|
FlamingLiberal posted:She's doing pretty well fleecing dumb idiots of their cash while pretending to run. Your latter instinct is correct: neither Trump nor Palin will ever run for anything, as they both empty cans rattling.
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Well, it remains to be seen what party he'll register in the primary for. He ran as a Republican in 2008, but a Democrat in 2004 and 2012. Well in addition to his position on dental hygiene, he did also promise to buy everyone a pony. That more or less seals up the brony demographic, though I can only hope it that was not his intention.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
Foyes36 posted:Didn't he show some vague signs of economic populism too that scared off more establishment figures? I don't remember anything like that, but during the Revered Wright "God drat America" non-event, he made the fatal mistake of being understanding of where Wright was coming from and acknowledged that any black American who'd lived during segregation had a valid right to be a bit upset with the country allowing that.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Remember that "Cruz to the Future" coloring book from last year? According to Vox, the creators are back with a new supplement entitled "Ted Cruz Saves America", apparently from snakes representing "high taxes", "illegal immigration" and "lawlessness" among others. Hmm what a well thought out image to borrow from, considering how Laocoön totally kicked those snakes' asses and sure didn't get poisoned and die or anything.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:Remind me, is Represent.us the group that that stupid guy was trying to promote on the forums? I got invited to some event for a new chapter here. That was MayOne. Unless they're both related, of course.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Not the worst NPR interview of this month though. Way to set that bar high.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:Abraham Lincoln, by his own admission. Sources say that he had a kind of animated craggy charisma despite that, though. Lincoln overcame his awkward boobery largely by his ability to be really charming and personable, in particularly by having an uncanny instinct about how to craft folksy anecdotes specific to whomever he was trying to win over and/or confound.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2014 00:39
|
|
|
Joementum posted:I'll play along, even though you're not being serious. Not that it matters a bit, but isn't Dean likely on the Clinton blacklist for his opposition to the DLC in 2004 and his backing of Obama early on in the 2008 primary?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:I have every confidence the Clintons' lust for power will overcome any bad blood if Dean is even marginally useful. (See: State, secretary of) I have a hard time deciding whether their lust for power is more potent than their capacity for grudge-holding/score-evening.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:In office, though, he wasn't much to write home about. Cough cough Camp David Accords cough cough.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
FMguru posted:IIRC Quayle was a such a risible joke that it did cost Bush a point or a point-and-a-half in the final tally. But for the most part VP picks have little effect - a really bad one can cost you slightly, and if a good pick buoys the ticket, that's probably a sign that the top of the ticket is weak and is probably going to lose (I think Bentsen in 1988 was good for Dukakis, but the fact that a VP pick was enough to bump his polls was a sign of how deep a hole his campaign was in). I've always considered those sort of VP strategies akin to a hockey team pulling their goalie near the end of the third period: it's a sign of desperation by a team that knows it's probably already lost, rarely results in any spectacular turn-around, and can make a loss that much more humiliating (if the other sides nails an empty-net goal).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:No one is going to remember who the hell Micheal Brown's dad is in a decade. Also Kirsten Gillibrand isn't gonna be running for president. They'll sure poo poo remember Sharpton, so any other black people in the shot serve to reinforce the "scary black men/race hustlers!" narrative.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Ted Cruz on Jeb's announcement: Hey, you don't understand just how stressful it was for Mitt to demonstrate in favor of the draft when he himself had a missionary exemption! That he was so whole-heartedly a supporter of the war in Vietnam, but unable due to forces that were clearly outside of his control from serving wound him up so tight I doubt he even enjoyed his time in southern France or wherever as much as he could have!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
forbidden lesbian posted:Is there a reason to be coy about running for president? Not relevant to Jeb, but there's always the Palin/Trump variation, when you make noises that suggest you may run to get your idiot core of mouthbreathing supporters to buy your latest ghostwritten book or whatever, then find some reason to never go through with it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
Chris Christie posted:Haven't checked in in a while. Am I wrong for thinking Romney 2016 should be a done deal? He's a two-time loser; the main reason he's as high as he is in current polling is the utter weakness of the rest of the field combined with only-other sorta-serious contended Jeb not really being in play yet. As in 2008 and 2012, the only way he gets the nomination is if there's no other slightly-less-empty suit in the room once the crazies have eaten each other alive.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
Juvenalian.Satyr posted:The only GOP personality I see that would ever take a anti-embargo side would be Rand Paul or the like, and for Rand in particular I doubt this is the hill he'll choose to die on, considering his utter lack of principles besides. Well you're in luck! Rand is already using the Cuba angle as a way to attack Rubio as "an isolationist." Still chuckling about that, myself.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Paul will likely go to legalising opium, heroin and cocaine, and Clinton will not touch that. But those drugs aren't as popular or as liked as Marijuana. I sincerely doubt Paul will of his own accord go in on legalizing anything harder than weed, though I would expect any number of blandly-nonspecific "decriminalize drugs/end the Pohl posted:I guess I can just reiterate my point, No. He's got long odds, but Paul isn't as obviously a walking punchline like Carson, and if he manages to inherit his father's rabid followers, he can at least put in a performance during the primaries, potentially a strong one if the field remains as weak/contaminated as it currently is.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
Beamed posted:Wait, really? I thought Rand's gameplan was always the 2016 nomination. He'll take it if he can get it, but unlike a certain Dr. Seuss enthusiast, Rand hasn't burned so many bridges that he can't also bank on a long Senate career while repeating his father's act to milk his idiot base for all their worth.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:He's also taken the wrong side of the Cuba thing, which, while it might win him the votes of the decaying Cuban exile bloc, will not endear him to any Hispanics under the age of, like, 50. Should he somehow get the nomination, and then predictably go down in flames, I expect there would be a rash of Rovian op-eds with titles like "What's Wrong With Latino Americans?" As the right, scratching its head, tries to puzzle out yet again why insincere tokenism didn't produce expected results.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:Chris Christie got the "black" from Obama when he hugged him, he is tainted and therefore ineligible for the Republican nomination. I guess that explains the awkward hug footage from that Cowboys game.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/22/mitt-romney-climate-change-is-real-human-induced-a/ By acting as though he's already the candidate for the general, he's attempting to preempt the usual need to cater to the crazies during the primary, and indeed to position himself as the natural candidate who all the others must try to define themselves against. The problem, which Disinterested notes, is that the GOP practice for two elections now is for the primary to be a crazy-off between frothing lunatics and a few tepid money Republicans who have to act at least as nuts to avoid alienating the party base, so this could well backfire.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
Good Citizen posted:He made liberals really mad that one time. That, and as has been the case for the last two presidential cycles, the GOP's bench is mostly lightweights, has-beens, and also-rans. Among such company there's plenty of room for someone as unaccomplished as Walker.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
SnakePlissken posted:Nah. A sensible Republican makes a world of sense, considering Paul, Huckabee, etc. I think it stands a chance of reining in the idiots before this country looks even more like a bunch of entitled, demented big fat babies than we already do, thanks to Newt Gingrich, et al. I think Romney's chances don't look too bad really, nor the JEB, and having somebody with a grain of sense running for office will be doing everybody in the world a favor. I think you're being wildly optimistic in thinking that the GOP base would tolerate a "sensible" Republican when there's more than enough loonies tossing them red meat, and I don't see much to suggest that the party has done any, let alone enough, soul-searching since 2012/2008 that might justify sidelining the lunatics during the primary. I qualify "sensible" above as I don't really think Romney is that, nor that he's got a grain of sense given his past campaign behavior, nor even what one might look like these days. Old, dying Bob Dole, perhaps? OctoberBlues posted:Now I'm hoping that Mitt claims the Republican party is too wacko, switches to Democrat, and tries to beat Hillary in the primaries. Possibly by attacking from the left. This has already been (sorta) predicted: 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 03:59
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:There was no good that could come from it. The instant anybody brought up Mormonism you'd see a massive increase in the "Obama is a Muslim" bullshit in response to it. Anybody at all bringing race up would have done nothing other than make the race much uglier and much dirtier. It would have started a fight nobody could win so nobody picked it. Didn't one of Santorum's surrogates try the whole "Mormonism isn't really Christianity" thing during the primary? I swear I remember something like that.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
Warcabbit posted:Bigotry. Hate. Bad. Well that's going to get him nowhere with the party base.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:We're going full crazy. 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. Intel&Sebastian posted:*fires wadded ball of money at you* Well that just brings us back to the fundamental question: Is greed or spite the more powerful vice within the GOP (I say spite, narrowly).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:If it was truly spite we would've had much more fun last presidential election. Spite was the stronger emotion, but it attached to the weaker candidates.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Guess who's in Des Moines tonight. Yeah, I heard that on NPR earlier this evening. If I remember right, the commentator mentioned Trump in the "also attending are these weirdos and losers who no one expects much if anything from" category, though he did use slightly less blunt language.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:Freep's admin was banning anyone who said they supported Romney for months, but they all shut up and got in line once he had the nomination. Hilariously, jimrob (the admin, for those of you wise enough not to bathe in the vitriol that thread presents) then turned around and started banning people who mentioned the earlier bans of Romney supporters. It was one of the most Orwellian things I've ever seen.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
agent_wildflower posted:How does one even eat that? Noisily, and with a profound sense of shame.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
Titus Sardonicus posted:Jesus dickriding christ what a moron. How the hell did this guy get through his undergrad biology courses, let alone med school, without even the slightest understanding of evolution? And the second part isn't about political correctness so much as it's about Dr Carson being an upper echelon cock. I imagine he did it the same way other creationists with advanced degrees manage it: compartmentalized memorization that they do their best to forget as soon as they've got the degree.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
bpower posted:Yeah, I was one of them. Out of all the candidates last time he was only one that didn't repulse me. I remember back in 2008 when he was one of the very few on the right not to try to pigpile Obama over Reverend Wright, going so far as to say on Fox (if I remember right) that as someone who grew up in latter days of Jim Crow he totally understood why African Americans of Wright's age might well still carry resentments. It was surprisingly reasonable of him.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:2008 Huckabee is the Huckabee who was given the chance to repudiate his 1992 comments about people with HIV/AIDS needing to be "isolated" from society, and didn't take it. He wasn't a nice guy. Oh don't get me wrong, I wasn't trying to imply that his is, rather than on that one occasion he expressed a surprising degree of understanding running contrary to the frothing outrage just about every other Republican was indulging in over "god drat America!" Hieronymous Alloy posted:Huckabee is one of the more frightening Republican candidates because he's smart, charming, and (relatively) sane, which makes him a one-eyed man in the land of the blind as far as the modern Republican party is concerned. He's just got the old-time religion. I wouldn't call him all that frightening, as I don't see how even if he makes a real run he'll make it out of the primaries without getting eaten alive for 1) occasionally being non-terrible on this and that, and 2) the whole cop killer commutation thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Mitt never had anything to offer as VP. "And so my fellow Americans-" *awkwardly applies Rogaine via plastic dropper*
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:Wait, Laura Bush killed somebody? Killed a classmate in a car accident when she was a teenager.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Lindsey Graham, on Face the Nation this morning, said essentially the same thing. Apparently ignoring that Obama's strategy is working and demanding a Third Iraq War is going to be a non-trivial thing, at least during the preliminary GOP primary scuffling.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:So did Robert Gates on MTP, but he said that his definition of "boots on the ground" didn't mean a full scale invasion. More like a a few hundred troops and some spec ops. he definitely didn't seem to care for Obama. Graham said "about ten thousand," so he at least is talking a substantial ground presence which I'm sure would never ever grow or experience mission creep, and certainly wouldn't have us directly entangled in middle east warfare for another loving decade or anything.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
I tell you, it's a drat shame they merged vainglory into pride rather than leaving it as its own deadly sin, particularly with Cruz in the Senate.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:Witnesses get stichnesses. Remember in 2008 when the Very Serious people were asking if Obama was "too cool" to be president? Good times, man.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2015 22:36
|
|