I'm kinda with Sammitch in supporting Kasich. I differ a little bit in that I think he is the GOP's best shot--short of the economy getting flushed down the crapper this summer--to carry the battleground states. Trump, imo, isn't going to see a ceiling until August (assuming he gets the nod). I just don't see a scenario--once again, short of the economy going into meltdown--that a Ted Cruz can carry states like Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, and Florida. While I understand these odds are still against him, I think Kasich could--on the other hand--put places like Michigan and Pennsylvania into play. If the GOP candidate can't put the Democrats on the defensive in these states then this is all a big waste of time and money.
All that said, I've got a few hours to decide whether to vote my conscience or attempt to be a spoiler vote in the primary with the other guys.
Do you really see Obama being capable of being president?
Like it or lump it, he's been doing that job for fucking seven years...dude. Time to get some new material.
Actually pariahs point is well taken in the context of the discussion we were having. If Obama-who arguably had less experience than Trump prior to his (Obama's) election-could serve 8 years as president there's no reason to assume Trump isn't capable of being president.
Do you really see Obama being capable of being president?
Like it or lump it, he's been doing that job for fucking seven years...dude. Time to get some new material.
Actually pariahs point is well taken in the context of the discussion we were having. If Obama-who arguably had less experience than Trump prior to his (Obama's) election-could serve 8 years as president there's no reason to assume Trump isn't capable of being president.
What are you counting as experience? His years as a reality show host? He's not a leader nor does he have the temperament to become one. Probably his biggest political achievement previously was leading the charge that Obama was not a us citizen.
Cruz needs to win Missouri or Kasich's win in Ohio does little to stop Trump getting to a non-contested convention. Trump wins and he can get around a 250+ delegate lead on Cruz. The places left don't play to his base strengths so I don't see him being able to do enough to close the gap. So, even if you hate Cruz, you have to pull for him in Missouri tonight if you hate Donald Trump more.
No, Pariah worded it to sound as if Obama hasn't been doing his job. It isn't that. He has done his job for seven years. He just hasn't done it to Pariah's liking.
According to the line you guys pushed about Obama's inexperience over the past eight years, the only person really qualified to be in the race is Kasich...
Pretty sure Missouri is a mixed with winner take all popular vote and delegates awarded for winning CDs.
The silence from the establishment today is deafening. With Rubio out, many are packing it in on the presidential primary and focusing on holding the Senate and keep projected House losses--while maintaining a majority--to a minimum. Rick Scott backed Trump. All Cruz got was a top Rubio staffer and private prayers from SC's Nikki Haley. It is like they all know that getting on board with Cruz is like hopping on board with the Ferryman. He can't win, period.
But, oh, it isn't for want of trying on the Cruz pundits' parts. The new high point for delusion is that--in actuality--Ted has over seven hundred candidates! No, seriously. It is completely unfounded assertion that any vote against Trump can never actually be a vote for him so really the overwhelming majority of those delegates would go to Cruz. So, really, he is the one with all the momentum despite not winning a single race yesterday.
By the way, did I mention that Trump has an impervious ceiling in the low forties that I had to completely make up for him after he broke his mid-thirties ceiling that I pretended to know that he had a few weeks ago? Did I remember to add that the Cruz campaign is the only campaign to have consistently beaten the Trump campaign on occasion? Also, do not forget that every remaining vote out there is clearly a #NeverTrump vote. I'm super duper cereal.
Do you really see Obama being capable of being president?
Like it or lump it, he's been doing that job for fucking seven years...dude. Time to get some new material.
Actually pariahs point is well taken in the context of the discussion we were having. If Obama-who arguably had less experience than Trump prior to his (Obama's) election-could serve 8 years as president there's no reason to assume Trump isn't capable of being president.
Says the guy who thinks I'm going to let Hillary buttsex me so I feel like one of the cool kids. Obama had a decade of civil service on his record prior to winning the WH in 2008. I know you guys like to just toss around his time as a community organizer, but the guy has a record of service if you fuckers could get your head out of your ass long enough to pay attention to it.
Seriously? This from the guy that has turned into Pariah's elderly bitch? Sorry for trying to help you guys realize that turd ideas are turd ideas and they take on an extra shitty quality when presented by turd candidates. I'll repeat...the next four to eight years of Hillary is totally on you guys. I'm sure she thanks you for all your hard work and support by way of delusional opposition.
Pretty sure Missouri is a mixed with winner take all popular vote and delegates awarded for winning CDs.
The silence from the establishment today is deafening. With Rubio out, many are packing it in on the presidential primary and focusing on holding the Senate and keep projected House losses--while maintaining a majority--to a minimum. Rick Scott backed Trump. All Cruz got was a top Rubio staffer and private prayers from SC's Nikki Haley. It is like they all know that getting on board with Cruz is like hopping on board with the Ferryman. He can't win, period.
