Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ...
2
10
11
12
13
14
LastLast
  1. #221
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,204
    Quote Originally Posted by obdigore View Post
    Something like 'gays can't get married because tradition!' while they cheat on multiple wives with multiple women multiple different times?
    Eh, maybe I worded it poorly. Meant Newt Gingrich in particular.
    Is it a rule that you have to be rude and sarcastic in every conversation here?

  2. #222
    Quote Originally Posted by Chickat View Post
    2016 will be Democrat Hillary Clinton against Republican Sarah Palin.

    First woman president 2016=D
    Clinton is the likely candidate, but Palin doesn't have a chance in hell. Palin wouldn't even make it through the primaries. My money would be on Marco Rubio or Chris Christie.

  3. #223
    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly Willy View Post
    Eh, maybe I worded it poorly. Meant Newt Gingrich in particular.
    I know. I described Gingrich iirc :P

  4. #224
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,204
    Quote Originally Posted by obdigore View Post
    I know. I described Gingrich iirc :P
    Ah. My recollection of his misdeeds paints a rosier picture than is reality.
    Is it a rule that you have to be rude and sarcastic in every conversation here?

  5. #225
    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly Willy View Post
    Ah. My recollection of his misdeeds paints a rosier picture than is reality.
    Guess he only cheated twice with his next two wives before 'finishing' his previous marriages.

  6. #226
    Herald of the Titans RicardoZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Hotlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,542
    Quote Originally Posted by Chickat View Post
    2016 will be Democrat Hillary Clinton against Republican Sarah Palin.

    First woman president 2016=D
    No chance.

    The Democrats could well put Hillary up there, but the GOP would never put Palin in front of a camera on official business ever again.

    I see 2016 for the Republicans involving Marco Rubio, Luis Fortuño, Rand Paul, and Allen West. I strongly doubt any of them could defeat Clinton, though. To tell you the truth, I wouldn't be surprised to see the USA become more or less a de facto one party state in the not too distant future. The younger generation that will be old enough to vote by 2016 is so overwhelmingly supportive of the left, as are the new waves of immigrants who are also starting to vote along with those legalized by Obama's immigration reform, that elections will be little more than formalities in the future with the Democrats locking in a majority that will probably never again be challenged by 2024.

  7. #227
    Honestly I don't see Christie being the Republican nominee in 2016, as much as the party needs someone to run that isn't so far to the right, America hasn't elected a fat person for president since before Television. I'm not saying that's the only reason why, but his health is a huge deterrent, the stress of being president has crazy effects on people who are healthy, just imagine them on Christie if he got elected.

    Right now, Marco Rubio is looking very likely to be a front runner in the primaries, maybe Rand Paul as well.
    "Then we have found, as it seems, that the many beliefs of the many about what's fair and about the other things roll around somewhere between not-being and being purely and simply." - Plato: Republic

  8. #228
    The Lightbringer ringpriest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    3,892
    Quote Originally Posted by RicardoZ View Post
    No chance.

    The Democrats could well put Hillary up there, but the GOP would never put Palin in front of a camera on official business ever again.

    I see 2016 for the Republicans involving Marco Rubio, Luis Fortuño, Rand Paul, and Allen West. I strongly doubt any of them could defeat Clinton, though. To tell you the truth, I wouldn't be surprised to see the USA become more or less a de facto one party state in the not too distant future. The younger generation that will be old enough to vote by 2016 is so overwhelmingly supportive of the left, as are the new waves of immigrants who are also starting to vote along with those legalized by Obama's immigration reform, that elections will be little more than formalities in the future with the Democrats locking in a majority that will probably never again be challenged by 2024.
    Nah, sooner or later the Republicans are going to veer back to the middle, unless they want to suffer the fate of the Whigs. It's just a question of how many elections they're going to lose before they figure it out. Hypothetically, a Republican candidate in 2012 could run on civil rights, ending military interventionism (just like W did, lol), and prosecuting too-big-to jail executives; all while still remaining true to the purported Republican party ethos. And while I suspect the chance of any such Republican candidate is very, very low, I do think it would be a pretty popular platform.

