|
It will never cease to crack me up with how Trump and Palin continue to troll their own party and bilk them for cash.
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 21:47 |
|
|
I'm waiting to see if the True Believers on freep do their usual "Sarah, save us!" routine this time around, as she remains one of the very few Republicans they've not yet cast aside as a filthy RINO who'll be first against the wall once the revolution comes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:It will never cease to crack me up with how Trump and Palin continue to troll their own party and bilk them for cash. Honestly, it's more the little guy getting fleeced by Palin. The party is getting fleeced by a higher class of grifter, like Karl Rove. How much did he walk away with in 2012?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:So Romney is basically running as the candidate that kicked his rear end in 2012? He pretty much did that in 2012 too. Immediately after the primary he just occupied Obama's space on anything concrete but added a bunch of vague language about how he was going to be better somehow. It threw Obama off his game in the early debates because there was no room to hammer him on the specifics of horrible Republican policy stances. The totally awesome budget/economy plan (that you aren't allowed to see unless we win) was especially hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
How effective would rolling your eyes and saying, "pfft this loser again? Third times the charm, right mitt?" at any live debates be? Could you base you entire mittattack on him previously losing a bunch?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
katlington posted:How effective would rolling your eyes and saying, "pfft this loser again? Third times the charm, right mitt?" at any live debates be? Could you base you entire mittattack on him previously losing a bunch? It's one of the most obvious angles of attack and Romney will have spent a silly amount of time and money preparing a well crafted counter to it. Romney is going to wreck the first person who thinks they can take him off guard at a debate with that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
Good Citizen posted:It's one of the most obvious angles of attack and Romney will have spent a silly amount of time and money preparing a well crafted counter to it. Romney is going to wreck the first person who thinks they can take him off guard at a debate with that poo poo. The fun part comes when someone hits him from an angle he hasn't been programmed to respond to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:The fun part comes when someone hits him from an angle he hasn't been programmed to respond to. Mitt Romney, you're too in touch with the plight of the American worker.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Mitt Romney, you're too in touch with the plight of the American worker. This is, at the same time, an argument I can never imagine someone seriously making and yet completely in character for some candidates.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:The fun part comes when someone hits him from an angle he hasn't been programmed to respond to. "Please proceed Governor"
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
Good Citizen posted:It's one of the most obvious angles of attack and Romney will have spent a silly amount of time and money preparing a well crafted counter to it. Romney is going to wreck the first person who thinks they can take him off guard at a debate with that poo poo. It's really going to depend on which candidate does it. The fringe crazies who will be there early in the game are too crazy and desperate to care and willing to play the long odds for the chance at a shake up. Your Cruzes, Christies, and the like are probably way to big an rear end in a top hat to not go full bore no matter what deterrent Mitt thinks he has. Jeb, Perry, Rubio, Pataki, and anyone else going for the reasonable dude image aren't going to even mention it. Rand Paul may or may not, which ever choice he makes will, per usual, start off seeming reasonable and quickly turn to stupid. If we get lucky we'll get some true screwballs in this thing and we can spend every debate wondering what new insanity King or the Sky Admiral will unleash.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 04:35
|
|
|
Good Citizen posted:It's one of the most obvious angles of attack and Romney will have spent a silly amount of time and money preparing a well crafted counter to it. Romney is going to wreck the first person who thinks they can take him off guard at a debate with that poo poo. Then I really hope this happens, I'm looking forward to his response.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:She did this in 2012 too. Like Trump, she will never run because, also like him, she's too much a cowardly lightweight to get anywhere, but knows how to work the rubes. I seem to recall in 2012 she was more "I'm not going to run" even as she trolled everybody because she knew she would get attention. Even if she's just stirring up the 'grassroots' so people will be stupid enough to throw into the speaking fee collection plate it's funny she's making noise that she's considering it. There are far too many people out there who will throw every dime they have at her if she were to seriously say she's running.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Jeb Bush is already laying out his plan of attack for the election, based on a speech he just gave today. Some bullet points of possible policy positions: -'Rolling back' certain parts of Obamacare (no specifics, of course) -Reducing government regulations on fracking -Opening up more federal/national park land for oil/gas exploration -His position on immigration is pretty much the same as the compromise immigration bill that didn't pass the House last year ('back of the line' stuff, increased visa checking, paying fines, but eventual legal citizenship) -Blamed Obama for the rise of ISIS http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/os-ap-2016-jeb-bush-focus-on-middle-class-20150123-story.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:"Please proceed Governor" Still the best burn of that cycle. I had never seen a human actually kernel-panic the way Mitt did in the seconds after Obama said it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:25
