Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
The Library => The SGA => Topic started by: CCTAU on February 15, 2016, 10:41:30 AM
-
Trump blasts W. Was it merited? And did he really blast W, or the direction of the GOP?
There was an uninvited guest onstage Saturday night at the latest and most brutal Republican presidential debate: George W. Bush.
The focus on Bush 43's legacy signals a big problem for the GOP. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who declared in a prior debate that he missed the bygone president, pronounced (http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/02/14/george-w-bush-the-winner-of-south-carolina-debate-says-graham/) W the winner last night. But no matter how much Jeb Bush defended his brother, or Marco Rubio came to the former president's aid, that Bush's legacy abruptly became a question at all, at this very late date, dealt the establishment a potentially crippling blow.
Yes, the establishment — there's that word again, used advisedly but of necessity. For what was supposed to be more established a fact in the Republican Party but that George W. Bush — at a bare, bare minimum — was the right man in office on Sept. 11? Yet here was Donald Trump, naked in a way few have really seen him before, slamming home the message again and again: W messed up. He hurt the party. And he hurt the country.
"The World Trade Center came down during the reign of George Bush," Trump growled (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/13/the-cbs-republican-debate-transcript-annotated/). "He kept us safe? That is not safe." Technically true, but, as is so often the case with Trump, the details came second to theme, and the theme went far beyond 9/11 or the gasps and boos Trump's comments brought. Trump slapped W on Iraq, too. "The war in Iraq was a big, fat mistake. They lied," he said of Dubya's administration. "They said there were weapons of mass destruction. There were none."
Leave aside the particulars. (Saddam's men, ruled by fear and deceit, habitually lied and believed lies (https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/iraq/2006-05-01/saddams-delusions) about their own WMD and other special weapons.) Trump's eye-popping broadsides against the Bush administration far exceeded some kind of coming-out party as a Democrat. Nor were they animated by a longing to merely belittle Jeb Bush or exact juvenile revenge. Rather, they were illustrative of the sweeping but specific theme of Trump's night and his campaign, revealed with typical deadpan cockiness in his closing remarks.
"Politicians are all talk, no action."
But wait, you say. George W. Bush took lots of action!
"You've seen where they've taken you to," Trump says. "We are [at a budget of] 19 trillion dollars right now […]. We need a very big change." Because, of course, "we don't win anymore."
Vacuous, you say. Pablum.
But consider the logic within. In a culture where "politics" has become an echo chamber — a vain hall of mirrors installed by the worship of rhetoric and self-regard — true politics, the art and science of victory, is dead. The kinds of action that arise from a corrupt political culture, from the corrupted idea that politics is a game of semiotics first, are, therefore, also corrupted: fake actions, actions without integrity, actions born to lose.
Trump is saying that, under George W. Bush, the Republican Party allowed its understanding of politics to be corrupted. For whatever reason, under Bush, the GOP became a party that let self-aware rhetorical posturing dictate the way policy was formulated. The result was failure across the board. Worst of all was the ensuing failure of memory as Republicans forgot the winning arts and sciences. In so doing, they enabled America to lose its way in the hall of mirrors — and lose its greatness.
This is a dagger to the heart of the Bush legacy.
But Trump is not just running against Bushism. He's running against what it's a symptom of — the certain kind of insider sophistry that he says defines the political class. That's why he was onstage at all last night. That's why he's in first place now. And that's why he's more at home in the GOP than so many want to admit.
To understand how that could possibly be, understand what he's not arguing.
The typical critique of politics today is that the ruling class has been corrupted by privilege. There's too much money in politics; there's too much of a cult of access; the tropes go on and on. Trump's not saying that. Instead, he's saying, the ruling class has been corrupted by foolishness. The problem isn't that "the politicians" have vanished behind the velvet rope. It's that they've vanished up their own rear ends. Obsessed with themselves, they have forgotten who they are. They have lost their way — and ours.
Hard as it is to stomach or say, that is a kind of wisdom so deep, so populist, and so potent that many conservatives can't help but flutter toward it. Then again, neither can many moderate or liberal Republicans, which is why Trump performs well across all groups.
To be sure, in some ways Trump is a dreadful messenger for this dreadful message. Then again, watching him work up there like a Soviet wrestler, it's clear this man is not riding a fad or indulging a fantasy. An immense physical and mental strain is involved in hitting his fellow candidates — hungry, disciplined men — on issue after issue. He is delivering an intense message that no one else has proven capable of delivering with the requisite intensity: a shocking insight, when you pause to think about it, but for the fact that in this election year, nothing can shock anymore.
http://theweek.com/articles/606035/why-donald-trumps-vicious-attack-george-w-bush-brutally-effective--brilliant
-
You Trump "cult of personality" lovers better hope like hell Bloomberg runs 3rd party in November or Hillary gets indicted between now and then. Because it's the only chance you'll have if your fuehrer gets the nod.
Fwiw - the author here has it very wrong. The corruption at its core does not come from gw bush. He happened to be President during a time when there was GOP corruption. But those things tend to stem from Congress and outside sources. I would look more to Bob Dole, Tom Delay, John McCain, McConnell and others if you want to identify spineless corrupt king makers.
Also going after bush IN the southern primaries is not smart. Nor is blaming him for 9-11. You could go back to the Mujahideen and soviets, or Bill Clinton/Sudan if you want to look towards the blame for 9-11. People forget 9-11 happened not even 9 months into the W presidency.
I'm not a W fan but these statements he is making are just asinine and factually incorrect.
But hey, all Mexicans rape people and they are gonna be made to build a wall. Don't forget how he would tax Carrier AC out of business for moving some manufacturing there. Apple too. And we're gonna get China and those trade deals. And Cruz better be quiet or I'll sue. And Carson is sociopathic. And Megyn Kelly is not nice to me and is probably bleeding out of all areas. Did I mention Carly looks like a horse? I mean, that face! And Jeb only likes Mexicans because his wife is one. And anyone who disagrees is a liar. Oh yeah, and we're gonna win so much we will get bored with winning. Don't worry about substance guys, this is all just gonna magically happen. Trust me
Pretty much his platform ^^
-
You Trump "cult of personality" lovers better hope like hell Bloomberg runs 3rd party in November or Hillary gets indicted between now and then. Because it's the only chance you'll have if your fuehrer gets the nod.
Fwiw - the author here has it very wrong. The corruption at its core does not come from gw bush. He happened to be President during a time when there was GOP corruption. But those things tend to stem from Congress and outside sources. I would look more to Bob Dole, Tom Delay, John McCain, McConnell and others if you want to identify spineless corrupt king makers.
Also going after bush IN the southern primaries is not smart. Nor is blaming him for 9-11. You could go back to the Mujahideen and soviets, or Bill Clinton/Sudan if you want to look towards the blame for 9-11. People forget 9-11 happened not even 9 months into the W presidency.
I'm not a W fan but these statements he is making are just asinine and factually incorrect.
But hey, all Mexicans rape people and they are gonna be made to build a wall. Don't forget how he would tax Carrier AC out of business for moving some manufacturing there. Apple too. And we're gonna get China and those trade deals. And Cruz better be quiet or I'll sue. And Carson is sociopathic. And Megyn Kelly is not nice to me and is probably bleeding out of all areas. Did I mention Carly looks like a horse? I mean, that face! And Jeb only likes Mexicans because his wife is one. And anyone who disagrees is a liar. Oh yeah, and we're gonna win so much we will get bored with winning. Don't worry about substance guys, this is all just gonna magically happen. Trust me
Pretty much his platform ^^
(http://global3.memecdn.com/Nailed-It_c_136939.jpg)
-
You Trump "cult of personality" lovers better hope like hell Bloomberg runs 3rd party in November or Hillary gets indicted between now and then. Because it's the only chance you'll have if your fuehrer gets the nod.
Fwiw - the author here has it very wrong. The corruption at its core does not come from gw bush. He happened to be President during a time when there was GOP corruption. But those things tend to stem from Congress and outside sources. I would look more to Bob Dole, Tom Delay, John McCain, McConnell and others if you want to identify spineless corrupt king makers.
Also going after bush IN the southern primaries is not smart. Nor is blaming him for 9-11. You could go back to the Mujahideen and soviets, or Bill Clinton/Sudan if you want to look towards the blame for 9-11. People forget 9-11 happened not even 9 months into the W presidency.
I'm not a W fan but these statements he is making are just asinine and factually incorrect.
But hey, all Mexicans rape people and they are gonna be made to build a wall. Don't forget how he would tax Carrier AC out of business for moving some manufacturing there. Apple too. And we're gonna get China and those trade deals. And Cruz better be quiet or I'll sue. And Carson is sociopathic. And Megyn Kelly is not nice to me and is probably bleeding out of all areas. Did I mention Carly looks like a horse? I mean, that face! And Jeb only likes Mexicans because his wife is one. And anyone who disagrees is a liar. Oh yeah, and we're gonna win so much we will get bored with winning. Don't worry about substance guys, this is all just gonna magically happen. Trust me
Pretty much his platform ^^
But it did happen on Bush's watch. I agree it was not on him, but in most businesses and even the military, it matters not if it was your fault, only that you were in charge. I see where he comes from in that regard. I don't agree that it was Bush's fault, but that is not what Trump said.
And I think the author is spot on. The GOP decided at that time to transform into what it is today. The strong GOP we saw under Newt was gone.
So this is not about whether or not Trump is worthy. It is about why he is in the position he is in today. Your hatred of all things Trump do not even allow you to have a civil conversation about the state of affairs today.
I am flabbergasted that Trump is getting the support he has. This article attempt to analyze that.
In the end, I guess it doesn't matter. If he gets the nomination, you either vote for him, or choose the other side.
-
I the end, I guess it doesn't matter. If he gets the nomination, you either vote for him, or choose the other side.
Unfortunately, this is the absolute truth. He has run an incredibly effective campaign and I guess that if he is able to continue to swashbuckle his way through the primaries, then I will hold my nose when I pull the lever.
But I really do hope that it doesn't come to this.
-
In the end, I guess it doesn't matter. If he gets the nomination, you either vote for him, or choose the other side.
OR.
You vote for the grown-up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCS6PbtbGmA
-
But it did happen on Bush's watch. I agree it was not on him, but in most businesses and even the military, it matters not if it was your fault, only that you were in charge. I see where he comes from in that regard. I don't agree that it was Bush's fault, but that is not what Trump said.
And I think the author is spot on. The GOP decided at that time to transform into what it is today. The strong GOP we saw under Newt was gone.
So this is not about whether or not Trump is worthy. It is about why he is in the position he is in today. Your hatred of all things Trump do not even allow you to have a civil conversation about the state of affairs today.
I am flabbergasted that Trump is getting the support he has. This article attempt to analyze that.
In the end, I guess it doesn't matter. If he gets the nomination, you either vote for him, or choose the other side.
I get that.
But they are related. Trump can point out the flaws of W all he wants but he himself is an issue just as bad. Trump is using W and the dissatisfaction of the establishment to elevate himself when ideologically he is actually worse. He is pandering to a group of older white people who feel they've been betrayed. And they are right in that regard as far as their leaders go (GOP congress). But the answer ain't Trump. No one changes course on policy in 6 months time. No one. We're talking full about face 180s. And on some things he hasn't changed course if you listen close enough. He is an authoritarian at his core. Which is the very thing people complain about with the establishment. And Hillary. All the same house painted a different color. Again I don't like W all that much but the stuff trump is spewing just isn't factual. And frankly it's not smart.
I know you and K are not idiots. Which is why it is frustrating for someone like me to watch all of this unfold like a train wreck. This is the rights version of Obama all over again. The slogans, the same talking points, the same pandering to an angry demographic, the style over substance, the Teflon nature. All of it. That's what is frustrating.
-
OR.
You vote for the grown-up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCS6PbtbGmA
If someone wants a Constitutionalist, they should go to Cruz.
If they want pragmatism and appeal, go to Rubio.
If they want pragmatism with actual experience and results, go to Kasich.
If they want establishment and someone "safe", go to Bush.
I don't see where Donald trump has a place. There is always someone else. All more viable and adult acting than him. Agree or disagree with any of them but they are who they are and I would take any of them over trump. Sorry but I'm just not buying what he is selling.
-
And I think the author is spot on. The GOP decided at that time to transform into what it is today. The strong GOP we saw under Newt was gone.
That actually started in 1996 to 2000. It started before Bush was nominated. He just did nothing to stop it.
-
If someone wants a Constitutionalist, they should go to Cruz.
If they want pragmatism and appeal, go to Rubio.
If they want pragmatism with actual experience and results, go to Kasich.
If they want establishment and someone "safe", go to Bush.
I don't see where Donald trump has a place. There is always someone else. All more viable and adult acting than him. Agree or disagree with any of them but they are who they are and I would take any of them over trump. Sorry but I'm just not buying what he is selling.
Agree. But I know of one guy who is all of those things you mention (maybe except "safe").
I voted for him last year, and Bob Barr before that. I didn't feel as good about voting for Barr (honestly I kind of think he's a bit of a dick), but Gary Johnson is pretty much the only politician out there that I am simpatico with.
It was futile as shit last year. I'm hoping in this bizarro election, where the top choices are all truly, truly terrible, rules are completely out the window, and we appear to be trying out to "alternative" candidates, why is Gary Johnson not getting more attention? They need to put him up on the debate stage when the Presidential debates roll around. If Perot and Nader were able to get the kind of support they did in those years, I see no reason Johnson couldn't pull in plenty from both sides and the center in this year of all years.
-
OR.
You vote for the grown-up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCS6PbtbGmA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCS6PbtbGmA)
That's what I said, A VOTE FOR THE OTHER SIDE!
-
Agree. But I know of one guy who is all of those things you mention (maybe except "safe").
I voted for him last year, and Bob Barr before that. I didn't feel as good about voting for Barr (honestly I kind of think he's a bit of a dick), but Gary Johnson is pretty much the only politician out there that I am simpatico with.
It was futile as shit last year. I'm hoping in this bizarro election, where the top choices are all truly, truly terrible, rules are completely out the window, and we appear to be trying out to "alternative" candidates, why is Gary Johnson not getting more attention? They need to put him up on the debate stage when the Presidential debates roll around. If Perot and Nader were able to get the kind of support they did in those years, I see no reason Johnson couldn't pull in plenty from both sides and the center in this year of all years.
It's not everything but it does take money to get that visibility. Also takes a certain amount of gravitas. That's what Ron Paul lacked.
