***Official Political Discussion Thread***

Hillary Clinton had a better foot in the 2008 primaries as well man. Obama was an unknown. Look what happened.
Hillary had a better NAME footing in 2008 but she didn't have solid footing overall as the majority of the base was against her vote for the war in Iraq which really did her in early on.  That and not knowing all the rules of the Democratic primary, Obama being a fresh new face, and Obama being able to capitalize on the youth vote early.
Bush will not make it, I'm telling you.
I don't know if he'll make it or not, but I do see him running.  Whether he makes it or not remains to be seen.
If Hillary runs in 2016 I'm going to be pissed
Who else do you have in mind for 2016 then on the Democratic side??
I dunno how Jeb is gonna overcome history. Your dad was seen as a failure, your brother is still so hated he can't even so his face 4 years later. Moderates ain't gonna drink the kool-aid a third time
Very true, but Jeb already has the Republican base, and as far as immigration goes he's been very vocal on ways and solutions for the party to have to deal with this issue.  He was the governor of Florida, he has ideas on immigration and is able to talk to the Latino community.  All that being said, his last name is going to cause him many problems, that much is for certain.
 
Pretty sure Hilary said she doesn't want to do it anymore. 

Condoleeza could come home to roost if she really wanted too... 
laugh.gif


I heard Gen. Petraeus wasn't out of the picture either... 
nerd.gif


Don't sleep on Jeb though. If Kennedy's can still get elected to office, the Bushes have this on lock. Dude has already been distancing himself from the current GOP. 
 
Last edited:
cuomo > Hilliary >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>biden for 2016
Maybe, but if it's between Cuomo and Hillary, Cuomo is going to have to wait his turn as well.
Pretty sure Hilary said she doesn't want to do it anymore.
Yeah that sounds good, but what did Bill say on the matter
wink.gif
.
 
Its not socialism numbnuts.

Americans pay their lowest taxes EVER b. 

This isn't austerity we're talking about. 

You can't even have a tempered or reasoned argument without flying all the way to the right. 

Its about balance. 


We can't keep giving bailouts without accountability on banks and limits on those blank checks. 

On the other end, we can't keep cutting taxes and thinking thats an incentive to create jobs...ITS NOT. 


Its simple economics man. 

Demand drives growth. 


You think you sell more lolly pops by having 10x more on the stands????

Exactly.

How GOP portrayed the cuts:
"Oh, cutting taxes? Great! Let me run to go hire more people!"

In Reality
"Oh cutting taxes? Great! More money for me and larger dividend for my shareholders!"
 
Its not socialism numbnuts.

Americans pay their lowest taxes EVER b. 

This isn't austerity we're talking about. 

You can't even have a tempered or reasoned argument without flying all the way to the right. 

Its about balance. 


We can't keep giving bailouts without accountability on banks and limits on those blank checks. 

On the other end, we can't keep cutting taxes and thinking thats an incentive to create jobs...ITS NOT. 

Its simple economics man. 

Demand drives growth. 


You think you sell more lolly pops by having 10x more on the stands????
Exactly.

How GOP portrayed the cuts:
"Oh, cutting taxes? Great! Let me run to go hire more people!"

In Reality
"Oh cutting taxes? Great! More money for me and larger dividend for my shareholders!"
Even further, if you raise taxes, its more of an incentive to hire more people to increase production to make up for lost revenue!

Remember this. These are the LOWEST taxes we have EVER paid and are some of the lowest humans have seen in the HISTORY of civilizations. 
 
Last edited:
Hillary had a better NAME footing in 2008 but she didn't have solid footing overall as the majority of the base was against her vote for the war in Iraq which really did her in early on.  That and not knowing all the rules of the Democratic primary, Obama being a fresh new face, and Obama being able to capitalize on the youth vote early.


I don't know if he'll make it or not, but I do see him running.  Whether he makes it or not remains to be seen.



Who else do you have in mind for 2016 then on the Democratic side??

I'd like to see someone who doesn't come from a prestigious political family. That needs to stop. Don't want to see steps backwards in political progression. I have no idea who tho. Cuomo has a shot.
 
Hillary had a better NAME footing in 2008 but she didn't have solid footing overall as the majority of the base was against her vote for the war in Iraq which really did her in early on.  That and not knowing all the rules of the Democratic primary, Obama being a fresh new face, and Obama being able to capitalize on the youth vote early.


I don't know if he'll make it or not, but I do see him running.  Whether he makes it or not remains to be seen.



Who else do you have in mind for 2016 then on the Democratic side??
 
I'd like to see someone who doesn't come from a prestigious political family. That needs to stop. Don't want to see steps backwards in political progression. I have no idea who tho. Cuomo has a shot.
Meh...money begets money. 

I don't like it, but I understand how and why it happens.

They tell kids that you can't get a job without knowing someone, what makes you think being groomed for office is any different? 
 
Hillary had a better NAME footing in 2008 but she didn't have solid footing overall as the majority of the base was against her vote for the war in Iraq which really did her in early on.  That and not knowing all the rules of the Democratic primary, Obama being a fresh new face, and Obama being able to capitalize on the youth vote early.



I don't know if he'll make it or not, but I do see him running.  Whether he makes it or not remains to be seen.




Who else do you have in mind for 2016 then on the Democratic side??

 


I'd like to see someone who doesn't come from a prestigious political family. That needs to stop. Don't want to see steps backwards in political progression. I have no idea who tho. Cuomo has a shot.
Meh...money begets money. 

I don't like it, but I understand how and why it happens.

They tell kids that you can't get a job without knowing someone, what makes you think being groomed for office is any different? 

Biden made it sound like he may run again :lol: Smokin Joe....but yeah if you think about it Obama was an anomaly.....the GOP haven't had a winning ticket in 84 years without a Bush or Nixon on the ticket which is kind of astounding, If Hillary can get it in 2016 then the Clintons would sort of become that for Dems....its kind of the nature of the beast though, I mean look at all the Kennedys in the senate, presidential office, congress, etc.

I honestly hope a guy like Corey Booker would run in the next 10-15 yrs but I feel like he's more hands on than a presidency would allow him to be, dude should be the next Gov. of NJ though
 
HIT THAT TRACK BABY! 
roll.gif


Slick Willy out here.
Bill's approval ratings are at an all-time high, he's still able to draw crowds and if Obama has a "successful" second term and passes the baton to Hillary it would be monumental and rock star status.  Between the crowds and the media coverage, it's going to be epic.  Then there would be Bush on the other side firing up his base.  The presidential race of all presidential races.
I honestly hope a guy like Corey Booker would run in the next 10-15 yrs but I feel like he's more hands on than a presidency would allow him to be, dude should be the next Gov. of NJ though
I believe he will if and only if Christie runs for the Republican primary.  I think Booker is just waiting to see Christie's next move, nothing more than a game of chess.
 
I would love Booker to run.. He genuinely cares about helping people, and responds to people all day about questions and concerns for CIty services.. With that said he'd need to become more involved with National Politics before he ran, and with only 3 years to do it, there isn't that much time.. Can be done, but he'd be better off in 2020 than he would in 2016.

As for discussing Europe's predicament, I would go into why them falling is because of dependency on the US economy, but it would be lost on the person who brought it up
 
You have to be trolling.
Drug War = Drug problems
Get rid of the War on Drugs, you get rid of the drug problems.
"TERRORSTS!!"
roll.gif
You mean the same ones that the CIA was funding?
Supply-Side Economics = Keynesian Economics
Oh so opening allowing drug dealers to come to America would make the war on drugs better right?
 
HIT THAT TRACK BABY! 
roll.gif


Slick Willy out here.
Bill's approval ratings are at an all-time high, he's still able to draw crowds and if Obama has a "successful" second term and passes the baton to Hillary it would be monumental and rock star status.  Between the crowds and the media coverage, it's going to be epic.  Then there would be Bush on the other side firing up his base.  The presidential race of all presidential races.
Dems gotta know if they have a term rolling into 2016 thats trending up and Hillary gets the nod for the next ballot the GOP will not be about that life.  Sucks that GOP really wants Obama to do badly for their selfish reasons.
 
I'm still pissed at reading Ninjahood's implication that raising taxes on the upper class equates to socialism. The fact he thought he could pull that out like no one would notice and play it off as some almost benign comment just annoys the crap out of me. Its that same fox news talking point they drill into their electorate. 

I swear fo' gawd that dude is just lost. 

We have a MIXED economy. You already live in some degree of socialism. Read some political science theory or something. 

There is a such thing as a social contract and there is over 100 years of economic data to back it up. The middle class is what drives growth. 

There is a balance that needs to occur. Trust me, I fear sliding ALL the way to that of the Khmer Rouge as well. 
eyes.gif
...but we can't talk about progress if you think you can pull out these mental-kill switches and code words that you think will shut down arguments. 
 
[h1]Dear Republicans, Marco Rubio Will Not Save You[/h1]inShare[color= rgb(92, 92, 92)]NOV 8 2012, 3:22 PM ET[/color]  351
I think Matt Yglesias is exactly right when he says the GOP's "Latino problem" extends far beyond immigration:
Consider the GOP's deeply racialized campaign against Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor. What was so surprising about this -- and I know I'm not the only fair-skinned English-dominant person with a Spanish surname who was genuinely shocked -- was that conservatives could have easily opposed her purely on policy grounds. Sotamayor is a fairly conventional Democrat on constitutional issues, and that would have been ample reason for conservatives to criticize her. Indeed, Justice Elena Kagan was attacked on precisely those grounds. 

But rather than tempering opposition with at least some recognition that Sotomayor's life story might be a great example for immigrant parents trying to raise children in difficult circumstances, the country was treated to a mass racial panic in which Anglo America was about to be stomped by the boot of Sotomayor's ethnic prejudice. The graduate of Princeton and Yale Law, former prosecutor, and longtime federal judge was somehow not just too liberal for conservatives' taste but a "lightweight" who'd been coasting her whole life on the enormous privilege of growing up poor in the South Bronx.
I would say this extends even beyond Sonia Sotomayor and also, say, campaigning on Sharia Law. When you have someone like Allen West out front saying something like this:
We already have a 5th column that is already infiltrating into our colleges, into our universities, into our high schools, into our religious aspect, our cultural aspect, our financial, our political systems in this country. And that enemy represents something called Islam and Islam is a totalitarian theocratic political ideology, it is not a religion. It has not been a religion since 622 AD, and we need to have individuals that stand up and say that.
And then you combine that with a presidential candidates signing a documents like this:
.... a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA's first African-American President.
And you alloy that to another presidential candidate saying something like this:
And so I'm prepared, if the NAACP invites me, I'll go to their convention and talk about why the African-American community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps.
... what you start to get is the impression that you are looking at a party which represents the interest of those trying to keep you out. This impression is not wrong. Any serious conversation about Republican candidates needing to be more "diverse" needs to confront the hard reality of the Republican base.  

Sheriff Arpaio does not owe his prominence to a military coup. He owes it to actual Republicans, virtually none of whom have any interest in seeing the party diversify on a policy level. Diversity isn't simply giving Mia Love a plum speaking spot. It is finding a Mia Love who represents the interests, and will advocate for policies, of other Mia Loves.

I don't think this is something you fix by 2016.  This is a big problem. It took Democrats more than a half of a century of wandering to get it right. 
 
Last edited:
WHOA.....CIA Director Petraeus just resigned due to an extra marital affair :smh: wild

He was going to step down anyway. Clinton & Geithner are leaving too.

Edit - I'm sorry, I meant Panetta was stepping down. I didn't read your post carefully enough to see CIA Director...Bad year for the CIA this year in terms of scandal...
 
Last edited:
Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) is standing by his decision not to extend early voting hours, despite the fact that some voters said they waited as long as nine hours to cast a ballot.

"Well I'm very comfortable that the right thing happened," he told WXMG Orlando while speaking with reporters on Thursday night. "We had 4.4 million people vote."

The WXMG reporter tried to follow up again and ask whether hours should have been extended, but a member of Scott's staff appeared to end the press conference. When Scott was asked again while walking with reporters, he repeated his answer.

A major reason for Florida's chaotic early voting process was that last year, the state's GOP-controlled legislature shortened early voting days from 14 to eight. Long lines were reported across the state, with one polling place closing as late as 1 a.m. Sunday morning. In a sudden move, the Miami-Dade elections department allowed voters to cast in-person absentee ballots on Sunday afternoon, but closed temporarily because it could not meet demand.

Former Gov. Charlie Crist, a Republican-turned-independent, accused Scott of "voter suppression" for refusing to extend early voting hours, and said Scott should have extended hours like he did in 2008 when he was governor.

Things weren't any better on Election Day, as people waited in lines for up to six hours in Miami-Dade County. Voting ended in the county at around 1:30 a.m. Wednesday.
 
That sucks. I liked Patraeus. he seemed like a "good" guy( not that having an affair makes you a bad person. But it sows bad judgement). oh well. You'd think the CIA director couldve covered that up with some assassinations
 
Last edited:
and SOCIALISM doesn't work either genius, or does da European bailout has taught you NOTHING? :lol:

So going back to the tax rates of the 90s is socialism now? :smh:

You continue to amaze me with sheer amount of ignorance you can spew at one time :lol:

what part of YOU HAVE TO CUT SPENDING dont you understand?

western europe is about to go belly up because they couldn't control da SPENDING and you got countries trying to

take 70% of someone's income.

SIDEBAR...

i see da general stepped down over a extra marital affair...*cough libya cover up*
 
Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) is standing by his decision not to extend early voting hours, despite the fact that some voters said they waited as long as nine hours to cast a ballot.

"Well I'm very comfortable that the right thing happened," he told WXMG Orlando while speaking with reporters on Thursday night. "We had 4.4 million people vote."

The WXMG reporter tried to follow up again and ask whether hours should have been extended, but a member of Scott's staff appeared to end the press conference. When Scott was asked again while walking with reporters, he repeated his answer.

A major reason for Florida's chaotic early voting process was that last year, the state's GOP-controlled legislature shortened early voting days from 14 to eight. Long lines were reported across the state, with one polling place closing as late as 1 a.m. Sunday morning. In a sudden move, the Miami-Dade elections department allowed voters to cast in-person absentee ballots on Sunday afternoon, but closed temporarily because it could not meet demand.

Former Gov. Charlie Crist, a Republican-turned-independent, accused Scott of "voter suppression" for refusing to extend early voting hours, and said Scott should have extended hours like he did in 2008 when he was governor.

Things weren't any better on Election Day, as people waited in lines for up to six hours in Miami-Dade County. Voting ended in the county at around 1:30 a.m. Wednesday.

Is this rigid way of thinking that's killing republicans...Someone needs to smack the ish out of him...There's no reason counting the votes should take this long. It's disgraceful, especially given all the technology available now...
 
Back
Top Bottom