![]() |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Leslie
(Post 11862847)
The fact that we all like him is the kiss of death for Kasich.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Rubios voice just grates on my nerves.
|
Re: 2016 Election
He certainly stuck the knife into Hillary in his acceptance speech.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by dakota44
(Post 11862853)
Probably :lol: I think Bernies triumphs may have come to an end. He will likely lose by big numbers in S.C. and more states after that. His stuff plays in Iowa and N.H. but not so well in most of the states he will need. The scarey thing is that a lot of his supporters may sit out the general and hand the oval office to one of the three detestable Rep candidates.
Detestable Rep candidates. Do you mean Trump, Cruz and Rubio? Could you live with Kasich or Bush? Not everyone to the right of centre is a crazy loon, or are they in your view? |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius
(Post 11862878)
Agree that Bernie's run is probably at an end, although he's done lots of damage to Hillary. I loved those two guys at her rally with their "Settle for Hillary" t-shirts.
Detestable Rep candidates. Do you mean Trump, Cruz and Rubio? Could you live with Kasich or Bush? Not everyone to the right of centre is a crazy loon, or are they in your view? |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by dakota44
(Post 11862853)
Probably :lol: I think Bernies triumphs may have come to an end. He will likely lose by big numbers in S.C. and more states after that. His stuff plays in Iowa and N.H. but not so well in most of the states he will need. The scarey thing is that a lot of his supporters may sit out the general and hand the oval office to one of the three detestable Rep candidates.
I do vote even if there is nobody to vote for, I just write in who I want. But I am voting in California (last state of residence) ballot wise, so not like it a vote that matters. Suppose a voter in a state that matters may see things differently. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Jsmth321
(Post 11862884)
Why vote for someone simply to keep another out? I for one cannot vote for a candidate I do not agree with, and others feel the same I am sure.
I do vote even if there is nobody to vote for, I just write in who I want. But I am voting in California (last state of residence) ballot wise, so not like it a vote that matters. Suppose a voter in a state that matters may see things differently. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by dakota44
(Post 11862889)
Not a case of voting to keep someone out....other than the fact I would never, given the behaviour of Republicans the past 7 years, never vote for a Republican this election and if those Sanders supporters sit out and hand the oval to the repubs .. they would just be guaranteeing a continuation if all the things Sanders opposes.
It might even be Trump v Biden, if Hillary's campaign gets a fatal wound from the FBI. At this point I'm depressed and resigned to Trump v. Whomsoever. My guy, Rubio, is a dead candidate walking (thank you for nothing, Christie. Rubio was better than Cruz) and Jeb! couldn't get votes from any posters on this thread, so he's obviously finished as well. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius
(Post 11862894)
My guy, Rubio, is a dead candidate walking (thank you for nothing, Christie. Rubio was better than Cruz) and Jeb! couldn't get votes from any posters on this thread, so he's obviously finished as well.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by dakota44
(Post 11862889)
Not a case of voting to keep someone out....other than the fact I would never, given the behaviour of Republicans the past 7 years, never vote for a Republican this election and if those Sanders supporters sit out and hand the oval to the repubs .. they would just be guaranteeing a continuation if all the things Sanders opposes.
If in a swing state, one's vote is more important. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Jsmth321
(Post 11862935)
Really just depends what state your in, my ballot is for California, and no way they will lean GOP in this election. The electoral votes are safe for the democrat.
If in a swing state, one's vote is more important. |
Re: 2016 Election
The least corrupt out of all these candidates seems to be Bernie. Trump ..er maybee 2nd to Bernie. Hillary made made $250K per speech to GoldmanSachs and won't release the minutes of the speech.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Boomhauer
(Post 11863023)
The least corrupt out of all these candidates seems to be Bernie. Trump ..er maybee 2nd to Bernie. Hillary made made $250K per speech to GoldmanSachs and won't release the minutes of the speech.
As a complementary issue, The Telegraph had an opinion piece today about the fact that resignation from office as a matter of principle and honour seems missing in today's politicians: Why has no cabinet minister done the honourable thing and resigned over Europe? - Telegraph As you all know, the FBI has assigned 150 agents to investigate Hillary's use of a private email server for State Department business. IF the FBI should recommend an indictment AND the DOJ should decline, it will be fascinating to see whether Comey and anyone else would then resign on principle. [It probably wouldn't hurt Comey (who also served as Deputy Attorney General under W) to resign.] Should a Republican win the Presidency, and Comey had resigned, he would be on the shortest of lists to be named the next Attorney General. We'll see how this drama plays out, potentially the second biggest political story of 2016. |
Re: 2016 Election
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP
(Post 11862848)
I'm sure that's how they felt about President George McGovern, too.
Honestly, this is the sort of rhetoric that we hear out of the Tea Party. It's a group with only minority support that is deluded enough to regard itself as being the majority and that fails to acknowledge that its interests can only be represented if it enters into a coalition with others who are closer to the middle. Instead, they attack those who they need as allies as sellouts and consign themselves to being noisy but irrelevant. McGovern lost because: 1) His VP pick was nuts. Literally, he had the psych report to prove it. 2) Hubert Humphrey was working to get Nixon elected. 3) The unions turned against McGovern because he supported "the gays". 4) That little matter of Watergate. Also, I note that you recently said that it didn't matter that Clinton was risking losing the Sanders supporters because of her divisive surrogates. Which is it? Does is matter or not? |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 7:34 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.