|
A Winner is Jew posted:On the GOP side... really it all depends on if they double down on the crazy where you're looking at Bachmann, Palin, Paul, Perry, Ryan, or Santorum or if they actually pull their head out of their rear end (lol) you're looking at Jeb, Christie, Huntsman, McDonnell, Pawlenty, Rubio, or Walker. Out of all of them only Christie, Huntsman, and Rubio would be able to squeak out a win against Cuomo or Patrick since everyone on both sides would get slaughtered by Hillary. I don't see much of a chance that the Republican base lets the party do anything but double down on crazy at the moment. Look what they've done to Republican Senate aspirations the last two cycles, and how desperately they looked for any level of crazy other than Romney. I guess maybe if Talk Radio decides that it's in their monetary interest to try and ease out of the crazy. However since history shows that the big Talk Radio money is in egging on the crazy, that's unlikely. The best hope for the Republican party is likely to be getting it's rear end spanked in 2016. That way in 2020 some portion of the Rascal Raiders will have gone on to the great Walmart in the sky, Latinos will have had time for their anger at calls for electrified walls with alligator moats to cool, and a new wave of socially moderate young Republicans could be ready to run. Or they could just toss a random Latino on the ticket and hope that proves they're totally pro Latino, please ignore the crazy things they continue to say and do.
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2012 04:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 18:18 |
|
|
The more I think about it, the more I think Rubio has the Republican nomination if he wants it. The reaction I've been hearing to the racial split in the voters by the right seems to really support it. Blacks and other minorities voted for Obama because he's a minority. There's no other way that they see the results other than that. Minorities are racist and the whites who voted for Obama are moochers. To the base Rubio is the perfect choice because they seem to believe wholeheartedly that if they just but a Hispanic on the ticket all the other Hispanics will vote for him. I've heard similar arguments for why Cain would have been a game changer. I could just be hearing a minority view from the Republicans. However every time I've heard them talk about the racial breakdowns of the vote it's astonishing. I'm almost convinced that the reason they don't mention that whites broke 60/40 for Romney because of racism is because it's simply self evident to them.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2012 05:34
|
|
|
Abel Wingnut posted:Michelle is definitely sitting out, right? I don't want to live in your crazy world where we get a Clinton/Bachmann ticket.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2012 18:43
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:I kind of weep for Huntsman because I think he made kind of good moves but then made a terrible decision by running this time, before the wingnut theory of GOP politics had been refuted, that has ended his Presidential ambitions. I don't know if he could have won the 2016 primaries (after a Romney loss there might have been a "not ANOTHER Mormon" thing), but his chances would certainly have been a lot better than this time. As long as he thinks seemingly randomly speaking in Chinese durring a Republican debate is a good idea, he doesn't have a chance at the presidency. quote:As far as Biden vs. Clinton, I suspect Clinton would just get a lot more support by default and I think Biden is just too old whereas Clinton is just borderline too old. I'm hoping that the Biden or Clinton issue works itself out in private beforehand because I think Obama owes Clinton a ton of support in 2016 should she run, and it would be very difficult if he had to publicly choose between his running mate and Clinton in a primary. Obama isn't going to endorse anyone in the Primary. The only reason Bill even got into it was because Hillary was running. Other than that, Presidents pretty much keep mute durring the primary beyond broad strokes of how much they like the field.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2012 22:27
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:The ostensible issue with whether Obama was born in Hawaii is because of the requirement that the President be a natural-born citizen, which historically means born in the United States. If I recall correctly it's why Hamilton never got to be President. (That and Aaron Burr.) The problem is that a) it's a real dumb requirement and b) it was never defined properly, so it's real ambiguous. From a few days back, but natural born has always simply meant that you were born a citizen. If one or both of your parents are US Citizens it doesn't matter if you're born in another galaxy, you're natural born. The only exception to this was for people who were citizens at the time of the constitutions' adoption. Thus Hamilton was eligible to be president but never had the chance. The attack on the eligibility of a candidate always happens when it's available, because why not take a shot?. I believe there were calls of Cleveland being a faking Canadian.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2013 22:09
