Kilmer17 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 flip that to Dems voting for free **** and legal pot Well hell, I'll vote for that too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Well hell, I'll vote for that too. I knew you'd come around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Ted Cruz admitting that he's signing his family up for the ACA is freaking hilarious. Why doesn't he just go out and buy private insurance? Surely it's affordable. Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Ted Cruz admitting that he's signing his family up for the ACA is freaking hilarious. Why doesn't he just go out and buy private insurance? Surely it's affordable. Right? Can't! Mandated in the law. Government employees not covered by Medicare or spouses have to sign up. Wife gave it up. Idiot signing up. I'm lovin' it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Ted Cruz admitting that he's signing his family up for the ACA is freaking hilarious. Why doesn't he just go out and buy private insurance? Surely it's affordable. Right? why would he get one just to be fined? Affordable went out the window once ACA came in, **** just skyrocketed and continues to climb......Affordable my ass. add Wait for the squeals baby http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/24/us/many-will-need-to-repay-health-subsidies.html?ref=politics&_r=0 Half of the households that received subsidies to help pay health insurance premiums last year under the Affordable Care Act will probably have to repay some of that money to the federal government, according to a new analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 why would he get one just to be fined? Affordable went out the window once ACA came in, **** just skyrocketed and continues to climb......Affordable my ass. We're paying a rocketing................ Nothing, compared to having nothing. Come on, twa...he couldn't AFFORD the conflict of interest, but CAN afford the ACA? When he's said all along that almost NO ONE CAN? IT'LL KILL JOBS! IT'LL KILL DEMOCRACY! IT'LL KILL BABIES! Good grief. Ya'll are killing your chances. Not that I care about that. Carry on. As you were. All that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 free **** ain't free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Affordable went out the window once ACA came in, **** just skyrocketed and continues to climb......Affordable my ass. Yeah, health care was cheap, and the prices were stable, before the ACA came along, and made health care spending suddenly go up, like it never did before. free **** ain't free Unless it's tax cuts, or repealing Obamacare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Freedom should be. Unless it's tied to things I CAN'T DO, that have already been deemed legal, some 40 years ago. (Yeah, it's my schtick, and it'll continue to be.) I don't change with the wind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Yeah, health care was cheap, and the prices were stable, before the ACA came along, and made health care spending suddenly go up, like it never did before. Unless it's tax cuts, or repealing Obamacare. Have fun Junior. accounting day is coming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Have fun Junior. accounting day is coming You too, Senior. Did you invest all you could in that grand market before the evil government took your hard earned extra cash? Just sayin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted March 26, 2015 Author Share Posted March 26, 2015 With the Presidential race just starting; this article has some fun and speculates on potential Vice Presidential candidates. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/23/the-insiders-its-never-too-early-to-speculate-about-the-vice-presidential-selection/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted April 6, 2015 Author Share Posted April 6, 2015 Rand Paul will be enterting the race tomorrow. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/rand-pauls-delicate-balancing-act/2015/04/05/6e38af6c-d946-11e4-8103-fa84725dbf9d_story.html Rubio is supposed to be making an announcement in Miami next Monday; most likely him entering the Presidential race. Still no Democrats; though Hillary is supposed to announce this month. If someone is serious about challenging her; they need to be announcing now. Scott Walker & Jeb Bush haven't formally announced yet either; probably need to also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted April 7, 2015 Author Share Posted April 7, 2015 After Paul announces, he's going on a 4 state tour of the 4 early primaries. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2015/04/06/rand-paul-president-video-republican/25352739/ I don't see him going far, in the Republican primaries anyway. He could win some caucuses in some states and he could shock everyone and win New Hampshire but his Liberatian views are out of step with the Republican party on many issues; especially foreign policy. He will have a core group of followers; mostly the people who supported his father. He will win his share of delegates but I just don't see him winning the nomination. He could make noise as an independent and could even finish second; behind Hillary, depending on which person won the Republican nomination. His campaign will be interesting to watch though. Every campaign season there is one candidate that completely implodes. It will be curious, to see who it will be this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Was "reading" Fox News, while exercising, just now. They say that, right now, Rand is the #3 GOP candidate, in their polling. Just going from memory, I think it was like 18% Jeb 16% Scott 14% Paul. Me, I couldn't possibly vote for the guy, because I've seen too many Republican budgets. But then, every single Republican voted in favor of them, so it's not like the other ones come off better. (That might actually be a big plus, in Jeb's favor. He got out of the party before they went Full Retard. Maybe he could avoid getting tarred with what the rest of the GOP has been doing, for the last decade.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 After Paul announces, he's going on a 4 state tour of the 4 early primaries. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2015/04/06/rand-paul-president-video-republican/25352739/ I don't see him going far, in the Republican primaries anyway. He could win some caucuses in some states and he could shock everyone and win New Hampshire but his Liberatian views are out of step with the Republican party on many issues; especially foreign policy. He's a Libertarian when it's convenient, and when it's not he's a regular conservative. Seems like the last year or two he's been toning down the isolationist rhetoric, and ratcheting up the "strong smart national defense" angle. He's pro life (don't start with me twa. However you want to spin it, it's not a Libertarian position). He's personally anti-gay marriage. He can sell his take on spending I think. Fine for conservatives on guns, taxes, Obamacare... Seems to me his biggest hurdles as far as his views will be overcoming people who remember what he used to say about foreign policy before he was running for Prez, and his moderated stance on immigration. To a lesser degree, his moderate stances on mj, crime and voting too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 I believe the guys who know they are longshots are getting in early because they have to. When did Bachmann declare last go-around? June? July? That's the comparison for Cruz and Paul. For the next (X) weeks/months. They will try to be as loud as possible to build early support and hope for some sort of movement to grow. It's not a dumb strategy. bwahahahaa, I might buy one after he drops out and its super cheap on his site. Rubio is next, right? I think they are declaring in order of most remote chance of winning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted April 7, 2015 Author Share Posted April 7, 2015 I believe the guys who know they are longshots are getting in early because they have to. Rubio is next, right? I think they are declaring in order of most remote chance of winning. Cruz and Paul are going to have raise lots of money, so it makes sense they are annoucing. Paul is speaking as I type this. Rubio needs to raise money to, to counter Bush's fundraising abilities. Bush isn't a lock. He doesn't have the support of the base. Right now, the momentum is with Scott Walker. Is Scott ready for the national stage though? He's had some early stumbles. The 4 February states; Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina actually favor the non-establisnment candidates. Though, if Scott Walker can keep his momentum and win at least 2 of those early states; he will be a real threat to Bush. I can see Bush going 0-4. Yes, he has the money; so he can weather the loss as the race them moves into states where he can compete. I think in the primaries in states the first 2 weeks of March; the delegates are allocated proportionally. So, if some of these long shot candidates can win early; that will keep them alive. It's not winner take all until the third week of March and beyond. At least on the Republican side. Bush isn't appealing to the actual voters; so some of these candidates have to start early to overcome the obvious money advantage Bush has. Longshots can win. After all, we have President Obama and we had President Carter. So, we will see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 I honestly can't disagree with anything you said, Rdskins2000. I do however look at Rubio, Cruz and Paul.....and simply can't see it right now. Then again, I didn't see it with Obama when he started and think he'll be viewed favorably by history especially compared to his predecessor. So, maybe I just don't see what's really "real". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 I believe the guys who know they are longshots are getting in early because they have to. they need the extra time for fundraising and gaining traction, the others already have it. you are wrong Bliz , of course the label has great variation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted April 7, 2015 Author Share Posted April 7, 2015 they need the extra time for fundraising and gaining traction, the others already have it. you are wrong Bliz , of course the label has great variation What traction does Bush have? He's only polling high; due to name recognition. Once the debates start in August; his numbers will go down. He just isn't with the actual voters. He maybe be in with the money men and establishment but they can't control the actual vote. Or can they. Hmmmm. I just want to see who will be this years Libby Dole, Tim Pawlenty- the candidate who drops out well before the votes are actually cast and of course this year's Rick Perry, Phil Graham, Rudy Gullania- a supposed legit candidate who flops big time. I think Jeb is going regret not running in 2012. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExoDus84 Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Every Republican candidate is a long shot. Not only because they're all just a hodgepodge of the same BS, and no one stands apart, but because I really think no conservative candidate stands a chance in the Presidential election. The modern right wing party, too busy pandering to the fanatical far right, is too far behind. They are too anti-immigrant, anti-women, anti-gay, anti-climate change, etc. I'd love to see where republicans stand with independents and moderates. My guess is far, far behind. As far as the liberal candidate that I would be inclined to vote for, I'm not huge on Hilary. I'm really not. I don't want a lifetime politician who is balls deep in special interests. I really wish Elizabeth Warren would run. I could get behind her 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 you are wrong Bliz , of course the label has great variation particularly when co-opted by down-the-line republicans who don't want to acknowledge that's what they really are. And I'm not wrong. Govt interference in such matters is not a libertarian position. Keep the govt out of it and leave it to each individual's discretion. People who try to argue pro life as a libertarian position are trying to put a square peg in a round hole. They, and Rand, are not taking the libertarian position on that issue. Which is fine. You don't have to be doctrinaire everything, no matter what party you're in. It's probably preferable if you're not. "Abortion is a moral right—which should be left to the sole discretion of the woman involved; morally, nothing other than her wish in the matter is to be considered." ~ Ayn Rand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Not going to argue, but liberty w/o life is nothing. What traction does Bush have? He's only polling high; due to name recognition. Once the debates start in August; his numbers will go down. He just isn't with the actual voters. He maybe be in with the money men and establishment but they can't control the actual vote. Or can they. Hmmmm. I just want to see who will be this years Libby Dole, Tim Pawlenty- the candidate who drops out well before the votes are actually cast and of course this year's Rick Perry, Phil Graham, Rudy Gullania- a supposed legit candidate who flops big time. I think Jeb is going regret not running in 2012. He has much more than name recognition, whether he is willing to play the game all out will tell the tale. tis a nasty business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Right now, the momentum is with Scott Walker. Is Scott ready for the national stage though? He's had some early stumbles. The 4 February states; Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina actually favor the non-establisnment candidates. Though, if Scott Walker can keep his momentum and win at least 2 of those early states; he will be a real threat to Bush. I can see Bush going 0-4. Yes, he has the money; so he can weather the loss as the race them moves into states where he can compete. Walker is an interesting candidate right now. Sometimes I get the feeling he wants to be more pragmatic than the Right will allow him to be. I can't quite figure him out, but it's probably cause I haven't paid that much attention yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.