That said, I quit looking for a perfect candidate years ago. Doing that is fruitless. And with human nature, it's illogical and doesn't exist. I just want someone who gives a real shit about the country, has the record to prove it and has something beyond name calling and threats to get it done. I have come around to Kasich more lately. Is he probably a little more liberal than I desire? Sure but I think he's good. And I think he gives a shit. His record is pretty solid. I'm not the biggest fan of expanding Medicare or not thrwarting common core but he is governor of a moderate state. A lot of his decisions were "will of the people" situations. I don't think it means he would be a bad president at all. He has worked with Reagan before and with newt during the contract with America when the house was able to produce a budget surplus. That's huge to me. He's been in the trenches with good results. I like that.
-
It's not everything but it does take money to get that visibility. Also takes a certain amount of gravitas. That's what Ron Paul lacked.
Them damn gravoids will scare the hell out of you...
-
It's not everything but it does take money to get that visibility. Also takes a certain amount of gravitas. That's what Ron Paul lacked.
That said, I quit looking for a perfect candidate years ago. Doing that is fruitless. And with human nature, it's illogical and doesn't exist. I just want someone who gives a real shit about the country, has the record to prove it and has something beyond name calling and threats to get it done. I have come around to Kasich more lately. Is he probably a little more liberal than I desire? Sure but I think he's good. And I think he gives a shit. His record is pretty solid. I'm not the biggest fan of expanding Medicare or not thrwarting common core but he is governor of a moderate state. A lot of his decisions were "will of the people" situations. I don't think it means he would be a bad president at all. He has worked with Reagan before and with newt during the contract with America when the house was able to produce a budget surplus. That's huge to me. He's been in the trenches with good results. I like that.
That's where I am leaning.
I don't like expanding medicare either, however, some social programs are fine if you have a balanced budget, without raising taxes, to do it.
-
It's not everything but it does take money to get that visibility. Also takes a certain amount of gravitas. That's what Ron Paul lacked.
That said, I quit looking for a perfect candidate years ago. Doing that is fruitless. And with human nature, it's illogical and doesn't exist. I just want someone who gives a real shit about the country, has the record to prove it and has something beyond name calling and threats to get it done. I have come around to Kasich more lately. Is he probably a little more liberal than I desire? Sure but I think he's good. And I think he gives a shit. His record is pretty solid. I'm not the biggest fan of expanding Medicare or not thrwarting common core but he is governor of a moderate state. A lot of his decisions were "will of the people" situations. I don't think it means he would be a bad president at all. He has worked with Reagan before and with newt during the contract with America when the house was able to produce a budget surplus. That's huge to me. He's been in the trenches with good results. I like that.
Completely agree. If Kasich can get the nomination, I'm all for him. This hysteric search for partisan purity is what has destroyed both sides, IMO. Governance Life is nuanced and you've got to be able to bend a little bit to make things work. PURE left or right-wing ideology is not what got us this far. If you think he'd be a pinko commie disaster that will bring us to ruins, you're a tinfoil hat nutjob. Unfortunately, I think there are too many of those in the GOP's base right now for him to have a shot.
So if it's Cruz or for God's sake Trump? I'm 100% on the Johnson train.
-
So if it's Cruz or for God's sake Trump? I'm 100% on the Johnson train.
You've ridden a train of johnsons before, haven't you?
-
You've ridden a train of johnsons before, haven't you?
Well who hasn't.....I mean...err, good one. You got him with that one.
-
So if it's Cruz or for God's sake Trump? I'm 100% on the Johnson train.
Unfortunately, we Floridians don't get the luxury of wasting a 3rd party vote.
-
So if it's Cruz or for God's sake Trump? I'm 100% on the Johnson train.
Same. Alabama is going red anyways. I will write his name in that little spot on the ballot if he is not on it.
-
Same. Alabama is going red anyways. I will write his name in that little spot on the ballot if he is not on it.
He is on the ballot in all 50 states.
Unfortunately, we Floridians don't get the luxury of wasting a 3rd party vote.
Unfortunately, we Floridians don't get the luxury of wasting a 3rd party vote.
Frankly, I'm tired of this shit. Why is it a waste? Wouldn't it have been considered a waste to vote for an open Socialist not too long ago? Or a Fascist reality show billionaire like Trump?
WHY is common sense being treated as such a ridiculous notion? I realize I "wasted" my vote in the past. Two reasons I don't care. 1) It was who I agreed with more, and I was voting my conscious. Lesser of two evils is a bullshit notion if they're both evil. 2) I wanted to lay some foundation and try to dispel this notion that a third party can't get any traction whatsoever. #2 was a pretty big fail, as I remember no news coverage even reported on Johnson's numbers.
But I've been fed up with this bullshit for over a decade, and with this clown show going on this cycle I'm beyond fed up by a few lightyears. Everything is out the window now. So why the fuck not?
-
He is on the ballot in all 50 states.
Frankly, I'm tired of this shit. Why is it a waste?
So why the fuck not?
Because a third party candidate will never win...
-
If you're going to vote for somebody off the wall who has no chance like Gary Johnson? Might as well write a name, any name, on a piece of toilet paper, use it for its intended purpose and then flush it away.
Sadly that's where we are. I once voted for Ross Perot just as a means of protest. Except I wasn't protesting, I was just handing Clinton the election. It was a stupid wasteful, spiteful vote.
I won't ever do that again. I will look at the people who have a legitimate chance and (in the majority of cases) choose between the evil that resides behind door number one and the futility behind door number two.
Voted for Clinton the second time over Dole. Dole didn't move me and Clinton seemed to be getting things done.
Was I motivated to vote for GW Bush? Not really. I had the misfortune to meet him prior to the election and thought he was one of the dumbest people I'd ever talked to. But when the other choice is whackadoo Gore? I'm voting Bush. Bush vs. Crazy Ass Liar Kerry? Easy again.
I thought McCain was an incredibly weak Republican choice. But versus stuffed-shirt, hazy origin, never-done-anything Obama -- who I was flabbergasted ever even got the nomination he was such a fop -- I'm voting AGAINST him.
I didn't vote FOR Romney in 2012. I voted against everything the Muslim-In-Chief had done. Every lie he spouted, every coverup the media assisted in.
This year I'm reduced again to voting against something. I don't think the country can survive a Hillary Clinton presidency. I know it can't survive a lunatic Bernie Sanders occupancy. So I'm not so much FOR Trump (or Cruzio or Rubuz or whoever) I'm just against whoever wins the other side.
My belief is that Trump happens to be the only candidate with the emotional resonance to stir people to the polls in numbers enough to overcome the entitled masses who will flock to Bernie or Hillary. The fact that the guy is an avowed socialist -- something we fought against in WW2 -- and people are falling for his failed message stuns me.
It's sad that we're reduced to that.
Elections have become almost useless anyway. When I go to the polls I see all these positions and people I've never heard of and I'm supposed to make a choice? I typically write my own name in for one and then a few other people in for the others. I've gotten at least one vote for some office in every election for years.
-
He is on the ballot in all 50 states.
Frankly, I'm tired of this shit. Why is it a waste? Wouldn't it have been considered a waste to vote for an open Socialist not too long ago? Or a Fascist reality show billionaire like Trump?
WHY is common sense being treated as such a ridiculous notion? I realize I "wasted" my vote in the past. Two reasons I don't care. 1) It was who I agreed with more, and I was voting my conscious. Lesser of two evils is a bullshit notion if they're both evil. 2) I wanted to lay some foundation and try to dispel this notion that a third party can't get any traction whatsoever. #2 was a pretty big fail, as I remember no news coverage even reported on Johnson's numbers.
But I've been fed up with this bullshit for over a decade, and with this clown show going on this cycle I'm beyond fed up by a few lightyears. Everything is out the window now. So why the fuck not?
Florida is often very evenly split (see: 2000 Bush v Gore). If Trump is the Repub candidate, I can't risk not casting a vote for the Dem candidate.
-
Florida is often very evenly split (see: 2000 Bush v Gore). If Trump is the Repub candidate, I can't risk not casting a vote for the Dem candidate.
Remind me to come kidnap you for a bachelor party on election day.
-
Lots of people answering. No one answering my question.
WHY can't Johnson get enough votes to win? In 2016 of all years?
THIS is the year. Bernie and Trump are the frontrunners. Conventional wisdom is that neither of them stood a snowball's chance in hell either, until they did.
Stop voting for these fucktarded villains and vote for common sense.
Fuck these self-fulfilling prophecies. The only reason he may not have a real chance is because everyone is saying he doesn't have a real chance. Again, the same applied to Trump and Sanders until enough people said "Fuck it, I don't care, I'm voting for the guy I want to vote for". WHY can it happen for those two fucknuts but not someone with an actual, nuanced, educated, reality-based platform?
I confidently believe that if you put everything the three of them stood for on three sheets of paper and didn't tell anyone whose was whose or what party they represented and asked the entire country to pick the one they agreed with the most, Johnson would trounce Bernie & Trump in a landslide.
So why not?
-
He is on the ballot in all 50 states.
Frankly, I'm tired of this shit. Why is it a waste? Wouldn't it have been considered a waste to vote for an open Socialist not too long ago? Or a Fascist reality show billionaire like Trump?
WHY is common sense being treated as such a ridiculous notion? I realize I "wasted" my vote in the past. Two reasons I don't care. 1) It was who I agreed with more, and I was voting my conscious. Lesser of two evils is a bullshit notion if they're both evil. 2) I wanted to lay some foundation and try to dispel this notion that a third party can't get any traction whatsoever. #2 was a pretty big fail, as I remember no news coverage even reported on Johnson's numbers.
But I've been fed up with this bullshit for over a decade, and with this clown show going on this cycle I'm beyond fed up by a few lightyears. Everything is out the window now. So why the fuck not?
Good to know. Then Johnson has sealed my vote.
I don't see it as a wasted vote. Like you said, you are voting your conscious. You are voting the guy you want.
For your #2........we (and I include you) Libertarians are a lot like Auburn. We are our own worst enemy. We had a guy in late 2014 up until mid 2015 that was gaining traction in Rand Paul. He was standing up for individual freedoms and filibustering like a mad man until the White House gave him a yes or no answer to a question. My god, he was making people tune into C-Span for hours that normally wouldn't watch a second of it. Somehow he still couldn't get more than 30 or 40% support from those that self identify as Libertarians. Libertarians are so damn hard headed that it's either all or nothing. It's not going to happen overnight. One we need real grass root campaigns and win some house and senate seats. Two, we need to brush aside this "it's got to be 100%" mentality and elect someone like a Paul that has deep Libertarian tendencies, even if it's not what we agree with 100%.
He was labeled too Republican or too moderate Democrat leaning and couldn't build on what little support he gained from the more middle/moderate of either party. Democrats and the Republicans did all they could to dismiss him. McCain, McConnell, Graham and other establishment Republicans trashed him as crazy or wacko-bird, Democrats called him the same and Fox did one hell of a job distorting his policies. When both sides immediately went on the attack, I knew I had my guy. I just didn't think they would stop his momentum that he had going the way they did.
-
I don't see it as a wasted vote. Like you said, you are voting your conscious. You are voting the guy you want.
Everybody else does. The left thanks you for your vote.
Sometimes the war is won off of strategy, not just winning a battle.
-
Everybody else does. The left thanks you for your vote.
Sometimes the war is won off of strategy, not just winning a battle.
What you can't fathom is that the idea of a Trump presidency is equally abhorrent, possibly even MORE than a Sanders or Hillary presidency. That's not to say they wouldn't be both terrible, but if they're equally awful, I don't give a shit which side the coin flip lands on. I care more that I voted on principle, and hopefully did what I could to at least contribute to the end of the validity of this argument by at least putting a dent in the electorate.
The common thread in BOTH of the leading candidates is disgust and distrust in "the system". They want "an outsider". Johnson is the ultimate outsider, but actually not a fucking idiot who understands the nuances of government. He is undoubtedly the better candidate. So I'm going to vote for him.
-
Everybody else does. The left thanks you for your vote.
Sometimes the war is won off of strategy, not just winning a battle.
They are welcome then. I refuse to vote for someone who will in my opinion bring about the ruin of this country in 8 years instead of 4. The thing is, they both will ruin the country. Trump is not the "conservative" that he wants people to believe. He is very moderate liberal. Leopards never change their spots. Both are going to make things worse, but people are either to blind or stupid to realize it.
-
They are welcome then. I refuse to vote for someone who will in my opinion bring about the ruin of this country in 8 years instead of 4. The thing is, they both will ruin the country. Trump is not the "conservative" that he wants people to believe. He is very moderate liberal. Leopards never change their spots. Both are going to make things worse, but people are either to blind or stupid to realize it.
You callin' me blind?
-
You callin' me blind?
Yep.
-
Yep.
If I could see you, I'd hit you in the forehead so hard.
-
He is on the ballot in all 50 states.
Frankly, I'm tired of this shit. Why is it a waste? Wouldn't it have been considered a waste to vote for an open Socialist not too long ago? Or a Fascist reality show billionaire like Trump?
WHY is common sense being treated as such a ridiculous notion? I realize I "wasted" my vote in the past. Two reasons I don't care. 1) It was who I agreed with more, and I was voting my conscious. Lesser of two evils is a bullshit notion if they're both evil. 2) I wanted to lay some foundation and try to dispel this notion that a third party can't get any traction whatsoever. #2 was a pretty big fail, as I remember no news coverage even reported on Johnson's numbers.
But I've been fed up with this bullshit for over a decade, and with this clown show going on this cycle I'm beyond fed up by a few lightyears. Everything is out the window now. So why the fuck not?
It's incremental. It will take a long play to break the two party stranglehold. Until then, those of us in battleground states (read: not immediately identifiable as red/blue) must participate in the dance or risk an even more unpalatable outcome (trump presidency).
-
What you can't fathom is that the idea of a Trump presidency is equally abhorrent, possibly even MORE than a Sanders or Hillary presidency. That's not to say they wouldn't be both terrible, but if they're equally awful, I don't give a shit which side the coin flip lands on. I care more that I voted on principle, and hopefully did what I could to at least contribute to the end of the validity of this argument by at least putting a dent in the electorate.
The common thread in BOTH of the leading candidates is disgust and distrust in "the system". They want "an outsider". Johnson is the ultimate outsider, but actually not a fucking idiot who understands the nuances of government. He is undoubtedly the better candidate. So I'm going to vote for him.
I KNOW the left will continue to ruin it. There is proof of that.
I, nor you, have any idea what Trump will do.
That is in and of itself is scary. But the perfect storm has come. The establishment created this monster, not Trump. I don't think folks are so high on Trump as they are down on ANYONE who has held office.
-
It's incremental. It will take a long play to break the two party stranglehold. Until then, those of us in battleground states (read: not immediately identifiable as red/blue) must participate in the dance or risk an even more unpalatable outcome (trump presidency).
The incremental part is exactly why I'm voting for Johnson NOW. It's why I did voted Libertarian the last two cycles. Gotta start somewhere.
But it's not like the Socialist party was getting substantial votes in America before this year...
You've got to start to start.
-
The incremental part is exactly why I'm voting for Johnson NOW. It's why I did voted Libertarian the last two cycles. Gotta start somewhere.
But it's not like the Socialist party was getting substantial votes in America before this year...
You've got to start to start.
You guys are idiots. Your party is not offering free shit. therfore your party will not grow. So its a wasted vote.
Sure you want to legalize weed, but the slackers smoke that anyway.
So its a lose-lose for you!
-
The incremental part is exactly why I'm voting for Johnson NOW. It's why I did voted Libertarian the last two cycles. Gotta start somewhere.
But it's not like the Socialist party was getting substantial votes in America before this year...
You've got to start to start.
I'm saying that the "start" will have to happen in states with a predetermined outcome. The immediate stakes in my battleground state are too high.
-
Lots of people answering. No one answering my question.
WHY can't Johnson get enough votes to win? In 2016 of all years?
THIS is the year. Bernie and Trump are the frontrunners. Conventional wisdom is that neither of them stood a snowball's chance in hell either, until they did.
Stop voting for these fucktarded villains and vote for common sense.
Fuck these self-fulfilling prophecies. The only reason he may not have a real chance is because everyone is saying he doesn't have a real chance. Again, the same applied to Trump and Sanders until enough people said "Fuck it, I don't care, I'm voting for the guy I want to vote for". WHY can it happen for those two fucknuts but not someone with an actual, nuanced, educated, reality-based platform?
I confidently believe that if you put everything the three of them stood for on three sheets of paper and didn't tell anyone whose was whose or what party they represented and asked the entire country to pick the one they agreed with the most, Johnson would trounce Bernie & Trump in a landslide.
So why not?
I'll be honest man, if you had not told me I wouldn't know he was even running. Some of that is the media. I get that. But I read a lot. I stay into with ear to the ground on politics. I have several friends and family members involved in politics more than I (meaning working on campaigns, for current office holders, etc) and they didn't know either when I mentioned it. He's almost like a black hole.
WE!! Is right. It's hard for third party to get traction with out millions of dollars in the bank. That's the advantage of running in one of the main 2 parties. You get the exposure and money. Why didn't Johnson run on the GOP side? There may have been an opening for him this year. Esp seeing how well Kasich has done.
Rand Paul was a disappointment. I really liked him and hate his campaign really never took off.
-
A lot of weed talk in here today. Can somebody hook a brother up with a little for my glaucoma?
-
A lot of weed talk in here today. Can somebody hook a brother up with a little for my glaucoma?
You didn't put in on this.....man!
-
I KNOW the left will continue to ruin it. There is proof of that.
I, nor you, have any idea what Trump will do.
That is in and of itself is scary. But the perfect storm has come. The establishment created this monster, not Trump. I don't think folks are so high on Trump as they are down on ANYONE who has held office.
You don't sound as high on Trump as you were a month ago. That's promising. Baby steps.
You are right though on the second part. Mark Levin said as much too. I value his opinion highly. People get so emotionally upset with the establishment and Obama that they swing in an equally bad direction with a guy like Trump.
-
You didn't put in on this.....man!
Weed is from the earth. God put this here for me and you.
edit above post: glaucoma cataracts.
-
Weed is from the earth. God put this here for me and you.
edit above post: glaucoma cataracts.
Take advantage, Craig.
-
If I could see you, I'd hit you in the forehead so hard.
Oh, yeah? I will kick you in your bad knee you old geezer.
-
Why didn't Johnson run on the GOP side? There may have been an opening for him this year. Esp seeing how well Kasich has done.
Because he's not a Republican.
-
Oh, yeah? I will kick you in your bad knee you old geezer.
Which one?
-
Because he's not a Republican.
Neither is Paul, but he gave it a go and ended up on the stage for the debate.
I think the point is that you have to play the part, at least in the beginning, to get some notoriety. Fucked up as that is.
-
You don't sound as high on Trump as you were a month ago. That's promising. Baby steps.
You are right though on the second part. Mark Levin said as much too. I value his opinion highly. People get so emotionally upset with the establishment and Obama that they swing in an equally bad direction with a guy like Trump.
Its the same stuff I said a month ago, you were just so full of Trump hate, you did not hear.
Like I said, I am watching and waiting.
I don't LOVE Trump. But I'm not convinced he is as bad as the left either.
We are where we are due to people holding on to their little part.