  9. #229
    Quote Originally Posted by ringpriest View Post
    Nah, sooner or later the Republicans are going to veer back to the middle, unless they want to suffer the fate of the Whigs. It's just a question of how many elections they're going to lose before they figure it out. Hypothetically, a Republican candidate in 2012 could run on civil rights, ending military interventionism (just like W did, lol), and prosecuting too-big-to jail executives; all while still remaining true to the purported Republican party ethos. And while I suspect the chance of any such Republican candidate is very, very low, I do think it would be a pretty popular platform.
    The GOP, or the party of 'small government' is currently the one trying to force social restrictions upon everyone that isn't a white Christian male, and if you look at their Administrations starting with Reagan and moving forward, they have been the fiscally irresponsible party as well.

    The GOP has literally nothing to offer a majority of the country, unless you are a white Christian that feels that the government should regulate morality for everyone else, or are a multi-millionaire who wants to pay less taxes and at the expense of the country as a whole.

  10. #230
    Warchief Blitzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,119
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomatketchup View Post
    Let's us prepare for the inevitable and horrible kitchen jokes that will ravage the Internet by then.
    4chan's already thinking of ideas Haha
    “It is either easy or impossible.” - Salvador Dali

    WoW characters:
    Blitzo[Warrior] -Rex[Hunter] -Jax [Warlock]

  11. #231
    pretty much zero chance of that happening

    Hillary has less than 5% chance of running, and Sarah has less than 0.1% chance of winning primary, let alone running.

    ---------- Post added 2013-03-12 at 02:00 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by ringpriest View Post
    Nah, sooner or later the Republicans are going to veer back to the middle, unless they want to suffer the fate of the Whigs. It's just a question of how many elections they're going to lose before they figure it out. Hypothetically, a Republican candidate in 2012 could run on civil rights, ending military interventionism (just like W did, lol), and prosecuting too-big-to jail executives; all while still remaining true to the purported Republican party ethos. And while I suspect the chance of any such Republican candidate is very, very low, I do think it would be a pretty popular platform.
    WTF is the "middle" now adays and how do you define civil rights? They ALL run on civil rights. Too-big-to jail executives isn't a partisan issue whatsoever. Military interventionism? Lmao, not a partisan issue whatsoever between Dems/Reps, Libertarians yes.

    It's damn hard to beat an incumbent, so you shouldn't act like Republicans are declining. More people are leaving the Democratic party than any party. I swear to God every 8 years the 'other' party is declining and in turmoil. Things evolve.
    Last edited by Trakanonn; 2013-03-12 at 09:04 AM.
    Free-To-Play is the future.

  12. #232
    The Lightbringer Payday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    [Blue State], USA
    Posts
    3,260
    Quote Originally Posted by Trakanonn View Post
    Hillary has less than 5% chance of running
    Curious where you got this idea

  13. #233
    Personally I think Hillary will have too many medical issues to run for president. And Palin would have no choice of winning so I doubt she will make it through the primaries.

  14. #234
    Titan Kalyyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Indiana, US
    Posts
    11,293
    Quote Originally Posted by RicardoZ View Post
    No chance.

    The Democrats could well put Hillary up there, but the GOP would never put Palin in front of a camera on official business ever again.

    I see 2016 for the Republicans involving Marco Rubio, Luis Fortuño, Rand Paul, and Allen West. I strongly doubt any of them could defeat Clinton, though. To tell you the truth, I wouldn't be surprised to see the USA become more or less a de facto one party state in the not too distant future. The younger generation that will be old enough to vote by 2016 is so overwhelmingly supportive of the left, as are the new waves of immigrants who are also starting to vote along with those legalized by Obama's immigration reform, that elections will be little more than formalities in the future with the Democrats locking in a majority that will probably never again be challenged by 2024.
    Let us hope this does not come to reality. Regardless of your feelings about the Democratic party, you do not want to see them running the country unopposed. The most virtuous and benevolent political party turns corrupt and oppressive when it has nobody to keep it in check.

    Let this be a warning to all of you: Even if you hate the Republican party with your very soul, you need them to exist. You may think that a country run exclusively by democrats would be great. But you'll never see it, because once it happens, it won't be the same Democrats anymore. It will be the Democrats you know now, warped and corrupted by the knowledge that they can do anything they want, and nobody can stop them. No man on Earth can stay honest in that position.

  15. #235
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,204
    No, I really just want both parties dead and buried. Don't see the need for them when they're as shitty as they are now.
    Is it a rule that you have to be rude and sarcastic in every conversation here?

  16. #236
    Michelle obama will be the candidate, the people who vote obama wont even know it isnt him.

  17. #237
    If I have to guess, and it's certainly guessing...


    Andrew Cuomo versus Jeb Bush.

    Cuomo is ruthless, he has a massive political machine behind him... he will say anything, he's a natural liar... probably as good as Bill Clinton.

    Jeb's advantage is he's smart, he has a large politcal family/machine behind him... and he speaks fluent spanish and is married to a latina.
    The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities.

  18. #238
    Titan Kalyyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Indiana, US
    Posts
    11,293
    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly Willy View Post
    No, I really just want both parties dead and buried. Don't see the need for them when they're as shitty as they are now.
    Well one benefit of the two-party system is that it makes everyone more moderate. A good example of what happens when you have too many parties is India, which is basically in a state of high-functioning anarchy.
    Here's a scientific study about it.
    http://kellogg.nd.edu/publications/w...rs/WPS/144.pdf

    Or, if (like literally every normal human being) you find scientific papers boring, here it is in a cracked article!
    http://www.cracked.com/article_20134...y-believe.html
    It's #6 on the list.

    ---------- Post added 2013-03-12 at 07:53 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by oblivionx View Post
    If I have to guess, and it's certainly guessing...


    Andrew Cuomo versus Jeb Bush.

    Cuomo is ruthless, he has a massive political machine behind him... he will say anything, he's a natural liar... probably as good as Bill Clinton.

    Jeb's advantage is he's smart, he has a large politcal family/machine behind him... and he speaks fluent spanish and is married to a latina.
    Another thing Jeb has going for him is that by 2016, most of the extreme negative emotions about the Bush name will have dissipated from the general public. When people go to the polls, they'll see "Cuomo" and, like almost every candidate, realize that they've never heard of this guy before today. Then they'll see "Bush" on the other side, and say "hey, I think I've heard of this guy before..."
    People like familiarity. That's one reason it's so damn hard to beat an incumbent. Now, if they went with Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, she'd have an even greater advantage there. Because not only do most people know the name Clinton, they also know who Hillary is.

  19. #239
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,204
    Quote Originally Posted by oblivionx View Post
    If I have to guess, and it's certainly guessing...


    Andrew Cuomo versus Jeb Bush.

    Cuomo is ruthless, he has a massive political machine behind him... he will say anything, he's a natural liar... probably as good as Bill Clinton.

    Jeb's advantage is he's smart, he has a large politcal family/machine behind him... and he speaks fluent spanish and is married to a latina.
    So, evil Democrat versus Republican saint?
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalyyn View Post
    Well one benefit of the two-party system is that it makes everyone more moderate. A good example of what happens when you have too many parties is India, which is basically in a state of high-functioning anarchy.
    Here's a scientific study about it.
    http://kellogg.nd.edu/publications/w...rs/WPS/144.pdf

    Or, if (like literally every normal human being) you find scientific papers boring, here it is in a cracked article!
    http://www.cracked.com/article_20134...y-believe.html
    It's #6 on the list.
    Didn't mean to imply I want the party system to be done away with. I just want these two abominations out of this country.
    Is it a rule that you have to be rude and sarcastic in every conversation here?

  20. #240
    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly Willy View Post
    So, evil Democrat versus Republican saint?
    If it's Hillar(it)y it's the same pretty much.

    The only real knock on Cuomo is his evil is so apparent. It might not test well. Hillary had a big reinvention period to make her look like someone competent.
    The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •