|
DaveWoo posted:Speaking of Cuba, here's Jeb Bush on the issue: Not an unreasonable point, considering Cuban terrorists like Posada are still out there. State sponsors of terrorism is serious stuff.
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 12:37 |
|
|
Fulchrum posted:So baiting the Republicans into calling her a bitch? Also Ben Wyatt, which we all know became the President in the End.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:Speaking of Cuba, here's Jeb Bush on the issue: You'd think a former governor of Florida would have more insight into the Cuban situation. At least Rubio is being consistent with Cuba, even if his statements are ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:Speaking of Cuba, here's Jeb Bush on the issue: man I can't wait until Lindsey Graham starts campaigning and forces everybody to be more up-front about their foreign-policy belligerence harder to do all these softball "ah well what I'd have to do is re-assess the dynamics at play but certainly I would consider positioning us against that nation, if it were warranted," things when the bub across from you is going full "Blood for the Blood God! Skulls for the Skull Throne!", to thunderous applause.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
One of the debate questions for presidential candidates should be asking them to list in order which three countries they are most in favor of bombing at the time of asking. This should be the first question in the debate, and the moderator should be instructed to keep asking it until it is actually answered such that it cannot just be sidestepped unless the canidate(s) want to just forfeit all other debate time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
Tender Bender posted:Well, this is what you see when you encounter an error on her official website: That's certainly something. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:01
|
|
|
Nietzschean posted:One of the debate questions for presidential candidates should be asking them to list in order which three countries they are most in favor of bombing at the time of asking. This should be the first question in the debate, and the moderator should be instructed to keep asking it until it is actually answered such that it cannot just be sidestepped unless the canidate(s) want to just forfeit all other debate time. Wouldn't it be an easy "Syria, Yemen, Iraq" answer?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:08
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Wouldn't it be an easy "Syria, Yemen, Iraq" answer? I would have thought North Korea might be in there - maybe instead of Yemen?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:10
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Wouldn't it be an easy "Syria, Yemen, Iraq" answer? nah bud you got to stick with the countries the Electorate has heard of "Russia, China, Iran/England"
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:nah bud you got to stick with the countries the Electorate has heard of Don't forget "Kenya".
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi. Next question.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:32
|
|
|
sullat posted:Not an unreasonable point, considering Cuban terrorists like Posada are still out there. State sponsors of terrorism is serious stuff. Arrest John McCain then.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:32
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Don't forget "Kenya". "New York, California, Chicago."
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:33
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:"New York, California, Chicago" D&D is totally onboard for the third one thanks to MIGF.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:D&D is totally onboard for the third one thanks to MIGF. I would have gone with "Vermont" but I reckon most folks either never heard of that or believe it is in Europe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:35
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:"New York, California, Chicago." "The Union"
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:37
|
|
|
sullat posted:Not an unreasonable point, considering Cuban terrorists like Posada are still out there. State sponsors of terrorism is serious stuff.  it is indeed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:49
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Give-no-fucks-I'm-livin'-in-the-Magnum-House Obama Unfortunately, Obama gives the impression of being one of those suckers who may have gone into public life to try and make a positive difference, so even if he does take a vacation and is effectively free and clear with a pile of money and no need to endure politics ever again, I suspect he'll still return to the game. What are the rules regarding a sitting President campaigning on behalf of a candidate to replace them? Can Obama do some campaigning for Hillary? Maybe give a speech at the convention? I remember Bush was pretty scarce during McCain's campaign but he was also radioactive at the time, especially once the economic crisis was in full swing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 07:17
|
|
|
Dolash posted:Unfortunately, Obama gives the impression of being one of those suckers who may have gone into public life to try and make a positive difference, so even if he does take a vacation and is effectively free and clear with a pile of money and no need to endure politics ever again, I suspect he'll still return to the game. I think it's allowed with certain rules regarding resource usage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 07:21
|
|
|
Barack Obama's worst legacy will be convincing Senators, especially freshmen, that they too can be President
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 09:01
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:So baiting the Republicans into calling her a bitch? I would honestly rather toss my vote or vote for a third party. But that's just me  E: Any word that Sanders is going to run? I am out of the states right now and hard to follow the news closely. Enigma89 fucked around with this message at 10:14 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
mooyashi posted:Barack Obama's worst legacy will be convincing Senators, especially freshmen, that they too can be President One and done should be limited to college basketball.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
Except I think college athletes should be paid
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 11:18
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:"The Union" "The Union, Unions, Union Pacific Rail" Remember: conservatives hate trains. mooyashi posted:Except I think college athletes should be paid Not enough to save you from the guillotine, friend.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 11:50
|
|
|
Enigma89 posted:E: People who are better at analyzing these thing than I: I don't really think Bernie is going to run, and while we're quite a ways away from the Dems actually picking a candidate I think Hillary is going to be the nominee because she's had momentum and support building around her long before she announced, and I think that's a good indication that she's going to completely trounce whoever ends up driving the clown car of the right. But suppose Sanders did get the nomination, would he have just as good of a chance of besting whoever the GOP candidate ends up being? I really don't think he would, but I don't know how tight that race would be or if he'd actually loose. What do you guys think? Those would be some really fun debates though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 12:26
|
|
|
Sanders would get annihilated versus virtually any GOP nominee. He's a self described socialist in a time and place (USA, 2015) where socialism is literally a dirty word to the majority of the country, even if a huge portion of those people who "hate" socialism actually support many of its principles, they just don't know them under that name. He's also not particularly well known. Because of his politics he'd have difficulty getting financial support for his campaign, i.e. the same reason we DnDers like him, the corporate pimps who do a lot of political contribution wouldn't touch him, and it's currently a huge money game until the rules are changed. But he'd never get the Democratic nomination for the same reasons. Edit: Also, he's not even a member of the Democratic Party. Parties don't nominate someone who isn't even officially in their party, regardless if he caucuses with them and if his politics are admired by a significant portion of the base.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 12:36
|
|
|
Sanders said he would run last year, I thought. He was planning on being 2016's Kucinich, but smarter.Dolash posted:Unfortunately, Obama gives the impression of being one of those suckers who may have gone into public life to try and make a positive difference, so even if he does take a vacation and is effectively free and clear with a pile of money and no need to endure politics ever again, I suspect he'll still return to the game. Obama will be like Carter, annoying the GOP for decades to come doing things to help people and talking poo poo about the them in interviews. Unless he gets appointed to SCOTUS, of course, then it's time for maximum trolling. Sir Tonk fucked around with this message at 12:52 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 12:50
|
|
|
Bernie's more a social democrat than a honest-to-god socialist. Record's not too far off from the lefty wing of the official democratic party when all's said and done. If he hadn't gone out of his way to describe himself as a socialist, he could probably stand a fightin' chance against a sufficiently bad Republican nominee, despite his crotchetiness lack of a personal monied donor-base like the Clintons have. But he did, and that is the kiss of death. Another hypothetical Democrat who pulled off some miracle victory over Clinton, running with a similar platform to Bernie but less baggage? That would be a different question. But that person does not exist right now. As discontented as we Internet Liberals get with Obama, someone like him is more or less the best plausible case for the forseeable future. Charismatic enough to entice the liberal base, moderate enough to avoid putting off the Very Serious neoliberal operators and donors. PupsOfWar fucked around with this message at 12:59 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 12:52
|
|
|
Looking like Doc Brown doesn't exactly bode well for him either, since we seem to be living in an age of telegenic presidents.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 13:01
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 13:02
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Looking like Doc Brown doesn't exactly bode well for him either, since we seem to be living in an age of telegenic presidents. I always thought he looked (and sounded) more like Larry David.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 13:10
|
|
|
Enigma89 posted:I would honestly rather toss my vote or vote for a third party. But that's just me
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 13:14
|
|
|
The bottom of that graph reminds me of something... 
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 13:19
|
|
|
Has Marco given any indication that he'll also be running to keep his Senate seat? Because he's up for reelection this year. I assume while he's still in the primary he will be, but after that if he actually gets the nomination? I know there have been instances of VP candidates also running for their Senate seat (Lieberman in 2000 comes to mind) but I can't think of if it's happened for a party's actual Presidential candidate. Seems like it would be seen as showing a lack of confidence. Basically, I want to know if I should encourage Republicans friends to vote for Rubio in the primary, if it means we get an open Senate seat here in Florida. edit: Never mind, just found out it's illegal in Florida to be on the ballot for two different offices, and Rubio said he will not be running for reelection. Meaning this could be the political end of him for years to come, at best, if he loses. Oh you stupid bastard, thank you. thrawn527 fucked around with this message at 13:53 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 13:50
|
|
|
sullat posted:Not an unreasonable point, considering Cuban terrorists like Posada are still out there. State sponsors of terrorism is serious stuff. I hate to do "YEAH BUT THE UNITED STATES...!!" but my country is the largest state sponsor of terror in the world. Saying it's a legitimate cause for concern towards diplomatic relations is a big joke. If state sponsors of terrorism was actually a problem for US diplomacy, we wouldn't be so aggressively allied with Saudi Arabia what with numerous princes giving significant moneys out to serious terrorist organizations. In the world of realpolitik, it doesn't matter how much bad blood is between two people if you both have something to gain. Nelson Mandingo fucked around with this message at 14:01 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 13:54
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:I hate to do "YEAH BUT THE UNITED STATES...!!" but my country is the largest state sponsor of terror in the world. Saying it's a legitimate cause for concern towards diplomatic relations is a big joke. If state sponsors of terrorism was actually a problem for US diplomacy, we wouldn't be so aggressively allied with Saudi Arabia what with numerous princes giving significant moneys out to serious terrorist organizations. Posada was a US sponsored terrorist, Yay.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
Dolash posted:Unfortunately, Obama gives the impression of being one of those suckers who may have gone into public life to try and make a positive difference, so even if he does take a vacation and is effectively free and clear with a pile of money and no need to endure politics ever again, I suspect he'll still return to the game. Obama can campaign all he wants for Hillary. I think Obama will want to spend post-President years taking on the whole "elder statesman" role that Carter/Clinton took on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 14:17
|
|
|
GreyPowerVan posted:Posada was a US sponsored terrorist, Yay.  Probably should only shitpost, after coffee.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 14:19
|
|
|
GreyPowerVan posted:Posada was a US sponsored terrorist, Yay. Yeah, we have conducted far more terrorist attacks on Cuba than they have on us. Same is true for Iran, funnily enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 12:37 |
|
|
http://wonkette.com/582819/surprise-marco-rubios-church-is-full-of-demon-wrasslers-gay-haters-and-creationist-derp http://www.twocare.org/anti-gay-policy-exorcisms-and-creationism-at-marco-rubios-miami-church/ quote:Marco Rubio has two churches in Miami. One, as you might imagine, is the Catholic kind, because the Cuban-American Rubio is Catholic. The other one is a ginormous Baptist affair, featuring demon-wrasslin’, homo-hatin,’ and a sincerely held religious belief that Jesus rode a dinosaur. But how can a person be both Catholic and Baptist at the same time? So Rubio has his own Jeremiah Wright, but Palin wasn't criticized for her church members speaking in tongues and Jindal hasn't really been bothered with his exorcisms, so I wouldn't expect much out of this. Perhaps the Catholic and Baptists at the same time thing, but that might be seen as being extra religious and an asset.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 14:52
|
|