RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016

RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BamaD -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 2:16:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD And we can go back to the Bork conformation hearings. Bork did not have the temperament to be a SCOTUS justice. Also his views on a range of issues were well outside the mainstream. His willing actions in the Saturday Night Massacre proved that. Always keep in mind that 6 Republican senators voted against his nomination. He simply wasn't a good nominee and his anger over being questioned on his writings and public statements only confirmed that. It didn't matter about his fitness for the court, he was up for surgeon general. Before ripping someone find out what you are talking about.

BamaD -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 2:19:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Who will win.. or even run.. is still up in the air. I see those types of polls as the parties taking the temperature of their constituents at this point. If Christie doesnt win NJ, how will that affect his polls for Presidental run? Too many variables up in the air. I posted that poll based upon Butch's assertion that Jingal will draw many moderates from both parties. I dont see that happening unless conditions change. If Clinton runs, I dont see that happening at all. Something interesting to note on the Dem side in that poll as well... Between March and June.... Clinton 51% 40% Biden 12% 13% No one else is even close to those two... and we dont even know if Clinton is running yet. In that matchup I would vote for Clinton in a heartbeat.

BamaD -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 2:24:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Chris Christie and Rand Paul are the only creditable mentions on that list. Clinton isn't the WMD that Democrats think she is. A black President is one thing - a woman is quite another. And I doubt American men will be content with a woman as President. Christy is too much Dem lite for most rep voters as for Paul insanity runs in the family. I don't think opposition to Clinton is based on gender. Some , but by no means all of her support will come because of it. Women wanting to vote for a woman, men feeling guilty if they vote against a woman. This will far outweigh the anti woman vote.

BamaD -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 2:26:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Chris Christie and Rand Paul are the only creditable mentions on that list. Clinton isn't the WMD that Democrats think she is. A black President is one thing - a woman is quite another. And I doubt American men will be content with a woman as President. I'll agree with you on Christie but Paul is a bit out there. The problem with Christie is he touched a Democrat and liked it once so now he has cooties and, even though I think he'd do a hell of a job, he'll be destroyed by his own party for lack of 'idealogical purity'. Hillary (or anyone else the D side puts up) doesn't have to be good. They just have to be less odious than whatever Bible thumping batshit crazy nutbag the R side is sure to throw at them. Nice to see no one is using this thread to trash republicans

MrRodgers -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 2:44:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Chris Christie and Rand Paul are the only creditable mentions on that list. Clinton isn't the WMD that Democrats think she is. A black President is one thing - a woman is quite another. And I doubt American men will be content with a woman as President. I'll agree with you on Christie but Paul is a bit out there. The problem with Christie is he touched a Democrat and liked it once so now he has cooties and, even though I think he'd do a hell of a job, he'll be destroyed by his own party for lack of 'idealogical purity'. Hillary (or anyone else the D side puts up) doesn't have to be good. They just have to be less odious than whatever Bible thumping batshit crazy nutbag the R side is sure to throw at them. Nice to see no one is using this thread to trash republicans It is the repubs that bring this opprobrium on themselves.

Lucylastic -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 2:53:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Chris Christie and Rand Paul are the only creditable mentions on that list. Clinton isn't the WMD that Democrats think she is. A black President is one thing - a woman is quite another. And I doubt American men will be content with a woman as President. I'll agree with you on Christie but Paul is a bit out there. The problem with Christie is he touched a Democrat and liked it once so now he has cooties and, even though I think he'd do a hell of a job, he'll be destroyed by his own party for lack of 'idealogical purity'. Hillary (or anyone else the D side puts up) doesn't have to be good. They just have to be less odious than whatever Bible thumping batshit crazy nutbag the R side is sure to throw at them. Nice to see no one is using this thread to trash republicans So give us your person and reasons why they will be a good leader instead of whinging about dems/libs talk about hypcritical

MrRodgers -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 2:55:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD And we can go back to the Bork conformation hearings. Bork did not have the temperament to be a SCOTUS justice. Also his views on a range of issues were well outside the mainstream. His willing actions in the Saturday Night Massacre proved that. Always keep in mind that 6 Republican senators voted against his nomination. He simply wasn't a good nominee and his anger over being questioned on his writings and public statements only confirmed that. Funny how the term emerged that other were 'Borked' after the Bork hearings but I find that Bork...'Borked' himself when he said, "Well the 10th amendment is about the most dead-letter amendment there is." Spoken like a true fascist in-the-making. My next question would have been well judge at what point do you see any other constitutional amendments becoming...'dead-letter' amendments ? What say you judge ? The 1st or how about the 5th ? Oh and lets not forget that pesky little 4th amend. When can we bring back the slaves judge ?

MrRodgers -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:03:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD How does any of that make this thread about "the Republicans have to become Democrats or they are doomed. "? I accept that this was not your premise but read the thread. The Republicans have to go along with the Dems to survive. I did not mean they had to flip but the consensus here is that they must become the same as Democrats because all Republicans are stupid and evil. Again this is not intended as a reflection of your intent. I get the impression that you must feel as if the repubs must oppose everything dem or they are thinking like or acting like a dem when in fact they are trying to be TeaParty. Unfortunately, far too many repubs are stupid and while I won't say evil, they seem to have quite an imagination when it comes to political/economy and it usually favors the corporation and the rich which is exactly backwards. Recall if you will, for 6 years when the repubs had the WH and both 'houses' in congress, they often wouldn't even allow dems to attend subcommittee hearings, often allowed no dem amendments at all and then all but told the dems to go home.

BamaD -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:05:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD And we can go back to the Bork conformation hearings. Bork did not have the temperament to be a SCOTUS justice. Also his views on a range of issues were well outside the mainstream. His willing actions in the Saturday Night Massacre proved that. Always keep in mind that 6 Republican senators voted against his nomination. He simply wasn't a good nominee and his anger over being questioned on his writings and public statements only confirmed that. Funny how the term emerged that other were 'Borked' after the Bork hearings but I find that Bork...'Borked' himself when he said, "Well the 10th amendment is about the most dead-letter amendment there is." Spoken like a true fascist in-the-making. My next question would have been well judge at what point do you see any other constitutional amendments becoming...'dead-letter' amendments ? What say you judge ? The 1st or how about the 5th ? Oh and lets not forget that pesky little 4th amend. When can we bring back the slaves judge ? Again HE WAS UP FOR SURGEON GENERAL, not the court. The statement about the tenth was that it had been ignored and circumvented for decades.

BamaD -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:06:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD How does any of that make this thread about "the Republicans have to become Democrats or they are doomed. "? I accept that this was not your premise but read the thread. The Republicans have to go along with the Dems to survive. I did not mean they had to flip but the consensus here is that they must become the same as Democrats because all Republicans are stupid and evil. Again this is not intended as a reflection of your intent. I get the impression that you must feel as if the repubs must oppose everything dem or they are thinking like or acting like a dem when in fact they are trying to be TeaParty. Unfortunately, far too many repubs are stupid and while I won't say evil, they seem to have quite an imagination when it comes to political/economy and it usually favors the corporation and the rich which is exactly backwards. Recall if you will, for 6 years when the repubs had the WH and both 'houses' in congress, they often wouldn't even allow dems to attend subcommittee hearings, often allowed no dem amendments at all and then all but told the dems to go home. Yes they learned that from the Dems.

MrRodgers -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:10:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Scary proposition to be sure. Here I have to interject and say while I am not necessarily a Biden fan, it gets pretty easy to be good enough when compared to W. Historically it has been suggested and for reasons with which I agree...W was the worst president since WWI and maybe the worst or 2nd worst all time and by almost every measure.

tazzygirl -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:12:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Chris Christie and Rand Paul are the only creditable mentions on that list. Clinton isn't the WMD that Democrats think she is. A black President is one thing - a woman is quite another. And I doubt American men will be content with a woman as President. I'll agree with you on Christie but Paul is a bit out there. The problem with Christie is he touched a Democrat and liked it once so now he has cooties and, even though I think he'd do a hell of a job, he'll be destroyed by his own party for lack of 'idealogical purity'. Hillary (or anyone else the D side puts up) doesn't have to be good. They just have to be less odious than whatever Bible thumping batshit crazy nutbag the R side is sure to throw at them. Nice to see no one is using this thread to trash republicans That IS a valid statement, Bama. Many GOP'ers are pissed because of his actions just before the election.

Yachtie -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:12:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Again HE WAS UP FOR SURGEON GENERAL, not the court. WHAT!?!? The Robert Bork Supreme Court nomination refers to the 1987 nomination by President Ronald Reagan of Judge Robert Bork to serve as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. The U.S. Senate rejected his nomination.

tazzygirl -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:13:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Scary proposition to be sure. Here I have to interject and say while I am not necessarily a Biden fan, it gets pretty easy to be good enough when compared to W. Historically it has been suggested and for reasons with which I agree...W was the worst president since WWI and maybe the worst or 2nd worst all time and by almost every measure. I have heard the man is incredibly intelligent... it just hasnt shown yet. That could still change.

MrRodgers -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:13:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Chris Christie and Rand Paul are the only creditable mentions on that list. Clinton isn't the WMD that Democrats think she is. A black President is one thing - a woman is quite another. And I doubt American men will be content with a woman as President. I agree as I believe most men of the electorate that will vote, a majority will vote sexist. The deciding factor however will be the man the repubs put up against Clinton. The offset though could be the woman vote. Could do the same for Hillary as the black vote has done for Obama.

BamaD -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:17:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Chris Christie and Rand Paul are the only creditable mentions on that list. Clinton isn't the WMD that Democrats think she is. A black President is one thing - a woman is quite another. And I doubt American men will be content with a woman as President. I'll agree with you on Christie but Paul is a bit out there. The problem with Christie is he touched a Democrat and liked it once so now he has cooties and, even though I think he'd do a hell of a job, he'll be destroyed by his own party for lack of 'idealogical purity'. Hillary (or anyone else the D side puts up) doesn't have to be good. They just have to be less odious than whatever Bible thumping batshit crazy nutbag the R side is sure to throw at them. Nice to see no one is using this thread to trash republicans So give us your person and reasons why they will be a good leader instead of whinging about dems/libs talk about hypcritical While I am sure none of the libs here will agree there are many in congress who do not seem to have read the Constitution. And they sit on both sides of the isle. Many and this is more common on the Dem side consider it at "living document" translation it means what we want it to. Strict construction is dismissed because it gets in the way of doing what we think needs to be done. They forget that the Constitution was written to limit government. translation get in the way of what government wants to do. I don't think the Reps are the answer I just think that the Dems are even worse. It has been years since I saw a candidate I was really happy with. We need another Truman, Reagan or Kennedy but they are all dead. As for the glory of bipartisanship think about the Patriot Act Iraqi, and no child left behind

MrRodgers -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:19:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD And we can go back to the Bork conformation hearings. Bork did not have the temperament to be a SCOTUS justice. Also his views on a range of issues were well outside the mainstream. His willing actions in the Saturday Night Massacre proved that. Always keep in mind that 6 Republican senators voted against his nomination. He simply wasn't a good nominee and his anger over being questioned on his writings and public statements only confirmed that. It didn't matter about his fitness for the court, he was up for surgeon general. Before ripping someone find out what you are talking about. I am afraid there is lose wire here or something haywire. Bork was never 'up' for Surgeon general but was nominated for supreme court judge and served many years as a DC federal appeals court judge.

BamaD -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:20:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Scary proposition to be sure. Here I have to interject and say while I am not necessarily a Biden fan, it gets pretty easy to be good enough when compared to W. Historically it has been suggested and for reasons with which I agree...W was the worst president since WWI and maybe the worst or 2nd worst all time and by almost every measure. I have heard the man is incredibly intelligent... it just hasnt shown yet. That could still change. Do you remember that the Biden campaign collapsed when it turned out that he stole his stump speech from an Irish politician. But at least he knows there are only 50 states.

MrRodgers -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:26:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD And we can go back to the Bork conformation hearings. Bork did not have the temperament to be a SCOTUS justice. Also his views on a range of issues were well outside the mainstream. His willing actions in the Saturday Night Massacre proved that. Always keep in mind that 6 Republican senators voted against his nomination. He simply wasn't a good nominee and his anger over being questioned on his writings and public statements only confirmed that. Funny how the term emerged that other were 'Borked' after the Bork hearings but I find that Bork...'Borked' himself when he said, "Well the 10th amendment is about the most dead-letter amendment there is." Spoken like a true fascist in-the-making. My next question would have been well judge at what point do you see any other constitutional amendments becoming...'dead-letter' amendments ? What say you judge ? The 1st or how about the 5th ? Oh and lets not forget that pesky little 4th amend. When can we bring back the slaves judge ? Again HE WAS UP FOR SURGEON GENERAL, not the court. The statement about the tenth was that it had been ignored and circumvented for decades. Where do you get this from ? Robert Bork if we talking about the same Robert Bork...was never nominate for, considered or in any way qualified to be US Surgeon general. He was a Yale law professor, US solicitor and attorney general and then a federal judge. His forte was antitrust law and was among the best at it.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Republicans who can save the party in 2016 (6/25/2013 3:34:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: TAFKAA Chris Christie and Rand Paul are the only creditable mentions on that list. Clinton isn't the WMD that Democrats think she is. A black President is one thing - a woman is quite another. And I doubt American men will be content with a woman as President. I'll agree with you on Christie but Paul is a bit out there. The problem with Christie is he touched a Democrat and liked it once so now he has cooties and, even though I think he'd do a hell of a job, he'll be destroyed by his own party for lack of 'idealogical purity'. Hillary (or anyone else the D side puts up) doesn't have to be good. They just have to be less odious than whatever Bible thumping batshit crazy nutbag the R side is sure to throw at them. Nice to see no one is using this thread to trash republicans I'm not trashing 100 MIllion+ Republicans. I'm trashing their leadership.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875