Total Posts:42|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Aug. 6th GOP Debate

ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 9:22:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
So the first GOP debate is next week. Per Fox News rule, only 10 of the 17 will be allowed at the main debate, whereas the remaining seven will be relegated to what is effectively the "kid's table." Currently, looking at the RCP average [http://www.realclearpolitics.com...], the 10 candidates at the "main" debate will be:

Donald Trump: 20.8%
Scott Walker: 13.7%
Jeb Bush: 12.2%
Marco Rubio: 6.8%
Mike Huckabee: 6.3%
Ben Carson: 6.2%
Rand Paul: 5.5%
Ted Cruz: 5.2%
John Kasich: 3.5%
Chris Christie: 3%

This means that Rick Perry (2.2%), Bobby Jindal (1.7%), Rick Santorum (1.5%), Carly Fiorina (1.3%), and George Pataki (0.7%) will be attending the second-tier debate. For some reason this poll leaves out Lindsey Graham, and Jim Gilmore just declared a few days ago, so I oppose they'll be in attendance as well.

Any thoughts on how the field will evolve? Even speculation about next week's debate would be interesting.

My prediction: They play a game of pattycake, as they always do in the first few debates. There might be a few opportunistic jabs at (or from) Trump, but generally I think he in particular is going to tone down his rhetoric -- and, of course, turn Obama into a punching bag in the process. I feel as though all the pent-up animosity that's festered over the past few weeks over Trump's buffoonery -- his comments on Mexicans, on McCain, and more -- will be largely brushed to the side, at least for now.

Thoughts?
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 10:15:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 9:22:47 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
So the first GOP debate is next week. Per Fox News rule, only 10 of the 17 will be allowed at the main debate, whereas the remaining seven will be relegated to what is effectively the "kid's table." Currently, looking at the RCP average [http://www.realclearpolitics.com...], the 10 candidates at the "main" debate will be:

Donald Trump: 20.8%
Scott Walker: 13.7%
Jeb Bush: 12.2%
Marco Rubio: 6.8%
Mike Huckabee: 6.3%
Ben Carson: 6.2%
Rand Paul: 5.5%
Ted Cruz: 5.2%
John Kasich: 3.5%
Chris Christie: 3%

This means that Rick Perry (2.2%), Bobby Jindal (1.7%), Rick Santorum (1.5%), Carly Fiorina (1.3%), and George Pataki (0.7%) will be attending the second-tier debate. For some reason this poll leaves out Lindsey Graham, and Jim Gilmore just declared a few days ago, so I oppose they'll be in attendance as well.

Any thoughts on how the field will evolve? Even speculation about next week's debate would be interesting.

My prediction: They play a game of pattycake, as they always do in the first few debates. There might be a few opportunistic jabs at (or from) Trump, but generally I think he in particular is going to tone down his rhetoric -- and, of course, turn Obama into a punching bag in the process. I feel as though all the pent-up animosity that's festered over the past few weeks over Trump's buffoonery -- his comments on Mexicans, on McCain, and more -- will be largely brushed to the side, at least for now.

Thoughts?

We don't know if they will be using the RCP aggregate, but I think your list is correct.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 10:18:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 10:15:29 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 9:22:47 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
So the first GOP debate is next week. Per Fox News rule, only 10 of the 17 will be allowed at the main debate, whereas the remaining seven will be relegated to what is effectively the "kid's table." Currently, looking at the RCP average [http://www.realclearpolitics.com...], the 10 candidates at the "main" debate will be:

Donald Trump: 20.8%
Scott Walker: 13.7%
Jeb Bush: 12.2%
Marco Rubio: 6.8%
Mike Huckabee: 6.3%
Ben Carson: 6.2%
Rand Paul: 5.5%
Ted Cruz: 5.2%
John Kasich: 3.5%
Chris Christie: 3%

This means that Rick Perry (2.2%), Bobby Jindal (1.7%), Rick Santorum (1.5%), Carly Fiorina (1.3%), and George Pataki (0.7%) will be attending the second-tier debate. For some reason this poll leaves out Lindsey Graham, and Jim Gilmore just declared a few days ago, so I oppose they'll be in attendance as well.

Any thoughts on how the field will evolve? Even speculation about next week's debate would be interesting.

My prediction: They play a game of pattycake, as they always do in the first few debates. There might be a few opportunistic jabs at (or from) Trump, but generally I think he in particular is going to tone down his rhetoric -- and, of course, turn Obama into a punching bag in the process. I feel as though all the pent-up animosity that's festered over the past few weeks over Trump's buffoonery -- his comments on Mexicans, on McCain, and more -- will be largely brushed to the side, at least for now.

Thoughts?

We don't know if they will be using the RCP aggregate, but I think your list is correct.

True; it was the most comprehensive "average" I could find.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 10:25:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 10:18:13 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:15:29 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 9:22:47 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
So the first GOP debate is next week. Per Fox News rule, only 10 of the 17 will be allowed at the main debate, whereas the remaining seven will be relegated to what is effectively the "kid's table." Currently, looking at the RCP average [http://www.realclearpolitics.com...], the 10 candidates at the "main" debate will be:

Donald Trump: 20.8%
Scott Walker: 13.7%
Jeb Bush: 12.2%
Marco Rubio: 6.8%
Mike Huckabee: 6.3%
Ben Carson: 6.2%
Rand Paul: 5.5%
Ted Cruz: 5.2%
John Kasich: 3.5%
Chris Christie: 3%

This means that Rick Perry (2.2%), Bobby Jindal (1.7%), Rick Santorum (1.5%), Carly Fiorina (1.3%), and George Pataki (0.7%) will be attending the second-tier debate. For some reason this poll leaves out Lindsey Graham, and Jim Gilmore just declared a few days ago, so I oppose they'll be in attendance as well.

Any thoughts on how the field will evolve? Even speculation about next week's debate would be interesting.

My prediction: They play a game of pattycake, as they always do in the first few debates. There might be a few opportunistic jabs at (or from) Trump, but generally I think he in particular is going to tone down his rhetoric -- and, of course, turn Obama into a punching bag in the process. I feel as though all the pent-up animosity that's festered over the past few weeks over Trump's buffoonery -- his comments on Mexicans, on McCain, and more -- will be largely brushed to the side, at least for now.

Thoughts?

We don't know if they will be using the RCP aggregate, but I think your list is correct.

True; it was the most comprehensive "average" I could find.

I hope Kasich becomes a "top tier" candidate
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
imabench
Posts: 21,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 10:30:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 9:22:47 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:

My prediction: They play a game of pattycake, as they always do in the first few debates. There might be a few opportunistic jabs at (or from) Trump, but generally I think he in particular is going to tone down his rhetoric -- and, of course, turn Obama into a punching bag in the process. I feel as though all the pent-up animosity that's festered over the past few weeks over Trump's buffoonery -- his comments on Mexicans, on McCain, and more -- will be largely brushed to the side, at least for now.

Thoughts?

My prediction (for the debate):

Donald Trump will be his usual self and say something stupidly outlandish. Huckabee will then try to one-up Donald Trump in saying something to get the spotlight on himself, and only make himself look bad and pathetic in the process

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz meanwhile will have one memorable line in the debate each, which will be enough to get all of their die-hard supporters to cry out that their guy 'won' the debate even though they are literally the only people who think that.

Bush, Walker, and Rubio will keep themselves calm and reserved, not really standing out in any good or bad way, and people will wonder who the hell Carson and Kasich are
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 10:38:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 10:25:11 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:18:13 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:15:29 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 9:22:47 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
So the first GOP debate is next week. Per Fox News rule, only 10 of the 17 will be allowed at the main debate, whereas the remaining seven will be relegated to what is effectively the "kid's table." Currently, looking at the RCP average [http://www.realclearpolitics.com...], the 10 candidates at the "main" debate will be:

Donald Trump: 20.8%
Scott Walker: 13.7%
Jeb Bush: 12.2%
Marco Rubio: 6.8%
Mike Huckabee: 6.3%
Ben Carson: 6.2%
Rand Paul: 5.5%
Ted Cruz: 5.2%
John Kasich: 3.5%
Chris Christie: 3%

This means that Rick Perry (2.2%), Bobby Jindal (1.7%), Rick Santorum (1.5%), Carly Fiorina (1.3%), and George Pataki (0.7%) will be attending the second-tier debate. For some reason this poll leaves out Lindsey Graham, and Jim Gilmore just declared a few days ago, so I oppose they'll be in attendance as well.

Any thoughts on how the field will evolve? Even speculation about next week's debate would be interesting.

My prediction: They play a game of pattycake, as they always do in the first few debates. There might be a few opportunistic jabs at (or from) Trump, but generally I think he in particular is going to tone down his rhetoric -- and, of course, turn Obama into a punching bag in the process. I feel as though all the pent-up animosity that's festered over the past few weeks over Trump's buffoonery -- his comments on Mexicans, on McCain, and more -- will be largely brushed to the side, at least for now.

Thoughts?

We don't know if they will be using the RCP aggregate, but I think your list is correct.

True; it was the most comprehensive "average" I could find.

I hope Kasich becomes a "top tier" candidate

At one point he might become a "flavor of the month," but I think he sounds too reasonable to become "top tier." He's bucked his party a whole lot -- the comment on the "pearly gates," his insinuation that the GOP was waging a war on the poor, accepting Medicaid expansion, etc. -- and I think that's conducive to getting reamed by the crazies. Hell, he already backtracked on a whole lot of that.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 10:41:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 10:30:30 PM, imabench wrote:
At 8/1/2015 9:22:47 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:

My prediction: They play a game of pattycake, as they always do in the first few debates. There might be a few opportunistic jabs at (or from) Trump, but generally I think he in particular is going to tone down his rhetoric -- and, of course, turn Obama into a punching bag in the process. I feel as though all the pent-up animosity that's festered over the past few weeks over Trump's buffoonery -- his comments on Mexicans, on McCain, and more -- will be largely brushed to the side, at least for now.

Thoughts?

My prediction (for the debate):

Donald Trump will be his usual self and say something stupidly outlandish. Huckabee will then try to one-up Donald Trump in saying something to get the spotlight on himself, and only make himself look bad and pathetic in the process

I'm not convinced on the Trump point, which isn't to say that he's not naturally outlandish -- because surely he is -- but he made it a point to say just a few days ago that he would "play nice." I think his advisors are starting to drill into him that he can't be a complete dipsh1t and maintain his numbers, irrespective of whether being a crazy dipsh1t was the proximal cause of his rising poll number.

I've always thought Huckabee was fairly reasonable, putting aside his crazy religious fervor. I'm assuming they won't really get into social issues -- at least not at this debate -- so I don't think he'll be able to one-up anyone. Cruz is a whole other story.

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz meanwhile will have one memorable line in the debate each, which will be enough to get all of their die-hard supporters to cry out that their guy 'won' the debate even though they are literally the only people who think that.

This I agree with: probably something to do with bleeding the Treasury dry and drowning the government in the bathtub.

Bush, Walker, and Rubio will keep themselves calm and reserved, not really standing out in any good or bad way, and people will wonder who the hell Carson and Kasich are

I agree with this, too, though I think Bush and Trump may have a few contentious exchanges.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 10:50:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 10:38:05 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:25:11 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:18:13 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:15:29 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 9:22:47 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
So the first GOP debate is next week. Per Fox News rule, only 10 of the 17 will be allowed at the main debate, whereas the remaining seven will be relegated to what is effectively the "kid's table." Currently, looking at the RCP average [http://www.realclearpolitics.com...], the 10 candidates at the "main" debate will be:

Donald Trump: 20.8%
Scott Walker: 13.7%
Jeb Bush: 12.2%
Marco Rubio: 6.8%
Mike Huckabee: 6.3%
Ben Carson: 6.2%
Rand Paul: 5.5%
Ted Cruz: 5.2%
John Kasich: 3.5%
Chris Christie: 3%

This means that Rick Perry (2.2%), Bobby Jindal (1.7%), Rick Santorum (1.5%), Carly Fiorina (1.3%), and George Pataki (0.7%) will be attending the second-tier debate. For some reason this poll leaves out Lindsey Graham, and Jim Gilmore just declared a few days ago, so I oppose they'll be in attendance as well.

