2016 Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
#8,751
#8,751
alexmanu said:
Reagan was also statesmanlike and could actually formulate proper sentences. Trump is so vague in explaining his policies that I actually think he either doesn't know or understand the specifics. "We're gonna do this and that and yada yada... blah blah blahhh...Make America great again". Tosh.
Click to expand...

You forgot that we're "going to be winning" at everything again. Then not tell us how we're going to be doing so much "winning". The last person that said winning as much as he does now has HIV.
 
#8,752
#8,752
I just saw the speech by Kasich that got every feminists' panties in a wad.

Good grief, the concept of "context" has lost all ****ing meaning in this nation. And people are too damned sensitive these days.
 
#8,753
#8,753
alexmanu said:
Reagan was also statesmanlike and could actually formulate proper sentences. Trump is so vague in explaining his policies that I actually think he either doesn't know or understand the specifics. "We're gonna do this and that and yada yada... blah blah blahhh...Make America great again". Tosh.
Click to expand...

He was a phenomenal orator. He campaigned on cutting taxes, a strong military, and negotiating with foreign powers from a position of strength. And he did campaign on a feel-good platform of a revival of American pride. Of course every candidate tries to put their own spin on it.

Do you remember Reagans campaign?
 
#8,754
#8,754
Grand Vol said:
I just saw the speech by Kasich that got every feminists' panties in a wad.

Good grief, the concept of "context" has lost all ****ing meaning in this nation. And people are too damned sensitive these days.
Click to expand...

Politicians should know that every single word they say will be taken out of context. A HUGE problem with political discourse stems from an irresponsible media
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#8,755
#8,755
golfballs said:
He was a phenomenal orator. He campaigned on cutting taxes, a strong military, and negotiating with foreign powers from a position of strength. And he did campaign on a feel-good platform of a revival of American pride. Of course every candidate tries to put their own spin on it.

Do you remember Reagans campaign?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I do.

And he sure as hell didn't go off about building a wall or talk about those rapey Mexicans or shutting down immigration from a certain religious group.

Oh, and I'd bet he knew what the nuclear triad was before a debate.

The line you are trying to draw does not exist. Reagan brought the nation together. He sure as hell didn't invoke hatred in his speeches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#8,756
#8,756
Grand Vol said:
Yeah, I do.

And he sure as hell didn't go off about building a wall or talk about those rapey Mexicans or shutting down immigration from a certain religious group.

Oh, and I'd bet he knew what the nuclear triad was before a debate.

The line you are trying to draw does not exist. Reagan brought the nation together. He sure as hell didn't invoke hatred in his speeches.
Click to expand...

Ha. Not saying they're the same candidate. But everyone tries to draw similarities to Reagan and there's always some kind of parallel. None of these candidates are any more "Reagan-like" than the other
 
#8,757
#8,757
Do you want another liberal justice on the Supreme Court? Vote for Trump.

Pretty simple.

Rubio is the only viable path to not getting a liberal Supreme Court justice.


As a foreigner I'm more interested in economic and foreign policy. But I have studied American politics since university and having another liberal justice would be intolerable to most conservatives in America.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#8,758
#8,758
The Nevada Caucus is getting out of control.
 

Attachments

  • Cb8aISPXIAIGJ3k.jpg
    Cb8aISPXIAIGJ3k.jpg
    31.2 KB · Views: 0
  • Cb8aHbuXIAECjfi.jpg
    Cb8aHbuXIAECjfi.jpg
    34.1 KB · Views: 0
  • Cb8aGbtW8AI-aVD.jpg
    Cb8aGbtW8AI-aVD.jpg
    32.8 KB · Views: 0
  • Cb8aFeUXIAAxDlv.jpg
    Cb8aFeUXIAAxDlv.jpg
    24.6 KB · Views: 0
#8,760
#8,760
alexmanu said:
Do you want another liberal justice on the Supreme Court? Vote for Trump.

