|
celeron 300a posted:And the sitting two-term vice president isn't even being considered? I I believe Biden would like to run, but knows he has no shot with Hillary running. If she announced she wasn't running though I think he'd run.
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2015 02:24
|
|
that Joe Biden will be at the first official democratic primary debate (official being defined as organized by the DNC and carried by a major tv network).
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 08:26 |
|
|
Good Citizen posted:She wouldn't have been directly involved in any serious policy issues. A Palin presidency would have all the actual governing farmed out to advisors and aids. The only thing Palin would directly involve herself in would be taking petty retribution against everyone she perceives as having slighted her. One of the key skills is knowing who your advisors should be. Palin would be making decisions about who she delegated decisions to. That's what made Bush's presidency such a disaster - his own poor decisions were bad enough, but his habit of listening to idiots and putting them in charge was what really did the damage.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
bpower posted:Ironically Christie might be enough of a belligerent rear end in a top hat to survive the primaries without going crazy right wing. I could see him going ape-poo poo on anyone trying to call him a Rino. He could stake our a center-right position and just defend it like a rabid dog. the right likes his unhinged angry dog shtick when directed against liberals, they won't like it directed against them
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Yes, Romney still got 47% of the vote. All you need is a year with one of the following: Saying Romney got 47% of the vote is a little misleading about what it takes for him to win - he did, but because Democrats have an edge in the current layout of the electoral college he probably would have lost at like 50.5%.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
FMguru posted:All true. But the notion that he was some sort of disaster pick just isn't supported by the evidence. There have been VP picks that had no discernible effect (Paul Ryan didn't move the needle at all) and VP picks that have actively damaged their tickets from the moment they were selected (Quayle). Lieberman was pretty popular - heck, in late 2002-early 2003 he was led the polls for 2004 Dem nomination. I suppose you could say that the Nader 2000 movement was fed by people who were upset by the Lieberman choice, but I don't remember too many 2K Naderites complaining about Holy Joe - they were mostly about Gush/Bore, vote for a real change, the two parties are interchangeable corporate hand-puppets, and the like. Lieberman was a bad pick because it was part of Gore's distancing himself from the highly popular Clinton presidency, but it was more a symptom rather than a problem in itself. I think most people's loathing for Lieberman came after the election when he became one of the go-to rightist Democrats for the Republicans.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2015 14:44
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:My guess is that the big donors just weren't there. Yeah, he spent three weeks talking to all the important people and concluded he would lose, and badly. Invisible primary at work.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Three Olives posted:I am honestly having a hard time processing this, is the Republican party honestly walking towards being anti-vacination? This can not be a real thing that is happening can it? I'm having a slow stroke, right? crank magnetism in its most malignant form
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:I kind of agree the right has one semi-palatable candidate. I'd expect Cuomo to jump in if he thought Hillary wasn't running as he's been positioning himself for a run for years. Biden would run in a heartbeat if Hillary wasn't in - he wants to be President but I think he realizes he's got no shot of beating Hillary.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:Cuomo is pretty widely disliked amongst New York Dems as far as I can tell. Yeah, he's burned a lot of bridges being 'bipartisan'. His antics during the snowstorm where he canceled the subway without telling NYC or the subway itself, only to discover that the subway had to keep running to keep snow off the tracks just without letting anyone on did not help.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:From a Christian perspective, I disagree, but if you're not Christian you don't consider one of my assumptions valid. A christian perspective has no relevance to a discussion of what science says. It is definitely not true that science dictates we were created by God: science has nothing to say (either for or against) on the subject. The correct statement is that science is not incompatible with a belief in God and that we were created by God. Basically his second statement is true but his first is definitively not. evilweasel fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Feb 12, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Reread his statement. It isn't "science dictates a belief in god", it's "Both science and my faith dictate my belief that we are created by God" Since he says "both" you can cut out the "faith" part and you're left with "science dictate[s] my belief that we are created by God". It's not just "science is compatible with my belief in God", he's trying to assert that science not only supports but compels his belief. Maybe he misspoke, but his statement is definitely incorrect under any reasonable parsing of the statement without rewriting it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Boy the anti-Hillary talking points are in full swing this week, between stuff on FOX and the RNC stuff. Not sure why now though, since she hasn't teased announcing anything yet. Yeah I don't know why everyone isn't respecting the meaningless distinction of if Hillary has officially announced she is running or not.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
Litany Unheard posted:^^^^ Ya'll need to stop describing my personal nightmares. It's hard enough to get a good night's sleep. He has his dad throw out the red meat for Ron's base, while Rand talks about the stuff that's more widely liked and avoids discussing his dad. Best of both worlds: he gets to have the crazies vote for him without the crazy coming out of his mouth.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:So you could get an easy win by betting against a third party winning, is what you're saying. Guaranteed profit right there. Once you count in the risk of the site going under with your money and the rate of return you get on the cash locked up for that long it's pretty bad.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
trump is going to win new hampshire:quote:@realDonaldTrump
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:I think Carson will lose support after a few more debates. I don't think he can handle himself head to head against the other candidates, and now that he's the one that non-Trump candidates need to steal support from (since Trump seems to have locked down his) he's going to be a target. Yeah I can't really explain Carson except for being sort of the similar candidate to the NotRomneys from 2012. I think the 'top-tier' candidates have been really damaged by Trump because most of their rationale is competence - they can beat Hillary/get things done for Conservatism/etc and they're getting beaten like a drum by someone they despise. It's incredibly damaging. Carson, on the other hand, is clearly Not Trump but he also doesn't have the same expectations that the top-tier candidates had to be a competent politician. It's not a problem for him that he hasn't beaten Trump. But I'm not sure he has much of a platform besides "well, I'm not Trump and he hasn't humilated me yet" that distinguishes him. Honestly I'm starting to believe Trump is going to pull it off. If he sweeps Iowa and New Hampshire, I no longer believe that people who support another candidate will refuse to support him.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2015 15:28
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Carson is really frustrating to watch because you know you're listening to a genuinely smart guy who's pretty sociable, but restrained by needing to out-conservative other dudes No he's not, he is that conservative. He's a great doctor who thinks that means he also is smarter than everyone at not-medicine.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Mrit posted:He reminds me more of Tim Tebow. Everyone thinks he is awesome... until they see him play. just like tebow, Jeb is getting hammered into the turf by True American Patriots. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:I am legit happy that Tim Tebow loving sucks and is mocked and made fun, because he was enjoying Kim Davis level cultishness online and on ESPN, and I literally shouted expletives at obama when he did that bullshit tebowing tebow is more like romney he managed a stunning come-from-behind victory to beat a notable shithead and raised expectations among the faithful only to be utterly humiliated in the next game so badly he was driven out of the league forever
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
Brannock posted:Lol if Rubio and Jeb tear each other apart nothing left for rubio to tear
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:What happened? Toppled Boehner, then blocked McCarthy from taking his place.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Nessus posted:What happens if the House can't actually select a speaker? Does Obama get to institute Full Obamunism and Sharia Law? Boehner's resignation is not effective until there's a new speaker.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
It looks like the odds of Kasich getting second place has spiked on Predictit for no apparent reason - has something leaked? It keeps going up but I can't find any news about it, wondering if someone got their hands on exit polls or the like.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2016 22:37
|
|
|
Boosted_C5 posted:I'd hold my nose and vote for Cruz if he's the candidate. To be fair, it's not that the entire establishment hates cruz, it's everyone, everywhere, who has ever had to spend any time with the guy or work with the guy. It's really amazing how widely he is personally loathed.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