Any thoughts on how the field will evolve? Even speculation about next week's debate would be interesting.

My prediction: They play a game of pattycake, as they always do in the first few debates. There might be a few opportunistic jabs at (or from) Trump, but generally I think he in particular is going to tone down his rhetoric -- and, of course, turn Obama into a punching bag in the process. I feel as though all the pent-up animosity that's festered over the past few weeks over Trump's buffoonery -- his comments on Mexicans, on McCain, and more -- will be largely brushed to the side, at least for now.

Thoughts?

We don't know if they will be using the RCP aggregate, but I think your list is correct.

True; it was the most comprehensive "average" I could find.

I hope Kasich becomes a "top tier" candidate

At one point he might become a "flavor of the month," but I think he sounds too reasonable to become "top tier." He's bucked his party a whole lot -- the comment on the "pearly gates," his insinuation that the GOP was waging a war on the poor, accepting Medicaid expansion, etc. -- and I think that's conducive to getting reamed by the crazies. Hell, he already backtracked on a whole lot of that.

Nah I think if he pwns in this debate that he can do well. I saw some pollster say that Walker, Rubio, Jeb, and Kasich are the only ones with long-term viability. He actually predicted this to turn into a Bush v Kasich match at the end. I think that'd be cool
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 11:05:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 10:50:38 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:38:05 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:25:11 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:18:13 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:15:29 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 9:22:47 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
So the first GOP debate is next week. Per Fox News rule, only 10 of the 17 will be allowed at the main debate, whereas the remaining seven will be relegated to what is effectively the "kid's table." Currently, looking at the RCP average [http://www.realclearpolitics.com...], the 10 candidates at the "main" debate will be:

Donald Trump: 20.8%
Scott Walker: 13.7%
Jeb Bush: 12.2%
Marco Rubio: 6.8%
Mike Huckabee: 6.3%
Ben Carson: 6.2%
Rand Paul: 5.5%
Ted Cruz: 5.2%
John Kasich: 3.5%
Chris Christie: 3%

This means that Rick Perry (2.2%), Bobby Jindal (1.7%), Rick Santorum (1.5%), Carly Fiorina (1.3%), and George Pataki (0.7%) will be attending the second-tier debate. For some reason this poll leaves out Lindsey Graham, and Jim Gilmore just declared a few days ago, so I oppose they'll be in attendance as well.

Any thoughts on how the field will evolve? Even speculation about next week's debate would be interesting.

My prediction: They play a game of pattycake, as they always do in the first few debates. There might be a few opportunistic jabs at (or from) Trump, but generally I think he in particular is going to tone down his rhetoric -- and, of course, turn Obama into a punching bag in the process. I feel as though all the pent-up animosity that's festered over the past few weeks over Trump's buffoonery -- his comments on Mexicans, on McCain, and more -- will be largely brushed to the side, at least for now.

Thoughts?

We don't know if they will be using the RCP aggregate, but I think your list is correct.

True; it was the most comprehensive "average" I could find.

I hope Kasich becomes a "top tier" candidate

At one point he might become a "flavor of the month," but I think he sounds too reasonable to become "top tier." He's bucked his party a whole lot -- the comment on the "pearly gates," his insinuation that the GOP was waging a war on the poor, accepting Medicaid expansion, etc. -- and I think that's conducive to getting reamed by the crazies. Hell, he already backtracked on a whole lot of that.

Nah I think if he pwns in this debate that he can do well.

That depends on what the definition of "pwning" is, though. He backtracked on his pearly-gates comment with the help of Hannity. His record as governor seems to be center-right, but he's running in a field with dipsh1ts like Cruz, Paul, Jindal, etc. whose policy on poor people is essentially "let them eat cake." From what we've seen from Kasich so far, he's been backtracking and moving to the right a la Romney. At that point, he's going to get attacked from the far right in the same way Santorum went after Mittens for passing the individual mandate in MA.

I saw some pollster say that Walker, Rubio, Jeb, and Kasich are the only ones with long-term viability.

I agree with this, -- at least as it pertains to Rubio, Jeb and Kasich, though I'm unconvinced on Walker -- but I think that's more of a relative judgment. I mean, when you're standing next to blowhards like Trump, of course you look "more viable," lol. I think they all have baggage in various forms: for Kasich it's being reasonable; for Rubio it's immigration reform (which, btw, was a great idea -- and one he flopped all over the place on); Jeb for... his name?; and Walker for the whole "union-busting douchenozzle" thing.

He actually predicted this to turn into a Bush v Kasich match at the end. I think that'd be cool

I'd predict Bush, Rubio, Kasich, but that sounds about right.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 11:36:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Oops, typo in the first post:

I *suppose* that Lindsey Graham and Jim Gilmore will be in the second-tier debate.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 11:37:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 11:05:49 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:50:38 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:38:05 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:25:11 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:18:13 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/1/2015 10:15:29 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 9:22:47 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
So the first GOP debate is next week. Per Fox News rule, only 10 of the 17 will be allowed at the main debate, whereas the remaining seven will be relegated to what is effectively the "kid's table." Currently, looking at the RCP average [http://www.realclearpolitics.com...], the 10 candidates at the "main" debate will be:

Donald Trump: 20.8%
Scott Walker: 13.7%
Jeb Bush: 12.2%
Marco Rubio: 6.8%
Mike Huckabee: 6.3%
Ben Carson: 6.2%
Rand Paul: 5.5%
Ted Cruz: 5.2%
John Kasich: 3.5%
Chris Christie: 3%

This means that Rick Perry (2.2%), Bobby Jindal (1.7%), Rick Santorum (1.5%), Carly Fiorina (1.3%), and George Pataki (0.7%) will be attending the second-tier debate. For some reason this poll leaves out Lindsey Graham, and Jim Gilmore just declared a few days ago, so I oppose they'll be in attendance as well.

Any thoughts on how the field will evolve? Even speculation about next week's debate would be interesting.

My prediction: They play a game of pattycake, as they always do in the first few debates. There might be a few opportunistic jabs at (or from) Trump, but generally I think he in particular is going to tone down his rhetoric -- and, of course, turn Obama into a punching bag in the process. I feel as though all the pent-up animosity that's festered over the past few weeks over Trump's buffoonery -- his comments on Mexicans, on McCain, and more -- will be largely brushed to the side, at least for now.

Thoughts?

We don't know if they will be using the RCP aggregate, but I think your list is correct.

True; it was the most comprehensive "average" I could find.

I hope Kasich becomes a "top tier" candidate

At one point he might become a "flavor of the month," but I think he sounds too reasonable to become "top tier." He's bucked his party a whole lot -- the comment on the "pearly gates," his insinuation that the GOP was waging a war on the poor, accepting Medicaid expansion, etc. -- and I think that's conducive to getting reamed by the crazies. Hell, he already backtracked on a whole lot of that.

Nah I think if he pwns in this debate that he can do well.

That depends on what the definition of "pwning" is, though. He backtracked on his pearly-gates comment with the help of Hannity. His record as governor seems to be center-right, but he's running in a field with dipsh1ts like Cruz, Paul, Jindal, etc. whose policy on poor people is essentially "let them eat cake." From what we've seen from Kasich so far, he's been backtracking and moving to the right a la Romney. At that point, he's going to get attacked from the far right in the same way Santorum went after Mittens for passing the individual mandate in MA.

I saw some pollster say that Walker, Rubio, Jeb, and Kasich are the only ones with long-term viability.

I agree with this, -- at least as it pertains to Rubio, Jeb and Kasich, though I'm unconvinced on Walker -- but I think that's more of a relative judgment. I mean, when you're standing next to blowhards like Trump, of course you look "more viable," lol. I think they all have baggage in various forms: for Kasich it's being reasonable; for Rubio it's immigration reform (which, btw, was a great idea -- and one he flopped all over the place on); Jeb for... his name?; and Walker for the whole "union-busting douchenozzle" thing.

Rubio didn't really flop on immigration, but said that we would need multiple bills instead of one because the GOP will b!tch and moan if it is all together because they may hate half of it, and he would probably move to a pathway to resident-status rather than citizenship. So he is still moderate, but he is just using Luntz wording :P

People think Jeb is a RINO, when he isn't, because they're dumb.


He actually predicted this to turn into a Bush v Kasich match at the end. I think that'd be cool

I'd predict Bush, Rubio, Kasich, but that sounds about right.

Rubio has kinda fallen in the polls, so we'll see. I really like him so hopefully he rebounds. Since Trump has gotten most of his support from moderates (http://thepulse2016.com...), which is probably eating away at Rubio's moderate supporters, but he is holding his more conservative ones. I hope those three are the main ones. I mean Walker is okay I guess, but he isn't my first choice.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 11:38:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 11:36:41 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
Oops, typo in the first post:


I *suppose* that Lindsey Graham and Jim Gilmore will be in the second-tier debate.

No, they are the frontrunners. Reking trump secretly. Media doesn't tell you anything!
source: alex jones
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 11:45:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 11:37:24 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Rubio didn't really flop on immigration, but said that we would need multiple bills instead of one because the GOP will b!tch and moan if it is all together because they may hate half of it, and he would probably move to a pathway to resident-status rather than citizenship. So he is still moderate, but he is just using Luntz wording :P

I remember him flopping on it a few times, actually. First he said -- I think to Hannity -- that if there was some provision for gay immigrant couples or something to that effect he was going to drop his support. Then the gang-of-8 bill passed the Senate, which he voted for, but about a year later his staff said something like, "Let's piecemeal it." I'm not sure if that was for the sake of actually passing it -- I'll dig up the articles on that, because I did a debate on Rubio about a year ago, though I could've sworn it was a pronounced flip flop -- but in reality we both know that "peacemealing" immigration reform means passing draconian border security measures, and then conveniently forgetting about the pathway to citizenship because the GOP won't vote for that, either. I'd rather tie their hands and force them to vote for a pathway. I mean, the amount of draconian border security in that Senate bill was nuts to begin with: I'm pretty sure it included back taxes and a 14-year process.

People think Jeb is a RINO, when he isn't, because they're dumb.

The word "RINO" is stupid to begin with, lol. Thank Ted "Joe McCarthy" Cruz, a.k.a "There are 10 communist professors at Harvard!" for that.


He actually predicted this to turn into a Bush v Kasich match at the end. I think that'd be cool

I'd predict Bush, Rubio, Kasich, but that sounds about right.

Rubio has kinda fallen in the polls, so we'll see. I really like him so hopefully he rebounds.

I'm not surprised. Has he really said anything meaningful in the past few weeks? He seems to be maintaining a really low profile, which is probably beneficial in the longer run. He's not really the type to say crazy sh1t for the sake of a headline.

Since Trump has gotten most of his support from moderates (http://thepulse2016.com...), which is probably eating away at Rubio's moderate supporters, but he is holding his more conservative ones.

Now *that* is fcking scary.... "Moderate" to me, much like "independent," means people who don't really know much about politics, but vote based on their feelings or on whether they could envision themselves having a beer with the candidate. In other words, hillbillies and soccer moms.

The funny story is, he's not all that conservative. He's the only Republican I've seen actively advocate protectionism. He's closer to Bernie on trade than almost anyone, and that's a really dangerous move.

I hope those three are the main ones. I mean Walker is okay I guess, but he isn't my first choice.

Walker scares the sh1t out of me, lol. I'd be happy with either Jeb or Kasich.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2015 11:46:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 11:38:09 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 11:36:41 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
Oops, typo in the first post:


I *suppose* that Lindsey Graham and Jim Gilmore will be in the second-tier debate.

No, they are the frontrunners. Reking trump secretly. Media doesn't tell you anything!
source: alex jones

Lmfao.

I know nothing about Gilmore, but Graham is a fascinating fellow: reasonable on a whole lot of stuff, minus foreign policy, where's he an absolute nut. I think he was the only person truly incensed at Trump's comments on McCain, so it would've been interesting to see him on stage. Alas, he hasn't a ghost of a chance.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:05:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 11:45:06 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/1/2015 11:37:24 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Rubio didn't really flop on immigration, but said that we would need multiple bills instead of one because the GOP will b!tch and moan if it is all together because they may hate half of it, and he would probably move to a pathway to resident-status rather than citizenship. So he is still moderate, but he is just using Luntz wording :P

I remember him flopping on it a few times, actually. First he said -- I think to Hannity -- that if there was some provision for gay immigrant couples or something to that effect he was going to drop his support. Then the gang-of-8 bill passed the Senate, which he voted for, but about a year later his staff said something like, "Let's piecemeal it." I'm not sure if that was for the sake of actually passing it -- I'll dig up the articles on that, because I did a debate on Rubio about a year ago, though I could've sworn it was a pronounced flip flop -- but in reality we both know that "peacemealing" immigration reform means passing draconian border security measures, and then conveniently forgetting about the pathway to citizenship because the GOP won't vote for that, either. I'd rather tie their hands and force them to vote for a pathway. I mean, the amount of draconian border security in that Senate bill was nuts to begin with: I'm pretty sure it included back taxes and a 14-year process.

they predict the senate to either be barely GOP or barely Dem, so it would pass the Senate. If you word it right, it would pass the house, too. I think a bigger bill is probably a better idea.... But I think he is saying this to survive the primary.


People think Jeb is a RINO, when he isn't, because they're dumb.

The word "RINO" is stupid to begin with, lol. Thank Ted "Joe McCarthy" Cruz, a.k.a "There are 10 communist professors at Harvard!" for that.

Says the RINO. Silly nerd.



He actually predicted this to turn into a Bush v Kasich match at the end. I think that'd be cool

I'd predict Bush, Rubio, Kasich, but that sounds about right.

Rubio has kinda fallen in the polls, so we'll see. I really like him so hopefully he rebounds.

I'm not surprised. Has he really said anything meaningful in the past few weeks? He seems to be maintaining a really low profile, which is probably beneficial in the longer run. He's not really the type to say crazy sh1t for the sake of a headline.

He was ambushed by TMZ about Cecil the lion and rekt the question. You may disagree with him, but it was a n0scope (http://www.tmz.com...). His PAC is also running ads on FOX about his opposition to the Iran deal. Trump is just sucking up all his air.

Since Trump has gotten most of his support from moderates (http://thepulse2016.com...), which is probably eating away at Rubio's moderate supporters, but he is holding his more conservative ones.

Now *that* is fcking scary.... "Moderate" to me, much like "independent," means people who don't really know much about politics, but vote based on their feelings or on whether they could envision themselves having a beer with the candidate. In other words, hillbillies and soccer moms.

yep


The funny story is, he's not all that conservative. He's the only Republican I've seen actively advocate protectionism. He's closer to Bernie on trade than almost anyone, and that's a really dangerous move.

I hope those three are the main ones. I mean Walker is okay I guess, but he isn't my first choice.

Walker scares the sh1t out of me, lol. I'd be happy with either Jeb or Kasich.

I just hate hillary XD
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:16:29 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/2/2015 12:05:36 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 11:45:06 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/1/2015 11:37:24 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Rubio didn't really flop on immigration, but said that we would need multiple bills instead of one because the GOP will b!tch and moan if it is all together because they may hate half of it, and he would probably move to a pathway to resident-status rather than citizenship. So he is still moderate, but he is just using Luntz wording :P

I remember him flopping on it a few times, actually. First he said -- I think to Hannity -- that if there was some provision for gay immigrant couples or something to that effect he was going to drop his support. Then the gang-of-8 bill passed the Senate, which he voted for, but about a year later his staff said something like, "Let's piecemeal it." I'm not sure if that was for the sake of actually passing it -- I'll dig up the articles on that, because I did a debate on Rubio about a year ago, though I could've sworn it was a pronounced flip flop -- but in reality we both know that "peacemealing" immigration reform means passing draconian border security measures, and then conveniently forgetting about the pathway to citizenship because the GOP won't vote for that, either. I'd rather tie their hands and force them to vote for a pathway. I mean, the amount of draconian border security in that Senate bill was nuts to begin with: I'm pretty sure it included back taxes and a 14-year process.

they predict the senate to either be barely GOP or barely Dem, so it would pass the Senate. If you word it right, it would pass the house, too. I think a bigger bill is probably a better idea.... But I think he is saying this to survive the primary.

He's definitely saying it to get through the primary, though the problem is Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton are smart enough to quote him back in a general. "Mr. Rubio, you're only for immigration reform when it's convenient for your political prospects. You agreed with Trump and Jindal that we should 'secure the border first' before even talking about a pathway."

I also don't think it'll get through the House. I mean, Boehner has had.. a year and a half?.. to bring something to the floor. He could've even taken the Senate Bill -- which was draconian as hell -- and fixed it up. Instead, he spouted some bullsh1t about Obama "eroding the American people's confidence because of his delays to the ACA." How that's related when the bill was literally on his desk, and Obama didn't even write the Senate language, is beyond me.