|
|
|
With Santorum, Perry and Bolton making moves, the field is shaping up to be nearly as entertaining as last time. Sadly I don't think anyone will be able to fill the enormous shoes of Hermain Cain.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
Puella Magissima posted:I was reading about Cruz on Wikipedia and I found this gem: Wait, a direct link to the evil red boogieman of communism and Castro to boot? Shaping up to be another glorious GOP primary.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2013 18:49
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Castro's revolution was publicly for restoring the constitutional republic that preceded Batista's dictatorship. A lot of first-wave exiles (the ones who created the image of hardline anti-Castro, anti-Communist Cubans in Miami and New Jersey) were supporters of a constitutionalist insurrection who had provided support to the revolution and then protested the change in direction that culminated in Castro saying "The revolution has no time for elections." Many, if not most of them, were themselves or had family and close friends who had been tortured or killed by the Batista regime and many found their friends and family getting tortured and killed by the Castro regime. I'm not sure a nuanced understanding of history and refusing to whip up undue controversy are things to reasonably expect from the GOP primary though. If no one questions the patriotism and patriotic laissez faire bonafides of Cruz by taring his immigrant Cuban father with ties to the Cuban revolution, I'll be rather surprised.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:I assume that his potential primary opponents give will give a poo poo about winning, yes. When I say "do it credibly" I mean "without forfeiting yardage." I don't see the benefits of trying to pull that poo poo outweighing the costs to even the most short-sighted of campaign staffers. I don't expect a Ron Paul style ad about it to be officially put out by one of the campaigns. However that's the type of things that you can just ask a lot of questions about, not to mention the completely unsourced rumor campaigns and an angry millionaire with a PAC or two. Also it depends on who ends up making up the field. All you need is another fleet admiral, moon colonist, or postmodern comedian and all bets are off.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2013 02:31
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Hmm, maybe Bush has saved more lives... I mean, the Carter Center, has only almost eliminated a disease that plagued 3.5 million individuals (dracunculiasis) and averted 1.6 million more cases of poor vision caused by onchocerciasis (1m) and trachoma (600k), but I guess they're not as sexy as HIV so they don't count. So good job Bush! Hasn't Carter also built enough homes to create a city? I mean hate the guy out of some sort of spite if you want, but you can't deny Carter has set the bar pretty drat high for ex-presidents.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
radical meme posted:One of the problems right now though is the quartet of Cruz-Lee-Rubio-Paul are out to gut the party establishment; maybe not so much Rubio cause he may just be tagging along to stay relevant. I'm not sure how much longer the so called party establishment will last and the money men will still give money to the last man standing, whoever it is. These guys answer more to ALEC, Heritage and talk radio than they do the RNC. Cruz refers to those guys as the "gray beards". The money will stop flowing if the unelectable become the leaders. Sure you'll still be rolling in the windfall from the Council of Repugnant Rich White Billionaires, but all the other money is going to dry right up. You've got to stay sane enough that all that business money doesn't think you'll actually turn the economy to ash if you don't get your way.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2013 15:56
|
|
|
I would also think that an open field due to a term limited POTUS would be a far more ideal time to run than going for a run against a sitting President.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
ManifunkDestiny posted:Especially if Condi runs Condi is far to close to reasonable to have a snowball's chance at the nomination. Huntsman was a sure bet in comparison.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2013 05:59
|
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:Where is the source for this? Jesus christ who would wear that. You are talking about the party who had people wearing band aids with purple hearts on them during their 2004 convention. The people wearing the band aids were not shunned or herded out of sight but allowed to proudly show off on TV. Why? Because the Democrat running who had both a Silver and Bronze Star also had 3 Purple Hearts, and that was clearly unfair, so they made fun of all purple hearts while ignoring the Silver and Bronze Stars.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2013 17:21
