2016 US Presidential election thread [Archive] - Page 3

vienna

12-09-15, 05:53 PM

As it should. I see you linked Maryland. O'Malley(who is busy pandering for a position as president or at least a VP for Hillary) did single handed change the districts to of course...his favor(Dems). But, MD has always been as blue as blue can get. Currently, however, our gov is a republican. :hmmm:

I support non-partisan (or, failing that, at least multi-partisan), non-political commissions to draw voting districts in states. Here in California, the DEMs have very long dominated the State Legislature, who used to draw the districts. The state conservative GOP had a hard time getting their candidates elected and sought to change the situation. First, the sought term limits of no more than two terms for all state elected offices and finally succeeded in getting the idea passed via a state proposition put on the ballot by the initiative process. The DEMs wre very split on the idea and, oddly, the GOP didn't really take a lead in favor. The new process effectively broke up the DEM political machine in Sacramento. This was an overall win for the voters of the state regardless of party. But, the conservatives still weren't making headway, so they went after the redistricting process and initiated lawsuits that really didn't go anywhere at all. A effort was then made to set up a commission outside of the state political process to redraw districts. An initiative was passed forming the commission for the drawing of districts related to state elections, but not US Congressional elections. The commission consists of four GOP members, four DEM members, and four non-affiliated members; the law provides there must be a "super-majority" agreement in order for the district boundaries to be accepted (3 out of 4 votes from each of the GOP, DEM, and non-affiliated members). The process worked rather well, but rankled the DEMs who had lost their sway over the process in the Legislature. Rather than try to sue, as the GOP had done, the DEMs resorted to the initiative process to put a act repealing the commission on the ballot. A counter measure was put on the ballot by the GOP to expand the scope of the commission to include Congressional district redrawing. The vote came down to the expansion garnering more votes than the repeal, so the repeal was defeated and the commission's scope expanded. The GOP had been confident of gaining not only seats in the Legislature, but, also, in Congress. However, when the new districts were drawn a large number of formerly GOP-held areas became more DEM in their demographics and, worse for the incumbent GOP office holders, seats seen as "safe" suddenly became much more competitive. It was a case of "be careful of what you wish for" for the state GOP; they are currently actively seeking to dismantle the very process they pushed so hard to enact and have filed a number of lawsuits on the state and federal level. It is going to be an uphill fight since the redraw process neither takes the party affiliation of the population in a district nor the affiliation of the incumbent into consideration. It is basically there are X number of people in the district with the same social (not political) demographic and they are contiguous in nature of distribution. I think the commission's membership and set-up and the criteria used to draw the districts is most probably the fairest method for all parties concerned and most certainly the fairest for the representation of the voters in the Legislature and in Congress. But it is amusing to see the very people who fought so hard to make what are fair, practical, working changes to a previously unfair process now fight so hard to overturn their work just because it didn't turn out to their favor politically. Again, "be careful of what you wish for"...

<O>

AVGWarhawk

12-10-15, 08:27 AM

Just curious, why do you think he can't be bought? Is there something, beside Donald Trump that Donald Trump loves more than money?

Trump has not received any campaign contributions that I'm aware of. He is self funded. As we have seen in the past....cash contributed to a campaign often results in special treatment for the contributor down the road.

Oberon

12-10-15, 08:44 AM

Trump has not received any campaign contributions that I'm aware of. He is self funded. As we have seen in the past....cash contributed to a campaign often results in special treatment for the contributor down the road.

Doesn't look like he's had much, although it's hard to understand the US contribution system...
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contrib.php?cycle=All&id=N00023864&type=

Bernie, I think, is similar, although I think he's got $25k from outside sources whereas Trump has got $0. Jeb Bush on the other hand... :doh:

https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/

AVGWarhawk

12-10-15, 09:25 AM

Doesn't look like he's had much, although it's hard to understand the US contribution system...
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contrib.php?cycle=All&id=N00023864&type=

Bernie, I think, is similar, although I think he's got $25k from outside sources whereas Trump has got $0. Jeb Bush on the other hand... :doh:

https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/

Trump has turned down offers. This country needs Bernie like we an perforated ulcer. Bernie forgets that even the rich will eventually run out of money. Jeb has gotten a mad amount of cash. I recommend he returns it.

Oberon

12-10-15, 12:38 PM

Trump has turned down offers. This country needs Bernie like we an perforated ulcer. Bernie forgets that even the rich will eventually run out of money. Jeb has gotten a mad amount of cash. I recommend he returns it.

I like Bernie but I think he's a bit like our Corbyn, good as a senator but not so good as a President.

AVGWarhawk

12-10-15, 01:05 PM

I like Bernie but I think he's a bit like our Corbyn, good as a senator but not so good as a President.

Bernie is the Epitome of Socialism.

nikimcbee

12-10-15, 01:09 PM

Bernie is the Epitome of Socialism.
Bernie's voice sounds like that aardvark from the Pink Panther cartoons.:har:

mapuc

12-10-15, 01:17 PM

Oberon

12-10-15, 01:21 PM

Bernie is the Epitome of Socialism.

And Trump is of capitalism. :03:

AVGWarhawk

12-10-15, 01:38 PM

And Trump is of capitalism. :03:

And Capitalism is what the country was built on. Bernie wants to print money, take from the rich and share alike. Bernie needs to get a grip and look at Greece.

nikimcbee

12-10-15, 01:42 PM

And Capitalism is what the country was built on. Bernie wants to print money, take from the rich and share alike. Bernie needs to get a grip and look at Greece.

Don't worry, we can call Tante Merkel and she'll give us some money.

Oberon

12-10-15, 01:47 PM

And Capitalism is what the country was built on. Bernie wants to print money, take from the rich and share alike. Bernie needs to get a grip and look at Greece.

Well, that and rebelling when we tried to over capitalism you. :O:

STEED

12-10-15, 01:49 PM

Don't worry, we can call Tante Merkel and she'll give us some money.

http://estaticos01.cache.el-mundo.net/elmundo/fotos_gente/2008/04/14/1208174664_extras_fotos_gente_0.jpg

You rang sweet cheeks. :D

nikimcbee

12-10-15, 01:51 PM

Zoinks!!!:o:o:o:o

I think you're in the wrong thread?
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=215278

Betonov

12-10-15, 01:53 PM

And Capitalism is what the country was built on. Bernie wants to print money, take from the rich and share alike. Bernie needs to get a grip and look at Greece.

Greece failed because no one took from the rich.
The working Dimitris was taxed to braking point and the fat cats in economy and politics dodged every tax possible.

STEED

12-10-15, 01:57 PM

Zoinks!!!:o:o:o:o

That put a big :D on your face just don't show the wife. :O:

nikimcbee

12-10-15, 02:03 PM

That put a big :D on your face just don't show the wife. :O:

Now you're playing dirty!
I'm looking for my eye bleach.:dead:

AVGWarhawk

12-10-15, 02:05 PM

Greece failed because no one took from the rich.
The working Dimitris was taxed to braking point and the fat cats in economy and politics dodged every tax possible.

And welfare began to rise. Pensions unsustainable(same that we are seeing here in the small municipalities as well as major cities like Detroit). I can assure you all looked to dodge a tax or two. All of this started in 2008. Much the same for the rest of the world. Taking from the rich had little to do with it.

Betonov

12-10-15, 02:09 PM

AVGWarhawk

12-10-15, 02:12 PM

Welfare rose to meet the rising unemployment, unemplyment was caused by pork barrel projects, hostile takeovers, plundering of the private sector and nepotism in public sector and witholding wages and not one of those acts done by the middle/low class. Only the fat pigs at the top.
Plus, a 1000 workers cannot dodge so much tax as one fat cat.

The rising unemployment was a result of 2008 financial ruin that resinated around the world. I do not think turning the rich upside down to have the cash flow was the answer. Eventually even that cash flow runs out.

Aktungbby

12-10-15, 02:13 PM

Rule 1 in bridge: "always pull Trump!":har: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK-I_LYbOcY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK-I_LYbOcY)

Oberon

12-10-15, 02:13 PM

You can only tax the poor so much as well...

nikimcbee

12-10-15, 02:17 PM

What is the pension age in Greece? Isn't it pretty young?:hmm2:

STEED

12-10-15, 02:19 PM

Now you're playing dirty!
I'm looking for my eye bleach.:dead:

:haha:

Nothing wrong with Trump after all the world is full of crazy folk. :03:

And if he wins so be, just keep the launch codes far out his reach. :03: :yep:

AVGWarhawk

12-10-15, 02:20 PM

Rule 1 in bridge: "always pull Trump!":har: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK-I_LYbOcY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK-I_LYbOcY)

Holy.....:o

Betonov

12-10-15, 02:21 PM

Strangely how Seaway survived the 2008 crisis and suddenly died in 6 months last year at the same time ownership was changed.
Don't lecture me about rich people. They're fat greedy pigs and if they paid their dues, you don't even have to raise taxes, hell, you can lower them, just don't let them dodge taxes, if they paid their dues there would be plenty to go around. Because 10% tax may be half one poor fammily budget (after bills are paid) and a third luxury yacht for the spoiled spawn of a CEO.

The masses have no financial strenght to start a new trend, let alone cause countries to crash.

nikimcbee

12-10-15, 02:24 PM

Rule 1 in bridge: "always pull Trump!":har: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK-I_LYbOcY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK-I_LYbOcY)

Best Hitler video evah!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkLCAHk_qW4

AVGWarhawk

12-10-15, 02:25 PM

You can only tax the poor so much as well...

Which is true. However, not taxing the rich is not the sole reason Greece is in trouble.

nikimcbee

12-10-15, 02:27 PM

:haha:

Nothing wrong with Trump after all the world is full of crazy folk. :03:

And if he wins so be, just keep the launch codes far out his reach. :03: :yep:

Breaking news......
Steed....
Endorses....
Trump!

Possible VP?:/\\k:

STEED

12-10-15, 02:31 PM

Rule 1 in bridge: "always pull Trump!":har: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK-I_LYbOcY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vK-I_LYbOcY)

:har:

Breaking news......
Steed....
Endorses....
Trump!

Possible VP?:/\\k:

I rather vote for Mr Flibble

http://mydisguises.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/red-dwarf-rimmer.jpg

AVGWarhawk

12-10-15, 02:33 PM

Betonov

12-10-15, 02:41 PM

No lecture here. You think the rich is the sole reason Greece is in the situation it is. That is not the case.

No it's not. But cracking down on nepostism (which can only be achieved in the first place by the top levels, aka the rich) would free up resources to crack down on welfare scroungers and tax dodgers.
I lived on welfare this summer because the bank directors decided that my worplace is worth to them more dead than alive. And if it werent for that welfare I'd died of starvation. Sure, I'm the lucky one, I still have my parents that helped me during hard times.
That's why I get angry when people say things against welfare. It keeps those of us without connections and rich parents alive.

Kptlt. Neuerburg

12-10-15, 02:44 PM

Just as I thought I wasn't really sure about it because the American people could be different mentally

Before Mr Trumps famous "speech" he had about 30 %

Today (it is from Fox News) 38 % (seen in a news issue)

Are you surprised ?

Markus No surprise there. Although that is 38% of the Republican party not 38% of the whole American public.

Speaking of Trump's famous or imfamous speech about banning Musliums he stated that he was only banning foreign Muslims from entering the US, but he would still allow those living in the US to leave the country, to travel to where ever it is they are going and then return to the US. Well that should be a consern because what's to stop a person living in the US who is or is planning to convert to Islam, to travel to the Middle East, meet with terrorists and then return the United States to pull off another attack? Under Trumps plan there seems to be nothing to prevent this from happening.

AVGWarhawk

12-10-15, 02:47 PM

No it's not. But cracking down on nepostism (which can only be achieved in the first place by the top levels, aka the rich) would free up resources to crack down on welfare scroungers and tax dodgers.
I lived on welfare this summer because the bank directors decided that my worplace is worth to them more dead than alive. And if it werent for that welfare I'd died of starvation. Sure, I'm the lucky one, I still have my parents that helped me during hard times.
That's why I get angry when people say things against welfare. It keeps those of us without connections and rich parents alive.

We could well say then that if there were no welfare scroungers and tax dodgers creating a problem then the rich would not need to pay more tax to take care of said problem. :hmmm:

I did not say anything about welfare other than that it was on the rise starting in 2010.

nikimcbee

12-10-15, 02:48 PM

:har:

I rather vote for Mr Flibble

http://mydisguises.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/red-dwarf-rimmer.jpg

Steed! What did I say about posting selfies?

STEED

12-10-15, 02:49 PM

Steed! What did I say about posting selfies?

Give you a big wet sloppy kiss? :hmmm:

Betonov

12-10-15, 02:51 PM

We could well say then that if there were no welfare scroungers and tax dodgers creating a problem then the rich would not need to pay more tax to take care of said problem. :hmmm:

They don't need to pay more tax. It wouldn't hurt them. They'd hardly notice. Maybe only 16 luxury cars in the garage instead of 17.
They just have to stop using their influence and wealth to dodge taxes and cry all over the media about the evil socialists trying to force them to do something the average Joe already has to do. And blaming the low class for dodging €20 tax while pocketing a few grands.

nikimcbee

12-10-15, 02:54 PM

Give you a big wet sloppy kiss? :hmmm:

Touche!

http://www.corbisimages.com/images/Corbis-MI-063-0153.jpg?size=67&uid=9bc842ea-33c1-4d42-a049-a888e1b82e25

AVGWarhawk

12-10-15, 02:55 PM

They don't need to pay more tax. It wouldn't hurt them. They'd hardly notice. Maybe only 16 luxury cars in the garage instead of 17.
They just have to stop using their influence and wealth to dodge taxes and cry all over the media about the evil socialists trying to force them to do something the average Joe already has to do. And blaming the low class for dodging €20 tax while pocketing a few grands.

I can't argue that point. We here have those that hide cash(off shore accounts and undeclared income). It is an imperfect system.

Betonov

12-10-15, 03:05 PM

I can't argue that point. We here have those that hide cash(off shore accounts and undeclared income). It is an imperfect system.

Exactly.
It's their victim complex they start having when someone asks them when they'll pay that 0,1% of wealth they owe to the state.