A daring GOP position would be to publicly condemn and try to oust John Boehner. Cruz fans would love it because they think Boehner is a RINO. Most Americans would love it because Boehner's an obstructionist troll.


People think Jeb is a RINO, when he isn't, because they're dumb.

The word "RINO" is stupid to begin with, lol. Thank Ted "Joe McCarthy" Cruz, a.k.a "There are 10 communist professors at Harvard!" for that.

Says the RINO. Silly nerd.

Most people probably would consider me a RINO, lol. I mean, I don't really identify as a Republican because I don't look at issues through a political lens. Call me crazy!


He actually predicted this to turn into a Bush v Kasich match at the end. I think that'd be cool

I'd predict Bush, Rubio, Kasich, but that sounds about right.

Rubio has kinda fallen in the polls, so we'll see. I really like him so hopefully he rebounds.

I'm not surprised. Has he really said anything meaningful in the past few weeks? He seems to be maintaining a really low profile, which is probably beneficial in the longer run. He's not really the type to say crazy sh1t for the sake of a headline.

He was ambushed by TMZ about Cecil the lion and rekt the question. You may disagree with him, but it was a n0scope (http://www.tmz.com...). His PAC is also running ads on FOX about his opposition to the Iran deal. Trump is just sucking up all his air.

Cecil the Lion is a campaign issue?! Jesus...

Also, you know the Planned Parenthood thing is a farce, right? The video was taken completely out of context; if you watched it in full, you'd see that the Planned Parenthood representative said explicitly that they don't profit off selling fetal tissue -- they donate parts to biotech companies for research, and the $30 to $100 fee is for transportation costs. I mean, if you were engaging in black market dealings, why in the world would you only charge $30?

The Iran Deal I... don't know much about, but most of our allies seem to think it's the only way to get Iran to the table, and attaching additional strings like releasing the four American hostages they're holding would just complicate the deal -- though obviously that should be likewise dealt with.

I mean, Ted Cruz was proven pretty much demonstrably wrong in asserting Rowhani and the Ayatollah actually wanted a nuke.. they said pretty explicitly that they had no interest in one whatsoever. Buy that or not, the deal is -- and I hate hearing this phrase continuously, but it's true -- based on verification, not trust. At the moment I haven't any problems with it.

Of course, I agree on Trump.

Since Trump has gotten most of his support from moderates (http://thepulse2016.com...), which is probably eating away at Rubio's moderate supporters, but he is holding his more conservative ones.

Now *that* is fcking scary.... "Moderate" to me, much like "independent," means people who don't really know much about politics, but vote based on their feelings or on whether they could envision themselves having a beer with the candidate. In other words, hillbillies and soccer moms.

yep


The funny story is, he's not all that conservative. He's the only Republican I've seen actively advocate protectionism. He's closer to Bernie on trade than almost anyone, and that's a really dangerous move.

I hope those three are the main ones. I mean Walker is okay I guess, but he isn't my first choice.

Walker scares the sh1t out of me, lol. I'd be happy with either Jeb or Kasich.

I just hate hillary XD

Eh, I'd take her. Not much will really change, tbh. Hell, I'd take anyone except for some crazy loon on the GOP side, lol.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:23:39 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I love Kasich for having that balls to state the painfully obvious: that judicial review has been a thing since Marbury v. Madison.

If he wins the nomination, I'll probably be voting Republican.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:24:53 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/2/2015 12:23:39 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
I love Kasich for having that balls to state the painfully obvious: that judicial review has been a thing since Marbury v. Madison.

If he wins the nomination, I'll probably be voting Republican.

I think I'm with Cruz on that one, tbh. Abolish the judicial branch!
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:26:11 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/2/2015 12:24:53 AM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/2/2015 12:23:39 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
I love Kasich for having that balls to state the painfully obvious: that judicial review has been a thing since Marbury v. Madison.

If he wins the nomination, I'll probably be voting Republican.

I think I'm with Cruz on that one, tbh. Abolish the judicial branch!

Lol, Ted Cruz is a man so dedicated to the constitution that his flaming passion would incinerate an entire article!
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:26:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/2/2015 12:26:11 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 8/2/2015 12:24:53 AM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/2/2015 12:23:39 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
I love Kasich for having that balls to state the painfully obvious: that judicial review has been a thing since Marbury v. Madison.

If he wins the nomination, I'll probably be voting Republican.

I think I'm with Cruz on that one, tbh. Abolish the judicial branch!

Lol, Ted Cruz is a man so dedicated to the constitution that his flaming passion would incinerate an entire article!

That's all the more reason to vote for him: more fossil-fuel emissions!
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:30:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
My prediction: can't stump the trump.

Trump is the only thing that will make the debate worth watching. Trump triumph '16!
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:30:24 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/2/2015 12:26:59 AM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/2/2015 12:26:11 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 8/2/2015 12:24:53 AM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/2/2015 12:23:39 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
I love Kasich for having that balls to state the painfully obvious: that judicial review has been a thing since Marbury v. Madison.

If he wins the nomination, I'll probably be voting Republican.

I think I'm with Cruz on that one, tbh. Abolish the judicial branch!

Lol, Ted Cruz is a man so dedicated to the constitution that his flaming passion would incinerate an entire article!

That's all the more reason to vote for him: more fossil-fuel emissions!

Yeah, that's seriously one of my biggest pet peeves: claiming that the courts are overreaching their powers whenever they disagree with you. Liberals do this with Hobbylobby and Citizens United, and conservatives do it with Gay Marriage and Abortion. Honestly, either become a justice/bring a case to the court, or shut the f&%$ up.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:33:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/2/2015 12:30:24 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 8/2/2015 12:26:59 AM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/2/2015 12:26:11 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 8/2/2015 12:24:53 AM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/2/2015 12:23:39 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
I love Kasich for having that balls to state the painfully obvious: that judicial review has been a thing since Marbury v. Madison.

If he wins the nomination, I'll probably be voting Republican.