AllanGordon posted:Trump was probably happy since he got a bunch of press from it. Honestly an entertainer getting roasted is just how it goes. He was not. Look at a video of the event, Trump is furious.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I can't believe people are arguing against eminent domain. Don't people realize that a country without eminent domain would be completely paralyzed and unworkable? People dislike the use of eminent domain for private development projects. Nobody sane argues against eminent domain for a road, but when it comes to private development projects it becomes a lot more problematic.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Trump constantly says "repeal and replace Obamacare" and I want to know so bad what he intends to replace it with. That is a standard republican talking point and they just never get around to what the replacement is.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 05:36
|
|
|
but seriously, is anyone planning on doing a poll of south carolina this month
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:On SC: I wonder whether Trump will do well in the state that was anti-establishment enough to attempt secession, where Republican voters are (statistically) low-income, uneducated and racist, and where there's a very high number of veterans.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:Watching last night's debate made me realise that Carson may be the craziest person still in the race. He thinks trying to avoid civilian casualties when you're bombing terrorists is asinine, proposess a flat tax plan in which even the poorest members of society are forced to contribute, and proudly declares that instead of fining bankers for breaking the law, we should abolish all regulations to foster economic growth. Even Cruz' statements were more moderate than his. how was "I think the pyramids were actually built to store grain" not crazy enough to get him there already
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
Korelle posted:So we can now cross "praising Planned Parenthood" and "Bush did 9/11" off the list of things that will stop Donald Trump. That polls data is from before the debate.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
Boosted_C5 posted:We now have 3 South Carolina polls conducted post Iowa and New Hampshire. I'm suprised Rubio is still beating Jeb! but I don't think Jeb! will drop out here even if he loses to Rubio.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
Adar posted:While Rubio making GBS threads the bed at the exact wrong time complicates things and frankly makes the Trump/Cruz winner 80%+, I still think the establishment has enough pull to make the Jeb/Rubio loser post-SC or post-Nevada drop out. It all depends on if they can consolidate before the winner-take-all primaries and that's looking less and less likely. I mean, Kasich is probably out after SC but Bush and Rubio are both going to try to wait till Florida. And if they're both in on the first wave of winner-take-all primaries, how the gently caress do they ever overcome that?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewi...campaign=buffer I know what he's saying is that he doesn't care between the Senate voting to reject a nominee and the Senate simply not voting, but boy is that a dumb thing to say since it sounds like he doesn't care if Obama manages to get an appointee or not.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
Boosted_C5 posted:Obama can EASILY get the GOP congress to confirm a SCOTUS nominee. All he has to do is nominate a liberal who ISN'T an extremist and has been on record as being AGAINST the minority decisions in Heller and McDonald. the democrats are going to fill scalia's seat and heller is going to be overturned
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
Schnorkles posted:I've read your posts from last night, but I'm curious. Taking away the idea that you think that Trump was positioning for a general, do you think last night hurts him or helps him in the the republican primary? I think what he (or some other Trump supporter) said was that it was going to hurt him but he had more than enough of a lead to afford it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
I actually get the feeling that the 9/11 thing isn't planned and is sort of personal to Trump. I mean, he probably does know people who died in the attacks, and the "he kept us safe!!!!" line personally irritates him. There was no percentage in that line for Trump - it won't even play all that well with voters outside New York in the general.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 20:00
|
|
|
Trump wouldn't need to win to "win" by going third party: he would need to beat the Republican candidate. As long as he does that, it was the Republican who stole his nomination that threw the Presidency to the Democrats, not him.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Heller will never be overturned, it's too edge-case of a case. The only thing it prevents is an outright ban on all guns kept in the home. Licensing, registration, storage requirements, number of guns owned limitations, type of gun regulations, etc, are all perfectly fine under Heller. For example, a law that limited firearm ownership to a single revolver kept in a mandatory gun safe and inspected yearly by federal gun inspectors uner a $10,000 annual licensing fee would arguably satisfy all the requirements of Heller; anything short of an outright ban is arguably allowable regulation.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 08:26 |
|
|
Can anyone think of a scenario that Jeb wins that doesn't involve current candidates dying or the press discovering multiple career-ending scandals? I can't.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 20:57
|
|