|
AATREK CURES KIDS posted:I think it's hilarious that he wants to establish a traditional Christian theocracy, but his position on marijuana is to the left of Obama. His position on abortion is to the left of numerous Republicans, for that matter. He at least acknowledges the idea that life of the mother might possibly matter.
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
Not to mention that he wants to increase school budgets and teacher's compensation.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
Yeah, that platform had me going: "Huh. Not so bad, that sounds pretty reasonable."  "Well, that was bad, but this part is Not terrible." 
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
My favorite part was the vague but ominous "review several laws including several statute-of-limitations". I mean after spelling out such fundamental changes to American society, what could possibly be so offensive that he's like, "Better hold that one back, don't want to scare anybody."
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
Kaal posted:My favorite part was the vague but ominous "review several laws including several statute-of-limitations". I mean after spelling out such fundamental changes to American society, what could possibly be so offensive that he's like, "Better hold that one back, don't want to scare anybody." That is weird, shouldn't Christians be in favor of the statute of limitations? You did something wrong a long time ago, but have kept on the straight and narrow since then. All you need is to ask forgiveness between a and b and that's a standard Christian redemption story.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
All courts to be replaced with confessionals/baptismal fonts. Also, his idea of 'christianity' as a homogenous unit is quaintly childish.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:That is weird, shouldn't Christians be in favor of the statute of limitations? You did something wrong a long time ago, but have kept on the straight and narrow since then. All you need is to ask forgiveness between a and b and that's a standard Christian redemption story. Christians of his ilk tend to be much more about god's wrath and punishment of the wicked (however defined) than redemption and forgiveness.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:All courts to be replaced with confessionals/baptismal fonts.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
Kaal posted:My favorite part was the vague but ominous "review several laws including several statute-of-limitations". I mean after spelling out such fundamental changes to American society, what could possibly be so offensive that he's like, "Better hold that one back, don't want to scare anybody." He was going to spell it out more clearly, but his legal team convinced him Margaret Atwood might sue for breach of copyright.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:That is weird, shouldn't Christians be in favor of the statute of limitations? You did something wrong a long time ago, but have kept on the straight and narrow since then. All you need is to ask forgiveness between a and b and that's a standard Christian redemption story. American fundamentalism has more in common with Hernán Cortés and Francisco Pizarro's brand of christianity, than anything coherent.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Your issue here is you may be assuming he considers those other people to be Christians, not heretics. Oh, he almost assuredly does. But those whacky protestants - the true heir to the early church is a highly contentious title. I wonder how restrictive this christian utopia will be? I guess there would have to be a 'department of religion' added to the government and then obviously have to hear arguments about all the wonderful, myriad facets of protestantism and who should be put to death and how exactly it should be done. Stoning? Hanging? Drowning? And what of the jews? They never seem to fare well in these religious upheavals. I wonder how far you would have to be from whatever flavor of protestantism he is for just absolute annihilation. I wonder if he'd send all the mormons to the gas chambers for Mass Heresy. Or is he cool with the mormons? Oh, what a brave new world. At least my right to purchase firearms won't be abrogated so I can blow my loving head off. EDIT: And the best part of all, military assistance to Israel to rebuild the temple! Hooray! Full Battle Rattle fucked around with this message at 19:40 on May 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
It really is adorable that Rand Paul is being talked about like a legitimate candidate for 2016.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 15:04
|
|
|
What's primary season without the Paul family?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:It really is adorable that Rand Paul is being talked about like a legitimate candidate for 2016. Given the alternatives, he might actually be.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
Seriously. Their "serious" options currently are Christie and Jeb Bush. (In a vacuum Jeb might actually be a serious option but the US isn't the Philippines, at least not yet.)
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 16:06
|
|
|
Tempest_56 posted:Given the alternatives, he might actually be. Except that he has a fatal flaw with literally every single possible consistency, so no, he won't be.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Except that he has a fatal flaw with literally every single possible consistency, so no, he won't be. Except that he has fewer than everybody else, especially in terms of surviving the primaries.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
JEB(!) is the kind of candidate that Michelle Rhee would be proud of. Vouchers, balkanized/standardized tests (turns out the state is always in the bottom quartile) but when adjusting for race the students are in the top half or so - with minorities doing better than whites. Keep in mind this is not a direct comparison but a "25th among whites" and "23rd among blacks" so it's a scale full of thumbs given the nation as a whole. Lies, drat lies, statistics.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Except that he has fewer than everybody else, especially in terms of surviving the primaries. No, he doesn't. He has candidacy ending flaws with GOP base constituencies which other candidates don't.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:No, he doesn't. He has candidacy ending flaws with GOP base constituencies which other candidates don't. Why does he lose to: -Rubio -Jeb -Cruz -Christie -Santorum -Bachmann -Comedy Mitch Daniels ?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
Kaal posted:My favorite part was the vague but ominous "review several laws including several statute-of-limitations". I mean after spelling out such fundamental changes to American society, what could possibly be so offensive that he's like, "Better hold that one back, don't want to scare anybody." Mine was "God will be asked to be an integral part of the government of the U.S." because it struck me as so literal. Like they would hold some kind of giant ceremony on the capitol steps imploring the almighty to come and run the government for them, speaking in tongues and becoming increasingly desperate as he fails to manifest himself.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Why does he lose to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9U4FTd-1m-o & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27r0y8hZGRo Not the content mind you, the base eats that poo poo up. It's the fact that he even spoke to that godless lesbian.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9U4FTd-1m-o & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27r0y8hZGRo Also he has expressed discomfort with drone strikes against Americans in a way that makes it seem like he might be against it if done by a white/GOP president. So, even though he's actually totally cool with such action (so long as the appropriate FISA-like rubber stamp panels of judges say there's a crime in progress) he said it was bad and used nonpartisan words. Ergo he is liable to dispute the power of a GOP executive.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
I'm reading "Before The Storm" by Rick Perlstein about the Goldwater phenomenon right now. Being on the opposite side of the so-called party "establishment" rarely works out, but back then it was easier to shut down an insurgent due to the arcane primary and convention system (it's how we got President Eisenhower and not Taft). Goldwater needed a perfect storm of Bircher anger, anti-Civil Rights anger, the birth of the insurgent YAF and William F. Buckley machine, and the support of Reagan and John Wayne in California to barely beat Rockefeller. Paul has the few remaining Paultards who didn't turn on him over being too close to the GOP leadership and a weakening Tea Party. He may not even get all of them if a Bachman or Herman Cain or Huckabee runs. It's Jeb!s for the taking.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Except that he has a fatal flaw with literally every single possible consistency, so no, he won't be. Last time around our 'serious' contenders included an insane religious extremist who hadn't held office in five years, a pizza czar who quoted Pokemon, a woman who publicly stated that God directly spoke to her enough to make her a saint twice over, and Newt loving Gingrich. Ron Paul (kill youre parents) was strong enough to make a credible impact, despite being a fairly obvious madman. We have crossed the Rubicon of insanity. Rand Paul will not win, but you're deluding yourself if you think he can't wage a reasonable fight against the likes of Ted Cruz and Chris Christie.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Why does he lose to: He wins against all of these people except Jeb in a straight 1 on 1 and I'm convinced that Jeb won't run -or- that he runs, is the poll king for three weeks and then the rank and file sours on him for the new hotness. There are four potential serious candidates this cycle right now - Paul, Rubio, Jeb and Scott Walker (Christie was the fifth but welp). The others are window dressing.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
Adar posted:He wins against all of these people except Jeb in a straight 1 on 1 and I'm convinced that Jeb won't run -or- that he runs, is the poll king for three weeks and then the rank and file sours on him for the new hotness. Delicious window dressing.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
Adar posted:He wins against all of these people except Jeb in a straight 1 on 1 and I'm convinced that Jeb won't run -or- that he runs, is the poll king for three weeks and then the rank and file sours on him for the new hotness. Scott Walker looks like every kid who only has a job because his dad owns a window company.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
S-Wal=T-Paw. He'll be lost on a stage with anyone with a personality.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
Adar posted:He wins against all of these people except Jeb in a straight 1 on 1 and I'm convinced that Jeb won't run -or- that he runs, is the poll king for three weeks and then the rank and file sours on him for the new hotness. Rubio, Jeb and Walker are the only ones who could win it.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
So no one here has any comments on Governor Martin O'Malley's IAMA on Reddit a few hours ago? It's okay - the O'Malley team probably wishes no one on Reddit had any comments either.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Rubio, Jeb and Walker are the only ones who could win it. And they're all RINOs, which means they'll come out of the primary with fatal damage.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:And they're all RINOs, which means they'll come out of the primary with fatal damage. With the present makeup of the GOP, that pretty much applies to anyone who could make it out of a primary.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:And they're all RINOs, which means they'll come out of the primary with fatal damage. Rubio in particular. I'm not sure why we're tossing his name about this prominently, I thought he was still cosigned to the outer darkness for having committed the fatal sin of agreeing with Obama that one time, particularly since Cruz has come along as a potential alternative Latin candidate.* *here defined in classic GOP token form of appealing to that demographic by being technically part of it, despite having little to nothing else to offer.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Rubio in particular. I'm not sure why we're tossing his name about this prominently, I thought he was still cosigned to the outer darkness for having committed the fatal sin of agreeing with Obama that one time, particularly since Cruz has come along as a potential alternative Latin candidate.* Don't underestimate the appeal of "look guys! we have a brown! we're not racist!" to the GOP base. And Rubio is also willing to whore himself out to the Koch's of the world on economic stuff and the McCain's of the world on foreign policy.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Don't underestimate the appeal of "look guys! we have a brown! we're not racist!" to the GOP base. By "appeal" do you mean "enrage them and depress their turnout"?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Eschers Basement posted:So no one here has any comments on Governor Martin O'Malley's IAMA on Reddit a few hours ago? Wow, that's amazing.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
Eschers Basement posted:So no one here has any comments on Governor Martin O'Malley's IAMA on Reddit a few hours ago? Um...so are people in Baltimore under the impression that they're the only city that Comcast has a monopoly on? Because I'm pretty sure every city I've lived in has been the same, be it Comcast or TWC. If that's the big ice burn on him, it's pretty dumb. If people are looking for an anti-Hillary, a Warren-less field isn't going to be good for them. And Warren is not running.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
O'Malley is about as uninspiring as it gets.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
So who's the real anti-Hillary?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2014 19:49
|
|