Discussion: The REPUBLICAN Party XI

Status
Not open for further replies.
1. Romney flips flops.
Sure Romney flip flops, but that doesn't really matter with the scenario Obama has. John Kerry flip flopped a lot too and he came close to winning. If Bush were in Obama's situation, I'd be very willing to wager that Kerry would have beaten him, flip flops and all.

2. Yeah, sure, bet. Gary will surprise people.
No he won't :o
 
No one outside of New Mexico and the Libertarian Party knows who Gary Johnson is. He doesn't get media coverage and doesn't have a warchest big enough to get him national exposure.
 
No one outside of New Mexico and the Libertarian Party knows who Gary Johnson is. He doesn't get media coverage and doesn't have a warchest big enough to get him national exposure.

That can change this summer.
 
I like to have hope. Like how I hope there's gonna be a 7, 8, 9 Star Wars movies...

After the travesty of the prequels, who in their right mind would hope for that?!

Look I hate to burst your bubble, but Stephen Colbert has a greater chance of being the next President than this Gary guy.
 
After the travesty of the prequels, who in their right mind would hope for that?!

Look I hate to burst your bubble, but Stephen Colbert has a greater chance of being the next President than this Gary guy.

The prequels have good action...and I've entered the madness, so yeah.

Whatever, we'll see in November. ha....Hahahahaha...
 
Dubya flip flopped plenty too, but the "liberal media" only called Kerry out on it.
 
I dont want to derail the thread but the "liberal media bias" thing had always amused me. Is this the same media that had a field day mocking Bill "Bubba" Clinton and idolizes Ronald Reagan?
 
The prequels have good action...and I've entered the madness, so yeah.

Whatever, we'll see in November. ha....Hahahahaha...

Lol you have entered the madness. Intrade, the political betting site, has Johnson at a 0.2% probability of winning the election in November. Hey it's better than 0.1 at least.
http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/common/c_cd.jsp?conDetailID=755793&z=1334983597593

But if you really believe it, put your money where your mouth is. When it cashes out you'll make a gazillion dollars.
 
I dont want to derail the thread but the "liberal media bias" thing had always amused me. Is this the same media that had a field day mocking Bill "Bubba" Clinton and idolizes Ronald Reagan?

It's part of that alternate reality they've created. where tax cuts = jobs and all the money trickles down. where small govt is enforcing your religious and moral beliefs on others through legislation and taking money from schools,roads,bridges,police and health care to give to billionaires to spend overseas is a good investment. I'm sure an uneducated workforce and crumbling infrastructure will attract new business. a sick society is a plus too.
 
Last edited:
And the "liberal Judges legislate from the bench" myth. With the Citizens United decision and the healthcare law most likely getting thrown out, who's really legislating from the bench?
 
They only have a problem with "legislating from the bench" when they don't like the ruling.
 
Rubio said he won't consider being VP. Though I'm not sure that means a whole lot.

Joe Biden once said he had no interest in being VP either. :oldrazz:
 
And the "liberal Judges legislate from the bench" myth. With the Citizens United decision and the healthcare law most likely getting thrown out, who's really legislating from the bench?

Citizens United Decision is 5-4 in Supreme Court (in the major parts) ...but there are several other levels of federal courts below the Supreme Court that have created the 'activist liberal judge' perception.

I don't really like calling judge's job to declare bills unconstitutional "legislating" from the bench.
 
I dont want to derail the thread but the "liberal media bias" thing had always amused me. Is this the same media that had a field day mocking Bill "Bubba" Clinton and idolizes Ronald Reagan?

The majority of mainstream media is primarily sensationalist but leans to left. They will report sex scandals no matter who it is because that is there bread and butter. Otherwise, yes, majority of mainstream media has advanced a center-left agenda.

I don't know about this idolizing Ronald Reagan...you think they weren't idolizing Bill "the comeback kid" Clinton in 92?
 
The majority of mainstream media is primarily sensationalist but leans to left. They will report sex scandals no matter who it is because that is there bread and butter. Otherwise, yes, majority of mainstream media has advanced a center-left agenda.

I don't know about this idolizing Ronald Reagan...you think they weren't idolizing Bill "the comeback kid" Clinton in 92?


You can't seriously be talking about the news and political media in the United States. The facts belie your opinion.
 
In 2000 the media gushed about how charismatic and personable Bush was and how boring Gore was, and in 2004 they did the same with Bush and Kerry. They harped on Kerry's flip flops and ignored Bush's.
 
It's part of that alternate reality they've created. where tax cuts = jobs and all the money trickles down. where small govt is enforcing your religious and moral beliefs on others through legislation and taking money from schools,roads,bridges,police and health care to give to billionaires to spend overseas is a good investment. I'm sure an uneducated workforce and crumbling infrastructure will attract new business. a sick society is a plus too.

Despite all the propaganda that GOP wants to eliminate the federal government, the federal government grew in budget under President Bush...and Reagan...and pretty much every Republican President..and every Democratic President for that matter since WWII. Nixon created EPA...Bush allocated billions more to US Department of Education (with No Child Left Behind with Ted Kennedy) and foreign aid (not just Iraq and Afghan War). Reagan campaigned on ending the department and also grew it. I would say the Republican legacy has been insignificantly attempting to slow the growth of federal government bureaucracy, but certainly not cutting it.

You have two parties, one wants to moderately grow government and the other wants to exponentially grow it. Which is better?

I'm not against funding some of those programs, but there has to be an effort to balance the budget...and when it comes to Democrats simply don't give a rats ass about budget deficits....the term budget doesn't really come into their thinking when it comes to allocating funding for departments...every department is always "underfunded" even if there has never been a point in history where they've had more funding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,288
Messages
22,079,714
Members
45,880
Latest member
Heartbeat
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"