I think I'm with Cruz on that one, tbh. Abolish the judicial branch!

Lol, Ted Cruz is a man so dedicated to the constitution that his flaming passion would incinerate an entire article!

That's all the more reason to vote for him: more fossil-fuel emissions!

Yeah, that's seriously one of my biggest pet peeves: claiming that the courts are overreaching their powers whenever they disagree with you. Liberals do this with Hobbylobby and Citizens United, and conservatives do it with Gay Marriage and Abortion. Honestly, either become a justice/bring a case to the court, or shut the f&%$ up.

I agree that they both certainly do this, though I'm probably biased at least when it comes to Citizens United, because I cannot conceive of a sensible reading of the first amendment that actually affords speech rights -- or any rights -- to corporations, or for that matter deems the "people." Hobby Lobby I can at least understand, though I think the objection to paying indirectly for birth control is just ridiculous.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:33:42 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/2/2015 12:16:29 AM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/2/2015 12:05:36 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 8/1/2015 11:45:06 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 8/1/2015 11:37:24 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Rubio didn't really flop on immigration, but said that we would need multiple bills instead of one because the GOP will b!tch and moan if it is all together because they may hate half of it, and he would probably move to a pathway to resident-status rather than citizenship. So he is still moderate, but he is just using Luntz wording :P

I remember him flopping on it a few times, actually. First he said -- I think to Hannity -- that if there was some provision for gay immigrant couples or something to that effect he was going to drop his support. Then the gang-of-8 bill passed the Senate, which he voted for, but about a year later his staff said something like, "Let's piecemeal it." I'm not sure if that was for the sake of actually passing it -- I'll dig up the articles on that, because I did a debate on Rubio about a year ago, though I could've sworn it was a pronounced flip flop -- but in reality we both know that "peacemealing" immigration reform means passing draconian border security measures, and then conveniently forgetting about the pathway to citizenship because the GOP won't vote for that, either. I'd rather tie their hands and force them to vote for a pathway. I mean, the amount of draconian border security in that Senate bill was nuts to begin with: I'm pretty sure it included back taxes and a 14-year process.

they predict the senate to either be barely GOP or barely Dem, so it would pass the Senate. If you word it right, it would pass the house, too. I think a bigger bill is probably a better idea.... But I think he is saying this to survive the primary.

He's definitely saying it to get through the primary, though the problem is Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton are smart enough to quote him back in a general. "Mr. Rubio, you're only for immigration reform when it's convenient for your political prospects. You agreed with Trump and Jindal that we should 'secure the border first' before even talking about a pathway."

I would too for national security reasons, lol. And Rubio seems like a good debater so he'd probably rek it.


I also don't think it'll get through the House. I mean, Boehner has had.. a year and a half?.. to bring something to the floor. He could've even taken the Senate Bill -- which was draconian as hell -- and fixed it up. Instead, he spouted some bullsh1t about Obama "eroding the American people's confidence because of his delays to the ACA." How that's related when the bill was literally on his desk, and Obama didn't even write the Senate language, is beyond me.

Some think he'll lose the speakership


A daring GOP position would be to publicly condemn and try to oust John Boehner. Cruz fans would love it because they think Boehner is a RINO. Most Americans would love it because Boehner's an obstructionist troll.

They think he might



People think Jeb is a RINO, when he isn't, because they're dumb.

The word "RINO" is stupid to begin with, lol. Thank Ted "Joe McCarthy" Cruz, a.k.a "There are 10 communist professors at Harvard!" for that.

Says the RINO. Silly nerd.

Most people probably would consider me a RINO, lol. I mean, I don't really identify as a Republican because I don't look at issues through a political lens. Call me crazy!

nerd



He actually predicted this to turn into a Bush v Kasich match at the end. I think that'd be cool

I'd predict Bush, Rubio, Kasich, but that sounds about right.

Rubio has kinda fallen in the polls, so we'll see. I really like him so hopefully he rebounds.

I'm not surprised. Has he really said anything meaningful in the past few weeks? He seems to be maintaining a really low profile, which is probably beneficial in the longer run. He's not really the type to say crazy sh1t for the sake of a headline.

He was ambushed by TMZ about Cecil the lion and rekt the question. You may disagree with him, but it was a n0scope (http://www.tmz.com...). His PAC is also running ads on FOX about his opposition to the Iran deal. Trump is just sucking up all his air.

Cecil the Lion is a campaign issue?! Jesus...

lel


Also, you know the Planned Parenthood thing is a farce, right? The video was taken completely out of context; if you watched it in full, you'd see that the Planned Parenthood representative said explicitly that they don't profit off selling fetal tissue -- they donate parts to biotech companies for research, and the $30 to $100 fee is for transportation costs. I mean, if you were engaging in black market dealings, why in the world would you only charge $30?


It is not really selling it that has me mad, but how they are pretty much doing partial birth abortions without doing them at the same time. It is a loophole. We ban partial birth abortions because the way it is done is fvcked up. The way they have to maneuver the baby to donate its organs is a similar procedure.
The Iran Deal I... don't know much about, but most of our allies seem to think it's the only way to get Iran to the table, and attaching additional strings like releasing the four American hostages they're holding would just complicate the deal -- though obviously that should be likewise dealt with.

The deal is kinda sh!tty and kinda not. We had a similar deal with North Korea in the 1990s lol


I mean, Ted Cruz was proven pretty much demonstrably wrong in asserting Rowhani and the Ayatollah actually wanted a nuke.. they said pretty explicitly that they had no interest in one whatsoever. Buy that or not, the deal is -- and I hate hearing this phrase continuously, but it's true -- based on verification, not trust. At the moment I haven't any problems with it.

You trust the Ayatollah's word over a Rubio flip flop? XD I would trust a Romney flip flop over them any day. It is pretty clear that they want one. It will take them a while, though.


Of course, I agree on Trump.