Oberon

12-10-15, 03:26 PM

If the poor could use financial loopholes as efficiently as the rich, you'd soon see those loopholes closed in a hurry. :O:

vienna

12-10-15, 06:30 PM

No surprise there. Although that is 38% of the Republican party not 38% of the whole American public.

In fact, since the GOP voter base is only 32% of the voting population, that 38% only accounts for about 12% of the total likely voters in the US, meaning that about 88% of US voters are functionally sane...

If the poor could use financial loopholes as efficiently as the rich, you'd soon see those loopholes closed in a hurry. :O:

Truer words were never spoken. Need proof? Consider how the banks and other financial institutions, on the eve of their forays in to risky sub-prime financial dealings that resulted in the Great Recession of 2008 lobbied hard and heavy to change the bankruptcy (BK) laws for individual BKs to make it harder for private citizens to declare BK and absolve their debts and lobbied for a loosening of corporate BK restrictions to ease corporate BKs, all of which was passed into law and signed cheerfully by the Bush Administration. The banks and financial institutions knew there was a very good chance sub-prime and its ramifications could blow up in their faces so they did everything to ensure the actual victims of the debacle, the private individuals in the middle to low income levels, would have little to no recourse legally for relief while the corporations and the wealthy would be shielded. Would the tax loopholes be closed if we poorer folk could use them? You bet, just as sure as abortion would be fully legal if men were the ones who got pregnant...

<O>

Nippelspanner

12-10-15, 07:16 PM

If the poor could use financial loopholes as efficiently as the rich, you'd soon see those loopholes closed in a hurry. :O:
QFT!

Jimbuna

12-11-15, 10:26 AM

Money makes money and always will.

Oberon

12-11-15, 10:48 AM

Meanwhile in the Globe:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CV8y_SQVAAAqr6f.jpg:large

vienna

12-12-15, 01:39 PM

http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/UzVCGDMVqgY9z8IlpbzXNQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3NfbGVnbztmaT1maWxsO2g9MzA1O2lsPXBsYW 5lO3B5b2ZmPTA7cT03NTt3PTQ1MA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/Reuters/2015-12-12T103001Z_3_LYNXMPEBBB010_RTROPTP_2_USA-ELECTION-TRUMP.JPG

"The Mikado" (Gilbert & Sullivan):

As Some Day It May Happen aka I've Got A Little List

(Ko-Ko)
As some day it may happen that a victim must be found,
I've got a little list — I've got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground,
And who never would be missed — who never would be missed!
There's the pestilential nuisances who write for autographs —
All people who have flabby hands and irritating laughs —
All children who are up in dates, and floor you with 'em flat —
All persons who in shaking hands, shake hands with you like that —
And all third persons who on spoiling tête-á-têtes insist —
They'd none of 'em be missed — they'd none of 'em be missed!

(Chorus)
He's got 'em on the list — he's got 'em on the list;
And they'll none of 'em be missed — they'll none of 'em be missed.

(Ko-Ko)
There's the banjo serenader, and the others of his race,
And the piano-organist — I've got him on the list!
And the people who eat peppermint and puff it in your face,
They never would be missed — they never would be missed!
Then the idiot who praises, with enthusiastic tone,
All centuries but this, and every country but his own;
And the lady from the provinces, who dresses like a guy,
And who "doesn't think she dances, but would rather like to try";
And that singular anomaly, the lady novelist —
I don't think she'd be missed — I'm sure she'd not he missed!

(Chorus)
He's got her on the list — he's got her on the list;
And I don't think she'll be missed — I'm sure she'll not be missed!

(Ko-Ko)
And that Nisi Prius nuisance, who just now is rather rife,
The Judicial humorist — I've got him on the list!
All funny fellows, comic men, and clowns of private life —
They'd none of 'em be missed — they'd none of 'em be missed.
And apologetic statesmen of a compromising kind,
Such as — What d'ye call him — Thing'em-bob, and likewise — Never-mind,
And 'St— 'st— 'st— and What's-his-name, and also You-know-who —
The task of filling up the blanks I'd rather leave to you.
But it really doesn't matter whom you put upon the list,
For they'd none of 'em be missed — they'd none of 'em be missed!

(Chorus)
You may put 'em on the list — you may put 'em on the list;
And they'll none of 'em be missed — they'll none of 'em be missed!

...

<O>

Oberon

12-12-15, 06:20 PM

One for August:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35066940

August

12-12-15, 06:27 PM

One for August:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35066940

I'm telling ya.

Oberon

12-12-15, 08:00 PM

I'm telling ya.

Even if he is, it says a lot about the state of affairs in the US that he is so popular. I mean, if he actually gets the Republican vote, and becomes the Republican runner for the 2016 election then something is deeply deeply rotten in the state of the United States.

Platapus

12-13-15, 10:59 AM

People make poor decisions when they are stressed or scared.

Beware of anyone who uses stress or fear to push a decision.

This is especially true with politicians.

The only thing we have to fear is politicians using fear against us.

Oberon

12-13-15, 12:01 PM

The only thing we have to fear is politicians using fear against us.

I'm going to steal this for my signature. :yeah:

Onkel Neal

12-13-15, 02:16 PM

Oberon

12-13-15, 02:40 PM

And the media, who have built an industry on fear and controversy.

Sadly, also true, and so, so, so many people have brought into that fear.
It's a shame to see it happening. :nope:

AVGWarhawk

12-14-15, 10:39 AM

And the media, who have built an industry on fear and controversy.

Because it sells.

Onkel Neal

12-14-15, 10:42 AM

AVGWarhawk

12-14-15, 12:01 PM

Yes, it does, especially among the uneducated and powerless.

New polls in Idaho show a shift away from Carson and Trump to Cruz. I guess we should expect a multi-pronged character assassination aimed at Cruz next.

Cruz will not have anything new brought to light. He has had his character looked at extensively for quite sometime now. He has been labelled a loon by some. Personally, I like the guy. He kind of looks like my brother. :haha:

I did read a poll today that has Hillary 10 points over Trump(Iowa polls) and Cruz just 3 behind Hillary. Then again, it may be the media just "predicting" the outcome. We know how that works.

vienna

12-14-15, 04:31 PM

The whole farce about Trump being a shill for Clinton is laughable. This is the common fallback of those who don't have any valid arguments for their assertions: externalize a target to deflect from their shortcomings. Don't have a workable set of policies or logical, common-sense arguments to support them? Well, then, the problem must be some cabal by the opposition since, everyone knows, it can't be because there is a paucity of substance to the hollow beliefs they are trying to foist off on the general public. Your candidates are perceived as a bunch of Keystone Kop-ish buffoons? It must be that same cabal setting up a straw man candidate in your party, not the fact the lot of the candidates you do have really are a bunch of sloganeering, platitude-spouting, one-dimensional political panderers, including the candidate you claim is a plant. No, it can't be anything your party is doing wrong; the only answer must be, has to be, there is a vast conspiracy to undermine a structure that is already falling apart on its own and of its own weight. It's kind of like a man who stands inside his house, proclaiming everything is fine while he fails to stop his children demolishing the building and then blames the neighbors for the destruction. Sometimes, the only solution is to take responsibility for the kids and get them in line. For some of them, a damn good spanking might be in order...

The real take away from this is the disturbing fact so many of the GOP voters are buying into the whole Trump idea. Even if Trump really were a DEM plant, what does it say about the GOP electorate that so many of them enthusiastically support him and his utterances? Is this what the once great party of Lincoln has come to: demagoguery replacing reason, fear-mongering replacing solid argument, mediocrity replacing a striving for excellence? The last truly great, truly effective GOP President was Eisenhower; since his administration, the successive GOP holders of the White House have given ever eroding performances as Chief Executives. Nixon, Ford, Reagan, GHW Bush and Dubbya have each, successively, left office with the country in worst shape than when they took office. They have each left legacies that include the three worst recessions since The Great Depression, involvement in foreign conflicts that should have not been undertaken, polarization of the US populace, and assorted other failings. This is not to say the DEM are any much better, but, lets be honest, the only DEMs since Nixon gutted the country to hold the White House are Carter and Clinton. Carter, although he is himself a good and honorable man, was way over his head as president, but he only won office because the voters didn't want any more of Ford and the Nixon stench that came with him; the DEMs didn't win because they were the best, but because Nixon/Ford were so bad. Clinton, likewise, didn't really win because he was the best candidate, but because the voters didn't want anymore of Regan/Bush policies, particularly the farce of "Reaganomics". But Clinton took office with the burden of a wrecked economy, domestic and foreign entanglements, and public distrust, and came out of the White House with a robust economy, a nation at peace, and a very strong support among the voters; he is still the most popular of the living former Presidents. Why can't the GOP produce candidates like the DEMs seem to do, candidates who have a solid substance rather than petty demagogues who have given us, in addition to failed economies and military debacles, such memories as Watergate, useless WIN buttons, Iran-Contra, a bungled Gulf War, etc. And let's not forget the strong probability we would not have had the current crisis over ISIL and expanded global terrorism if some White House office holder had not thought it was a great ideas to flagrantly lie to the American people and destabilize the entire Middle East...

I really, really don't care which party holds the White House or Congress or any other part of government. I just want some party, any party, to put up a candidate who isn't just a shill for party-power brokers; I want to be able to vote for someone who actually has a reasoned, logical, fair head on his shoulders and who has the strength of will to make decisions based on what is good and right for the nation, not what is good or right for the poll numbers of their party. I just want to be able to vote for someone because I actually believe in them and think they are better, not because the alternative is so much worse. Is it really that hard for any party to find someone who really is the "best and brightest"?...

<O>

Platapus

12-14-15, 06:01 PM

I just want to be able to vote for someone because I actually believe in them and think they are better, not because the alternative is so much worse. Is it really that hard for any party to find someone who really is the "best and brightest"?...

<O>

That is my primary dissatisfaction with this whole process. I can't remember the last time I voted for a candidate instead of voting against the other candidate. I so want to vote for a candidate, but that brings up the second part of this portion of your post.

Are both political parties really telling me that these candidates represent the best of the best of the best that the party can muster???

Really really?

Out of all the members of the parties, these are the best that they can come up with?

If these candidates are truly the best that the parties can muster, then there is something really wrong with the current state of the parties.

These are the times I wish our elections were not based on a plurality but on a majority. Then we could cast a null vote for none of these clowns.

It is so depressing. :nope:

Onkel Neal

12-14-15, 06:35 PM

I cannot speak for other Republicans or conservatives, but I think a large part of Trump's appeal is he won't take any crap from the liberals and PC mob. I certainly appreciate that, but I don't want him to be the President.

That is my primary dissatisfaction with this whole process. I can't remember the last time I voted for a candidate instead of voting against the other candidate. I so want to vote for a candidate, but that brings up the second part of this portion of your post.

Are both political parties really telling me that these candidates represent the best of the best of the best that the party can muster???

Really really?

Out of all the members of the parties, these are the best that they can come up with?

If these candidates are truly the best that the parties can muster, then there is something really wrong with the current state of the parties.

These are the times I wish our elections were not based on a plurality but on a majority. Then we could cast a null vote for none of these clowns.

It is so depressing. :nope:

Yeah, it's been a long time since there was a candidate that I liked, it's been the lesser of 2 evils for years.

u crank

12-14-15, 06:45 PM

Really really?

Out of all the members of the parties, these are the best that they can come up with?

If these candidates are truly the best that the parties can muster, then there is something really wrong with the current state of the parties.

I think the truth is more like ... these are the best candidates who are willing to run. The question is why would anyone want to be President these days? These candidates might be answering that question.

Platapus

12-14-15, 07:58 PM

I think the truth is more like ... these are the best candidates who are willing to run. The question is why would anyone want to be President these days? These candidates might be answering that question.

Good point, who really wants that job these days?

vienna

12-14-15, 09:23 PM

Mostly those who are least qualified, most ego-driven, most power-hungry, shills for backroom power brokers, mediocre, inept, self-serving...

...any or all of the above...

<O>

Buddahaid

12-14-15, 09:45 PM

I don't think it's really any different than it ever was, it's just the tools have changed.

Onkel Neal

12-16-15, 03:57 PM

What? No one watched the latest debacl...er, debate?

I found this amusing and disturbing in equally massive proportions...:huh:

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/donald-trump-has-no-idea-what-americas-nuclear-triad-is-1748283463

Oddly enough, a description of the Nuclear Triad was embedded in Hewitt’s question, yet Trump still stumbled around the question, making almost no sense throughout his reply.

The exchange went as follows:

HEWITT: Mr. Trump... Dr. Carson just referenced the single most important job of the president, the command, the control and the care of our nuclear forces. And he mentioned the triad. The B-52s are older than I am. The missiles are old. The submarines are aging out. It’s an executive order. It’s a commander-in-chief decision. What’s your priority among our nuclear triad?

TRUMP: Well, first of all, I think we need somebody absolutely that we can trust, who is totally responsible; who really knows what he or she is doing. That is so powerful and so important. And one of the things that I’m frankly most proud of is that in 2003, 2004, I was totally against going into Iraq because you’re going to destabilize the Middle East. I called it. I called it very strongly. And it was very important.

But we have to be extremely vigilant and extremely careful when it comes to nuclear. Nuclear changes the whole ball game. Frankly, I would have said get out of Syria; get out – if we didn’t have the power of weaponry today. The power is so massive that we can’t just leave areas that 50 years ago or 75 years ago we wouldn’t care. It was hand-to-hand combat.

HEWITT: Of the three legs of the triad, though, do you have a priority? I want to go to Senator Rubio after that and ask him.

TRUMP: I think – I think, for me, nuclear is just the power, the devastation is very important to me.

The biggest problem this world has today is not President Obama with global warming, which is inconceivable, this is what he’s saying. The biggest problem we have is nuclear – nuclear proliferation and having some maniac, having some madman go out and get a nuclear weapon. That’s in my opinion, that is the single biggest problem that our country faces right now.
From Trump’s response, it’s clear that he either has no idea what the nuclear triad is, or that he had no idea what the question was and just decided to go with some sort of free-form jazz riff on the topic of “anything nuclear.” But even after Hewitt threw Trump another clue, he replied with total gibberish.