|
|
|
computer parts posted:What about Jefferson or Van Buren? Look, Burr lost and it's time your Burrites admit it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2013 11:34
|
|
|
tadashi posted:The fallacy that you can be these things simultaneously is pretty awful. If society really is going in that direction, then we're in trouble. I don't know how true a self identification it is though. I know that I claimed to be fiscally conservative for quite a while longer than I was due to a misunderstanding of what the label actually meant. I think most people think it just means being fiscally responsible, and have varying definitions of what is responsible.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
Frum posted:Cruz delivered half his convention speech in Spanish and used the other half to rededicate the party to “the compassion of conservatism,” a subtle variant of an old phrase that delighted convention delegates. It's got to be a pain to do a speech half in Spanish and half in English only then reflexively say it again in French.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2013 22:32
|
|
|
Am I wrong, or is it only in hellscape alternate realities where Scott Walker has a chance at becoming President? Governors named Scott just don't have what it takes.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2013 03:58
|
|
|
notthegoatseguy posted:Wisconsin voting R for POTUS isn't outside of the realm of possibility, though it'd be pretty tough and would probably only happen if the GOP managed to get a wave election during a Presidential race. What if Christie gives a speech half in Spanish, half in Wiseguy?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2013 15:55
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Transportation Secretary Biden would be pretty great. The nation awakens on January 21st 2017 to find the entire interstate highway system was replaced with railways overnight. The press notes that in hindsight Biden wearing his engineer's cap to the inauguration ceremony was a giveaway. Edit: As far as Hilary vs Joe, 2008 shows that a drawn out fight between two heavy weights can be alright for the Democrats. Especially if 2016 is the clown show on the GOP side that it's shaping up to be. Gyges fucked around with this message at 01:12 on Oct 31, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 01:09
|
|
|
FMguru posted:Is Huntsman Mormon? I always thought a lot of that bad blood was intra-sect conflict. Nah, Romney strikes me as a faithful Mormon type of guy. If anyone wasn't getting a fair cut it's the tax man not the church. I have a hunch that aside from some perfectly legal but shady as all gently caress looking accounting, Romney financials would show he gave slightly more than the minimum tithe. My assumption is that due to Romney's wealth, his advisers felt that showing millions going to the Mormon Church would do nothing but resurrect the lingering specter of his religion. A lot of the religious right had to really, super, pray for the wisdom of Solomon, talk themselves into voting for a member of a heretical cult. Say what you will about that Kenyan Muslim, at least it's an Abrahamic religion and not the corruption of the Gospel by Satan through a morally bankrupt conman just looking to line his pockets and take advantage of women. Also Romeny doesn't like sharing things he doesn't have to, and nothing says the Hoi polloi get to gawk at his finances.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 02:28
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:When Romney trotted out what he paid in taxes as an off-the-top-of-his-head percentage (I believe he said 12-13%) even that drew criticism. The team was content to sit and take the punches on that issue for months and months without releasing anything. It was surely something damaging, like "paid 0% effective tax rate or lower." And maybe indeed he paid a giant tithe back to the church every year, which would've raised some evangelical eyebrows and annoyed liberals even more when they compared his tithe to his rate. If 12-13% was accurate, what was to be gained from releasing proof beyond off the cuff candidate response? There's no doubt at all that Romney paid as little as number crunched by highly paid accountants possible. However given the cavalier reaction to everything else that should have been shameful, I just don't think that's why. Remember that he's the one who said he didn't make very much in speaking fees, which was only a few hundred thousand dollars. Also he still sees nothing wrong with strapping his dog to the roof of his car for a trip.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 04:03
|
|
|
