|
Cigar Aficionado posted:http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/233063-poll-huckabee-surging-bush-stalling-in-gop-2016-pack That's a pretty good poll of who's been mentioned in the news most recently. Expect a similar surge for Jeb and maybe Rand Paul in the next round since they're getting ink this week.
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 04:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 19:26 |
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:This is why I hold the belief that the only way to win in the long run is by electing a Republican If you want to ruin someone's life go kill some SCOTUS justices, at least you're only ruining your own (and whichever poor bastards you shoot I guess).
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 04:42
|
|
|
computer parts posted:If you want to ruin someone's life go kill some SCOTUS justices, at least you're only ruining your own (and whichever poor bastards you shoot I guess). Now, as for the ethics of assassinating a politician who is unelected and has a lifetime appointment, that is an interesting conversation that can thankfully be had in this great country without fear of reprisal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
I don't know why you people think that 2016 to 2020 is going to be a bad period of time to be president. People are so beaten up over the past 14 years that the slightly less stinky poo poo they are going to be choking down in the near future will taste comparatively great. Hillary might find a way to gently caress it up (5 years is a long time) but I don't know how you could say that our outlook in 2015 looks worse than it did in 2011.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:I don't know why you people think that 2016 to 2020 is going to be a bad period of time to be president. People are so beaten up over the past 14 years that the slightly less stinky poo poo they are going to be choking down in the near future will taste comparatively great. Hillary might find a way to gently caress it up (5 years is a long time) but I don't know how you could say that our outlook in 2015 looks worse than it did in 2011. I think people are thinking of the "America has gotten continually shittier over the past 30 years" thing and are figuring that that trend will just kind of keep happening if everything is labelled R after the next election. I'm pretty sure the Republicans would summon Cthulhu and feed him black people if such a thing were actually possible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:I don't know why you people think that 2016 to 2020 is going to be a bad period of time to be president. People are so beaten up over the past 14 years that the slightly less stinky poo poo they are going to be choking down in the near future will taste comparatively great. Hillary might find a way to gently caress it up (5 years is a long time) but I don't know how you could say that our outlook in 2015 looks worse than it did in 2011. if I were president I'd be elected in 2016 I'd coordinate strikes against Iran in 2017 I'd deal with the fallout of Russian tactical nuke use against Ukraine in 2018 I'd drink away my troubles with tax reform in 2019 I'd be as good as politically dead in 2020
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 05:10
|
|
|
Kalman posted:I too think handing Republicans control of both houses and the presidency at the same time is a choice that won't lead to immediate long-lasting disaster. Much agreed. You guys were alive for the Bush years right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 05:15
|
|
|
Wait, why bomb Iran?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 05:58
|
|
|
Lockback posted:Wait, why bomb Iran? Because if we don't bomb them now, the Iraq war would be meaningless. Unless, of course, they offer us a good nuke agreement. However, that don't looj possible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
Lockback posted:Wait, why bomb Iran? Because they're at the RED LINE: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 06:04
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Because if we don't bomb them now, the Iraq war would be meaningless. That's a better justification than most of the ones I've heard, frankly. At least it's honest.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 06:44
|
|
|
SpiderHyphenMan posted:Any political assassination would only shift us further to the right. You realize people have gotten visits from law enforcement for having "interesting conversations" like that on this very forum, yes?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 06:45
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Because if we don't bomb them now, the Iraq war would be meaningless. The Iraq war was meaningless. And does it occur to you that the sstated result of your foreign policy, assuming you are right (you aren't), is a nuke being dropped on Ukraine. Does that sound like a good, or even sane thing for the stated goal that appears to be 'sunk cost fallacy'. Seriously dude, get back on your meds if you think Russia is going to nuke anyone in our lifetimes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 07:27
|
|
|
Chadderbox posted:You realize people have gotten visits from law enforcement for having "interesting conversations" like that on this very forum, yes? I wonder how hard lowtax will shut down DnD if the SCOTUS Police (their actual name) knock on his door.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 07:48
|
|
|
PLEASE DO NOT DISCUSS ASSASSINATION IN THE POLITICS FORUM, FOR gently caress'S loving SAKE DO I HAVE TO PUT THIS INTO THE FORUM NAME OR SOMETHING????
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 08:11
|
|
|
XyloJW posted:PLEASE DO NOT DISCUSS ASSASSINATION IN THE POLITICS FORUM, FOR gently caress'S loving SAKE it goes in Let's Play?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 08:17
|
|
|
XyloJW posted:PLEASE DO NOT DISCUSS ASSASSINATION IN THE POLITICS FORUM, FOR gently caress'S loving SAKE 2016 Presidential Primary:
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 09:46
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:if I were president Why does Russia use tactical nuclear weapons against the Ukraine because we engaged in strikes against Iran? Please, paint me this picture. Perhaps include some reference to the inevitable spread of Ebola into India while you are here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 09:54
|
|
|
Meet the College Student Who Started a Super PAC to Get Millennials to Vote for Jeb Bush
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 11:31
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:Meet the College Student Who Started a Super PAC to Get Millennials to Vote for Jeb Bush The best part: quote:The Washington state native, who got his start in politics working as the campaign sign coordinator for a mayoral candidate in high school, hired an artist online (“I think someone in India”) to design a graphic for merchandise. The online store is currently selling $20 “Jeb the Thinker” T-shirts and $35 flasks. And Agnew already has received his first donation: $250.  Jeb's got a 21 year old yard sign coordinator in his corner. Pack it in Hillailures!
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I'll bite. Look, it's not like Putin can drop a nuke on Western Russia. So how else is he going to get that sweet radioactive fallout where he wants it without dropping a nuke on the Ukraine instead?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 13:34
|
|
|
Lockback posted:Wait, why bomb Iran? "They hate Israel!" "Iran will have a Nuclear Weapon any day now!" "We have to fight the bad guys!" The real reason: "Those fuckers took our guys hostage!" in 1979 The other real reason: "something something they're all Muslims/terrorists/Middle Easterners/[insert various Middle Eastern ethnic slurs here] anyway." The other other real reason (aka the really real one): Money. Lots and lots of money. Also Obama is making a deal with Iran and Obama bad, so anything Obama wants is automatically bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
ErIog posted:The best part: Watch it! All those signs are going to show up and vote!
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 16:25
|
|
|
Kalman posted:I too think handing Republicans control of both houses and the presidency at the same time is a choice that won't lead to immediate long-lasting disaster. I didn't mean to come off as accelerationist so much as a political pragmatist. As everyone has already noted, the Republicans very probably won't lose Congress before 2018 (at the very earliest) and midterm blowback for the party in the White House is real, putting even that date into question if we have President Hillary. Meanwhile, Democrats can't hold the White House forever. Republicans can still get 47% of the vote, and Quinnipiac just came out with a set of polls saying that Hillary barely does better than any named Republican in Virginia and Colorado, so she's probably not going to do much better. So when do you propose we let them in, if you really want Castro/Castro 2024? Of course the real answer is that Republicans will win in 2020 no matter who wins 2016. Hillary loses if the economy crashes, so a Republican president in 2016 gets to be portrayed as saving the economy and safely avoids having to deal with it happening on his watch so he has a safer time with incumbency in 2020. Conversely, a Hillary win means the economy hasn't crashed, and then that means she gets the blame and loses 2020 when it does. The only possible way Republicans lose 2020 is if the economy miraculously fails to enter a recession for 11 years straight after 2009 [very unlikely; the longest period was during the 1990s and that was only 10 years], Hillary somehow avoids the blame for it [very unlikely with Republicans blocking any meaningful financial assistance for a recovery], or Republicans win in 2016 without the economy going bust [somewhat unlikely; basically means some other poo poo sandwich has to happen, like a terrorist attack] ComradeCosmobot fucked around with this message at 16:59 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:
Incumbents don't generally lose either. The last one to lose was because his party got mad at him, not because of the electorate itself ( a large spoiler candidate didn't help either). The last one to lose before that was due to foreign policy. Also remember the late 19th Century had shittons of computer parts fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
Even taking that analysis as true, I'd sacrifice a lot to see the balance changed on the supreme court. I'm expecting a lot of justices to die in the next ten years. I'd rather see the balance swing left, rather than have conservative dominance cemented for the next twenty years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Incumbents don't generally lose either. The last one to lose was because his party got mad at him, not because of the electorate itself ( a large spoiler candidate didn't help either). Can you be absolutely certain of that? Both presidents in question also happen to have presided over recessions that ended during their term in office. Now, I'll give you that H.W. was riding high after that recession ended, and may have pulled off a win, but then again, "It's the economy, stupid". Carter's recession literally lasted almost his entire presidency and did not end until the January of the year he was voted out, so the economic case there is only stronger. EDIT: TheBalor posted:Even taking that analysis as true, I'd sacrifice a lot to see the balance changed on the supreme court. I'm expecting a lot of justices to die in the next ten years. I'd rather see the balance swing left, rather than have conservative dominance cemented for the next twenty years. Wishful thinking I'm afraid. Hillary 2016 would save Ginsberg's seat, sure, but it's not at all clear she'd get a chance to actually do anything more than be that backstop. It's not like Scalia wouldn't hang on in spite until 2020 just to keep the 5-4 in Republican hands. ComradeCosmobot fucked around with this message at 17:11 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Can you be absolutely certain of that? Both presidents in question also happen to have presided over recessions that ended during their term in office. Now, I'll give you that H.W. was riding high after that recession ended, and may have pulled off a win, but then again, "It's the economy, stupid". Bush would've won if his party didn't go into a pissy panic about him raising taxes. Carter's issues were more influenced by the economy than I previous said but we are literally in the exact opposite situation as the 1970s right now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:You also think net neutrality is a bad idea. No, I think title 2 is a bad idea. I think net neutrality is a great idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:If we bomb Iran, its likely Putin authorizes tactical nukes in Ukraine. I like how casually you say something completely insane.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Jets owner and Romney backer Woody Johnson is supporting Jeb. He only backs losers, I guess? Good news for Hillary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Bush would've won if his party didn't go into a pissy panic about him raising taxes. Carter's issues were more influenced by the economy than I previous said but we are literally in the exact opposite situation as the 1970s right now. Also there was a super big charisma gap between both Carter/Reagan and Bush/Clinton. With Carter's other issues other than the economy and Bush seeming pretty out of touch there's more to it than just pointing to the recession and deciding that's why they lost. The recessions certainly didn't help, but just being in a recession isn't a kiss of death.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Because if we don't bomb them now, the Iraq war would be meaningless. Is this a good time to remind you that your schtick is really tired, unimaginative, and boring and that nobody likes you?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Is this a good time to remind you that your schtick is really tired, unimaginative, and boring and that nobody likes you? I like him, and his gimmick.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Is this a good time to remind you that your schtick is really tired, unimaginative, and boring and that nobody likes you? Half or less is truth couched in absurdity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Throw back Thursday Jeb Edition quote:Bush's tough brand of conservatism also featured new restrictions for Florida's welfare recipients. In early 1994, Bush unveiled a welfare reform plan dubbed the "Phoenix Project." The goal of the project, he later told the Miami Herald, was to "dismantle the welfare state and all the culture that comes from it." http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6436546
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Throw back Thursday Jeb Edition God. drat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Half or less is truth couched in absurdity. Taken out of context this reads like a Zen koan. EDIT Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Throw back Thursday Jeb Edition What is this I don't even. "Identify the fathers of their children." Jesus F. Christ. Alien Arcana fucked around with this message at 18:49 on Feb 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Throw back Thursday Jeb Edition Sounds like we have our 2016 Republican candidate then. How can anyone top that? Maybe Walker could get close, but drat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 19:26 |
|
|
Kalman posted:No, I think title 2 is a bad idea. I think net neutrality is a great idea. Since MIGF is Rahm then you're Randpaul.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2015 18:54
|
|
