2016 Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
#6,876
#6,876
hog88 said:
A lot of scholars think the second amendment only applies to militias, but now we have definitive proof they are wrong.
Click to expand...

Well, I believe the distinction is they don't think that WE are the militia. Originalists like myself believe we are the militia. We are the pool from which the well-regulated militia is taken and at the time of the adoption of the bill of rights you typically brought your own gun to serve, so it's implied that you already own one.
 
#6,877
#6,877
n_huffhines said:
The only way that someone can be unprepared for a debate question is if they don't have principled views and/or consistent actions. You could ask Reagan (as I recall) or Ron Paul or Goldwater (as I understand it) about anything.
Click to expand...

And I honestly don't think Rubio was prepared for Christie to come out and announce to the nation (world) "I don't feel he is qualified for the office."

In that kind of forum, it's not a statement that's typically made.
 
#6,878
#6,878
Vol8188 said:
The GOP wants just as much of your money. The difference is that you simply like what they do with your money (war and foreign aid). If you were to be ideologically consistent here (not something I'd expect from you), you'd say that you're the best person to determine how and who your money aids.

Lol and what current candidate for the GOP has any respect for the constitution?
Click to expand...

Look skippy, I'm under no illusion that the GOP is going to be anymore fiscally responsible than the Dems it's that the Dem party ideology and mine are almost polar opposite and there is no turning them back. The Republican Party is about to go over the same ledge but not completely gone yet, it can be fixed. I think this election cycle is a good example of people being tired of the status quo.
 
#6,879
#6,879
n_huffhines said:
Well, I believe the distinction is they don't think that WE are the militia. Originalists like myself believe we are the militia. We are the pool from which the well-regulated militia is taken and at the time of the adoption of the bill of rights you typically brought your own gun to serve, so it's implied that you already own one.
Click to expand...

Correct. I in no way believe that the drafters of the Constitution intended for militias to include everyday citizens and certainly didn't intend for it to be taken to the extremes we are at in today's society.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,880
#6,880
Grand Vol said:
Three notable exceptions to the rules. Reagan was the master at public speaking. He made you feel like he was in your living room talking with you instead of to an entire country. He had a way of using wit, charm and humor to put people at ease and drawing them onto his side of the matter. And eventually winning them over despite their opposing views on whatever he was talking about. I don't think we will ever have another President with that kind of personality that can unite a nation as he did.
Click to expand...

Ron Paul is an exception to the rule because he had mostly consistent views. It's easy to catch others in snafus because they don't have consistent views. Some can talk their way out of it (Reagan - who usually pushed small government, but didn't always).

Today's Rs talk small government but quickly abandon this principle, depending on the issue at question. That's why there are few exceptions to the rule.
 
#6,881
#6,881
hog88 said:
Look skippy, I'm under no illusion that the GOP is going to be anymore fiscally responsible than the Dems it's that the Dem party ideology and mine are almost polar opposite and there is no turning them back. The Republican Party is about to go over the same ledge but not completely gone yet, it can be fixed. I think this election cycle is a good example of people being tired of the status quo.
Click to expand...

Who currently running could fix it? And who currently running respects the constitution since you claim dems don't
 
#6,882
#6,882
bnhunt said:
Correct. I in no way believe that the drafters of the Constitution intended for militias to include everyday citizens and certainly didn't intend for it to be taken to the extremes we are at in today's society.
Click to expand...

What extremes are you talking about?
 
#6,883
#6,883
Vol8188 said:
That's where you're wrong. Foreign aid could 100% be done through individual donations. Millions of people donated to hati. Millions of people donate to fight AIDS in Africa. The government shouldn't decide where my money goes.
Click to expand...
I can't necessarily argue against that. but the government does need to run the military, and foreign policy dictates where/how that money is spent. So we need to elect good people (I almost couldn't type that because I was actually laughing)
 
#6,884
#6,884
bnhunt said:
Correct. I in no way believe that the drafters of the Constitution intended for militias to include everyday citizens and certainly didn't intend for it to be taken to the extremes we are at in today's society.
Click to expand...

I don't think we agree. I feel like I'm saying the opposite. They aren't saying we are the National Guard, they are saying we are a militia. We are the last line of defense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,885
#6,885
n_huffhines said:
Ron Paul is an exception to the rule because he had mostly consistent views. It's easy to catch others in snafus because they don't have consistent views. Some can talk their way out of it (Reagan - who usually pushed small government, but didn't always).

Today's Rs talk small government but quickly abandon this principle, depending on the issue at question. That's why there are few exceptions to the rule.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I don't think anyone has every applied the word "witty" or "funny" to Ron Paul lol

He's a pretty direct and in your face kind of guy.
 
#6,886
#6,886
Vol8188 said:
Who currently running could fix it? And who currently running respects the constitution since you claim dems don't
Click to expand...
No one person regardless of who it is will fix the problems we have. Until people throw out ALL congress/senators... yours, mine.... ALL of them, nothing will change. Pork bringers keep getting elected. There is the problem
 
#6,887
#6,887
bnhunt said:
Correct. I in no way believe that the drafters of the Constitution intended for militias to include everyday citizens and certainly didn't intend for it to be taken to the extremes we are at in today's society.
Click to expand...

At the time the constitution was written militias were compromised of common every day citizens. How the hell do get that they didn't intend what was actual fact at the time?
 
#6,888
#6,888
SpaceCoastVol said:
No one person regardless of who it is will fix the problems we have. Until people throw out ALL congress/senators... yours, mine.... ALL of them, nothing will change. Pork bringers keep getting elected. There is the problem
Click to expand...

Why are you so confident the people we replace them with will do better?
 
#6,889
#6,889
Vol8188 said:
Who currently running could fix it? And who currently running respects the constitution since you claim dems don't
Click to expand...

Currently running, none. Political change is a slow grind, I think we are just now seeing that wheel start really turning in the R party.
 
#6,890
#6,890
Right now the four most likely presidents are:

Two draft dodgers
A pathological liar from Canada
And a woman who should probably be in prison

Yet we believe only the Democratic Party is broken?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,891
#6,891
hog88 said:
Currently running, none. Political change is a slow grind, I think we are just now seeing that wheel start really turning in the R party.
Click to expand...

But it's turning the wrong way. Intellectualism is frowned upon in the GOP because it makes a candidate seem "too boring". They want a draft dodger who makes joke about Rosie O or a pathological liar from Canada who's idea of foreign policy is to "make the sand glow".
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#6,893
#6,893
If any current GOP candidate outside of possibly Kasich were in office during the Cuban missile crisis, we wouldn't have an east coast
 
#6,898
#6,898
Grand Vol said:
One of the talking heads invoked Dan Quayle last night. And pretty much comparatively was spot on with the deer in headlights look.

Rubio's my guy honestly, but at this point he has to earn his way back into the top. If I wasn't objective, I'd say it was childish for a candidate (Christie) to go after Rubio when there is no chance they get the nomination, but it's the way the game is played. I agree with the Fox panel that it didn't hurt Christie, but it also didn't help him any either.

Rubio was unprepared for the question and it showed. But I also recognize the fact that Christie was a prosecutor (in case he never mentioned it) and his job was cornering people in tough situations to gauge their reactions. And he did that job spot on last night in the court of national opinion.

I agree the nomination is/was Rubio's to lose as I feel he has the best chance to reach across a broad range and get the voters motivated. But he has to be better prepared for those kinds of things to pop up. His staff really let him down by not preparing him for that line of questioning as it could have been easily countered (I explained in the debate thread) and he could have come off at least on even ground in the end.
Click to expand...


In other words Christi showed he was smarter and thinks on his feet much quicker than Rubio. Christi saw he rattled Rubio and poured it on. Rubio did not know how to respond. That should give those supporting Rubio a pause. I think it shows he is not ready.

Compare the way Rubio responded when attached vs Cruz when he is attacked. I don't like Cruz but he is a fast thinker, much quicker than Rubio. I have now marked Rubio off my list of possible candidates to support.
 
#6,899
#6,899
Grand Vol said:
One of the talking heads invoked Dan Quayle last night. And pretty much comparatively was spot on with the deer in headlights look.

Rubio's my guy honestly, but at this point he has to earn his way back into the top. If I wasn't objective, I'd say it was childish for a candidate (Christie) to go after Rubio when there is no chance they get the nomination, but it's the way the game is played. I agree with the Fox panel that it didn't hurt Christie, but it also didn't help him any either.

Rubio was unprepared for the question and it showed. But I also recognize the fact that Christie was a prosecutor (in case he never mentioned it) and his job was cornering people in tough situations to gauge their reactions. And he did that job spot on last night in the court of national opinion.

I agree the nomination is/was Rubio's to lose as I feel he has the best chance to reach across a broad range and get the voters motivated. But he has to be better prepared for those kinds of things to pop up. His staff really let him down by not preparing him for that line of questioning as it could have been easily countered (I explained in the debate thread) and he could have come off at least on even ground in the end.
Click to expand...

Rubio criticized Christie over his disaster response and Christie put him in his place. It wasn't like Christie randomly attacked Rubio out of the blue
 
#6,900
#6,900
Obsessed said:
Lmao

Is Hillary disqualified for her lies?
Click to expand...

Why would you consider voting for a candidate that you know 100% for sure stands on that debate stage and willfully lies?

Cruz has done so multiple times. Because the Dems are colorblind and stick with Hillary is not a reason.
 
Last edited:
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top