POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
I have zero doubt she mandated the election year baby from Chelsea, was probably there at the conception. Don't doubt for a second that she would stage some health event from Bill to get sympathy.
Im fairly certain the only reason any informed voter may favor Rubio is because it seems he has the best chance in the general. There definitely cant be any other reason.
Apparently they didnt get the memo from Hillary and Albright saying they were going to hell if they didnt vote for Hillary.
In fairness, its ok to bitch about all problems. Both are definitely a problem.
My guess is that Hillary ages a man worse than Laura lol.
Politics aside, can you imagine being married to Hillary?
That's one of Dante's "Rings of Hell" right there...
I'd marry Hilary if it meant I could be President and bang Elizabeth Hurley on the side and not really give a shit what she thinks about it. Shit, I'd marry Bill Clinton if I could bang Elizabeth Hurley on the side.
I'm hoping that Michael Bloomberg throws his hat into the ring. He'd definitely get my support. No idea who he would hurt the most but I definitely think he would be better than any of the current list of candidates. I could support Kasich if he had a prayers chance...
Current top 3...
Bloomberg
.
.
.
Kasich
Sanders
Current top 3...
Bloomberg
.
.
.
Kasich
Sanders
From Newsday, a reminder of just how unpredictable NH is, and how worthless the polling often is before that primary. Should be an interesting night.
- In 1980, a CBS poll showed Ronald Reagan beating George H.W. Bush by 45 points, though his actual margin of victory was 27 points.
- In 1984, the final Washington Post-ABC News poll had Walter Mondale tied with Gary Hart, and the final CNN poll had Mondale winning by six points. Hart won by nine.
- In 1988, Gallup had Bob Dole beating George H.W. Bush by eight points, and the Post-ABC poll had Dole up by three.Bush won by nine.
- In 1996, CNN-Time showed Dole winning by 15 points. Patrick Buchanan won by one point.
- In 2000, the average of all polls showed John McCain beating George W. Bush by eight points. McCain won by 18 points, more than twice what polls predicted. Though this was a larger average error than in 2008, it was not labeled a “fiasco,” nor did the AAPOR investigate the causes.
- Most famously, all of the pollsters predicted Barack Obama would win the Democratic primary in 2008, and Hillary Clinton won.
Cujo, I agree partly, but using Romans to prove God?
Holy false equivalence meme, Batgirl...quote I used could have come from the National Enquirer (amirite, atheists?) and still made the same point.
Sorry I quoted from God's word in the politico thread, y'all!
That would be great, except he's campaigning for lil bro to try to get a 3rd Bush elected.
Not a false equivalence. You are trying to prove a point from a point that says it exists. Same with using a sci-book to claim aliens.
Spiderman comics are not the same as the Bible, obviously though. Its more circular reasoning to say God exists because the Bible says so.
Bloomberg? My goodness. The guy who wanted to ban large sodas and couldn't see his overreach or his lack of logic? I haven't had soda in 12 years but free will, man.
Last edited:
Crap you still don't get it, maybe it's my fault. The whole point was to observe and study the natural world and what that demonstrates, which is what the verse says. Doesn't actually matter the source. But the point is rendered irrelevant because...bible. Right? I didn't ask him to take the bible's word for it, could have made the same point by quoting a professor of neurophysiology:
"when I was studying synapses. I was deeply impressed by the amazing complexity of these supposedly simple connections between nerve cells. ‘How,’ I wondered, ‘could synapses and the genetic programs underlying them be products of mere blind chance?’ It really made no sense."
Thanks for clearing up the part about Spiderman comics not being the same as the bible though
![[thumb2]](https://ct.yimg.com/mr/uploads/891/1684387.png "Thumbs Up 2 [thumb2]")
Ok. I read from your first quote that you were claiming the existence of God was proven through Romans. My bad.Crap you still don't get it, maybe it's my fault. The whole point was to observe and study the natural world and what that demonstrates, which is what the verse says. Doesn't actually matter the source. But the point is rendered irrelevant because...bible. Right? I didn't ask him to take the bible's word for it, could have made the same point by quoting a professor of neurophysiology:
"when I was studying synapses. I was deeply impressed by the amazing complexity of these supposedly simple connections between nerve cells. ‘How,’ I wondered, ‘could synapses and the genetic programs underlying them be products of mere blind chance?’ It really made no sense."