But, oh, it isn't for want of trying on the Cruz pundits' parts. The new high point for delusion is that--in actuality--Ted has over seven hundred candidates! No, seriously. It is completely unfounded assertion that any vote against Trump can never actually be a vote for him so really the overwhelming majority of those delegates would go to Cruz. So, really, he is the one with all the momentum despite not winning a single race yesterday.
By the way, did I mention that Trump has an impervious ceiling in the low forties that I had to completely make up for him after he broke his mid-thirties ceiling that I pretended to know that he had a few weeks ago? Did I remember to add that the Cruz campaign is the only campaign to have consistently beaten the Trump campaign on occasion? Also, do not forget that every remaining vote out there is clearly a #NeverTrump vote. I'm super duper cereal.
All hail your new Cheeto-faced Overlord!
This all depends on how people will react to Kasich. Not very well I bet. But we'll see just how much Soros' money can boost his numbers--and if Cruz can take his votes.
Originally Posted By: iggy
Obama had a decade of civil service on his record prior to winning the WH in 2008. I know you guys like to just toss around his time as a community organizer
The desperation...
Equating community organizing/agitating to "civil service" is like calling Saul Alinsky a public official.
I guess you really can't tell the difference between "occupying a position" and "doing a job". So you have to resort to this kinda bullshit.
Quote:
I'll repeat...the next four to eight years of Hillary is totally on you guys. I'm sure she thanks you for all your hard work and support by way of delusional opposition.
G-man accuses you of being willing to take Hillary's thrusting manhood and--as an argumentative response--you (un)subtly shill for her by attacking Trump the same way Rove and friends were doing leading up to the primaries--when he made fools of all of them.
Just curious G-man but do you really see Trump being capable of being President?
Yes. He's a gasbag (and I know gasbags per Sammitch) but he's not stupid. He'll surround himself with advisors and pretty much be a figurehead.
I also suspect (were he to be elected) you'll end up liking him as president more than I will. I say that because I tend to believe he's really a Bloomberg style liberal to moderate who's telling the populists what they want to hear right now.
He's already spent to much time cultivating the politics of fear that there is zero chance of me liking him at all. He's not a good person and I think there's a big enough chunk of your party that feels that way too where he's not going to be President.
I don't know who "you guys" are, nor do I know what wording you're referring to.
I simply asked MEM (and you) what Obama's presidential "capab[ility]" is.
It's there you just refuse to acknowledge it. Trump works with fear and hate. That isn't what our country needs and it wouldn't certainly make us great.
I voted Trump. I considered Cruz, but ultimately, I can't see Cruz (however conservative he is) rallying cooperation from other Republicans, let alone rallying Democrats to join in legislation. Trump I see as a guy with the personality to inspire support, or by his popularity nationwide, leverage their cooperation. I think Trump would be conservative on economic issues, and probably more liberal (or at least more hands-off) on social issues like gay rights and abortion. And I see Trump as a president that nations like Russia, China, Iran and North Korea would think twice about messing with. Where Obama is all too predictable and easy to intimidate, these rogue nations would be uncertain and fearful of what Trump as president would do in response to their provocations.
Rubio lost me a long time ago with his immigration plan. Kasich, while arguably the most competent on many other issues, made clear in the Fox News debate that he also would completely cave as president to illegals. He said "it's impossible to round them all up." But as I've said repeatedly, it's actually quite easy to eliminate ongoing illegal immigration, and get rid of those already here:
1) Use 7,000-10,000 National Guard to secure the southern border. 2) Build a double fence along the entire border, and begin charging $ 1 to each person who crosses the border to pay for its construction and maintenance. 3) Enforce heavy fines on employers of illegals. With this, employers will be afraid to hire illegals. And without work, they will be forced to return to their home countries. 4) Use INS to round up those who do not self-deport. 5) Add an amendment to the Constitution, that only the children of those who are legally in this country are entitled to citizenship at birth. That those born here to illegals are not entitled to that right. That would eliminate the burden of 300,000 "anchor babies" born in this country every year (10% of all U.S. births!) that create a path toward citizenship for their entire extended families.
It's not "impossible". The only thing blocking the possibility is the lack of will to do so.
Do you really see Obama being capable of being president?
Like it or lump it, he's been doing that job for fucking seven years...dude. Time to get some new material.
Actually pariahs point is well taken in the context of the discussion we were having. If Obama-who arguably had less experience than Trump prior to his (Obama's) election-could serve 8 years as president there's no reason to assume Trump isn't capable of being president.
At least Trump is not a cultural Marxist (or a disciple of Saul Alinsky, anti-Colonialism, liberation theology, Frank Marshall Davis and William Ayers) dedicated to crippling America, and transferring its wealth to third-world nations.
