monkeygirl Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 His former campaign director, whom he is now suing, came out and admitted that in the beginning it was a publicity stunt, but after he got humbers his ego took over and he decided he could actually pull it off.This was my thought all along-that he got sick of yelling at his teevee and decided to toss his hat in the ring, just to get himself on television. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeygirl Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Black Lives Matter has real issues and gripes. If you don't think racism is not institutionalized you live in bubble.No doubt. Much like black on black crime. Which one gets more press, though? Hmmmmmm......... WHAT is much like black on black crime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Dameron Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Institutional racism I assume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeygirl Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 ...okay... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie Mathison Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 I can't imagine why Pence gave up the governor's mansion and took the nomination. He's generally cautious in which campaigns he runs in, he probably would have won the nomination outright four years ago, but chose the lay-up as governor.LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Dameron Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 I can't imagine why Pence gave up the governor's mansion and took the nomination. He's generally cautious in which campaigns he runs in, he probably would have won the nomination outright four years ago, but chose the lay-up as governor.LOL In 2012 Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum all led the race for a time. Even Michele Bachmann was doing well for a time. There was an Anybody-But-Romney roulette going on, but none of the other candidates were remotely acceptable. Even with that, Santorum hung with Romney for some time during the primaries. If he'd won Michigan, who knows? If Pence had been in there, he would have gotten a chance. He's a polished enough candidate that I doubt that he would have face-planted as often as the other candidates. He would have had the talk radio crowd on his side. Yeah, he probably would have won the nomination. I'd even go so far as to say that he would have had a fairly easy path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie Mathison Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 I mean, look, I could get drawn into this but I decline. In some of the discussions I've had with you, you've been so inflexible and border-line Rain-man, just repeating your same point over and over, that it's not really any fun talking to you. You stake out an initial position, stubbornly cling to it, and then as the discussion develops, I never get the sense you're actually considering what the other person writes (and perhaps, not even reading it). So this is going to be my only post on this, and honestly, I wasn't even going to post that initial "LOL," but I just couldn't let something that ridiculous go by and have some other person in this thread read your post and think you might actually know what you're talking about. If you think a candidate that was completely unknown outside of a) political junkies like me; b) people who live in Indiana; and c) bible-thumpers; and furthermore a candidate with no money, no establishment support, no rich donor support, that is also boring/un-charismatic and appealed to basically no one except the neo-con jesus freak group, actually had a chance, well, then we really have nothing more to discuss. I have a feeling that pretty much nothing I'm going to say will cause you to reflect upon your puzzling opinion, an opinion which by the way, I believe is shared by exactly 0 political writers. The only candidate that was in a real position to challenge Romney was Perry, and that was before he humiliated himself in the debates and demonstrated he wasn't ready for primetime. I get that Pence is the type of candidate that's right up your alley, I do, but guess what, that segment of the party is never going to get one of 'theirs' in as the candidate. Never. They weren't in '08, they weren't in '12, they didn't this year, and they never will. You might as well deal with it bub. People like me own this party, so go ahead and put that in your pipe and smoke it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms. Spam Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 What do we know? I mean Trump is now the official nominee of the party of Reagan and Lincoln. A joke - a lark - a publicity stunt - has won your party and you own it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie Mathison Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 What's your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Dameron Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 In some of the discussions I've had with you, you've been so inflexible and border-line Rain-man, just repeating your same point over and over, that it's not really any fun talking to you. It's a pain in the butt when the other person refuses to be drawn into a side conversation, I'm aware. Particularly in political debates where it's easier to move someone off into a position they aren't trying to defend, but they stubbornly refuse to follow you there. It's called being a disciplined debater. Try it sometime. But then, you seem to prefer just going out and attacking your opponent on a personal level instead. Hope that makes you feel big. If you think a candidate that was completely unknown outside of a) political junkies like me; b) people who live in Indiana; and c) bible-thumpers; and furthermore a candidate with no money, no establishment support, no rich donor support, that is also boring/un-charismatic and appealed to basically no one except the neo-con jesus freak group, actually had a chance, well, then we really have nothing more to discuss. <Shrug> Rick Santorum won 11 states. Unless you're telling me that Pence isn't at least as appealing a candidate as Rick Santorum, then Pence stood a chance. I mean, you can act all dismissive, but half the party in 2012 were desperately searching for a savior. Someone, anyone, who could take down Romney. Would Pence have stood a chance in a normal year? Heck no. If he'd run in 2008 or 2016 from his House seat, he'd have ended up as buried as Duncan Hunter was. But 2012 was the year that no one ran for some reason. In 2016, none of the candidates, save Romney would have even made it onto the main debate stage. That's not hyperbole, Perry and Santorum tried. So just dismissing Pence because he would have started out with little support is meaningless. The question of whether he would have won the nomination is twofold: 1. Would he have have gotten a chance as the anti-Romney? Given that pretty much everyone got a crack taking that mantle, I'd say the answer to that is affirmative. 