Pretty simple.

Rubio is the only viable path to not getting a liberal Supreme Court justice.


As a foreigner I'm more interested in economic and foreign policy. But I have studied American politics since university and having another liberal justice would be intolerable to most conservatives in America.
Click to expand...

Actually of those running, I'd trust Cruz (as dirty as it may feel) to pick a SCOTUS Justice the most.

I'm going to wash my hands now.
 
#8,761
#8,761
Grand Vol said:
Actually of those running, I'd trust Cruz (as dirty as it may feel) to pick a SCOTUS Justice the most.

I'm going to wash my hands now.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but my point is that Cruz is not electable and Rubio is. And Rubio would most likely pick a conservative, or at the very least 'moderate', justice.
 
#8,762
#8,762
There is one similarity between Donald Trump and Ronald Reagan: Trump will pull in millions of democrat votes, just like Reagan did in 1980.

Then, the Reagan democrats will become Trump democrats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#8,763
#8,763
alexmanu said:
Do you want another liberal justice on the Supreme Court? Vote for Trump.

Pretty simple.

Rubio is the only viable path to not getting a liberal Supreme Court justice.


As a foreigner I'm more interested in economic and foreign policy. But I have studied American politics since university and having another liberal justice would be intolerable to most conservatives in America.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your interest and input. But I don't think any of the arguments made in this forum are going to convince anyone of who to vote for. Btw, are you convinced that Obama won't be able to get a nominee through? I doubt Cruz, given the opportunity, would nominate a liberal justice.
 
#8,765
#8,765
alexmanu said:
Do you want another liberal justice on the Supreme Court? Vote for Trump.

Pretty simple.

Rubio is the only viable path to not getting a liberal Supreme Court justice.


As a foreigner I'm more interested in economic and foreign policy. But I have studied American politics since university and having another liberal justice would be intolerable to most conservatives in America.
Click to expand...

An unbalanced SCOTUS in either direction is no good. A liberal replacement now or two conservatives filling the seats of Scalia and Ginsburg would be equally concerning.
 
#8,767
#8,767
alexmanu said:
Fair enough, but my point is that Cruz is not electable and Rubio is. And Rubio would most likely pick a conservative, or at the very least 'moderate', justice.
Click to expand...

So of all the "electable" candidates, which is just Rubio, Rubio is the most likely to pick a conservative. Got it
 
#8,768
#8,768
Grand Vol said:
I think what Carlos was trying to say is:

"Anyone not named Donald Trump is an establishment RINO."

ETA: According to some at least.
Click to expand...

My counterpoint is that other camps do it just as frequently and before the Trump movement came to fruition.
 
#8,770
#8,770
golfballs said:
Thanks for your interest and input. But I don't think any of the arguments made in this forum are going to convince anyone of who to vote for. Btw, are you convinced that Obama won't be able to get a nominee through? I doubt Cruz, given the opportunity, would nominate a liberal justice.
Click to expand...

There is no constitutional provision that requires the Senate to vote on ANY nominee for the Supreme Court. It is done on a consensual basis. During the Constitutional Convention of 1787 James Madison proposed a discretionary Senate veto to address this exact point. It was voted down. The framers clearly favored an advice and consent model.
 
#8,773
#8,773
alexmanu said:
There is no constitutional provision that requires the Senate to vote on ANY nominee for the Supreme Court. It is done on a consensual basis. During the Constitutional Convention of 1787 James Madison proposed a discretionary Senate veto to address this exact point. It was voted down. The framers clearly favored an advice and consent model.
Click to expand...

Ok so do you think it will happen or not
 
#8,774
#8,774
carlos86 said:
Hell yes. Not checking photo ids and people knowingly voting twice. And people representing candidates counting votes.
Click to expand...

Wow, yeah this caucus should be a write-off. Why do they even caucus? It's so archaic. Just do a normal primary election like the previous three states, it runs smoothly and it's proper democracy.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top