For example. Now that gay marriage is here, there are a lot of folks who let that go and accept candidates without having to broach that issue. So guys like Trump can be looked at from a different angle, rather than through pro marriage eyes.
Times are calling for a more moderate republican candidate. Trump knows what he is doing. He is campaigning to the "wants".
-
Its the same stuff I said a month ago, you were just so full of Trump hate, you did not hear.
Like I said, I am watching and waiting.
I don't LOVE Trump. But I'm not convinced he is as bad as the left either.
We are where we are due to people holding on to their little part.
For example. Now that gay marriage is here, there are a lot of folks who let that go and accept candidates without having to broach that issue. So guys like Trump can be looked at from a different angle, rather than through pro marriage eyes.
Times are calling for a more moderate republican candidate. Trump knows what he is doing. He is campaigning to the "wants".
Trump is a populist.
Populists typical aren't ideologues. So yes, that is correct.
Fwiw- if you look back at the summer and fall, I didn't hate Trump. He was saying the right things. It sounded great at first. Then you kind of wake up and realize that the guy is full of shit. Same broken record every day. Same talking points. One day it clicked that this guy was a phony. I guess it takes hearing him several times saying the same generic non substantive talking points to realize there is nothing there. He's Oz behind the curtain. You point out facts or some hard truths on his authoritarian record then he makes threats and stomps up and down like a spoiled brat, calls names, changes topics, insults people.
The side show gets old. It's cute at first but wears thin. Kinda like the jerry springer show.
-
Trump is a populist.
Populists typical aren't ideologues. So yes, that is correct.
Fwiw- if you look back at the summer and fall, I didn't hate Trump. He was saying the right things. It sounded great at first. Then you kind of wake up and realize that the guy is full of shit. Same broken record every day. Same talking points. One day it clicked that this guy was a phony. I guess it takes hearing him several times saying the same generic non substantive talking points to realize there is nothing there. He's Oz behind the curtain. You point out facts or some hard truths on his authoritarian record then he makes threats and stomps up and down like a spoiled brat, calls names, changes topics, insults people.
The side show gets old. It's cute at first but wears thin. Kinda like the jerry springer show.
The word populist doesn't scare me. George C. Wallace was a populist. He would have made a fantastic president.
-
The word populist doesn't scare me. George C. Wallace was a populist. He would have made a fantastic president.
How about fascist?
-
How about fascist?
You forgot "pig"!
-
How about fascist?
(http://i.imgur.com/f7FdEdG.jpg)
-
How about fascist?
You know nothing Jon Snow.
-
Trump has been busy working over the Bush legacy and the unlikeable hothead, Cruz. He's saving Rubio because he's going to need him if he intends to finish. Just has to allow him to be annointed by the religious south as its man of conviction and faith. Just sayin'.
-
Trump has been busy working over the Bush legacy and the unlikeable hothead, Cruz. He's saving Rubio because he's going to need him if he intends to finish. Just has to allow him to be annointed by the religious south as its man of conviction and faith. Just sayin'.
Calling Cruz a hothead from the trump perspective? Holy shit I've heard it all now.
Of course most on here agree you are about as coherent and logical as Otis Campbell on a Saturday night.
-
How about fascist?
Most fascists are populist. It's their appeal. Communists aren't quite as charming.
-
Calling Cruz a hothead from the trump perspective? Holy shit I've heard it all now.
Of course most on here agree you are about as coherent and logical as Otis Campbell on a Saturday night.
I don't think Trump is a hothead. Petty and insulting yes.
Cruz is a hothead.
-
Calling Cruz a hothead from the trump perspective? Holy shit I've heard it all now.
Of course most on here agree you are about as coherent and logical as Otis Campbell on a Saturday night.
And sorry I touched on a nerve merely by pointing out what I have seen and read about your boy Ted. I'm sure he has some good qualities.
-
And sorry I touched on a nerve merely by pointing out what I have seen and read about your boy Ted. I'm sure he has some good qualities.
You just hate him because he's Hispanic.
Racist!
-
http://youtu.be/QF7rQRNCCOY
Hothead would be putting it mildly.
-
The Young Turks (TYT) is an online American liberal/progressive political and social commentary program hosted by Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian; the show has an associated network of online shows and is owned by a company of the same name (The Young Turks LLC).
-
Raphael Cruz and Donald Trump are similar in that they both have somewhat of a narcissistic personality disorder...Cruz maybe slightly more so than Trump.
-
Bernie Sanders and Vladimir Putin are similar in that they both are fucking commies.
But Bernie looks better shirtless.
-
http://youtu.be/QF7rQRNCCOY
Hothead would be putting it mildly.
This is seriously what you linked to try and make your point?
-
This is seriously what you linked to try and make your point?
I don't think you understood when I said that calling him a "hothead" would be putting it mildly. He (Cruz) was the one that shut the government down and he wanted to do it a second time, before his own party shut him down and then the House speaker called Rafael Edward Cruz a "Jackass".