Joementum posted:In order for a base revolt to work against the Republican establishment pick, it's going to need to be funded. In Balz's report of the meeting Ken Langone and Henry Kissinger organized to convince Christie to run in 2012, David Koch was in the room. That's pretty much the whole game. Wasn't that their desperate last ditch effort to find a viable Not-Romeny who wasn't just on a book tour or running against medieval moral decay? 2016 already looks like it's going to be different. Cruz, should he maintain his balance, will be the one true Tea Party Jesus; Paul will be there for the money and the libertarianish wing; Santorum will be back for those who hate the moral cancer of post 1517 society, and for those who love to hear about big strong hands; Christie then has to carefully draw in the skittish and endangered GOP Primary Moderate while almost the entirety of the GOP ground game has already sworn allegiance to his opponents. Of course it still remains to be seen how many also-rans jump in. We've already got Perry and Jindal trying to get into the fray. Many more far right lunatics and crazyland is to diluted to really oppose Christie, one or two viable "moderates" and Christie is on the defensive.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
TheBalor posted:Exactly. Of all of Christie's opponents, Paul and Ryan are the most dangerous, because they can dip their toes in both pools. While Cruz, his dad, Santorum and whoever bang on about the apocalypse, Ryan and Paul will appear to be moderates who just care about the budget and civil liberties. What advantage has Chris Christie got if he hasn't got the advantage of not being in the room with seven dwarves? Being a loudmouth who hugged Obama? It's not like he's going to snag a bunch of crossover dem votes. Until Cruz finally stumbles and is declared a RINO by the Terror, I don't think it's correct to think of him as just another one of the crazies. If he can manage 4 more years of walking on the balance beam, being the hero of the Tea Party should make him one of the top contenders. Paul just has to follow daddy's playbook to remain in the field and soak up the money. He'll probably even do better. What happens to Christie if Santorum wins Iowa, Paul wins New Hampshire and Cruz wins South Carolina?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Andy Kaczynski, who has also written a story about Rand's plagiarizing, notes that it is forbidden in the Kentucky constitution for its officeholders to duel. Man, Jackson really did scare the poo poo out of Clay.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2013 21:20
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Which would be more effective in the war on terror: letters of marque or duels? Obviously if you can get an agreement to Champion Warfare, you've got to go the duel. Otherwise letters of marque are the better choice, fighting fire with fire and all that. No drones allowed unless your opponent is coming out of a liquor store with a weapon and no less than $50 in cash though.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
PrBacterio posted:I can sort of see this happening once, but after that first time why didn't he just have a staffer find out the correct number for him? Folks, it's because it's a big loving deal that he literally do it himself. Literally.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2013 02:43
|
|
|
whydirt posted:I get that these are all technically plagiarism, but they're rephrased enough that I don't think most people will care. To most people plagiarism means copied word-for-word or very near to it. Those same people are unlikely to actually read the two things side by side, instead just seeing that yet another article is out about Rand Paul plagiarizing. Once or twice is yer typical gotcha journalism. Weeks of new stories about yet another plagiarized speech or article is repetition, and repetition is fact. It's like how people know Saddam was linked to 9-11, only this time it happens to be true. Which isn't to say that the base will give two shits about this. Rand Paul is repeating things they believe, and the arbiters of truth at Fox and on the radio ain't saying poo poo about this. The only way this matters to the base is if Rand stumbles and reveals himself to be one of the dread were-RHINOs. Under the light of reason the cursed are revealed when driven by their foul disease to try and govern, espouse compassion for the downtrodden, or agree with an idea that is not anathema to the 21st century.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2013 23:16
|
|
|
Is it wrong to want it to come down to Clinton vs Paul just on the off chance the Political Kombat guys do a surrogate fight round of the Southern Avenger vs Carlos Danger?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2013 14:07
|
|
|
ReindeerF posted:Yeah, true, I guess I'm just a bit surprised if a sitting Governor can spend anything approaching a similar amount of time running around the country raising money for his political allies the way he did when he was a full-time DLC/Clinton bag man. A lot of that money comes from other parts of the country (and China Aren't we talking about a guy who stopped in for a fundraiser while bringing his newborn home from the hospital? Being Governor just means he's got a nice mansion to hold dinners in.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2013 20:18
|
|
).
