Messages
4,952
Reaction score
0
No, he has no money. He'll get no support here in the SE on Super Tuesday. Has no chance in places like Florida, Texas or Louisiana

Might be a legit VP candidate for someone though

If he maintains some popularity, the money will follow. Keep in mind there's still big donors waiting it out and plenty of other donors who will throw money at him solely because he's not Trump or Cruz.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
58,563
Reaction score
9,056
If he maintains some popularity, the money will follow. Keep in mind there's still big donors waiting it out and plenty of other donors who will throw money at him solely because he's not Trump or Cruz.

I guess if they'd like another Bob Dole or John McCain to trot out there, Kasich might be their man
 
Messages
4,952
Reaction score
0
I guess if they'd like another Bob Dole or John McCain to trot out there, Kasich might be their man

The party still can't win without minority or female votes. Kasich might be their best chance at stealing some of those votes and also scooping up moderate voters who hate she-devil Hillary/don't wanna get taxed 80% by Bernie.
 

Doomsday

High Plains Drifter
Messages
21,800
Reaction score
4,305
The party still can't win without minority or female votes.
Independent voters rule the roost. Doesn't matter their gender or skin color, they far outnumber any other group or stripe. And at this point I don't see any candidate that I as a Independent, really like.

That said, I wouldn't mind Bernie winning the Dem nomination, and as long as it isn't Bush, Kasich, Cruz or Rubio with the GOP nomination, I'm okay.

Hell, might even vote for Trump if he wins the Nom.
 
Messages
4,952
Reaction score
0
Independent voters rule the roost.

Well in that case, you'll end up with a guy like Cruz having a better chance than a moderate. They went the Romney/McCain route already and gained no independents.

Rubio and Bush are toast btw.
 

Doomsday

High Plains Drifter
Messages
21,800
Reaction score
4,305
Well in that case, you'll end up with a guy like Cruz having a better chance than a moderate.
It's a pretty angry electorate and that includes the Indys, so definitely "moderates" are out in the cold this time around.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
58,563
Reaction score
9,056
The party still can't win without minority or female votes. Kasich might be their best chance at stealing some of those votes and also scooping up moderate voters who hate she-devil Hillary/don't wanna get taxed 80% by Bernie.

Trump probably stands as good a chance, if not better of grabbing a lot of those moderate votes. Would probably get a ton of moderate independents too.

Kasich is the same thing as Dole and McCain, in other words he has zero chance of winning unless the ****** Sanders wins the dem side. And I don't think the dems will let him win, even if he really did.

Already doing it to Sanders in NH. Apparently despite being trampled by 20+ pts Hildakunt is leaving NH with the same number of delegates as Sanders got.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
58,563
Reaction score
9,056
You cant make this stuff up.


Reporter Took Orders from Hillary Clinton’s Staff, Down to Specific Adjective

by John Sexton9 Feb 2016552

A newly revealed email exchange shows a reporter for a major political magazine agreeing to use the exact word suggested by a member of Hillary’s staff to write positive coverage of her speech.

The email exchange between the Atlantic‘s Marc Ambinder and Hillary Clinton’s aide at the State Department, Philippe Reines, took place in 2009. It was published Tuesday by Gawker.

Ambinder wrote to Reines asking for an advance copy of a speech Hillary was set to deliver to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Reines replied that he would make the speech available on three conditions:

1) You in your own voice describe them as “muscular”

2) You note that a look at the CFR seating plan shows that all the envoys — from Holbrooke to Mitchell to Ross — will be arrayed in front of her, which in your own clever way you can say certainly not a coincidence and meant to convey something

3) You don’t say you were blackmailed!

Ambinder immediately responded, “got it.” As promised, Ambinder wrote coverage of the CFR speech which opened:

When you think of President Obama’s foreign policy, think of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. That’s the message behind a muscular speech that Clinton is set to deliver today to the Council on Foreign Relations. The staging gives a clue to its purpose: seated in front of Clinton, subordinate to Clinton, in the first row, will be three potentially rival power centers: envoys Richard Holbrooke and George Mitchell, and National Security Council senior director Rep. Dennis Ross (R-FL)

Asked about having Hillary’s PR people write his columns, Ambinder now claims he does not remember the exchange and adds that he is not interested in defending it. “It made me uncomfortable then, and it makes me uncomfortable today,” he tells Gawker.

The Atlantic is not the only news site which covered Clinton’s CFR speech exactly as her staff wanted it covered. In an amazing coincidence, Mike Allen of Politico wrote about the speech in a piece that opened, “In a muscular first major address as secretary of state….” And midway through the story Allen writes, “A look at the CFR’s guest seating chart shows that arrayed in the front row will be top members of her team — the envoys she has called her “force multipliers”: Richard Holbrooke, George Mitchell, Dennis Ross, Philip Goldberg and Stephen Bosworth.”

Similarly, the New York Times’ Mark Landler seemed to be working from the same script. In his second paragraph he writes, “But with its muscular tone and sweeping scope, it was also an effort to recapture the limelight….” And in his fourth paragraph, he mentions the attendees, “She even marshaled a cheering section of special envoys and other senior American diplomats in the first few rows at the Council on Foreign Relations.” Neither of these details appeared in the Associated Press story about the speech which the New York Times linked.

There’s no proof that Allen or the Landler spoke with Reines or anyone else working for Clinton before filing their stories, but the details are remarkably similar. And, in the case of Politico‘s Mike Allen, other emails show he has willing to offer a guaranteed “no risk” interview of Chelsea Clinton, seemingly as a way to ingratiate himself with Hillary Clinton
 

bbgun

Administrator
Messages
15,169
Reaction score
2,355
hillary_speaks_jive_2-10-16.jpg


:lol
 

Sheik

All-Pro
Messages
24,809
Reaction score
5
The only one I think can stop Trump is Rubio. But for that to happen, 3 or 4 guys need to drop out pretty soon and their support would have to go to Rubio.

Fuck Rubio tho. Little gay boy.
 

bbgun

Administrator
Messages
15,169
Reaction score
2,355
have no love for Christie, but at least he exposed Rubio as a fraud before he left the race
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
58,563
Reaction score
9,056
have no love for Christie, but at least he exposed Rubio as a fraud before he left the race

I think Christie could wind up in the new administration in some capacity. Maybe attorney general if he isn't a VP.
 

jnday

UDFA
Messages
2,680
Reaction score
0
It's a pretty angry electorate and that includes the Indys, so definitely "moderates" are out in the cold this time around.

The anger is the very reason that Trump has a chance . I don't know if Trump is going to do any of the stuff he is promising , but threatening to boot illegals out and other such topics tap right into anger from the voters.
 

JBond

UDFA
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
2
Socialism ends private ownership over the means of production.

Haven't heard any candidate champion that idea. I doubt anyone would even endorse such an idea. The big distinction I guess would be that Democratic Socialism can be 100% in favor of private ownership of the means of production and 100% in favor of seeing the rewards of the system be more evenly distributed. Not even "equally" distributed between the owners of the means of production and their labor force, but more evenly distributed.

In an NFL sense, it's the CBA. The CBA doesn't divide the league amongst the players as it would under Socialism, it just makes sure that the players have certain protections and can't be treated like cattle. Could the NFL owners make more money without the protections the CBA provides? Bet your fucking ass they could. Anyone care to say the owners are hurting from the CBA?

Look at the minimum wage. Nobody is saying that the minimum wage should give everyone a 6-figure income. But maybe - just maybe - the minimum wage should be enough to where it would preclude the need for someone to collect government assistance. How much sense does it make for someone to be be able to collect government assistance even though they are employed full time? Tax payers subsidizing corporate wages. For what? That may as well be some odd dystopia version of socialism where everyone has a shared responsibility in funding the means or production but they don't have the shared wealth generated by it.

If you really want to talk about socialist ideas, the current healthcare system is a pretty fucking hard setup to beat. Medicare and Medicaid cost over $1T per year. Personal income tax generates $1.5T ever year. An amount roughly equivalent to 2/3rds of everyone's personal income tax bill goes to paying for healthcare for OTHER PEOPLE. Think about that amount of money when put into those terms and then consider that everyone who is paying for healthcare for other people also have to pay for it for themselves.

The government spent $3 trillion last year on healthcare. Why lowball it?
 
Top Bottom