Thanks for clearing up the part about Spiderman comics not being the same as the bible though
Yep, Bin Laden's been dead for four years now. Besides, I don't think we have to worry about Killary any more -- you know your campaign is heading straight for the iceberg when you trot out 88 year-old Walter Mondale to stump for you...
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
Gold. Mail it in. Winner winner chicken dinner
Yep, Bin Laden's been dead for four years now. Besides, I don't think we have to worry about Killary any more -- you know your campaign is heading straight for the iceberg when you trot out 88 year-old Walter Mondale to stump for you...
Priceless!!!!!!!!!!!!
Actually both pictured here were with Bin Laden last night during the filming of the latest walking dead episode. Problem is, these people are not acting.Yep, Bin Laden's been dead for four years now. Besides, I don't think we have to worry about Killary any more -- you know your campaign is heading straight for the iceberg when you trot out 88 year-old Walter Mondale to stump for you...
Bernie Sanders winning would be hilarious as it would undercut his entire raison d'etre; money corrupting elections. Would he just fold into a singularity if he won while spending less than everyone else?
Trump destroyed the field tonight and all I hear these bozos on tv say is that Kasich has real momentum with 2nd place. So he is a winner tonight yet Trump lost with a close 2nd place in IA. Yeah, pretty fair analysis.
By the way, if Sanders wins this country is done.
By the way, if Sanders wins this country is done.
Done? Sanders wins and nothing will happen. Niether party wants Bernie to win and they won't let him win. Even if he does some how pull off a miracle, nothing will get accomplished. Just four years of nothing.
Well I'm feeling the Bern if this is true
However, 66% of the people voted for someone else. When there aren't 7-8 other people on the ballot, who gets those votes? Trump's negatives are as high as Hillary's which suggests that most of those who aren't supporting him now, won't in the future. Trump may hold on and pull it out but there is a long, long way to go.
Agree, the political analysis leaves much to be desired. All the glee, handwringing, whatever. I guess they have to have something to talk about. One, Trump won big, but isn't this what was expected for him in NH? The Trump story hasn't changed, the riddle is how will he do when it gets down to 2 or 3 and his ceiling comes into play. Two, they are trying to make various big stories from the Kasich-Cruz-Bush-Rubio finish. Right now they are basically at 16, 11, 11, and 11%, and that's supposed to be meaningful? Rubio beat Bush by 35,000 votes in Iowa, and if he loses by 500 to Bush in NH it's supposed to be some big departure point? Three, they are trying to make the case that a huge Sanders win somehow makes him more viable. If the south and west is suddenly overrun with wealthy liberals and college students, and all ethnic minoritie flee the country, maybe Bernie can win.
They know all of this. But I guess you have to fill air time....
They know all of this. But I guess you have to fill air time....
the issue is that winning a bunch of Iowas won't win you the general election. A bunch of NHs, though....
NH is full of independents (just like the general)
NH is an open primary (just like the general)
If Trump wins South Carolina, having won NH, he will have demonstrated he can pretty much win anywhere.
^^^I get that. But still, those are some razor thin margins from which to be making any real conclusions.
I like Kasich, and since I'm all about electability he'd put Ohio nicely in play. But isn't he polling around 2% in the next several states? I read today he's counting on Michigan. What?
I like Kasich, and since I'm all about electability he'd put Ohio nicely in play. But isn't he polling around 2% in the next several states? I read today he's counting on Michigan. What?
Yes and no. His profile looks for all the world like he'd have fringe appeal, would appeal to certain regions or maybe even specific states. So, yeah, that he's doing well in such diverse places is eye opening. But.....like I said above, let this thing get down to 3 or especially 2 people and see how Trump does. At some point, being completely upside down on likeability has to factor...
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
UK hosts D II national champ in one of its exhibition games- Latest: Pygmy Sasquatch
-