Just curious G-man but do you really see Trump being capable of being President?
Yes. He's a gasbag (and I know gasbags per Sammitch) but he's not stupid. He'll surround himself with advisors and pretty much be a figurehead.
I also suspect (were he to be elected) you'll end up liking him as president more than I will. I say that because I tend to believe he's really a Bloomberg style liberal to moderate who's telling the populists what they want to hear right now.
He's already spent to much time cultivating the politics of fear that there is zero chance of me liking him at all. He's not a good person and I think there's a big enough chunk of your party that feels that way too where he's not going to be President.
How is "let's make America great again", pushing for sensible economic policy, for bringing jobs back to the U.S., for a strong military, and for sensible foreign policy, the "politics of fear"?
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Just curious G-man but do you really see Trump being capable of being President?
Yes. He's a gasbag (and I know gasbags per Sammitch) but he's not stupid. He'll surround himself with advisors and pretty much be a figurehead.
I also suspect (were he to be elected) you'll end up liking him as president more than I will. I say that because I tend to believe he's really a Bloomberg style liberal to moderate who's telling the populists what they want to hear right now.
He's already spent to much time cultivating the politics of fear that there is zero chance of me liking him at all. He's not a good person and I think there's a big enough chunk of your party that feels that way too where he's not going to be President.
Oh bullshit. If he comes out with some sufficiently pro gay policy you'll swoon.
All the while this is going on, Republican establishment seeks to sneak Ryan in through the back door while Hillary loyalist delegates disenfranchise voters.
I think this commentary by O'Reilly from Monday, April 4th, on the rise of Trump...
...does a good job of explaining not only what caused Trump to run, but also what has made his run over the last 6 months so successful. If the GOP at multiple turns had not betrayed its own base, Trump likely would not have run, nor would the public (including the GOP voter-base) be so receptive to him.
Likewise on the Democrat side. The voter-base, beyond being "angry", is also terrified of what lies ahead. We've had interest rates pretty much at zero for 10 years, and "quantitative easing" printing money for banks to lend and keep the economy going, and to buy our own treasury bills that Japan and China are no longer buying. There is great concern that we are heading for another depression, or worse, such as the collapse of the U.S. dollar, or a wider Islamic war that could bring Iran, Russia or China into the mix.
And from that perspective, when we're already headed for the cliff with the status quo candidates, taking a risk on Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders becomes a lot more palatable. A wildcard that at least has a chance of changing course away from the cliff.
Trump crushes the competition in New York and looks to take about 90 of 95 delegates. Cruz is right at or just over the mathematical probability point...probably should be hoping there isn't film of him saying Kasich should get out of the race because he can't mathematically win. Kasich prevents Trump from winning all the delegates...closes gap on Rubio.
Hillary cruises to victory. Sanders's looks more and more like Don Quixote.
Sanders is pretty much out at this point. He outspent Clinton and still lost. He's where she was at for the 08 campaign. My guess is he'll stay in but the fight is done and the tone of his campaign will mellow out. As for the GOP, no surprise that Trump won over Cruz. It's a fight to see who will lose to Clinton, lol
I guess Democrat voters prefer an indictable candidate.
All bets are off if FBI investigators move for indictment.
The FBI can only recommend an indictment. The decision whether to present the case to a grand jury or seek an indictment will have to come from AG Loretta Lynch. Do you really believe the most politicized Justice Department in history would make such a move against their presumptive nominee?
Wasn't the most politicized Justice Department in history Bush's? Sheesh, at one point that administration was even caught trying to make PBS conservative. As for the FBI recommending an indictment, I'm sure that in itself would be enough to sink Clinton's chances of winning the general. If that doesn't happen though she's good. I've read some reporting on the matter and unless there's something yet uncovered I don't see the FBI doing what you guys are hoping for.
Lol, says the guy who draws a paycheck from the government.
Please, by all means, lets have a discussion on the need for a military vs the need for a department that didn't even receive a congressional charter until the late 1800s.
The DOJ is a pet organization filled with cronies that answer to one person. No different than the ATF or the DHS--or even the CIA when it was first chartered under Truman.
Please, by all means, lets have a discussion on the need for a military vs the need for a department that didn't even receive a congressional charter until the late 1800s.
You forget, Pariah, people like MEM (and the Clintons) loathe the military.
That's not true but you go ahead and enjoy creating false attacks G-man. Trump really is the candidate you deserve. And Pariah keep taking that paycheck from the government you hate, lol.
Please, by all means, lets have a discussion on the need for a military vs the need for a department that didn't even receive a congressional charter until the late 1800s.
You forget, Pariah, people like MEM (and the Clintons) loathe the military.
Originally Posted By: M E M
That's not true...
The Secret Service who guarded the Clintons say otherwise:
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