Trump needs to get stumped



Since Trump has gotten most of his support from moderates (http://thepulse2016.com...), which is probably eating away at Rubio's moderate supporters, but he is holding his more conservative ones.

Now *that* is fcking scary.... "Moderate" to me, much like "independent," means people who don't really know much about politics, but vote based on their feelings or on whether they could envision themselves having a beer with the candidate. In other words, hillbillies and soccer moms.

yep


The funny story is, he's not all that conservative. He's the only Republican I've seen actively advocate protectionism. He's closer to Bernie on trade than almost anyone, and that's a really dangerous move.

I hope those three are the main ones. I mean Walker is okay I guess, but he isn't my first choice.

Walker scares the sh1t out of me, lol. I'd be happy with either Jeb or Kasich.

I just hate hillary XD

Eh, I'd take her. Not much will really change, tbh. Hell, I'd take anyone except for some crazy loon on the GOP side, lol.

She gives me cancer. If Cruz or Paul wins, I dunno who to vote for... But she gives me cancer
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:36:49 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/1/2015 10:30:30 PM, imabench wrote:
At 8/1/2015 9:22:47 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz meanwhile will have one memorable line in the debate each, which will be enough to get all of their die-hard supporters to cry out that their guy 'won' the debate even though they are literally the only people who think that.


Lol, this is so true.
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:39:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/2/2015 12:35:09 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
Let's hope they give Jon Stewart some good material to work with.

Trump probably will.

The thing is, supporting a $15 minimum wage is a joke in and of itself. Sadly, no one sees it as one. ;D

Also, democrats are the ones who don't know the earth revolves around the sun and believe in astrology. We are retarded as fvck on evolution, but hey, at least we got the more obvious one right. https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Maybe O'Malley can say he doesn't think it does to win support :P
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/2/2015 12:40:53 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/2/2015 12:33:42 AM, 16kadams wrote:
I would too for national security reasons, lol. And Rubio seems like a good debater so he'd probably rek it.

What kind of national security reasons, though? I mean.. a grand total of zero terrorists have infiltrated the Texas-Mexican border. There's a sensible reason for *some* border security or, at the very least, some streamlined process of background checks for people coming in. But this whole idea of "let's build a fence, electrify it, encircle it with an alligator-filled moat, and arm border-security agents with machine guns" is just silly. Oh, and have the Mexican government foot the bill, of course!

Some think he'll lose the speakership

I highly, highly doubt it. But, I mean, who will take his place? Louie Gohmert?

Actually.. maybe Paul Ryan. He's enough of a Wall-Street shill to not, like, default on the U.S. debt or something, but his budgets are cancerous. Even if I were a deficit hawk, I would be outraged.

They think he might

Let's get it trending.



People think Jeb is a RINO, when he isn't, because they're dumb.

The word "RINO" is stupid to begin with, lol. Thank Ted "Joe McCarthy" Cruz, a.k.a "There are 10 communist professors at Harvard!" for that.

Says the RINO. Silly nerd.

Most people probably would consider me a RINO, lol. I mean, I don't really identify as a Republican because I don't look at issues through a political lens. Call me crazy!

nerd

^:

He actually predicted this to turn into a Bush v Kasich match at the end. I think that'd be cool

I'd predict Bush, Rubio, Kasich, but that sounds about right.

Rubio has kinda fallen in the polls, so we'll see. I really like him so hopefully he rebounds.


It is not really selling it that has me mad, but how they are pretty much doing partial birth abortions without doing them at the same time. It is a loophole. We ban partial birth abortions because the way it is done is fvcked up. The way they have to maneuver the baby to donate its organs is a similar procedure.

I think they're legally allowed to do partial-birth abortions when the health of the mother is at stake. I don't know of all the details, though.

The Iran Deal I... don't know much about, but most of our allies seem to think it's the only way to get Iran to the table, and attaching additional strings like releasing the four American hostages they're holding would just complicate the deal -- though obviously that should be likewise dealt with.

The deal is kinda sh!tty and kinda not. We had a similar deal with North Korea in the 1990s lol

If North Korea is the precedent, that's cancer, lol. I feel like that's a bit hyperbolic, though.


I mean, Ted Cruz was proven pretty much demonstrably wrong in asserting Rowhani and the Ayatollah actually wanted a nuke.. they said pretty explicitly that they had no interest in one whatsoever. Buy that or not, the deal is -- and I hate hearing this phrase continuously, but it's true -- based on verification, not trust. At the moment I haven't any problems with it.

You trust the Ayatollah's word over a Rubio flip flop? XD

Naw, not at all, but the deal reimposes sanctions if Iran slips up. The deal's based on verification. I don't need to trust the Ayatollah.

I would trust a Romney flip flop over them any day. It is pretty clear that they want one. It will take them a while, though.

Even if they want one, I highly, highly doubt they'll have any chance of getting one with this deal.


Of course, I agree on Trump.

Trump needs to get stumped

He gets stumped the second he opens his mouth, lol.



Since Trump has gotten most of his support from moderates (http://thepulse2016.com...), which is probably eating away at Rubio's moderate supporters, but he is holding his more conservative ones.

Now *that* is fcking scary.... "Moderate" to me, much like "independent," means people who don't really know much about politics, but vote based on their feelings or on whether they could envision themselves having a beer with the candidate. In other words, hillbillies and soccer moms.

yep


The funny story is, he's not all that conservative. He's the only Republican I've seen actively advocate protectionism. He's closer to Bernie on trade than almost anyone, and that's a really dangerous move.

I hope those three are the main ones. I mean Walker is okay I guess, but he isn't my first choice.

Walker scares the sh1t out of me, lol. I'd be happy with either Jeb or Kasich.

I just hate hillary XD

Eh, I'd take her. Not much will really change, tbh. Hell, I'd take anyone except for some crazy loon on the GOP side, lol.

She gives me cancer. If Cruz or Paul wins, I dunno who to vote for... But she gives me cancer

Why?
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah