this point: it's going to be Bush vs Clinton. Nobody in the Republican party can hang with Bush and Warren has reiterated that she's not running.

They'll pair Scott Walker up with Bush and Hillary will choose some Latino.
 
Originally posted by jamo0001:
it's obvious tat this point: it's going to be Bush vs Clinton. Nobody in the Republican party can hang with Bush and Warren has reiterated that she's not running.

They'll pair Scott Walker up with Bush and Hillary will choose some Latino.
Certainly hope you are wrong on Bush, but if not I would think that he would be looking for a Hispanic himself for the VP spot.
 
There is one and only one road to the Whitehouse for the Pubs. That's a Bush/Kasich ticket. Think about it. what two states determine all the national elections? Florida and Ohio of course. With Bush/Kasich you get the daily double. If they win those two the Dems would have to, hold serve, and knock off just about every other purple state and even that might not even be enough.

Clinton has baggage, lots of it and the Pubs will exploit ever bit of it, but in the end, with the money, the backing from Wallstreet, the Clinton machine, and Slick Willy pimping her all over the country, not to mention the increasing demographic advantages of the Democrats, she will be tough to beat.








This post was edited on 4/12 7:23 PM by Deeeefense
 
Originally posted by Deeeefense:
There is one and only one road to the Whitehouse for the Pubs. That's a Bush/Kasich ticket. Think about it. what two states determine all the national elections? Florida and Ohio of course. With Bush/Kasich you get the daily double. If they win those two the Dems would have to, hold serve, and knock off just about every other purple state and even that might not even be enough.

Clinton has baggage, lots of it and the Pubs will exploit ever bit of it, but in the end, with the money, the backing from Wallstreet, the Clinton machine, and Slick Willy pimping her all over the country, not to mention the increasing demographic advantages of the Democrats, she will be tough to beat.









This post was edited on 4/12 7:23 PM by Deeeefense
And she will have the backing of the media.
 
Originally posted by Catfan in Tn.:
Originally posted by jamo0001:
it's obvious tat this point: it's going to be Bush vs Clinton. Nobody in the Republican party can hang with Bush and Warren has reiterated that she's not running.

They'll pair Scott Walker up with Bush and Hillary will choose some Latino.
Certainly hope you are wrong on Bush, but if not I would think that he would be looking for a Hispanic himself for the VP spot.
why would Jeb Bush need a latino on the ticket?
 
Bush is the only chance they have which means there is no way he gets through the nutcases in the primary. I can't wait till Cruz wins a couple of states then by comparison Rand will look sane.

Bill Clinton, The Big Dog, is still the most popular political figure in the United States and if The Big Dog wants his wife to be president then she's going to be president.

Operation VOTE TEDDY CRUZ IN THE PRIMARY will ensure it. From this point forward I am all in on Cruz. I will work, eat, and sleep Cruz and demand a Cruz/Rand ticket. Anything less then the GOP is not standing on principle. We need more white in this country and less gay stuff. Ted Cruz, Indiana, and that Arizona pastor that wants to kill all the gays are what this campaign season is all about. Hate, hate, and more hate. That's a winning ticket for the GOP, folks. :)
 
I was thinking Governor Martinez of New Mexico. Whether she would be interested or not I guess remains to be seen. D might be right on the Governor of Ohio. A women to counter Hillary and possibly bringing Hispanic voters the Republicans way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT