quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
Even you aren't for a single candidate.

we all have a very large handful of months for them to distinguish themselves from each other. many of them share enough in common where it makes sense to speak in small numbers.

Yeah, because big numbers are just to hard for them. Unfortunately the job requires to understand complex equations and large sets of numbers. An then report on these large numbers to the American public.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
Even you aren't for a single candidate.

we all have a very large handful of months for them to distinguish themselves from each other. many of them share enough in common where it makes sense to speak in small numbers.

Yeah, because big numbers are just to hard for them. Unfortunately the job requires to understand complex equations and large sets of numbers. An then report on these large numbers to the American public.

whats insightful here, is you are so quick to bash republicans, that you completely missed that the "numbers" in question had to do with my having a small number of candidates at this point, and absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the candidates can "understand complex equations."

is this a simple reading error I wonder, or a character issue?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
good luck not looking foolish on that one.


Come on Bounty, why should this be different?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

Not Jeb Bush. Got it.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4242631656001/rubio-jeb-bush-face-repeated-questions-on-iraq-war/?#sp=show-clips

As you see, this is a Fox News driven thing (IRAQ War do-over question.)

they can only talk about hillary, they havent been given their talking points on jeb bush or rubio or any of the others that have have "idiot" moments.
Like allen west who claimed sharia law was in walmart.
Rand paul flip flopping, oh sorry "evolving in days " over defense and other things...
Bush and his daily flip flops, Rubio NOT gaining the latino vote, Cruz is getting battered by nasa misunderstanding. and what it should and shouldnt cover.
As for the other nut cases, santorum, Donald Trump,Ben Carson,Lindsey Graham,Mike Huckabee,Bobby Jindal are too crackpot even by moderate republican standards.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

try looking again at post #16...

and making ridiculous assumptions---"no one on this thread supports..."---doesn't help your case either.

did you come here to genuinely discuss things, or to toss insults and start a fight I wonder?

Cruz first and of the serious contenders Bush last. All better than Hillery

So you feel someone that wanted to shut down the whole government because he was childish, would make a good President? You do know that....EVERY....enemy of the United States has been trying to do that for centuries now? He succeeded where the others failed: by exploiting the ignorance of the 'Low Information Voters'. Would you have a problem if Al Qaeda had partially shut down the US Government? Of course you would! But if a Republican does it, your 'OK' with it.....

Jeb Bush recently stated the 21 advisers he would have for his foreign policy team. Seventeen of them were in the George W. Bush administration. Mr. J. Bush also stated he would have his brother helping on the team. So this guy just lost all credibility to be taken seriously.

Your going to tell me the remaining people between these two are any better......how?

You dont like Hillary because she is more a man than you are!

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
Even you aren't for a single candidate.

Yeah, because big numbers are just to hard for them. Unfortunately the job requires to understand complex equations and large sets of numbers. An then report on these large numbers to the American public.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
good luck not looking foolish on that one.


Come on Bounty, why should this be different?

What's wrong? Getting taxed to much to afford anything more than a cheap shot?

:P

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

As presented by Gail Collins:

• Republican contenders are multiplying like gerbils

• The first Republican debate is scheduled for Aug. 6 — plan your party now — and the way things stand, the crowd on stage may be the size of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir.

• Right now there seem to be at least 15 hopefuls: Jeb Bush, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Donald Trump, George Pataki, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Lindsey Graham, Bobby Jindal, George Pataki, Rand Paul, Scott Walker, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Mike Huckabee

• That’s a pretty diverse group, with one Indian-American, one African-American, two Cuban-Americans and, anyway, at least one woman. Plus, the list includes both the first surgeon to separate twins conjoined at the back of the head and the first reality-show host to fire Khloe Kardashian.

• The Republicans are planning a maximum of 12 primary debates this year

• on the issues front, there’s already a lot of consensus. For instance, retroactive foreign policy: If they could time-travel back to 2002, everybody would stay the heck out of Iraq.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/16/opinion/gail-collins-let-george-do-it.html?_r=0

With all that mass of bodies one would think someone would emerge with a brain and know how to use it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Yeah, because big numbers are just to hard for them. Unfortunately the job requires to understand complex equations and large sets of numbers. An then report on these large numbers to the American public.

It's called 'thinking for yourself'. Or are you just told what to think and do?

Individuals form individual viewpoints. On each person by themselves and their merits.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Yeah, because big numbers are just to hard for them. Unfortunately the job requires to understand complex equations and large sets of numbers. An then report on these large numbers to the American public.

It's called 'thinking for yourself'. Or are you just told what to think and do?

Individuals form individual viewpoints. On each person by themselves and their merits.

How long until one of our "liberal" friends (perhaps joether himself) pipes up DEMANDING that we show the greedy, lying, underhanded, obnoxious and sociopathic bitch they have running for president "proper dignity and respect"

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


You really have no positive support for anyone or anything. Amazing indeed. You're in for a hard 10 years.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


Everyone and their idiot brother thought going into Iraq, when we did, was the right thing to do; including Hillary, John Kerry, I believe even Harry Reid.

What Iraq proved to me (and a lot of former military personnel) is that the way we wage "peace keeping" is a waste of lives and money.

If we must use the military, they should have a plan for real victory, execute it, and move on to the exit strategy. We had none. We haven't conducted a war with the purpose of going in and defeating an enemy since WWII. We ask our fighting men to go onto death's ground with their trigger hand tied around their balls.
Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


Everyone and their idiot brother thought going into Iraq, when we did, was the right thing to do; including Hillary, John Kerry, I believe even Harry Reid.

What Iraq proved to me (and a lot of former military personnel) is that the way we wage "peace keeping" is a waste of lives and money.

If we must use the military, they should have a plan for real victory, execute it, and move on to the exit strategy. We had none. We haven't conducted a war with the purpose of going in and defeating an enemy since WWII. We ask our fighting men to go onto death's ground with their trigger hand tied around their balls.

Iraq was a mistake. No one disputes that, now. The PPLs have to hang on to it because it's on their list or talking points and it's an attempt to distract from all the shit that this "transparent" administration has been outed on.



Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


Everyone and their idiot brother thought going into Iraq, when we did, was the right thing to do; including Hillary, John Kerry, I believe even Harry Reid.

What Iraq proved to me (and a lot of former military personnel) is that the way we wage "peace keeping" is a waste of lives and money.

If we must use the military, they should have a plan for real victory, execute it, and move on to the exit strategy. We had none. We haven't conducted a war with the purpose of going in and defeating an enemy since WWII. We ask our fighting men to go onto death's ground with their trigger hand tied around their balls.

Iraq was a mistake. No one disputes that, now. The PPLs have to hang on to it because it's on their list or talking points and it's an attempt to distract from all the shit that this "transparent" administration has been outed on.



Michael

I would add...and don't send in JAG lawyers with the troops to second guess difficult decisions they make in combat.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

It would have been apparent to you and I, but some other people might take offense it wasn't explicitly stated. I'm sure it would have been more explicitly implied if I used words like candy ass REMF's.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

You're leaving the Galaxy. Topic is Republican Presidential Candidates. Who are you going to vote for and why? How will that candidate help the nation?

All Candidates will be asked the following question (which was asked on Fox News) -- would you invade IRAQ in 2002 now that you've seen the results of the invasion.

Given public reaction this week, any answer of YES means such candidate will forfeit his/her Presidential nomination.

What a stupid question. Hindsight being 20/20 and all that. They need to come up with better questions.

And again, Hillarys' decision to support the Iraq war is immaterial?