|
skaboomizzy posted:Would this make Rick Santorum the President of Pizza Ranch? I say yes. Pizza Ranch is a weird rear end place, but it's too fake Cowboy for Santorum. He'd rule a bland and weird but completely sincere land. Rick Perry though, he's definitely an emperor for life of Pizza Ranch type.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
deoju posted:Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker described his ideal Republican presidential candidate... You know who else fits that criteria? Rick Scott. He should be free of the hindrances of being an active governor at that time, and he self funds his campaigns so he isn't beholden to special interests he's not a part of. This is of course assuming that we're using the definition of successful things that means things conservatives like and not things that actually work well for everyone.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2013 03:57
|
|
|
Joementum posted:The more important reforms for the Republicans will come later when we find out if they're able to cut down on the clown show aspects of the primary, like the Ames Straw Poll and the 20+ debates. Since the only thing actually turning these things into a clown show were the candidates, that's a long haul for the RNC.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2014 16:17
|
|
|
Disco De Soto posted:What qualifications did Reagan have? 2 term Governor of California, former Union leader, and past runner up for the nomination who had been doing political poo poo since at least the 40s. Sure it's fun to laugh that the actor became President, but he did have a perfectly reasonable resume.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2014 14:21
|
|
|
Swan Oat posted:Doesn't Colorado's balanced budget law totally gently caress their schools and infrastructure? Is there a balance budget law that doesn't totally gently caress schools and infrastructure? Just can't afford to train future workers or maintain the things keeping us from returning to candles and ox carts. Not and push through these vital tax cuts, that's for sure.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2014 21:42
|
|
|
Math Debater posted:Yeah, well I may be inclined to believe that the advancement of a revolutionary movement to defeat capitalism in the United States and throughout the world would be worth risking the deaths of millions of people for. When you put it like that, who wouldn't be with you? Other than the millions of dead, of course. quote:Edit: So, uh, yeah, I really hope Sanders chooses the more radical option of running as an independent or third party candidate instead of running as a Democrat! If he insists on running as a Democrat, I would at least like for him to continue his campaign as an independent or 3rd party candidate after he inevitably is not nominated as the Democratic presidential candidate. If you want a crazy amazing show as Bernie fights the power live at the debates, you want him to run as a Republican. If you want to bring down the two party system then you've got to build a new part from the local positions up, finally capping your decades long struggle off with a presidential win. Of course then there will be a party realignment with one of the existing parties going the way of the Wigs and you being a proud member of half the viable US political parties.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
Math Debater posted:Sanders, in my humble opinion, should give zero fucks about what the Serious & Respectable Washingtonians think of him and should be doing everything he can to try to incite the masses to rise up and overturn the status quo. If he wanted to do so, I think Sanders could do a lot to turn people on to revolutionary leftism by running for president in 2016 as an independent or 3rd party candidate and by being more aggressive in his work as a Senator. Neither the Black Guy nor the 2007 Crash managed to incite the masses, on either side. An old Vermont dude talking about things sure as poo poo isn't going to incite anything or even nudge the status quo. Especially not in the black hole of attention that is being a 3rd Party candidate for POTUS.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:I mean, the bottom line is that it doesn't matter if you are the Pope, you cannot run for President of the United States and even compete unless you can raise at least a several hundred million dollars as well as have the ability to pull media attention to you. Bernie Sanders couldn't raise $10 million dollars, much less $100 million. Third party presidential runs are about ego, not politics. That's been the case for some time now. To be fair, I'm sure the Pope would clear it with the big man so he could have some campaign workers pass a hat or two around every Sunday. Plus, dude's got a hell of an organization. Too bad the US doesn't go in for Catholicism much. Maybe once Texas turns blue.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
GodlessCommie posted:Isn't there a rule about a pres and vp being from the same state that nullifies the electoral college votes from their state? I remember Cheney had to say he was from Wyoming so the GOP didn't lose Texas. That would rule out Cuomo for VP. Electors in that state can vote for either the VP or Presidential candidate on the ticket but not both. Cheney just used his dark arts to predict that should he not change his residency another man would become Vice President. And he didn't run an exhaustive search committee just for someone else to get that post. Wonder how the world would change if Vice President Lieberman had been sworn in with Bush.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2014 20:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 18:18 |
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:I am fairly sure Obama won't be getting the nomination in 2016 though. Of course Barak Obama won't get the 2016 nomination. Barry Soetoro/Joey B 2016. Yes We Can. Muahaha
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 22:37
|
|