2. Would Pence have imploded like the rest of the field? Unlike the other anti-Romneys, Pence is knowledgeable about substance, knows how to handle the media well and is fairly skilled at speaking persuasively (former talk show host), has credentials both from the conservative wing of the party and establishment, and isn't a completely unacceptable joke. Given how little support Romney really had even with the Republican establishment, Pence would have been much more difficult to summarily dismiss as many politicos and voters did for Santorum, Gingrich, and Cain. an opinion which by the way, I believe is shared by exactly 0 political writers. I doubt many political writers have even thought about it. I get that Pence is the type of candidate that's right up your alley, I do, but guess what, that segment of the party is never going to get one of 'theirs' in as the candidate. Never. I'm sorry, are you under the impression that my statement was an endorsement for Pence in 2012? I would have voted for Romney. I got my guy that year. I'm looking realistically at one of the people who could have taken it away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms. Spam Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 What's your point?You bought that? I mean you own the party right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie Mathison Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 Still not sure what your point is. Is it I should be embarrassed that Trump is the nominee? Because I'm not. Was there another point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms. Spam Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Pretty much. Just a big meh. I did ask you a few questions that I am interested in your opinion in the convention thread though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest El Chalupacabra Posted August 2, 2016 Share Posted August 2, 2016 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-hired-me-as-an-attorneyplease-dont_us_579e52dee4b00e7e269fb30f Interesting, if not a well-articulated article about the obvious.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good God a Bear Posted August 2, 2016 Share Posted August 2, 2016 Interesting insight into Clinton's character as well...especially if we're talking about bullies in the White House. http://www.inquisitr.com/3374818/eric-bonners-facebook-post-what-hillary-clinton-said-to-military-k-9-handler-cost-her-his-vote/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burt Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 I miss Mitt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Dameron Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 I miss Mitt. It's weird that Republicans nominated the genuinely nicest guy run for president since... maybe ever really. Then turned around nominated a pig like Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms. Spam Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 El Oh El. Is the GOP finally ending and we are witnesses? I just watched my first Hillary political commercial and it was really pointed and well done as a stab at Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Dameron Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 El Oh El. Is the GOP finally ending and we are witnesses?Naw. This Trump madness will pass. Trump is a glitch in the system functioning on a high school bully level where the beta males are following him chuckling at his misbehavior and happy to be a part of the in-crowd. It would take many election cycles to displace Republicans in wide regions across the country as the dominant party. Will the Republicans manage to put forward a good candidate for president? I'm not sure. If it hadn't been Trump this year, it very well likely could have been Ted Cruz (ironically, despite being an insurgent candidate, he was one of the few who outright refused to submit before Trump). He would have lost to Clinton, but would have at least made a case beyond name calling and bluster. Plus, unlike many establishment politicians, he actually believes in this stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest El Chalupacabra Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 El Oh El. Is the GOP finally ending and we are witnesses? I just watched my first Hillary political commercial and it was really pointed and well done as a stab at Trump.You can bet your ass that the GOP is going to enact policies to prevent another Trump take over, and probably even have their version of super delegates by the next election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Dameron Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 El Oh El. Is the GOP finally ending and we are witnesses? I just watched my first Hillary political commercial and it was really pointed and well done as a stab at Trump.You can bet your ass that the GOP is going to enact policies to prevent another Trump take over, and probably even have their version of super delegates by the next election. Here's hoping. There are good reasons why the Founders were wary of pure democracy. And Trump manages to touch on a good chunk of them. Parties should protect themselves from this sort of thing happening and leaving their voters without a good, or even reasonable choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas1138 Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 It's been a pretty remarkable turnaround lately. Looks like we can all lower our Xanax dosages. http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms. Spam Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 Can we trust Russia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 We can trust Russia to act in the best interest of Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc DuQuesne Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 I only wonder why the Russians are using their chips this way. I have seen a few reports that quote Assange as saying the next leak will lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton. I couldn't find any reference to the statement on more reputable media, so I take it with a grain of salt. They must really be on to how much of a clown Trump is or believe he is in their bag if they do give those chips to Assange though, cause those are the chips you hold for a very strong play. I think if Trump wins Russia and China both make huge moves. If it is Clinton the moves will only be very large. I seriously think it could be somebody else though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts