2016 Presidential election

[1ViciousGSX]

50/50 for me between Perry and Walker. Rubio looks like a sell out to me at times. Rand Paul is too inconsistent.

What's everybody's thoughts on Carly Fiorina? She doesn't look like a push over.

Who ever wants to win had better go after the liberal/ideology record hard.

[Murlo26]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

50/50 for me between Perry and Walker. Rubio looks like a sell out to me at times. Rand Paul is too inconsistent.

What's everybody's thoughts on Carly Fiorina? She doesn't look like a push over.

Who ever wants to win had better go after the liberal/ideology record hard.

Yep.

[Goat Blower]

I'd probably say Walker as well at this point. Jindal would be my first choice when he throws in his hat.

[AJ]

First one that comes out and bans the Kardashians from our lives and ship the Biebs back to Canada will have my initial ear. Not sure why people want to be president anymore the way shit is.

[1ViciousGSX]

I like Jindal too, if he ever announces,..... We're getting the idea here that it might be coming soon.

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by Goat Blower

I have no idea right now, my only concern is one of these guys will pull a Perot and split the vote handing it to another unqualified loon the dems produce.

This is so true.
Look at the Dems, Hillbilly is their choice. When was the last time you saw a large number of Dems running against each other? You don't because they know what splitting the vote does. And that's why all the "pile on" is going to hurt conservatives.

[Trogdor]

I always have such a hard time finding someone who matches the way I think. The closest being libertarians; socially liberal, fiscally conservative. But at the core I think libertarian's believe people are good natured and will behave themselves when left alone. Where I think people fucking retarded and greedy when left to their own devices.

[Kracka]

^I'd rather vote for my wallet than the warm fuzzies.

[1ViciousGSX]

When I read the comments that Rick Perry is "too Texas" are you saying he's "too American"? "Too successful" because Texas is doing great while the liberal world crashes and burns?
I don't get that. That's what I would expect Hillbilly supporters to say, forget that they're from Arkansas,.... Reagan was a rancher, Bush Sr & Jr were from Texas, so I don't understand why any libertarian or conservative would think that's a bad thing.

[Murlo26]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

When I read the comments that Rick Perry is "too Texas" are you saying he's "too American"? "Too successful" because Texas is doing great while the liberal world crashes and burns?
I don't get that. That's what I would expect Hillbilly supporters to say, forget that they're from Arkansas,.... Reagan was a rancher, Bush Sr & Jr were from Texas, so I don't understand why any libertarian or conservative would think that's a bad thing.

I am not saying it's bad, just saying I don't think that he can win being that. At least that is what I meant by it.

NO sense in supporting someone who has no chance.

Realistically, our election system is supporting the lesser of two evils.

Like south park, a turd sandwich or giant douche or whatever they said lol.

That is referencing the actual election but Primaries aren't too different either as typically there is no "perfect candidate" and the one that comes close in my eyes usually has zero chance of winning so I don't bother getting my hopes up.

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by Murlo26

I am not saying it's bad, just saying I don't think that he can win being that. At least that is what I meant by it.

NO sense in supporting someone who has no chance.

Realistically, our election system is supporting the lesser of two evils.

Like south park, a turd sandwich or giant douche or whatever they said lol.

That is referencing the actual election but Primaries aren't too different either as typically there is no "perfect candidate" and the one that comes close in my eyes usually has zero chance of winning so I don't bother getting my hopes up.

Not picking on you, but this is an interesting conversation, so don't take it personal.

Perry is a true American, he believes in this country. He's been very successful as Governor and Texas is thriving.
So that being the case, that should be an example of what he can do and a plus. Where we lose the battle is by allowing the hard left to concentrate on his "boots don't travel well" (Chris "dumbass" Matthews) instead of his record. His record against Obama or Hillary would be a shoe in if we control the debate and hit back at the hard left when they try to circumvent it.

[Kracka]

I think Perry would make for an excellent President as what he was able to accomplish in Texas was no short of spectacular; I intent to fully support him while he's still in the running. What I mean by "too Texas" is that the rest of the country is tired of hearing about how good Texas has done, how successful Texas remained while the rest of the country was in a recession, how strong the economy is here, etc. Texas is the state everyone loves to hate...because they can't be like it. With all that said, I'm glad that a boatload of business are flooding into the state to take advantage of the workforce, low cost of living, and low regulation/tax environment. The low COL portion is starting to erode now that businesses are moving in like crazy though; home values are climbing fast, as is apartment rent (comparatively).

The quality of his public speaking and speech giving ability is night & day from 2012 to now, it's obvious he's worked very hard at that aspect of his campaign.

[Murlo26]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

Not picking on you, but this is an interesting conversation, so don't take it personal.

Perry is a true American, he believes in this country. He's been very successful as Governor and Texas is thriving.
So that being the case, that should be an example of what he can do and a plus. Where we lose the battle is by allowing the hard left to concentrate on his "boots don't travel well" (Chris "dumbass" Matthews) instead of his record. His record against Obama or Hillary would be a shoe in if we control the debate and hit back at the hard left when they try to circumvent it.

I don't mind at all.

I love Perry and agree with everything you and Kracka are saying. But as Kracka pointed out Texas is a tough sell right now.

I am to the point of I want the conservatives of the nation to fully support and back one person so we have a chance to win.

I feel like Mitt lost because he didn't get his voter base out to vote for him, I can't remember but it was something like 10 million less voters that year.

[asshanson]

Originally Posted by Trogdor

I always have such a hard time finding someone who matches the way I think. The closest being libertarians; socially liberal, fiscally conservative. But at the core I think libertarian's believe people are good natured and will behave themselves when left alone. Where I think people fucking retarded and greedy when left to their own devices.

Guess you found someone, libertarian is my closest "affiliation". Hate the insane spending, and although I'm not all that socially liberal, I prefer to let people do what they want, as long as they don't hurt others. Give me Ron Paul. Too bad people like him will never be elected, because the population is so one-sided now, you have to be full on republican or democrat. No republican who says abortion is acceptable sometimes, or gay marriage, but wants to cut taxes and spending by a massive 50% will even get elected. I think people care more about those type of social issues than anything these days, they should be far less important imho.

[tpunx99GSX]

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...ates.html?_r=0

I find this funny. The reason i find this funny is that Republicans still havent realised that the quantity of candidates you guys put up every year only gives the democrats ammunition for when you have chosen a candidate. Heres how it will go, There will be a crap load of debates of which the republicans will all throw crap at each other coming from all angles. You will have some guy with no chance of winning come out with outrageous statements that rags on the more compelling candidates. he will get a bump and the likely candidate will drop in the polls. If you think about it, the republicans are doing the job the democrats should be doing, research into the candidates.
On the Democrat side, you have a small field of potential candidates, the debates will be less big blows at the others, and more promises. etc. And will come out of it virtually unscathed.
Im not going to put my vote behind any of the candidates yet. I do think Hillary has the best chance of winning, and honestly has one of the better resumes, She was in the white house, and she now knows the world leaders. But she comes with baggage that will come up, so im not sure how much that will come into play. She does know how to play the game though.
Bernie would be a good candidate as well.
The democrats are going to be putting in a crap load of money into this election im sure, to save the ACA and such. We usually do well in the primarys, not so much in the midterms.
I could rag on the republican candidates, but frankly, this post would be 10 pages by the end of the 3rd candidate. So i will wait until the field narrows.
Just my opinion from today.

[1ViciousGSX]

Not picking on Tom here.

Name Hillary's accomplishments. I'm not talking about who she knows, and I'm not talking about titles she's had (Secretary of State, Senator, Bill's other Woman, etc.). Name something she's done that has made a difference in a positive way for Americans.

[Kracka]

She does a lot of fundraising...for her family

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by Kracka

She does a lot of fundraising...for her family

[tpunx99GSX]

Taken From a Liberal Site but still true.

Even though her major initiative, the Clinton healthcare plan, failed (due to Republican obstruction), you cannot deny that it laid ground for what we have today, the Affordable Healthcare Act, something Clinton supports and would continue.
She played a leading role in the development of State Children’s Health Insurance Program, which provides the much-needed state support for children whose parents cannot afford nor provide them with adequate healthcare coverage.
She was also instrumental in the creation of the Adoption and Safe Families Act and the Foster Care Independence Act.
Successfully fought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and asthma at the National Institute of Health (NIH).
She spearheaded investigations into mental illness plaguing veterans of the Gulf War; we now have a term for it – Gulf War Syndrome.
At the Department of Justice, she helped create the office on Violence Against Women.
She was instrumental in securing over $21 billion in funding for the World Trade Center redevelopment.
Took a leading role in the investigation of health consequences of first responders and drafted the first bill to compensate and offer the health services our first responders deserve (Clinton’s successor in the Senate, Kirsten Gillibrand, passed the bill).
Was instrumental in working out a bi-partisan compromise to address civil liberty abuses for the renewal of the U.S. Patriot Act.
Proposed a revival of the New Deal-era Home Owners’ Loan Corporation to help homeowners refinance their mortgages in the wake of the 2008 financial disaster.
Was a major proponent of sensible diplomacy which brought about a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel, and brokered human rights with Burma.
Oversaw free trade agreements with our allies such as Panama, Colombia, and South Korea.
Was the most traveled Secretary of State to date.
The Clinton Foundation, founded by her and her husband, has improved the living conditions for nearly 400 million people in over 180 countries through its Initiative program.

[Murlo26]

Well, sounds like she knows how to spend money

I didn't realize they had resume's for politicians. We should get politician trading cards, like baseball cards with their stats to know more about them.