![]() |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by sir_eccles
(Post 11632889)
Any attempt to compare US left/right politics to European left/right politics and apply the same labels is doomed to failure. For example the Democrats are about as left wing as the Tory party.
Any attempt to compare the Republican and Democratic parties of today to those of any previous era and assume they are the same is also doomed to failure. They are not your daddy's parties so to speak. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by sir_eccles
(Post 11634540)
Any attempt to compare the Republican and Democratic parties of today to those of any previous era and assume they are the same is also doomed to failure. They are not your daddy's parties so to speak.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by SultanOfSwing
(Post 11634336)
Meh. Lighten up, all I said was you were talking crap about East Germany. I won't claim resposibility for what others said of course, and I won't pretend I was paying that much attention to it either.
Water off a duck's back and all that. This, I know and it is why I got a little excited when Sanders said he was running for nomination. He strikes me as someone who genuinely does want reform, who does want to replace the ACA with a sensible single-payer system, who wants to improve infrastructure and create jobs. Most importantly for me, he seems to be the only candidate thus far who will vocally criticize the 'billionaire class' that has had a stranglehold on US politics for years, holding the country back beyond belief. I'd like Elizabeth Warren to put her name forward too, to be honest. What I want isn't necessarily President Sanders but for enough progressive voices to speak up so the Democratic mainstream takes notice. "Nutter" Republicans refers to the current crop. Eisenhower was a fine president, who had many common sense ideas and policies and quite honestly I'd be happy to vote for someone like him. Nixon had his moments, too. Christ, even the Dubya looks sane compared to the likes of Paul Ryan, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz :blink: I'm hoping that that crude poseur, C. Clinton, falls on her arse and that Elizabeth Warren goes on to win the nomination. Maybe then my fans here will be forced to slide the Democrat Party back slightly left of the Tories, if not also Labour. Fat chance of that happening. Sorry about mentioning the DDR. It's a fixation of mine. When I was in Army Intel in Germany back in the '60s I spent more than two years studying everything known about the DDR organs of state security and their relationship with and funding of two West German organizations: the Easter March of Atomic Weapons Opponents and the German Peace Union. At that time the DDR was no laughing matter. |
Re: 2016 Election
At the rate its going, may just write in a name on the ballot. I don't think I can vote for Clinton.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by sir_eccles
(Post 11634540)
I have come up with an extension to my statement above.
Any attempt to compare the Republican and Democratic parties of today to those of any previous era and assume they are the same is also doomed to failure. They are not your daddy's parties so to speak. Times change. Daddy, hell, JFK, wouldn't recognize today's Democrat Party. |
Re: 2016 Election
Carly Fiorina - ruined HP, probably attack dog to go after Clinton without being called sexist.
Ben Carson - known idiot, opens mouth and inserts foot on regular basis. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by sir_eccles
(Post 11636688)
Carly Fiorina - ruined HP, probably attack dog to go after Clinton without being called sexist.
Ben Carson - known idiot, opens mouth and inserts foot on regular basis. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius
(Post 11636718)
Should be a walk in the park then. That comment about Ms. Fiorina, not sexist? A comment like that would work for Hillary. See, it only runs in one direction. :nod: [Explanation: If you point out that Fiorina ruined HP and call her an "attack dog," that's not sexist. If you say Hillary screwed up Benghazi and its aftermath, and the Russian reset, etc, etc., that's sexist.] Just saying. Call it "Democrat Privilege" similar to "White Privilege."
Could it be seen as sexist? Perhaps, but I don't think she is seen as a realistic candidate. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by sir_eccles
(Post 11636737)
Should have clarified. What I wrote was a summary of what I was seeing as the general opinion of political commentary.
Could it be seen as sexist? Perhaps, but I don't think she is seen as a realistic candidate. The only other time she ran was for a California Senate seat five years ago and she lost that. At least the other republican candidates managed to get elected to something! (Even if they do have the odd screw loose). |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by sir_eccles
(Post 11636737)
Should have clarified. What I wrote was a summary of what I was seeing as the general opinion of political commentary.
Could it be seen as sexist? Perhaps, but I don't think she is seen as a realistic candidate. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by username.exe
(Post 11636867)
A few commentators are speculating that she's doing it for publicity for a forthcoming book.
The only other time she ran was for a California Senate seat five years ago and she lost that. At least the other republican candidates managed to get elected to something! (Even if they do have the odd screw loose). Republican + incumbent democrat senators = no a good chance. Especially against Boxer. Feinstein and Boxer have been unbeatable during their terms. If Fiorina had been serious, she should have run for a state office, better chance at election to the state assembly or senate if she could find a republican friendly region to run in. |
Re: 2016 Election
Huckabee, again.
|
Re: 2016 Election
My guess is that the field narrows to Jeb, Scott, Marco and Ted. Two governors, two senators. VP slot to either Ben Carson or Fiorina. On the other side, Hillary and maybe O'Malley or Webb in the VP slot. I don't think she'd risk Sanders.
Odds that the Republicans win the Presidency - slightly better than even- and the Senate no better than even money. If they don't hold the Senate, nothing will get done with Chuckie in charge. We'd do better with a parliamentary system. |
Re: 2016 Election
I like how everyone announces ahead of time that they are going to announce their run for presidency. I guess that announcing your announcement doesn't count.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Anian
(Post 11637786)
I like how everyone announces ahead of time that they are going to announce their run for presidency. I guess that announcing your announcement doesn't count.
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 4:42 am. |
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.