|
|
|
HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:I seem to recall in 2012 she was more "I'm not going to run" even as she trolled everybody because she knew she would get attention. Even if she's just stirring up the 'grassroots' so people will be stupid enough to throw into the speaking fee collection plate it's funny she's making noise that she's considering it. There are far too many people out there who will throw every dime they have at her if she were to seriously say she's running. No. She had that whole tease with the Bus Tour Across America beforehand, so I think it was rather the opposite of how you portray it. I'm going to guess that the idiots who will actually buy the tease are a LOT smaller in number this time, even among this stupid crowd. Even wingnuts don't like getting jerked around, and there are limits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
Even thinking of going the oil route is lunacy. They're getting killed out there. Only the massive companies are booming right now. Saudis true legacy is false dreams of a new American oil industry when it will always be just Exxon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Even thinking of going the oil route is lunacy. They're getting killed out there. Only the massive companies are booming right now. Saudis true legacy is false dreams of a new American oil industry when it will always be just Exxon. But it feels like the Democrats have been stymieing oil production. Republicans make me feel like they could make gas cheaper. What's that? Statistics on fracking and drilling since Obama took office? I'm the average American voter, I don't have time for that poo poo.  In all seriousness, if gas prices remain low you're right; but if they spike again, arguments like Jeb's will have a lot more traction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 06:17
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Let's them spend general election sooner. This sort of stuff always feels strange to me, because sometimes it's the reverse - sometimes they want to push the nominating event to later in the cycle so that they can continue to raise primary money. Is the assumption that the candidates will have tapped out their entire market of folks willing to donate in excess of $2600/person by early summer? Or is this a reaction to Obama's successful "bury Mitt in the summer" strategy of 2012?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 08:11
|
|
|
Lote posted:He's a bit embarrassed after the whole nominee fiasco. Plus the Senators sitting in the front row have taken to holding up signs away from the cameras that say "Shut" "Up" "Cruz" on the backs of their legal pads while Cruz gives speeches from the podium. Reid is even in on it. What nominee fiasco? BTW, I went googling for information and found this article, which seems unrelated: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/18/ted-cruz-warns-a-republican-presidential-nominee-who-isnt-conservative-enough-wont-win-in-2016/ However, it did have this picture:  Yup, I can totally see it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 08:38
|
|
|
Delta-Wye posted:What nominee fiasco? End of last senate session, Cruz activated some archaic parliamentary loophole that allowed Democrats to confirm a bunch of federal nominees for Judicial benches and otherwise in their last day in power. It was entirely Cruz's fault and 100% self inflicted. Someone better versed can probably cover it in more detail later on in the day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 13:07
|
|
|
I think the basically Cruz insisted that the Senate remain open an extra day so that everyone could stay and hear his musings on the latest Obamatrocity, and Reid took the opportunity to activate voting mode when all the Senators were still in town. Otherwise they would have just gone home, because the Senate has a weird schedule. Like 4 10s, except 3 4s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:This sort of stuff always feels strange to me, because sometimes it's the reverse - sometimes they want to push the nominating event to later in the cycle so that they can continue to raise primary money. Is the assumption that the candidates will have tapped out their entire market of folks willing to donate in excess of $2600/person by early summer? Late conventions made sense for candidates using matching federal funds. McCain took matching funds, and was limited to spending ~90 million dollars for the general election. It makes sense to push back the convention so that you can spend 45 million/month for two months rather than 30 million/month for three. Now that federal matching funds are dead, you want access to your money as soon as possible. If you receive a donation of 5200$ in January 2015, you have 18 months to spend the first 2600$ of that, for the primary, and only 3-4 months to spend the other 2600$, for the general. Stretching out the primary period means you get cash strapped for the period of the campaign where the primary is de facto over, but the convention hasn't happened yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/22/mitt-romney-climate-change-is-real-human-induced-a/