Platapus

12-16-15, 04:03 PM

If he becomes president the senate will pay close attention to who they confirm as SecDef

vienna

12-16-15, 04:07 PM

There was some pundit on the radio who made the oft-repeated, not-yet-proven claim Trump is a stalking horse for Hillary and a sudden thought came to mind: what if Trump is actually a stalking horse and/or a 'sounding board' for the GOP leadership. What brought this to mind was something Nixon used to do, with great regularity, during his administration and that has been used to lesser degrees by ensuing administrations. After the drubbing he took from JFK during their debates in 1960, Nixon became very savvy about the use of media to manipulate public opinion. If Nixon had some policy change or new policy to broach and he was not sure what the public reaction might be, his administration would have some lower level functionary broach the subject to the press. Say it was an economic subject: an Under-Secretary of the Treasury Dept. would speak to the press and put the subject out into the open. Nixon would then wait to see the reaction from the press, and more importantly, the voters. If the reactions were positive, Nixon would step forward and lay claim to the original idea. If the reactions were negative, Nixon would distance himself from the idea and deny any involvement in the broaching the idea, leaving the functionary to take the brunt. If the idea really went south, the functionary would then fall on his sword, resign his post, apologizing to the Administration for the brouhaha and exculpating Nixon. What would then happen, the functionary would quietly "find" a better post with another government department or with a Nixon crony private entity...

The way this scenario could be working as it relates to the current GOP situation is this:

1. The GOP/RNC leaders find themselves in a situation where they are unable to field credible candidates who are able to grab the attention of the general voting public; it is obvious they are going to have to sell their ideas and policies rather than the lackluster personalities of their potential candidates;

2. A real danger exists in doing a cold presentation of their proposals in they might just further alienate and already dwindling GOP voter pool and torpedo any chances of swaying Independents and the stray DEM to vote for their eventual candidate if their policies are seen as too extreme or outlandish;

3. Since they can't be sure which way the wind will blow, politically, when the voters hear their proposals, they need a sort of 'dry run', some way of seeing what will float and what will sink, what the voters will accept or reject;

4. Along comes Trump, someone the public has come to expect to deal in bombast, shock, and outrage. He is essentially bulletproof because, unlike the more conventional GOP candidates (yes, even Rand Paul) who must maintain at least a semblance of mainstream acceptability, Trump is already a known controversial quantity: people expect crazy Uncle Donald to be crazy Uncle Donald;

5. So Trump joins the candidates and spews whatever might be actual GOP concepts or proposals the more mainstream candidates are not utter and, given whatever the public reaction might be, embrace wholeheartedly or reject with appropriate disdain whatever Trump proclaims. If it's good reaction, they keep it; if it's bad they lose and and, in the process, look as if the GOP is taking the moral and political high road;

6. The further advantage for the GOP is whoever their eventual candidate is, they will have a fairly good reading of the electorate and how to manipulate public opinion to their own advantage; the disadvantage is the DEMs are also watching and will have a likewise sounding of the political waters, free of charge, thanks to the GOP and Donald Trump;

It's just an idea, but it is an interesting one...

<O>

vienna

12-16-15, 04:16 PM

...But even after Hewitt threw Trump another clue, he replied with total gibberish.

Ah, then, Trump has mastered the art of the true politician: say nothing, but say it emotively with conviction. In all these debates, little has actually been said in detail or substance, GOP or DEM. I am not surprised at all, I mean look at a prior debate when the candidates were faced with an actual, specific question regarding the economy and what they would do, they instead turned to a vitriolic attack on the media. That's the hallmark sign of a really poor debater who has no cogent supportive underpinning or the means to relate: cornered?..then, deflect, deflect, deflect...

<O>

mapuc

12-16-15, 04:22 PM

My prediction

The Republican convention which are to be held in about 7 month from now will reject Trump and choose one of the two candidate which are number 2 and 3 in the poll.

Trump does what he warned the Republican he would do.

He start his own campaign and takes about 35-40 % of the Republican votes and supporters with him.

The steep will be a huge setback for the Republican

The Democrats ? They of course will support this

I hope however I'm wrong

Markus

Buddahaid

12-16-15, 11:50 PM

No, I didn't watch it, but I rarely ever watch these beauty pageants anymore. I couldn't stomach the CNN ad for it either. It was presented like more of a prize fight, or game show, than serious programming. Disgusting.

Onkel Neal

12-17-15, 10:01 AM

I'm amazed that has not gone viral. It would be excellent ammo to show how little he knows about govt and the military.

STEED

12-17-15, 10:05 AM

Am I right to say at this stage of the elections its all Punch & Judy with a splash of showboating before the candidates tow the line? :hmmm:

AVGWarhawk

12-17-15, 10:59 AM

mapuc

12-17-15, 12:33 PM

Trump will either not get the nomination(and he stated if he did not get it he would not run independent) but will change his mind. Running then as an independent will drawn votes away.

Then my memory must have gone wrong, ´cause I seem to remember Mr Trump saying just that-Run on his own if rejected.

Markus

Mr Quatro

12-17-15, 12:49 PM

Ah, then, Trump has mastered the art of the true politician: say nothing, but say it emotively with conviction. In all these debates, little has actually been said in detail or substance, GOP or DEM. I am not surprised at all, I mean look at a prior debate when the candidates were faced with an actual, specific question regarding the economy and what they would do, they instead turned to a vitriolic attack on the media. That's the hallmark sign of a really poor debater who has no cogent supportive underpinning or the means to relate: cornered?..then, deflect, deflect, deflect...

<O>

This is why I come here, better truth than watching TV all day :up:

Did you see the latest I was in a hurry and just saw the heading, "Putin says TRump is intelligent and is okay with him"?

Mr Quatro

12-17-15, 12:57 PM

I found it: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-putin-end-year-press-conference-20151217-story.html

Putin praised Donald Trump's talents and lauded his calls for better ties with Russia.
He called Trump an "absolute front-runner" in the presidential race and a "bright and talented person,"
adding that he "certainly welcomes" Trump's calls for better U.S.-Russia ties.

Tchocky

12-17-15, 02:29 PM

I'm amazed that has not gone viral. It would be excellent ammo to show how little he knows about govt and the military.

It won't because the audience the Republican primary candidates are looking for don't especially care.

What people are looking for right now (at least what I've seen from here)

1 - Someone who "tells it like it is", no matter what they're talking about. Make it sound like you're saying things other candidates are afraid to say (whether they are or not, it's all about tone)
2 - Someone who rationalises and amplifies a sense of fear, dread, and decline
3 - Someone who describes every disagreement as "the establishment trying to shut you up"

Look at Trump, Carson etc.

Ted Cruz has managed to make Protestants believe they are a persecuted minority.

Facts aren't too relevant.

I'm not trying to say any of these candidates are especially dumb, or if stupidity falls along political lines - these candidates know exactly what they are doing with this.

vienna

12-17-15, 04:06 PM

I received the link below in a security newsletter I subscribe to and I found it interesting as it relates to the ways campaigns are run today. The paper is the fourth entry down in the section labelled "Articles":

http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/surveillance-and-society/index

It seems we now have to deal with "Big Politics Is Watching"...

<O>

AVGWarhawk

12-18-15, 01:44 PM

Bernie, what did you find in that data breach?

Oberon

12-18-15, 03:03 PM

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/029/577/e77.jpg

August

12-18-15, 07:46 PM

Bernie, what did you find in that data breach?

Enough that the DNC cut his campaign off from their own voter information data. They claim it's not to benefit hitlery.

Oberon

12-18-15, 08:45 PM

Of course, the big question on both sides right now is 'Should the US bomb Agrabah?' (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/12/trump-leads-grows-nationally-41-of-his-voters-want-to-bomb-country-from-aladdin-clinton-maintains-bi.html), currently 30% of GOP voters support it, while 36% of Dem voters say that they would oppose bombing Agrabah.

Personally, I think the case for bombing Agrabah is clear, the rogue city state has Carpets of Mass Destruction that can be launched within 45 minutes, and as such poses a threat to all of the western world.

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/disney/images/b/b8/Aladdin_on_magic_carpet.png/revision/latest?cb=20111211025101
Pictured, An Agrabah terrorist and his accomplice examining their weaponry

August

12-18-15, 10:08 PM

Oberon

12-18-15, 10:24 PM

https://newrepublic.com/article/114682/ppp-polling-methodology-opaque-flawed

Figures, but if you look at the result it's actually just as damaging to the Dems, I mean more of them oppose bombing Agrabah than GOPs want to bomb it. The correct answer to the question would have been "Dude, what are you even asking me this for?" which is probably what 57% of them replied with and were marked down as 'Not sure', with 55% of the Dems marked down as 'Not sure'. Either which way, chances are more than a few on either side had no idea that Agrabah was not real. :03:

Polling people must be getting bored now. Still, primaries soon.

God help us. :doh:

EDIT: YouGov has a good opinion on PPP for some of their polls so there's that (https://today.yougov.com/news/2014/11/06/yougov-poll-performance-2014-governor-elections/)...YouGov have been fairly accurate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouGov#Accuracy) aside from the major clanger on this years UK election, but they were hardly alone on that one, I don't think any of the advance polls got it right. Even so, it's still a silly poll, but then...I think we're in for a pretty silly election, don't you?

Kptlt. Neuerburg

12-19-15, 01:25 PM

Well it looks like Transport for London is showing The Donald some love.
http://s6.postimg.org/4w570vdtt/untitled5_1.png

vienna

12-19-15, 02:33 PM

https://newrepublic.com/article/114682/ppp-polling-methodology-opaque-flawed

Typical of you to link to a known highly liberal source. It is obvious your bias is showing. You Clinton-lovers only cite that which advances your cause... :nope: ...

... :D

<O>

Betonov

12-19-15, 03:00 PM

Well it looks like Transport for London is showing The Donald some love.

Like that pompous prick would use public transport :)

Onkel Neal

01-14-16, 02:12 PM

Well, last Republican debate tonight. Latest polls show it's between Trump and Cruz in Iowa and all Trump in NH. I hope someone has clued Trump in on what the nuclear triad is by now.

On the Dems side, Komrade Bernie is neck and neck with Herr Hillary in Iowa and NH, which eerily seems like a repeat of 2008. They are saying no worries, she has a "firewall" in the south, but hmmm.... I don't know.

August

01-14-16, 02:32 PM

GoldenRivet

01-14-16, 03:07 PM

All i know is that we have had 8 long years of socialism and that has to end. America has to return to being a place where hard work is rewarded, and you "win" based on the merits of what you contribute to society and for working hard... not just for showing up to the party empty handed.

I for one am exhausted of leaving my family behind for 7-9 months out of the year to work my arse off just so i can contribute over $20,000 of my income to taxes, this has to change. the middle class is being taxed into non existence just so bubba and jethro can go on about buying crap they couldn't normally afford.

Folks like Sanders try to pass it off that the "1%" will carry the largest tax burden with their plans to dole out "free stuff" to the masses, but that has never EVER been the case... the middle class has always been the group to shoulder the burden of paying for everyone else's "free stuff", it has ALWAYS been that way, it will continue to be that way no matter who says it. no matter what they promise. no matter how they promise to deliver it. it will ALWAYS be the middle class that suffers the most when politicians make those kinds of promises for free candy and make any effort to deliver on those promises. and people keep falling for it.

we reward illegal immigrants and those who draw welfare with gobs of benefits and perks while our combat veterans languish in the streets.

We go on and on about those poor poor people with no jobs when everywhere - EVERYWHERE i see "help wanted" signs in windows. American doesnt have a jobs problem, it has an "I showed up to the party, now give me my prize" problem. it has a work ethic problem.

we sell piece after piece of the American dream to other nations and we think we can build them up and solve their problems by selling them a little bit of our American Dream... eventually you will run out of pieces to sell.

I am sick and tired of seeing people in the grocery store with shopping carts piled over with $200 in groceries they pay for with their welfare cards and a second cart full of $150 worth of beer and liquor. we cannot continue to support this kind of behavior in our society, its disgusting. it is completely disgusting. It nauseates me to know that individuals like this maybe worked 18 hours this week, if at all, and can come to the grocery store and stock up better than me when i work 90+ hours a week. its nauseating and infuriating.

i can go on... but it would be completely pointless. In fact typing all of that above was probably completely pointless.

the only thing i can do is vote for whatever or whoever ends up running against that murderer Hillary Clinton and that Communist SOB Sanders. I would literally vote for a golden retriever over those two.

Mr Quatro

01-14-16, 05:38 PM

I've been for Jeb Bush from the get go, but you never hear about anyone except the top two on either side of the Democrats or the GOP.

You have to trash mouth someone to get into the news now days.

I know I can google Jeb and get all the news I want, but I'm busy.
I read my mail on the toilet and watch CNN at the top of the hour ...
never Fox :down:

But still no Jeb ... tonight is his big chance to shine anyone else will cause me to cross over to Hillary due to her socialist Bernie Sanders cohort.

mapuc

01-14-16, 05:46 PM

GoldenRivet

01-14-16, 06:18 PM

There's one I do know-well that is if our "expert on American politics" are correct

The Republican will not make trump as their Presidential candidate-They will pick those who are number 2 or 3 in the poll.

Markus

thats the only way that hillary would win... if the conservative vote is split between trump running as an independent and whatever fourth string candidate the GOP nominates

em2nought

01-14-16, 06:45 PM

em2nought

01-14-16, 07:01 PM

Well it looks like Transport for London is showing The Donald some love.
http://s6.postimg.org/4w570vdtt/untitled5_1.png
Chamberlain was a macho man compared to you modern day fellows. LMAOhttp://euromaidanpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/NiceDoggie-AppeasementCartoon.jpg

Nippelspanner

01-15-16, 09:35 AM

Ok, at this point I just want someone to put America out of its misery.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/live-from-charleston/2016/01/donald-trump-song-usa-freedom-kids-217791#ixzz3xJlR3loW

Can't you guys over there do anything against that!?
This is gut-wrenching and really hard to witness without looking at you like a wounded animal that begs for a bullet.

Make America great again - and shut Tronald Dumb up! :timeout:

Oberon

01-15-16, 10:07 AM

It is getting somewhat disturbing...and it's only just beginning.

Can only go downhill from here. :dead:

Onkel Neal

01-15-16, 10:41 AM

It's starting to look like the Republican nominee will be either Trump or Cruz. This is going to be very interesting.

August

01-15-16, 10:48 AM

Ok, at this point I just want someone to put America out of its misery.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/live-from-charleston/2016/01/donald-trump-song-usa-freedom-kids-217791#ixzz3xJlR3loW

Can't you guys over there do anything against that!?
This is gut-wrenching and really hard to witness without looking at you like a wounded animal that begs for a bullet.

You want to put us out of our misery? You want to give us a bullet?
If I recall my history books you folks tried knocking us off twice (three times if you count the Hessians in 1776). How did that all work out for you? :hmmm:

Jimbuna

01-15-16, 10:58 AM

Didn't something similar happen when Obama entered office?

Republican frontrunner Donald Trump has attacked Ted Cruz over his birth in Canada, saying it raised questions about his presidential eligibility.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35321123

Onkel Neal

01-15-16, 11:10 AM

Yeah. I still am not sure what "natural born" actually means, but seeing that the Constitutional authors qualified the clause with a phrase outlining those existing men in the Colonies who were born before the US became the greatest country in the world:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

So, what does that mean? Why add the distinction between citizen of the US at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, and natural born citizen?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause

Yeah, Obama, where ever he was born, had an American mother. Still, people who opposed him politcally made a lot of noise about his actual birthplace. I wonder how many of them are making the same comments about Cruz.

If you search, you will find lots of opinions ranging far on both sides of the question, he must be born on US soil, to if one of the parents is American. I wonder, does that mean that anchor babies are natural born? Cause a lot of illegal immigration apologists swear that if an illegal mama gets into the US, and drops a baby, that baby is an American citizen. Which I think is nuts, but whatever, it still makes the whole issue convoluted.:dead:

Sailor Steve

01-15-16, 12:17 PM

Yeah. I still am not sure what "natural born" actually means
this document (http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42097.pdf) might help a little.

So, what does that mean? Why add the distinction between citizen of the US at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, and natural born citizen?
This (http://www.law.virginia.edu/html/news/2009_fall/white_oped.htm) should clarify that question nicely.

Yeah, Obama, where ever he was born, had an American mother. Still, people who opposed him politcally made a lot of noise about his actual birthplace. I wonder how many of them are making the same comments about Cruz.
That's why I have come to hate partisan politics in any form. People will go to any length to discredit someone from the other side, then do their best to defend their own guy against the exact same charge, and seemingly never even notice they're doing it.

I wonder, does that mean that anchor babies are natural born? Cause a lot of illegal immigration apologists swear that if an illegal mama gets into the US, and drops a baby, that baby is an American citizen. Which I think is nuts, but whatever, it still makes the whole issue convoluted.:dead:
Yes, that's exactly what it means. Often something written to solve a certain problem will come back to haunt the writers. The 14th Amendment (https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv) is one of those. It was created to guarantee citizenship to all the recently freed slaves, and written completely within that context. The authors likely could not have conceived of the whole "anchor baby" problem. On the other hand, it says what it says, and no amount of interpretation can get around that. It would take another Amendment to replace it and meet the current problem.

STEED

01-15-16, 12:22 PM

I was having a quite drink in the pub and this loud American Woman talking to her friends said Trump will restore American pride, wealth, honor and restore America's place in the world as King of all nations. :hmmm:

Oberon

01-15-16, 12:25 PM

Thought they didn't do kings? :O:

STEED

01-15-16, 12:30 PM

Thought they didn't do kings? :O:

Maybe shes picked up some bad UK habits. :har:

Platapus

01-15-16, 01:25 PM

Thought they didn't do kings? :O:

We like kings in the US

https://s16-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth% 3Fid%3DOIP.M8ff21a31b9576dda62f64aab382d6b6eo0%26p id%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=cf20c188e80fa8d7d73e4ff8d2b31492

https://s17-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse3.mm.bing.net%2Fth% 3Fid%3DOIP.M3e5351fce99d9e9bd63423bf8a59a79cH0%26p id%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=8c9d860f57f0c2bc6bfeda0072c3a407

https://s15-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse3.mm.bing.net%2Fth% 3Fid%3DOIP.Mbbb79273a8b40ed55635d138fd6df0ccH0%26p id%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=451165f3b88c1223dd59a5ddd2ec88ef

But we are not sexist here in 'merica

https://s17-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth% 3Fid%3DOIP.M84ad91de20b1f9de1dd49fa919685847H0%26p id%3D15.1%26f%3D1&sp=95b71e8a57958fa211e04270a782ff9b

Oberon

01-15-16, 01:35 PM

http://hypervocal4.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/queen20.jpg

STEED

01-15-16, 01:39 PM

^ Before you declare all out war my Queen I want to pop out to the shops and buy as much tea as I can. :03:

Those American's will be ditching it left right and centre in the sea and tea prices will rocket to the moon. :ping:

STEED

01-15-16, 01:47 PM

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11112/111122518/3851304-7496891779-Vote%2B.jpg

Got my vote. :)

vienna

01-15-16, 02:18 PM

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11112/111122518/3851304-7496891779-Vote%2B.jpg

Got my vote. :)

Ah, yes, "Ahnold", who as CA Governor, presided over one of the worst terms of office of any CA Governor. He was initially elected as the result of a recall election of the then DEM Governor who was roundly unpopular, a view eagerly egged on by the CA GOP and the RNC. The DEMs had no really strong candidate and Arnold basically won by default. Once he took office, the GOP assumed they had a 'mandate' and pushed hard to get a series of conservative GOP measures on the state ballot and presented them as a sort of package deal to the voters. The result was an embarrassing, resounding defeat for the GOP measures at the polls. Arnold then pretty much ditched the conservative GOP stance and continued on as a sort of 'hybrid' Governor. It was really a bit puzzling when the GOP raised a big stink over Arnold's switch; he's married to a Kennedy, for God's sake; what did they expect? As an independent, it was amusing to watch a major political party so severely trip over its own feet...

<O>

Mr Quatro

01-15-16, 02:42 PM

Ah, yes, "Ahnold", who as CA Governor, presided over one of the worst terms of office of any CA Governor. He was initially elected as the result of a recall election of the then DEM Governor who was roundly unpopular, a view eagerly egged on by the CA GOP and the RNC. The DEMs had no really strong candidate and Arnold basically won by default. Once he took office, the GOP assumed they had a 'mandate' and pushed hard to get a series of conservative GOP measures on the state ballot and presented them as a sort of package deal to the voters. The result was an embarrassing, resounding defeat for the GOP measures at the polls. Arnold then pretty much ditched the conservative GOP stance and continued on as a sort of 'hybrid' Governor. It was really a bit puzzling when the GOP raised a big stink over Arnold's switch; he's married to a Kennedy, for God's sake; what did they expect? As an independent, it was amusing to watch a major political party so severely trip over its own feet...

<O>

Arnold Schwarzenegger is an interesting subject born in Austria July 1947, became Governor of California in 2003 and
again for a second term in 2007.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/arnold-schwarzenegger-becomes-california-governor

Despite his inexperience, Schwarzenegger came out on top in the 11-week campaign to replace Gray Davis, who had earlier become the first United States governor to be recalled by the people since 1921. Schwarzenegger was one of 135 candidates on the ballot, which included career politicians, other actors, and one adult-film star.

He beat his closest challenger, the Democratic lieutenant governor Cruz Bustamante, by more than 1 million votes.

Arnold's acceptance speech ... "California has given me everything," he said. "I will not fail you. I will not disappoint you and I will not let you down."

STEED

01-15-16, 03:02 PM

Ah, yes, "Ahnold", who as CA Governor, presided over one of the worst terms of office of any CA Governor.

Perfect then. :)

eddie

01-15-16, 04:31 PM

Hard for me to decide who I want in the White House. Not a lot of good one to pick from. Who ever gets in will have to deal withe Congress. And doesn't matter which party controls it, they do what the heck they want to anyway.

The party that controls Congress has said repeatedly that they want to being down the debt. But the new budget they just passed added a trillion and a half to it! Funny way to bring it down,lol Like I said, when it comes to Washington, its the same crap, just a different day. That's why so much apathy can set in during an election. Still have trouble coming up with a good reason to vote sometimes. And before someone come's in and says if you don't vote, you can't complain! I say that is BS! I'll complain about Washington whether I vote or not. Just give me a reason to vote with this goofy crowd running.

Oberon

01-15-16, 05:34 PM

Seems so far, from what I can tell, the race is between a Communist, a Criminal and some Crackpots. :hmmm:

STEED

01-15-16, 05:44 PM

Seems so far, from what I can tell, the race is between a Communist, a Criminal and some Crackpots. :hmmm:

That's what politics is all about. :haha:

Sailor Steve

01-15-16, 06:36 PM

Hard for me to decide who I want in the White House. Not a lot of good one to pick from. Who ever gets in will have to deal withe Congress. And doesn't matter which party controls it, they do what the heck they want to anyway.
"Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."
-Pete Townsend, 'Won't Get Fooled Again'

And before someone come's in and says if you don't vote, you can't complain! I say that is BS! I'll complain about Washington whether I vote or not. Just give me a reason to vote with this goofy crowd running.
As I've said for many years now, "I have a right to complain until they put a slot on the ballot that says 'None of the above'. If I don't vote then, I don't have a right to complain."

eddie

01-15-16, 06:51 PM

When we vote Steve, we can have a write in candidate. Can I write in "None of the above!":)

August

01-15-16, 06:53 PM

Gridlock is still the best form of government for the common man.

Oberon

01-15-16, 07:18 PM

Gridlock is still the best form of government for the common man.

I guess it depends on what you want out of your government, and how much that gridlock effects its ability to function against external and internal threats to the nations security and how you want it to. :hmmm:

August

01-15-16, 07:49 PM

I guess it depends on what you want out of your government, and how much that gridlock effects its ability to function against external and internal threats to the nations security and how you want it to. :hmmm:

Maybe i'm just a bit jaded from a lifetime of watching my liberty erode a little more whenever one side or the other gets enough juice in government to advance their agenda. :dead:

Oberon

01-15-16, 07:58 PM

Maybe i'm just a bit jaded from a lifetime of watching my liberty erode a little more whenever one side or the other gets enough juice in government to advance their agenda. :dead:

But what if there was someone who wanted to reverse that, but couldn't because of the gridlocked government? :dead:

August

01-15-16, 09:26 PM

But what if there was someone who wanted to reverse that, but couldn't because of the gridlocked government? :dead:

I've yet to hear of such a person but maybe this hypothetical reincarnation of George Washington would have such strong public support that the two parties would be forced to yield to his wishes like they did to the original. In reality though so much power concentrated into one person is almost always a bad thing so i'm glad that our system is set up so that it takes a consensus to effect such great change.

Oberon

01-16-16, 06:57 AM

I've yet to hear of such a person but maybe this hypothetical reincarnation of George Washington would have such strong public support that the two parties would be forced to yield to his wishes like they did to the original. In reality though so much power concentrated into one person is almost always a bad thing so i'm glad that our system is set up so that it takes a consensus to effect such great change.

I think most political systems struggle to get large changes through them, which is what leads some people to become exasperated at the lack of progress, but equally, as you say, it can prevent ideological based agendas from being put in place. Then again, in a two party system, any agenda would only last as long as the party who put it in place stayed in power, whoever got in next could feasibly undo it, although whether they would or not depends on how much the agenda would benefit them I suspect. :hmmm:
I think that really the biggest challenge that faces the US government is the economic system of the US, and indeed the western world, and how it keeps running into trouble and when it does it screws with the general public. It's surely inherantly unfair that the actions of a few have such great impact on the many when it comes to finances.
Of course, finding the answer to that, well everyone has their own opinion, certainly it's something that the Bern has been campaigning on, and since many people blame the big banking systems for causing the pain which followed the 2008 crash it's little wonder that Berns comments on the big banks have gained him supporters. Will it be enough to counter Hillary? I don't know...but it's certainly a lot closer than anyone could have imagined back when the Democrats first started putting together their front runners.
The Republicans though, something went wrong and I think that if the Democrats get into the White House again this year, the Republicans really need to have a good think about their future and where they want to take the party. It might be that the party needs to split and the more moderate Republicans need to purge the Trump and Cruz members from the party before they can reform and rebuild into something that isn't quite so extreme, because if I'm honest, the popularity of Trump and the fact that he's got this far without being laughed out of the race indicates something has gone very wrong.

Meanwhile, Obama just doesn't care anymore:
http://imgur.com/gallery/lmr0gjK

Platapus

01-16-16, 07:29 AM

Seems so far, from what I can tell, the race is between a Communist, a Criminal and some Crackpots. :hmmm:

Remember that these candidates represent the best of the best of the best that the parties can offer.

This is a free election -- no incumbent. It is understandable that when going up against an incumbent that you withhold your "A" team.

But this coming election is free and open..... and this is what the parties offer us. That's pretty pathetic. :nope:

I wished some interviewer would ask the RNC/DNC leadership,

"You are telling us that of all the Republican/Democrats in the country that these are the very best your party can offer the citizens? Really?"

I hope it is all dream and that JR gets out of the shower and we can see the real candidates.

Ok parties, it was a great joke and you took us all in. Now show us the real candidates... please?

Jimbuna

01-16-16, 11:41 AM

As I've said for many years now, "I have a right to complain until they put a slot on the ballot that says 'None of the above'. If I don't vote then, I don't have a right to complain."

Rgr that :yep:

vienna

01-16-16, 03:46 PM

Arnold Schwarzenegger is an interesting subject born in Austria July 1947, became Governor of California in 2003 and
again for a second term in 2007.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/arnold-schwarzenegger-becomes-california-governor

Arnold's acceptance speech ... "California has given me everything," he said. "I will not fail you. I will not disappoint you and I will not let you down."

It should be noted Arnold became Governor in 2003 with less than 50% percent of the vote in an open election in which there was no party delineation; whoever got the most votes (not necessarily a majority of the total votes cast) won. Theoretically, if there were ten candidates and the vote was severely split, a candidate with, say, 11% of the vote would have won the election. Since the election was a recall election, CA's Constitution did not require a run-off between the two highest ranking candidates if there was no clear majority. Also to be noted, in 2007, he won reelection against an extremely weak DEM candidate. Arnold was, at the time, not very popular with the electorate, in general, so his win boiled down to the classic "lesser of two evils" sort of situation and in no way ranks as an endorsement of Arnold, his policies, nor those of the GOP. In fact, by the time of his reelection, he had already drifted away from the staunch conservative stance that had made him the darling of the CA GOP and was transitioning to a more liberal view. In any, case, by the time he left office, the state was arguably in a worse condition than when he entered office and set the stage for a DEM retaking of the Governor's office...

An interesting note is Arnold's successor is current Governor Jerry Brown, now in his second and last term. Brown had previously served two terms as Governor, making a total of four terms in office. When he was first elected, he succeeded another actor turned Governor who decided not to seek a third term when faced with a certain defeat by Brown and who also left a bit of a mess for Brown to clean up. The actor who Brown chased from office? Some guy named Ronald Reagan...

<O>

Onkel Neal

01-16-16, 06:35 PM

I hope it is all dream and that JR gets out of the shower and we can see the real candidates.

Not JR, that was Bobby. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCEjeTb1rrs) :shucks:
http://www.breakingnews.ie/remote/media.central.ie/media/images/b/bobbyEwingShowerScene_large.jpg?width=600

Platapus

01-17-16, 07:23 AM

Not JR, that was Bobby. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCEjeTb1rrs) :shucks:
http://www.breakingnews.ie/remote/media.central.ie/media/images/b/bobbyEwingShowerScene_large.jpg?width=600

Ach, you are right.

I can only plead ignorance being that I did not watch that show. :oops:

Onkel Neal

01-17-16, 04:58 PM

Haha, I stopped watching it after the Who Shot JR season.

Marco Rubio just torpedoed his campaign (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/marco-rubio-immigrants-217895)

Oberon

01-17-16, 05:07 PM

Eyup, pity though because he does have a point, rounding up and deporting 12 million people would take a monumental effort, and considering how organised most US agencies are, it's beyond the scope of the American government.

Onkel Neal

01-17-16, 05:18 PM

Pity? Why is it a pity? Self-deportation: just pass a law that levies a massive fine on any business that hires illegals, and enforce it. They managed to get in here, they can manage to go home.

nikimcbee

01-17-16, 05:23 PM

Pity? Why is it a pity? Self-deportation: just pass a law that levies a massive fine on any business that hires illegals, and enforce it. They managed to get in here, they can manage to go home.

We've weaponized the IRS, time to use it. Problem will fix itself.

Oberon

01-17-16, 05:28 PM

Pity? Why is it a pity? Self-deportation: just pass a law that levies a massive fine on any business that hires illegals, and enforce it. They managed to get in here, they can manage to go home.

How do you find out if businesses are hiring illegals?

nikimcbee

01-17-16, 05:36 PM

How do you find out if businesses are hiring illegals?

In farming, they (can) pay cash under the table, so they are harder to catch.

Probably an IRS audit of employee records.

vienna

01-17-16, 07:18 PM

How do you find out if businesses are hiring illegals?

There is a system called E-Verify that employers can use to verify an applicant is legally permitted to work in the US. However, this system is voluntary ans a relatively small percentage of employers actually use the system. Efforts have been made in the past to make use of the system mandatory, but lobbyists for mainly the service industries and the unions who would represent those sort of employees have been successful in blocking those efforts, aided by members of Congress well in the pocket of those interests. I would very much like to see the system made mandatory and for severe penalties to be assessed against those employers who hire worker not legally eligible for employment in the US, with the fines and penalties used to support training and retraining of legitimate workers who have found themselves unemployed. Verification of employer compliance would be very easy given the technology available today...

<O>

Oberon

01-17-16, 07:26 PM

There is a system called E-Verify that employers can use to verify an applicant is legally permitted to work in the US. However, this system is voluntary ans a relatively small percentage of employers actually use the system. Efforts have been made in the past to make use of the system mandatory, but lobbyists for mainly the service industries and the unions who would represent those sort of employees have been successful in blocking those efforts, aided by members of Congress well in the pocket of those interests. I would very much like to see the system made mandatory and for severe penalties to be assessed against those employers who hire worker not legally eligible for employment in the US, with the fines and penalties used to support training and retraining of legitimate workers who have found themselves unemployed. Verification of employer compliance would be very easy given the technology available today...

<O>

Well, I mean how would the government discover the illegal worker(s)?

Say, for example, a small restaurant in the middle of Arkansas hires an illegal immigrant as a worker, they pay him (or her) in cash and don't declare them on their paperwork. If they get the heads up that an inspector is coming around then that person is given the day off and the staff told not to mention their existence or they'd be fired.
The only two ways I could think of it happening is an unexpected visit by the inspector catching the illegal at work, in which case how can they be sure that this person is an illegal immigrant? The second is for the restaurant to be reported by someone, be it a staff member or a member of the public, but that is a system that is open to abuse with spurilous claims wasting time and money.

Onkel Neal

01-17-16, 07:59 PM

In farming, they (can) pay cash under the table, so they are harder to catch.

Probably an IRS audit of employee records.

Exactly. A simple audit of a ranch or farm would uncover how much work is required and who is being hired to perform the work.

There is a system called E-Verify that employers can use to verify an applicant is legally permitted to work in the US. However, this system is voluntary ans a relatively small percentage of employers actually use the system. Efforts have been made in the past to make use of the system mandatory, but lobbyists for mainly the service industries and the unions who would represent those sort of employees have been successful in blocking those efforts, aided by members of Congress well in the pocket of those interests. I would very much like to see the system made mandatory and for severe penalties to be assessed against those employers who hire worker not legally eligible for employment in the US, with the fines and penalties used to support training and retraining of legitimate workers who have found themselves unemployed. Verification of employer compliance would be very easy given the technology available today...

That's true, severe penalties will discourage many businesses from employing illegals.

Well, I mean how would the government discover the illegal worker(s)?

Say, for example, a small restaurant in the middle of Arkansas hires an illegal immigrant as a worker, they pay him (or her) in cash and don't declare them on their paperwork. If they get the heads up that an inspector is coming around then that person is given the day off and the staff told not to mention their existence or they'd be fired.
The only two ways I could think of it happening is an unexpected visit by the inspector catching the illegal at work, in which case how can they be sure that this person is an illegal immigrant? The second is for the restaurant to be reported by someone, be it a staff member or a member of the public, but that is a system that is open to abuse with spurilous claims wasting time and money.

Well, first of all, there won't be a heads up, inspections would be without warning. Same as a restaurant health inspection or EPA inspection, or DOT random drug testing. And with the threat of fines and imprisonment, most businesses would look to Americans to hire. We could get more Americans back to work.

Second, if the government would get serious about detecting illegals, they would stop issuing them driver's licenses. Schools would verify the children there are legal residents. There would not be sanctuary cities where illegals have no fear of being asked "for their papers". Which sounds sinister, but is it any different than a truck driver having to stop at every highway scale to prove his truck is legal? You know how many times a week I have to show my identification, TWIC card, and health certificate? Why should illegals get a pass? And when illegals are arrested for crimes committed, the government would stop releasing them back into the population.

Jimbuna

01-17-16, 08:12 PM

How do you find out if businesses are hiring illegals?

As is similarly done in the UK......work rosta and NI/Tax contributions or lack of.

August

01-17-16, 08:28 PM

Which sounds sinister, but is it any different than a truck driver having to stop at every highway scale to prove his truck is legal? You know how many times a week I have to show my identification, TWIC card, and health certificate? Why should illegals get a pass?

But Neal the only way to subject illegals to that kind of scrutiny is to subject everyone to it. I for one am not going to accept that kind of scrutiny from my government.

Onkel Neal

01-17-16, 08:47 PM

As long as you stay in your home, you don't have to.

August

01-17-16, 10:35 PM

As long as you stay in your home, you don't have to.

Sorry we're not going to have checkpoints on every corner with armed men demanding to see everyones ID. This is not the Soviet Union.

Onkel Neal

01-18-16, 12:20 AM

Oh, I see, you went right to the extreme.

Don't worry, with Hillary as president, you'll never see the police looking for illegals. They'll be newly minted citizens voting Democrat before she starts her second term.

Tchocky

01-18-16, 05:35 AM

Oberon

01-18-16, 06:41 AM

Guess you guys had better hope Comrade Bernie gets in then. :haha:
At least he's not as anti-gun as 'Hitlery'. :haha:

Cybermat47

01-18-16, 07:09 AM

About illegal immigration, why do the immigrants do it illegally? Surely it would be safer and permament to do legally become a citizen, so what's up with this sneaking across the border stuff?

August

01-18-16, 08:38 AM

About illegal immigration, why do the immigrants do it illegally? Surely it would be safer and permament to do legally become a citizen, so what's up with this sneaking across the border stuff?

Simply put, to immigrate legally one needs a job here, a network of supporters and all kinds of other expensive requirements and even then it can still take years for the paperwork to go through. To immigrate illegally one might need to climb a fence or wade across a shallow river or spend a night or two out in the desert.

Onkel Neal

01-18-16, 09:29 AM

How did the Dems debate go last night. I couldn't stay up and watch.

Onkel Neal

01-18-16, 11:47 AM

While waiting in the truck to unload, I listened to a speech by Trump at a rally, sounded like it was live. You know, when you listen to Trump without the hysteria and editing by the media, he sounds no better or worse than any of the other candidates. Until now, outside of the debates, almost every word I've heard from him was through a news outlet that decided what portion of his speech I should hear.

Platapus

01-18-16, 05:23 PM

How did the Dems debate go last night. I couldn't stay up and watch.

According to Factcheck, it appears that Hillary would not know the truth if it bit her.

Crikey, every candidate is lying in this election. :/\\!!:/\\!!:/\\!!

mapuc

01-18-16, 06:46 PM

According to Factcheck, it appears that Hillary would not know the truth if it bit her.

Crikey, every candidate is lying in this election. :/\\!!:/\\!!:/\\!!

Only in this election ?

Our politician does that in every election and we, the voters, fall for it every time.

Markus

Sailor Steve

01-18-16, 09:40 PM

The old joke has some truth in it:

How do you tell if a politician is lying?

His lips move.

Onkel Neal

01-18-16, 10:26 PM

If that is the plan then it will never get through a Republican House.

I can't imagine the Republican Party being more hospitable to a Clinton presidency than they have been over the last eight years.

Except, no, isn't the aforementioned Senator a Republican? And he's running for the nomination. Having a Republican Congress is no guarantee for national sovereignty these days,

Takeda Shingen

01-19-16, 08:39 AM

Except, no, isn't the aforementioned Senator a Republican? And he's running for the nomination. Having a Republican Congress is no guarantee for national sovereignty these days,

Did I miss a memo where the United States of America was no longer in charge of it's own affairs? Not sure that "national sovereignty" means what you think it means.

Tchocky

01-19-16, 11:44 AM

Except, no, isn't the aforementioned Senator a Republican? And he's running for the nomination. Having a Republican Congress is no guarantee for national sovereignty these days,

I'm responding to the idea that undocumented immigrants will suddenly become Democratic voters after 4 years of a Democratic president. Meh.

Mass deportation also is a silly idea. Huuuuge economic damage for a problem that has easier solutions.

Mr Quatro

01-19-16, 12:03 PM

I'm responding to the idea that undocumented immigrants will suddenly become Democratic voters after 4 years of a Democratic president. Meh.

Mass deportation also is a silly idea. Huuuuge economic damage for a problem that has easier solutions.

The supreme court is debating the Obama immigration plan right now that alows anyone that is in this country illegally and has given birth to a child to be allowed to stay. If approved would these some five million people then be allowed to vote?

Clinton si :up:

Trump no :down:

Tchocky

01-19-16, 01:07 PM

Well not really, as it's a federal offense for a non-citizen to vote.

kraznyi_oktjabr

01-19-16, 02:03 PM

Well not really, as it's a federal offense for a non-citizen to vote.Do your election officials check if person is citizen or not? I have odd feeling that answer is "no", if so: why?

vienna

01-19-16, 04:36 PM

The supreme court is debating the Obama immigration plan right now that alows anyone that is in this country illegally and has given birth to a child to be allowed to stay. If approved would these some five million people then be allowed to vote?

Clinton si :up:

Trump no :down:

Technically, they are actually debating the Constitutional legitimacy of his Executive Order; the ultimate decision will have only an incidental and rather minor effect on the whole immigration issue...

<O>

Mr Quatro

01-19-16, 04:48 PM

Well not really, as it's a federal offense for a non-citizen to vote.

Yes, but their children can vote, right?

Technically, they are actually debating the Constitutional legitimacy of his Executive Order; the ultimate decision will have only an incidental and rather minor effect on the whole immigration issue...
Thank you vienna ... if Obama wins this Executive order. Sounds more major than minor due to Trumps plan to deport everyone he can, plus reverse any of Obama's Executive orders.

If he wins that is and I seriously doubt that ... He sounds more like a chief petty officer than a captain of the ship. :o

Oberon

01-20-16, 03:41 AM

The GOP must be getting desperate, they just launched the Palin at Trump.
I think it bounced off the hull though.

Cybermat47

01-20-16, 07:08 AM

If he wins that is and I seriously doubt that ... He sounds more like a chief petty officer than a captain of the ship. :o

Not really. After all, CPOs generally don't get the entire British government despising them.

Skybird

01-20-16, 07:24 AM

Polls in WSJ and by NBC show that where one year ago just 23% of Republicans could imagine to elect Trump, it now is over 65%. In the same time, the closest Republican rival Jeb Bush dropped from 75 to around 40%.

Trump being elected becomes a scenario that one must realistically take into account.

German paper Die Welt asked a contemporary American political historian why this is so, he said that a recent study of his verified results from a comparable study from 1992, showing the decisive issues by which such candidates like Trump collect sympathies, are not ethnicity, income, educaiton, ideology - but only to factors showed statistical relevance, which are fear of terror, and a general sympathy for authoritarianism.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533

As I often said and indicated in various contexts: most people do not want own responsibility and freedom, they want to be led, even obey. By that they meld into the shine and glory of something that appears to them as being bigger than themselves, letting them forget their own smallness and irrelevance. The attractiveness of the mainstream, the mass, the organisation - it all founds a sense of own identity stronger than oneself as an individual really is. Every form of totalitarianism and authoritarianism works like this. The sidee3ffect is: it switches off ration and independent thinking, and replaces it with group dogma. Or as I put it: group size and IQ are inversely proportional.

Me thinks this sense of identity is even more important for many sympathisers of such concepts, than the craving for just objective security and a strong regime of law-and-order. Chaos means unpredictability of the future, means lack of safety and security. Authoritarian rule and obeying its ordewrs create an illusion of order that feeds the impression of that one "creates" the future" and can influence and manage the world's uncertainty as one sees fit.

Jimbuna

01-20-16, 09:58 AM

Trump being elected becomes a scenario that one must realistically take into account.

Yep, Corbyn defied all odds recently so it's not beyond the realms of imagination to think Trump can't/won't.

Onkel Neal

01-20-16, 10:14 AM

The GOP must be getting desperate, they just launched the Palin at Trump.
I think it bounced off the hull though.

I heard her speech on the radio....honestly, I could not believe it was real, it sounded like SNL. Not sure if I would want my candidate to be endorsed by Palin.

August

01-20-16, 10:46 AM

I heard her speech on the radio....honestly, I could not believe it was real, it sounded like SNL. Not sure if I would want my candidate to be endorsed by Palin.

If the GoP had anything to do with Palins endorsement then that's exactly what they want. It's no secret they are doing everything they can to torpedo Trumps candidacy.

nikimcbee

01-20-16, 12:23 PM

Trump needs to buy a caller id. When he gets any calls from alaska....call rejected.

vienna

01-20-16, 01:53 PM

Stalking horse anyone?:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-top-republicans-working-doggedly-help-bernie-sanders-204057214.html

I'm a bit surprised the RNC is so blatant...

<O>

vienna

01-20-16, 01:57 PM

I heard her speech on the radio....honestly, I could not believe it was real, it sounded like SNL. Not sure if I would want my candidate to be endorsed by Palin.

Saw the speech, also; you are right; I half way expected her to whip off the glasses and wig and reveal it was actually Tina Fey. :haha:

Something to consider after the speech: Is it at all possible Trump would select Palin to be his running mate in an effort to secure the fringe vote of the Palin followers?...

<O>

Onkel Neal

01-20-16, 02:31 PM

nikimcbee

01-20-16, 03:00 PM

It really makes me question trump's decision skills. He should get a with straining order against her. The look on his face is priceless though.

August

01-20-16, 03:47 PM

It really makes me question trump's decision skills. He should get a with straining order against her. The look on his face is priceless though.

"With straining" order? :)

AVGWarhawk

01-20-16, 03:49 PM

I don't know. I am not a political strategist by a long shot, but in this election, I really feel lost. We have Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton on one side, and Donald Trump and Ted Cruz on the other. There must be some verse in Revelation that covers this.

I'm beginning to think Hillary may be the best choice. If she can avoid indictment.

Tina Fey probably called her agent and announced her retirement from comedy after hearing Palin's speech: "How can I top that?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkKl-7Z1dg8

Here is my take. Hillary will be indicted for her email issues(sending TOP SECRET information on her personal server). Joe Biden and BO are very quiet. No endorsements for Hillary, etc. When Hillary is handed her indictment Biden will step in. If Hillary is not indicted that will be a huge punch in the nose for every American as well as the investigative body finding she had used an open server. Some will say it is past the time Biden can put in his bid as the rules states. We have see this administration has done with rules and laws. Bernie wants to give up to much free crap. He is lunatic left as Cruz is lunatic right. Trump has toned down his rhetoric but I still feel this is a PR stunt. Cruz will battle his birth place and citizenship until he is blue in the face.

Biden to take all.

Subnuts

01-20-16, 03:59 PM

So, right now, it looks like the most powerful person on the planet for the next four to eight years will be either:

A cold, unsympathetic liar whose last few years in politics have been incredibly sketchy.
A cranky old socialist with an incredibly small but vocal fan base.
A Canadian-born Cuban-American who hates immigrants, and has been the Gridlocker-in-Chief of the least popular Congress in history.
A billionaire with absolutely no political experience and multiple failed businesses under his belt, an incredibly thin skin, and whose main base is angry middle-age white people who are Totally Not Racist™.
A quack neurosurgeon who who hates science, has no political experience, and has essentially fallen off the face of the earth.
Dubya's brother who has spent $50 million on...something.
One of the other guys.

Reassuring guys, reassuring.

AVGWarhawk

01-20-16, 04:08 PM

Oberon

01-20-16, 04:13 PM

Platapus

01-20-16, 04:14 PM

Do your election officials check if person is citizen or not? I have odd feeling that answer is "no", if so: why?

Speaking as a Precinct Chief, no, I technically do not check if a person is a citizen. What I check is whether they are a registered voter.

It is up to the registrar to determine eligibility (e.g., citizenship) when they accept the voter's registration request.

eddie

01-20-16, 04:42 PM

I heard her speech on the radio....honestly, I could not believe it was real, it sounded like SNL. Not sure if I would want my candidate to be endorsed by Palin.

Now Trump just needs Michele Bachmann to endorse him, then he would have both quacks on his side,lol

Mr Quatro

01-20-16, 04:51 PM

Here is my take. Hillary will be indicted for her email issues(sending TOP SECRET information on her personal server). Joe Biden and BO are very quiet. No endorsements for Hillary, etc. When Hillary is handed her indictment Biden will step in. If Hillary is not indicted that will be a huge punch in the nose for every American as well as the investigative body finding she had used an open server. Some will say it is past the time Biden can put in his bid as the rules states. We have see this administration has done with rules and laws. Bernie wants to give up to much free crap. He is lunatic left as Cruz is lunatic right. Trump has toned down his rhetoric but I still feel this is a PR stunt. Cruz will battle his birth place and citizenship until he is blue in the face.

Biden to take all.

VP Joe Biden must know something he practically endorsed Bernie Sanders just last week and then he said he wished he had not bowed out of the race.

President Obama has already pissed off the FBI saying something about their investigation has ended a couple of months ago.

Hillary is still the front runner for the Democratic party ... remember Bernie Sanders is a socialist and is not running a party appeal campaign.

Trump and Cruz may be in the front running, but sleepy old Jeb Bush is the best choice for me.

I don't want another fence sitter like Obama, but I'm so thankful for all the boots that are not on the ground due to his holding back.

By the way did you hear that the war on isis is costing 11 million dollars a day?

As for Sarah Palin ... what a drag she will be. Trump does not represent the GOP ...
the GOP is not that dumb to make the same mistake twice :woot:

Torplexed

01-20-16, 08:53 PM

I heard her speech on the radio....honestly, I could not believe it was real, it sounded like SNL. Not sure if I would want my candidate to be endorsed by Palin.

My skin almost crawls when I hear Palin speak. Her speech cadence is so incoherent, muddled and disjointed. She was completely unschooled in the formalities of public speaking in 2008 and apparently nothing has changed since. She is not meant to be read either, even when it's an annotated transcript as her rambling screeching makes even less sense on the printed page. I guess she's meant to be experienced in person, if you can stand it.

I like McCain, but I don't know if I can ever forgive him for pulling her from the obscurity of Alaska and putting her in the national spotlight. :nope: If he had left her be, she might have gotten eaten by a grizzly by now.

Onkel Neal

01-20-16, 09:35 PM

So, right now, it looks like the most powerful person on the planet for the next four to eight years will be either:

A Canadian-born Cuban-American who hates ILLEGAL immigrants, and has been the Gridlocker-in-Chief of the least popular Congress in history.

Reassuring guys, reassuring.

You mischaracterized that. For some reason, everyone seems to gloss over the fact that a nation has laws and rules concerning immigration. No, Cruz does not "hate" immigrants".

vienna

01-20-16, 10:13 PM

...I like McCain, but I don't know if I can ever forgive him for pulling her from the obscurity of Alaska and putting her in the national spotlight. :nope: If he had left her be, she might have gotten eaten by a grizzly by now.

I like McCain, too, and would have voted for him, but the thought of Palin being " a heartbeat away" from occupying the Oval Office changed my mind quick. I still like McCain and I feel the choice of Palin was not his, but, rather, a choice made by the GOP/RNC wheeler-dealers who, for whatever reason, saddled a good candidate with a huge liability. Perhaps the GOP/RNC thought that, given his age, McCain might not be able to take the stress of the office if elected and, if he left, Palin would be a malleable little puppet/rubber stamp for whatever agenda they had, sort of like an Executive Office version of SCOTUS's Clarence Thomas ("Which way is Scalia voting? Ditto, me too, yes sir!"). When Reagan was President and the assassination attempt happened, a co-worker of mine opined he would not have been surprised if Regan was put in office just as a means of getting the person the wheeler-dealers really in office, Former CIA Director GHW Bush. When the whole McCain-Palin mess happened, I couldn't help but wonder if that co-worker might not have been on to something... :hmmm:

<O>

Oberon

01-21-16, 08:10 AM

Load Beck into tube one, target 'Cruz liner'...prepare to fire!

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/glen-beck-to-campaign-with-ted-cruz

AVGWarhawk

01-21-16, 12:34 PM

You mischaracterized that. For some reason, everyone seems to gloss over the fact that a nation has laws and rules concerning immigration. No, Cruz does not "hate" immigrants".

And as nutty as this sounds...I like Cruz. He always seems committed to what he believes. Sometimes to a fault. But who can't like a guy who filibusters with a reading of Dr. Seuss' "Green Eggs and Ham."? :haha:

I was a Ben Carson supporter but he has no fire and the desire does not appear to be there.

vienna

01-21-16, 03:56 PM

And as nutty as this sounds...I like Cruz. He always seems committed to what he believes. Sometimes to a fault. But who can't like a guy who filibusters with a reading of Dr. Seuss' "Green Eggs and Ham."? :haha:

I was a Ben Carson supporter but he has no fire and the desire does not appear to be there.

The main problem with a very large percentage of those described as "totally committed" is that they should be...

<O>

Oberon

01-21-16, 04:22 PM

The main problem with a very large percentage of those described as "totally committed" is that they should be...

<O>

Ja... :dead:

What's Rubio like? He seems to be slowly gaining some ground and seems...seems to not be a complete fruit-loop.

mapuc

01-21-16, 06:14 PM

August

01-21-16, 08:32 PM

A while ago some friends friend posted a statement on FB

Saying something like

If Trump win the GOP election and wins the election for President thousand if not hundreds of thousand American will leave USA.

Others are of course hoping to see him go all the way to the Oval office.

Markus

Thanks Markus, you've given me my first solid reason to vote for Trump. Most of those that would leave I would be glad to see go! :)

Torplexed

01-21-16, 08:45 PM

Ja... :dead:

What's Rubio like? He seems to be slowly gaining some ground and seems...seems to not be a complete fruit-loop.

He has a better chance than anyone else besides Cruz and Trump still in the race. Rubio doesn’t need to win New Hampshire or Iowa, but to move up nationally, he will need to finish ahead of Jeb Bush, John Kasich and Chris Christie by a clear margin. If Bush and Kasich depart the race after poor New Hampshire showings, Rubio could benefit enormously by consolidating support in their Florida and Ohio backyards.

The race on the GOP side is long overdue for a culling of candidates.

nikimcbee

01-21-16, 09:53 PM

My skin almost crawls when I hear Palin speak. Her speech cadence is so incoherent, muddled and disjointed. She was completely unschooled in the formalities of public speaking in 2008 and apparently nothing has changed since. She is not meant to be read either, even when it's an annotated transcript as her rambling screeching makes even less sense on the printed page. I guess she's meant to be experienced in person, if you can stand it.

I like McCain, but I don't know if I can ever forgive him for pulling her from the obscurity of Alaska and putting her in the national spotlight. :nope: If he had left her be, she might have gotten eaten by a grizzly by now.

I read on ta internetz, that Palin is a biiiig Torplexed cartoon fan. She's on her way to Seattle right now to endorse Torplexed cartoons.

A major news event?
Torplexed in grave danger?
Too the Batmobile!
http://www.johnbreneman.com//wp-content/uploads/2013/09/godzilla-palin.jpg

Platapus

01-22-16, 09:16 AM

STEED

01-22-16, 09:25 AM

Shes always good for a laugh. :haha:

"You Can actually See Russia From land here in Alaska "

:03:

AVGWarhawk

01-22-16, 09:37 AM

https://s15-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnbatitlechase.com%2Fbl og%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F01%2FNY-Times-Front-Page-Sarah-Palin-Donald-Trump-Im-With-Stupid.jpg&sp=71fd39e3720ac4377478a745855cc169

I can't think of a worse endorsement. However, Trump will need to embrace it since the up roar concerning his remarks in the past concerning women. IE, a face like that, etc.

Webster

01-22-16, 11:34 AM

Shes always good for a laugh. :haha:

"You Can actually See Russia From land here in Alaska "

:03:

are you even aware that that is indeed a factual and true statement? even Alaska tourism ads mention it in their advertisements.

there are indeed places in alaska where on a clear day you can stand on the Alaska shoreline and look out and see the Russian shore even though "some" wish to act like its a crazy untrue statement and some even go as far as to stretch the lie and say she said she could see it from her house.

she is just a good Christian who has outspoken Christian values like most of the country and haters just have to hate.

that said, she is no genius but then neither are those making fun of her.

no I wouldn't want her elected as my president, but the obsession with the left of going after her or family every time they get so much as a speeding ticket is just pathetic.

palin simply took a personal event, that was already being politicized by the left in national news stories around the country, and as she usually does, she used it as a way to reach out to others and call attention to the troubles that many soldiers are having when they come home and when they seek help, they are told they don't have proper VA resources to take care of them.

she never once said "Obama gave my son PTSD and that's why he got drunk and got arrested", but that's what everyone wanted to hear and imagined that she said, without ever listening to what she really said without predetermined bias, so they run with the narrative they want to believe and see reported by the left.

the biggest problem most people have with palin, weather they are willing to admit it or not is, she has good moral Christian values, loves freedom and the right to hunt and own guns, and above all believes in a smaller limited government and lower taxes. since its hard to attack someone based on these such widely held views across the country, they choose to attack her personally.

Mr Quatro

01-22-16, 11:48 AM

are you even aware that that is indeed a factual and true statement? even Alaska tourism ads mention it in their advertisements.

there are indeed places in alaska where on a clear day you can stand on the Alaska shoreline and look out and see the Russian shore even though "some" wish to act like its a crazy untrue statement and some even go as far as to stretch the lie and say she said she could see it from her house.

she is just a good Christian who has outspoken Christian values like most of the country and haters just have to hate.

that said, she is no genius but then neither are those making fun of her.

no I wouldn't want her elected as my president, but the obsession with the left of going after her or family every time they get so much as a speeding ticket is just pathetic.

palin simply took a personal event, that was already being politicized by the left in national news stories around the country, and as she usually does, she used it as a way to reach out to others and call attention to the troubles that many soldiers are having when they come home and when they seek help, they are told they don't have proper VA resources to take care of them.

she never once said "Obama gave my son PTSD and that's why he got drunk and got arrested", but that's what everyone wanted to hear and imagined that she said, without ever listening to what she really said without predetermined bias, so they run with the narrative they want to believe and see reported by the left.

the biggest problem most people have with palin, weather they are willing to admit it or not is, she has good moral Christian values, loves freedom and the right to hunt and own guns, and above all believes in a smaller limited government and lower taxes. since its hard to attack someone based on these such widely held views across the country, they choose to attack her personally.

Great feedback Webster ... your showing your passion for the truth. Most people just give one liners.

My only dislike for her is due to the failed run for VP with John McCain running against Obama in the 2008 campaign. Could John McCain have won without her? I think he would've had a better chance.

As for seeing Russia from Alaska wouldn't you have to be on one of the Aleutian Islands? Well at least I thought so till I looked it up:

http://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2015/07/27/13/aleutian-islands-earthquake.jpg

Webster

01-22-16, 11:52 AM

republican ticket

I see trump as being a moderate democrat, I say that he doesn't hold republican views on many things but he is about middle of the road on them, half conservative and half liberal depending on the topic. this used to be the definition of a moderate democrat and so that's how I view him. I think he will cut out most of the political crap going on and get rid of the political appointees for people who actually have brains and can do the job correctly. if nothing else that will fix most of this countries problems right there. I also think he will be in favor f many things I don't like but then so will all the rest and I don't think any of the other choices will change a single thing about how the government operates

I see cruz as a conservative republican who I was supporting until he started campaigning and then I heard his speeches where he compromised on many conservative issues and so I don't trust him not to "go along to get along" if he was elected just as all the others we elected quickly did.

carson is boring and has no voice, we don't need a librarian intellectual for president

Rubio is a pure sellout, whatever it takes and has no opinion other then what the polls say. same trash we have been electing for years.

the rest don't matter and shouldn't even still be in the race

democrat ticket

sanders is joseph stalin reincarnated, that pretty much says it all

Clinton is a crazy, power mad, sociopath, who has to win so she can avoid prison. if she were anything but a democrat, she would have been in jail the last 3 years already and facing life behind bars. but since she is a democrat, no evidence is enough, no facts are enough, even a video showing her admit it would be enough for any of her supporters to stop saying its all lies and a vast right wing conspiracy attacking her and making it all up.

when I watched her yesterday in the news saying she did not have secret info on her server I had flash backs of bill Clinton saying he did not have sex with monica lol. not to mention she blames republican operatives for it yet its a life long kool-aid drinking democrat who was appointed to office by Obama and voted in by the democrat controlled senate prior to the lastelection who came out and said she had tons of secret **** on her servers and knew it.

August

01-22-16, 12:36 PM

Left wing rag for a source but according to them you can see Russia across the Bering Strait...

...you can see Russia from the Tin City Air Force facility at Cape Prince of Wales, which is the westernmost point of the mainland Americas.The station chief at Tin City confirms that, for roughly half the year, you can see Siberian mountain ranges from the highest part of the facility.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2008/09/can_you_really_see_russia_from_alaska.html

vienna

01-22-16, 02:01 PM

vienna

01-22-16, 02:58 PM

William F. Buckley would be proud:

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/conservatives-unite-to-condemn-donald-trump-as-044852817.html

There are conservatives who are not raving loons...

BTW, "The National Review" is one of my favorite mags...

<O>

Platapus

01-22-16, 05:29 PM

The capacity for stupidity of American political figures never ceases to amaze me. Here is a whopping example:

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/trump-retweets-support-from-neo-nazi-white-164217608.html

First the Palin endorsement, then backing her using veterans and their struggles with PTSD as a political football, and now citing support form neo-Nazis. Is it possible Trump has gotten bored with the whole process and is now seeking to torpedo his POTUS run? Is he looking for a way out other than dropping out of his own accord and being labelled a quitter and failure? Could he be looking for a clamor in the press for him to step down so he can use the well-worn and over-used excuse of "it was the main-stream media's fault" so often resorted to by the Far-Right when their flawed and failed plans and efforts are held up to the light? So far, recently, Trump seems to be committing political suicide; and to what end?...

<O>

There are times when I think that Trump does not really want to be POTUS (after all it is far easier to criticize a president than to be one). Perhaps he just wanted to get his name in the press and write (hire a writer) for a few more books.

He makes these outlandish claims and then, to his chagrin, sees his numbers continue to rise. :o

So he makes more outlandish statements and his numbers continue to rise.

I think that is why Trump is associating himself with Palin.

He can't quit, but if he can get the GOP to dump him, that's even more fodder for his bitchin and probably a few more books.

What is easier/more profitable than criticizing a president? Criticizing a president after the opposing party dumped you.

If a democrat gets elected, he can complain
If a republican gets elected, he can complain

All the way to the bank.:salute:

No matter what happens, he comes out on the profitable end.. and that is all that Trump considers.... the art of the deal.

He can just entitle his books (and inevitably a TV show) "I told you so" and rake in the dough.

All this crumbles if he is actually elected POTUS and he has someone else criticizing him. :nope:

I think that is why we have such losers running for POTUS. It is no longer that enviable a position. POTUS needs to deal with an increasingly useless congress and with the advent of the Internets Tubes, massive smear campaigns accomplished far easier.

More money can be made in not being POTUS and criticizing than can be made as POTUS.

Most powerful man (woman) in the world? Not these days, heck not even the most powerful man (woman) in the United States any more.

Just my thoughts.

vienna

01-22-16, 06:29 PM

There are times when I think that Trump does not really want to be POTUS (after all it is far easier to criticize a president than to be one). Perhaps he just wanted to get his name in the press and write (hire a writer) for a few more books.

He makes these outlandish claims and then, to his chagrin, sees his numbers continue to rise. :o

So he makes more outlandish statements and his numbers continue to rise.

I think that is why Trump is associating himself with Palin.

He can't quit, but if he can get the GOP to dump him, that's even more fodder for his bitchin and probably a few more books.

What is easier/more profitable than criticizing a president? Criticizing a president after the opposing party dumped you.

If a democrat gets elected, he can complain
If a republican gets elected, he can complain

All the way to the bank.:salute:

No matter what happens, he comes out on the profitable end.. and that is all that Trump considers.... the art of the deal.

He can just entitle his books (and inevitably a TV show) "I told you so" and rake in the dough.

All this crumbles if he is actually elected POTUS and he has someone else criticizing him. :nope:

I think that is why we have such losers running for POTUS. It is no longer that enviable a position. POTUS needs to deal with an increasingly useless congress and with the advent of the Internets Tubes, massive smear campaigns accomplished far easier.

More money can be made in not being POTUS and criticizing than can be made as POTUS.

Most powerful man (woman) in the world? Not these days, heck not even the most powerful man (woman) in the United States any more.

Just my thoughts.

Dylan: "She knows there's no success like failure, and that failure's no success at all."...

There is much to what you wrote. I just recently saw somewhere a rewriting of and old adage: "If at first you don't succeed, just redefine 'success'". It seems to be more of a truism when you observe American politics and American standards and mores in general. We celebrate the low and seek to tear down the high; I once wrote a speech where I noted that Americans are great levelers: we take those who "pull themselves up by their bootstraps", laud them, and elevate them; once elevated, we then do our best to tear them down. We like things that are average: the average American family, the average American home, the average everything. We have a great liking for mediocrity, even to the extent of our government. We are wary of leaders with intelligence, thoughtful planning, foresight, or any other traits one would rationally expect from a leader. We are more susceptible to slick advertising-style gimmicks than a consideration of the actual worth or suitability of a candidate. Joseph de Maistre once noted: "Every country has the government it deserves." Given the sort of pap the general American voter devours with glee, yes, we have been getting the leaders we "deserve". As to why more capable individuals don't seek public office, why would anyone with intelligence willingly throw themselves into a mud pit?...

<O>

Oberon

01-22-16, 06:46 PM

Can't help but be reminded a little of an episode of Black Mirror:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Waldo_Moment_%28Black_Mirror%29

Onkel Neal

01-23-16, 02:11 PM

Can't help but be reminded a little of an episode of Black Mirror:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Waldo_Moment_%28Black_Mirror%29

Love that series, btw :up:

Bernie Sanders banner ads are showing up everywhere.
https://tpc.googlesyndication.com/simgad/12143086459441833118

Clever note: "Not the billionaire" :)

I like his slogan "Anyone who works 40 hours a week should not live in poverty'. Which I agree with, although I think 40 hours a week at minimum wage isn't exactly poverty. Perhaps in this era of homeless people with cell phones, some consider it poverty.

Edit: and then this!

Presidential Race Is Such a Mess That Bloomberg Considers Independent Run (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/01/23/michael_bloomberg_considers_independent_run_for_pr esidency.html)

Michael Bloomberg is sensing an opportunity. The billionaire former mayor of New York City has told close advisers to draw up plans for an independent campaign bid for the presidency, saying he would be willing to spend at least $1 billion on the effort, reports the New York Times, citing unnamed sources. Bloomberg is apparently very troubled with how things are turning out in the race, and has given himself a March deadline to decide whether to throw his hat in the ring.

The likelihood that the 73-year-old former mayor would join the race would increase if Republicans pick Donald Trump or Ted Cruz as their candidate and Democrats go with Bernie Sanders. Bloomberg believes that could give him an opening to run as an independent.

Holy smokes, could this get any weirder?

Oberon

01-23-16, 02:27 PM

A lot of stuff that Bernie has said is fairly straight-forward, but I can understand the whole 'OMG He's a communist' thing, because in the scheme of American politics he is very left wing, and that's very unusual. Since the birth of the Soviet Union anything left wing in America has generally been destroyed or dismantled as quickly as it appears, however this has slowly been changing. Perhaps its the anger at the inability to punish those responsible for the 2008 crash, the whole 1% phenomenon or perhaps it really is to do with liberal migrants, who can say?
I think, though, that Bernie as president would be a lot less radical than people think but probably a lot different to Obama who some people consider to be the prodigy of Lenin anyway.

Vice had a couple of good articles:
http://www.vice.com/read/we-asked-experts-what-would-actually-happen-if-bernie-sanders-were-president-384

http://www.vice.com/read/what-would-actually-happen-if-trump-became-president-721

Onkel Neal

01-23-16, 06:31 PM

I agree with you, the US would survive Sanders, or Hillary, but slippery slope. It's another step to government dependence by the population.

This time next year I will be poised to leave the work force and get some of that free college. It will be Dr. Stevens, to you.:know:

Oberon

01-23-16, 08:59 PM

Torplexed

01-23-16, 09:12 PM

Edit: and then this!

Presidential Race Is Such a Mess That Bloomberg Considers Independent Run (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/01/23/michael_bloomberg_considers_independent_run_for_pr esidency.html)

Holy smokes, could this get any weirder?

Another billionaire presidential candidate on the horizon? The race was needing one.

Interesting choice. He's got gravitas while Trump has none, but I fear my constitutional right to a Big Gulp coke might be in danger.

Platapus

01-24-16, 08:37 AM

Yikes, I don't think Bloomberg would be my choice for POTUS.

A co-worker asked me if I had a gun held to my head, who would I choose

Trump
Clinton

After some thought, I said I would choose the bullet to the head. :D

It got a laugh and not a few nods.

Mr Quatro

01-24-16, 10:06 AM

Bloomberg the billionaire? Running for POTUS?
Wow!

But then again I'm not so sure I wouldn't run myself ...
if I was a billionaire that is ... the people voting for Cruz
are really just voting against Donald Trump.

Someone said one time that the rich people choose who runs
for office and it is the poor people that elect them.

Which reminds me of the words of Solomon, "All things are vanity"

Ecclesiastes 1:1–8 (AV)
1 The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem.
2 Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.
3 What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?
4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.
5 The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.
6 The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually,
and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.
7 All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come,
thither they return again.
8 All things are full of labour; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing.

Torplexed

01-24-16, 10:27 AM

After some thought, I said I would choose the bullet to the head. :D

It got a laugh and not a few nods.

That is funny. Coincidentally, Trump noted that he could plug somebody with a bullet and not lose any support.

https://youtu.be/zOqj1aYDNjA

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody"

At a campaign stop in Iowa on Saturday, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said he could shoot someone in public and still not lose any voters.

“They say I have the most loyal people — did you ever see that? Where I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters.” he said. “It’s like incredible.” Trump said his supporters were smart and loyal, citing his strong poll numbers and criticizing his opponents as “soft” during the stop in Sioux Center, Iowa, according to reports by multiple outlets.

After leaving the event, Trump wrote on Twitter that the speech went well. “Just left Sioux Center, Iowa. My speech was very well received. Truly great people! Packed house- overflow!” he said.

I sometimes have to shake my head in a mix of amazement and shame. :nope:

Oberon

01-24-16, 01:04 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pinZNYxQeo&feature=youtu.be

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4WA534kpNY)

vienna

01-24-16, 03:54 PM

...It will be Dr. Stevens, to you.:know:

Will you be accepting Medicare?...

<O>

Onkel Neal

01-24-16, 04:52 PM

The public is dependent on something no matter which way you slice it, it's generally either big government or big business and both have shown themselves to be equally corrupt and incompetent. At least you can vote for some of the government members, you have to be a shareholder to vote for business members.

Wrong. No one is dependent on "big business".

Will you be accepting Medicare?...

<O>

Not going to be that kind of doctor ;) PhD History

ReallyDedPoet

01-24-16, 05:33 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pinZNYxQeo&feature=youtu.be

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4WA534kpNY)

Expect Fey to be popping up more with Palin around again. Lots of comedy fodder.

Oberon

01-24-16, 07:19 PM

Wrong. No one is dependent on "big business".

How do you keep your truck moving then? When you have a house who provides the power and the water? How are you typing on this forum?

Sure you could probably go live in a log cabin near a spring, catch your own food, do the whole Alaskan wilderness thing, but you're also pretty far away from government as well as the primary utilities in that case...and even so, if you want anything major doing you're going to have to get fuel unless you're prepared to go all Paul Bunyan on the place, and that fuel will not come from the little gas station owned by a family for ten generations, it will come from one of the major oil companies, and if you're in the middle of nowhere chances are the only way it will get to you will be by train which is owned by another major company. Also, unless you own a horse then you'll need some form of transportation, a car or some such thing, which is very very rarely built by a small factory by an old man and his sons, nope...again, large business.
Most of the food in the stores, except the locally caught meat and such, will be imported and it will have names on it like 'Campbell Soup Company' or 'General Mills', and they're not a small bakery company, nope.
Want to clean your teeth? Large business
Got a bad headache? Large business
Need a new pair of sunglasses? Most likely large business.

America probably hasn't had it quite as bad as the UK and Europe in how far the big chains have pushed the smaller homegrown businesses out of production by being able to absorb lower prices better, but it'll happen, because people will go where they can find stuff for the cheapest and nine times out of ten that is at a store owned by a big business company. Sure, there's incentives to 'buy local', and people always complain about the quality of 'cheap Chinese tat' but there's not much of a greater force than human greed and if people can spend less to get more, they will, and unfortunately a lot of the times that counts out the local producers because they simply cannot afford to sell stock at the price that the larger companies do and keep afloat.

In comparison, what do people rely on the government for? National security, foreign policy, and that's about it really, at the national level, obviously at the state level you've got education, policing and infrastructure which is more important to the average citizens daily life, but the stuff that powers the home, and goes into the stomachs of American people, that's not provided by the government, that's nearly always provided by big businesses.

Onkel Neal

01-25-16, 07:28 AM

How do you keep your truck moving then? When you have a house who provides the power and the water? How are you typing on this forum?

Sure you could probably go live in a log cabin near a spring, catch your own food, do the whole Alaskan wildzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

I guess the way you see it we are all dependent on everything, with it ultimately coming down to being dependent on the Sun and gravity.

No, there is a difference between a business transaction and dependency. I buy tires or pay a dentist, it is a business transaction, that is not dependency on big business. I work for a company, it is a business transaction. I work, they pay me, value is added to both parties. When someone is dependent on the government, no value is added, it is a drag on society. In many cases, a social safety net is a good thing for society, but when there are too many people who think that is their due, it will corrode the economy and ultimately, the society.

When I complete my tax forms, they ask me how many dependents I have, how many children are dependent on me. I'm sure you know what I meant when I said "another step to government dependence". The current trend and the goal of socialism is to make the people dependent on the government, instead of being self-reliant. So, now we have a large part of the population dependent on the govt for food, water, housing, utilities, health care, etc. Dependent on Daddy Government.

Oberon

01-25-16, 07:55 AM

I guess the way you see it we are all dependent on everything, with it ultimately coming down to being dependent on the Sun and gravity.

No, there is a difference between a business transaction and dependency. I buy tires or pay a dentist, it is a business transaction, that is not dependency on big business. I work for a company, it is a business transaction. I work, they pay me, value is added to both parties. When someone is dependent on the government, no value is added, it is a drag on society. In many cases, a social safety net is a good thing for society, but when there are too many people who think that is their due, it will corrode the economy and ultimately, the society.

When I complete my tax forms, they ask me how many dependents I have, how many children are dependent on me. I'm sure you know what I meant when I said "another step to government dependence". The current trend and the goal of socialism is to make the people dependent on the government, instead of being self-reliant. So, now we have a large part of the population dependent on the govt for food, water, housing, utilities, health care, etc. Dependent on Daddy Government.

I see what you mean, it is a mutually beneficial arrangement in terms of business needs custom just as much as custom needs business. Whereas reliance on social security just takes from the state and doesn't put back in, but of course it was never meant to be that way, since social security is meant to be a safety net, not a safety bed.
I would refute though that the goal of socialism is the make people dependent upon the state, the goal of socialism is to make the state work for the people, so that there are no barriers to entry into state sponsored entities. The true goal is to balance out the inequality curve in society so that wealth and the access to wealth is spread out more evenly and inequality, be it through wealth, social status, gender or race is made a thing of the past.
America has conquered a great deal of these monsters, we all have, but inequality is a problem that's only gotten worse and I think is going to be one of the major problems that society will face as we progress into the 21st century.

Of course, socialism on paper is often greatly different to socialism off paper, I am a socialist on paper, and yet I look at the Soviet Union as a bad example of socialism. I don't believe in people living purely on welfare unless they are medically unfit for work, I don't believe in government owning every single resource in society, and I can understand why things work in America as they do. However, I believe in justice and equality, I believe that we are all born equal and we all die equal and that there should be little in the middle that differentiates us, so why should there be such a dramatic unbalance in the distribution of wealth? Of course, taking all the wealth from the top and putting it on the bottom is daft, but leaving it all at the top is akin to trying to balance a pyramid upside down, it's going to eventually fall over. Some of that wealth needs to come back down, and not a trickle ala Reagan, but a steadier flow, because so far that trickle is barely a drop per year.

Oh, and I've been waiting for a chance to use this:

http://i.imgur.com/EkzEsN3.gif

Onkel Neal

01-25-16, 08:42 AM

Ok, I'll meet you halfway. I agree with what you say, and you said it well. Justice and equality are essential to any peaceful society, and as much of a capitalist as I am, I believe that capitalism needs a few (as few as possible) regulators to prevent overly ambitious people from breaking the system. Left unchecked, a capitalist society could become as distorted as a communist society, people are people. Somewhere there has to be a functional balance.

.
.

I like that gif, Sanders is a hoot. Although, I would not characterize it as being fearful of Socialism, fear is the wrong word, imo. More like pissed off.

This gif shows my view of socialism trying to scare a conservative.
http://i.imgur.com/qSOfDuL.gif

Oberon

01-25-16, 09:02 AM

Sounds good to me, checks and balances are definitely important for both capitalism and socialism. :yeah:

Ha, and good point with the gif. :haha:

Jimbuna

01-25-16, 04:20 PM

Best gif I've seen for a good while :har:

Oberon

01-26-16, 02:18 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufeliruQBDg

Nippelspanner

01-26-16, 02:51 PM

Haha, good one!

Onkel Neal

01-26-16, 05:36 PM

Another billionaire presidential candidate on the horizon? The race was needing one.

Interesting choice. He's got gravitas while Trump has none, but I fear my constitutional right to a Big Gulp coke might be in danger.

This may be the end for Big Gulps, but after listening to analysis today, I think Bloomberg would be a contender. Imagine if it's Trump/Cruz vs Hillary/Sanders. If Bloomberg were to get in and mount a serious campaign, it's no stretch that he could get 30% of the vote. And if no candidate reaches 270, the election gets thrown into the House, where I would bet the House Republicans would go for him over Sanders/Trump/Cruz.

Should be interesting,.....:hmmm:

Mr Quatro

01-26-16, 07:16 PM

Bloomberg likes to make noises to run to test the waters, but his main point is, "If Hillary Clinton doesn't get the democratic nomination"

That's not going to happen :arrgh!:

I'll post my vote over in the: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=224046

subsim 2016 election contest

Jimbuna

01-26-16, 07:28 PM

Trump for POTUS :O:

Onkel Neal

01-26-16, 07:52 PM

Torplexed

01-26-16, 09:43 PM

In another example of petulance which does not bode well for a possible President, Trump abruptly withdraws from Fox debate in Iowa.

MARSHALLTOWN, Iowa (Reuters) - U.S. Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump on Tuesday abruptly withdrew from a debate with party rivals this week out of anger at host Fox News , leaving the last encounter before Iowa's first-in-the-nation nominating contest without the front-runner.

Trump's campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, told reporters after a combative news conference held by the candidate that Trump would definitely not be participating in the debate scheduled for Thursday.

During the news conference before he addressed a large crowd in Marshalltown, Iowa, Trump expressed irritation that Fox News planned to leave in place as a moderator the anchor Megyn Kelly, whose questioning of Trump at a debate last August angered him.

He also expressed displeasure at a Fox News statement on Monday night saying Trump would have to learn sooner or later that "he doesn’t get to pick the journalists" and that "we’re very surprised he’s willing to show that much fear about being questioned by Megyn Kelly.”

No end of weird little turns in this race.

ReallyDedPoet

01-26-16, 10:00 PM

He wants to take on ISIS, yet is scared of Megyn Kelly....

Torplexed

01-26-16, 10:11 PM

He wants to take on ISIS, yet is scared of Megyn Kelly....

It would be a hoot if FOX kept an empty podium up with his name on it at the debate.

"Mr. Trump, your rebuttal----" *crickets*

AVGWarhawk

01-27-16, 12:19 PM

Well, she could be under indictment before the convention :)

She should be. However, we have seen the mincing of words and teflon coating the Clintons have.

Disgrace.

AVGWarhawk

01-27-16, 12:21 PM

Have fun with this.....

https://scontent.fash1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtf1/v/t1.0-9/12316169_928849020502481_819028596813151740_n.jpg? oh=c81afeed0165d3134aa2e9cbc3560e23&oe=5739E69E

Mr Quatro

01-27-16, 02:21 PM

Well, she could be under indictment before the convention :)

The USJ department takes a long time to investigate and then refuse to prosecute the problem.

Justice Dept Refuses to Prosecute Holder Over Gun Scandal
The Justice Department said on Friday it would not prosecute Attorney General Eric Holder for refusing to turn over to Congress documents about a gun-running scandal to Mexico. Holder, who heads the Justice Department, was cited on Thursday for …
News Max · 6/29/2012

Notice key words from above news thread 31/2 years ago:

In a letter to House Speaker John Boehner, Holder's deputy said that the attorney general properly withheld the documents under "executive privilege," which allows President Barack Obama to keep private documents on internal government discussions.

"The department will not bring the Congressional contempt citation before a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute the attorney general," said Deputy Attorney General James Cole.

She will be headed for the Democratic convention in July just six more months and then the election is November 3rd just ten months.

She could face a Nixon era early, but I don't think so.

If this election is a circus what could 2020 be if Trump wins ... just thinking about it causes me to :haha::o

Oberon

01-27-16, 02:53 PM

https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/12654163_415955901946898_1820269522700454107_n.jpg ?oh=49ba01d761a73539df984f2d366cbdf0&oe=57353BE8

ReallyDedPoet

01-27-16, 04:42 PM

http://s15.postimg.org/n04w6jl8r/12651267_1232218833455759_4374765201814754217_n.jp g

Dan D

01-27-16, 05:15 PM

Funny thing is, when I post the Titanic Magazin (German Satire) joke: „Trump is living a polymorphous-perverse symbiosis with his ferret toupee“ on facebook this gets instantly deleted because what?

Because the words „polymorphous-perverse“ appear, I guess. :woot:

Tits, Tits. the birds okay?

"Polymorphous perversity is a psychoanalytic concept proposing the ability to gain sexual gratification outside socially normative sexual behavior" according to wikipedia. Got it Facebook?

Oberon

01-27-16, 05:31 PM

https://archive.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1385/85/1385852915805.jpg

Platapus

01-27-16, 05:59 PM

He wants to take on ISIS, yet is scared of Megyn Kelly....

To be accurate, he wants to send other people and other people's kids to take on ISIS.

Beware of old men (women) eager to send young men (women) off to fight wars.

Onkel Neal

01-27-16, 06:02 PM

To be accurate, he wants to send other people and other people's kids to take on ISIS.

Beware of old men (women) eager to send young men (women) off to fight wars.

Well said. :yep:

ReallyDedPoet

01-27-16, 07:56 PM

To be accurate, he wants to send other people and other people's kids to take on ISIS.

Beware of old men (women) eager to send young men (women) off to fight wars.

:up:

vienna

01-27-16, 08:07 PM

True nearly fifty years ago, still true now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40JmEj0_aVM

<O>

Oberon

01-27-16, 08:15 PM

True nearly fifty years ago, still true now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40JmEj0_aVM

<O>

Indeed. :nope:

And Bob wasn't that wrong either:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exm7FN-t3PY

Sailor Steve

01-27-16, 09:09 PM

True nearly fifty years ago
I remember exactly where I was and what I was doing when I first heard that. I was too young to vote then, though they lowered the voting age to 18 the same year I hit 21.

Kptlt. Neuerburg

01-28-16, 12:47 AM

Indeed. :nope:

And Bob wasn't that wrong either:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exm7FN-t3PY
Dylan was right more then once. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmmLWsAvoj8

Webster

01-28-16, 02:49 PM

something to watch, especially those who think Donald trump just changed his views to run for president.

its quite eye opening for anyone who isn't biased already

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOKi5YeNtRI

Rockin Robbins

01-28-16, 02:57 PM

http://s15.postimg.org/n04w6jl8r/12651267_1232218833455759_4374765201814754217_n.jp g
That's a way to characterize it. But you'd be wrong. Richard Nixon skipped the debate before the Iowa primary too and was elected President after sweeping the primaries. So this has precedents and has nothing to do with who is afraid of who. It's all strategy, positioning and negotiation.

It'll be fun to watch what the other candidates do with Trump missing from the platform. Will they attack a paper tiger, just not mention him or some combination of the two? It's a very interesting situation.

This will toss a monkey wrench both in the candidates plans and the moderators' plans for the night. The resulting chaos will be very entertaining and, if we're lucky, informative.

vienna

01-28-16, 04:27 PM

I remember exactly where I was and what I was doing when I first heard that. I was too young to vote then, though they lowered the voting age to 18 the same year I hit 21.

Same here. I was really quite irritated it took so long to lower the age and then it happened when I would have been eligible under the old law. The only consolation was the fact I could then gleefully vote against Richard Nixon. He won the election and the US population lost the election. I recall when Nixon first won in 1968, the satirical comedy show Laugh-In was still on the air (the show and its stars and producers would later wind up on Nixon's infamous "Enemies List"); they did a sketch where Dick Martin walked up to an airline ticket desk:

Ticket Clerk: Good day, sir, how may I help you?
Martin: I'd like to buy some tickets for the first flight out of the country.
Clerk: Very well, sir. How many are in your party?
Martin: Oh, about 200 million Americans...

<O>