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 15:22
|
|
|
Ben Carson is speaking at Des Moines right now. He told an anecdote about how his mother used to chide him about using his brain to think through problems logically. In the very next sentence, he talks about his mother constantly praying to God for wisdom. The crowd is eating it up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
TRUMP!!! http://www.iafreedomsummit.com/ "Activist?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Late conventions made sense for candidates using matching federal funds. McCain took matching funds, and was limited to spending ~90 million dollars for the general election. It makes sense to push back the convention so that you can spend 45 million/month for two months rather than 30 million/month for three. There's also the particular make-up of this election. Clinton is going to have the entire primary to do general election stuff, outside occasional chats with Bernie Sanders. Meanwhile the Republicans will be spending the primary eating each other. Also given the usual does of insanity present in the Republican primary they want that poo poo over with as soon as possible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
Delta-Wye posted:What nominee fiasco? He always looks like he's on the verge of tears.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:We're going full crazy. Kill Me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
pork-based chili is terrble at least use the gatdamn moose chili recipe you're always goin on about, Palin
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
sullat posted:I think the basically Cruz insisted that the Senate remain open an extra day so that everyone could stay and hear his musings on the latest Obamatrocity, and Reid took the opportunity to activate voting mode when all the Senators were still in town. Otherwise they would have just gone home, because the Senate has a weird schedule. Like 4 10s, except 3 4s. You know they're still working before and after the floor closes and when they're home, right? There's a lot more to the job than what you see on C-SPAN.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:pork-based chili is terrble Eh, pork and beef make for a richer one than just beef, sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
skaboomizzy posted:Ben Carson is speaking at Des Moines right now. I was watching a little bit of this "Freedom Conference" or whatever it is on CSPAN today and it's as horrible as it sounds. A separate thread would be awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
Kalman posted:You know they're still working before and after the floor closes and when they're home, right? There's a lot more to the job than what you see on C-SPAN. This is only partially true. Senators in leadership have more extended hours. Most Senators do not work a whole lot when Congress isn't in session. Their staff, on the other hand..
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:This is only partially true. Senators in leadership have more extended hours. Most Senators do not work a whole lot when Congress isn't in session. Their staff, on the other hand.. Yeah, no. Worked for one, friends with staff for others, you're wrong. They work quite a bit when not in session - they aren't on the Hill but their schedules don't reduce all that much between various home office events, ongoing briefing from DC staff, and the ever present fundraising obligations. Their (DC) staff actually have a bigger difference in working time between in and out of session than the senators themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
 my fundraiser work weeks
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Eh, pork and beef make for a richer one than just beef, sometimes. Pork+Beef is great. Adds so much. Beef chili works. I learned recently when I had some sausage meat but no beef that sausage chili is terrible even with the exact same recipe. No idea why. It just doesn't work. Needs the beef. That completely discouraged me from trying turkey chili.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Yeah, no. Worked for one, friends with staff for others, you're wrong. They work quite a bit when not in session - they aren't on the Hill but their schedules don't reduce all that much between various home office events, ongoing briefing from DC staff, and the ever present fundraising obligations. Plenty of Senators do very little fundraising work in the first half of their term. Boozman, for example, is a freshman Senator who has raised all of $300,000 for his own committee since he was elected in 2010. And he's not exactly in demand as a fundraiser. Not all Senators do very many home office events, either. I know some who become absolutely furious if their calendar isn't kept full at all times, and there are some who don't do very many events. Unlike regular jobs, Senators can't be fired. Most US Senators have pretty safe seats. The idea that they are all hard working is a farce. Some certainly work very hard, but a great many also just coast. If you're not in leadership, the actual demands on your time are not very high outside of when you absolutely have to be on the floor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
Sarah Palin is speaking. And she's legit babbling. I'm pretty sure she decided to ad lib her speech.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 21:47 |
|
|
will Palin stop being a thing once she has aged out of being considered remotely attractive (even by her partisans) or can she keep Thatchering along?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 23:29
|
|