Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Should the Republican Party Bow Out of 2016?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • kentonio
    replied
    Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
    Also, hillary clinton's a ****ty politician. I don't know why anyone harbors fantasies to the contrary. Her campaign in 2008 was a shitshow, and the only time she actually had a major policy initiative, she cost the Clinton administration both houses of Congress (Hillarycare). Put her up against a decent GOP ex-Governor and she's fighting an uphill battle.
    You are very funny.

    Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
    Kentonio, your understanding of US politics rivals Ben Kenobi's. It would not have taken much for Romney to win, and YOU'RE deluded if you don't think Scott Walker is a major threat to the democrats. Democrats who are paying attention think he is a major threat to the democrats.
    I've lost count of how many times you've used that 'you don't understand US politics' line, yet you keep being wrong time after time. I suppose the GOP are going to sweep the Senate in 14 too?


    Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
    The GOP is in better shape than it has been in decades, actually. Don't look at the polls. Look at how much of the government they actually control. One house of congress and something like 30 states. They don't have the white house or the senate, true, but in the 80s it had been decades since they had both houses of congress and most state legislatures were solidly blue.

    Leave a comment:


  • Felch
    replied
    Originally posted by kentonio View Post
    It's not doomed but its in the worst shape it's been in for decades. If you don't see that, go look at some polls.
    If you think polls three years before an election matter, then you're obviously kentonio.

    Leave a comment:


  • Boris Godunov
    replied
    If the GOP gets over their ridiculous butthurt at Christie for having the temerity to put politics aside when his state was hit by a natural disaster, they would be smart to nominate him in 2016. He's the only realistic chance they have for winning the presidency, unless the Democrats do something stupid and nominate Andrew Cuomo.

    But I've said it all along, and will keep saying it: If Hillary runs, she wins. In a landslide, or pretty close to it.

    Leave a comment:


  • DaShi
    replied
    Originally posted by kentonio View Post
    Ryan wants to turn Medicare into a voucher plan, he is not a 'reasonable' candidate. Agreed about Christie though, who is already toast.
    Ryan might have to run on it during the primaries but will then have to drop it during the general. Of course, he'll then be accused of both being a flipflopper and wanting to kill Medicare. The whole voucher plan is a political loser for him. Whether it is good or not is irrelevant.

    Leave a comment:


  • kentonio
    replied
    Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
    Ryan's plan is perfectly reasonable. A voucher plan is exactly what medicare has to become if it isn't going to bankrupt the country. The left-leaning democrats are completely in denial about this. Less crazy democrats like Bill Clinton actually like Paul Ryan, and agree medicare needs changing.
    Was that the part where he said..

    Originally posted by Bill Clinton
    people will use less, get sicker and die quickly. Or they will be poorer because they'll have to spend so much of their money on health care.
    It's a ****ing horrible plan that would cause untold suffering to millions of people. If you think its something that can win an election you're an idiot. Go look at the percentage of the electorate that is a senior or approaching being.

    Leave a comment:


  • DaShi
    replied
    Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
    Also, hillary clinton's a ****ty politician. I don't know why anyone harbors fantasies to the contrary. Her campaign in 2008 was a shitshow, and the only time she actually had a major policy initiative, she cost the Clinton administration both houses of Congress (Hillarycare). Put her up against a decent GOP ex-Governor and she's fighting an uphill battle.
    Aren't you worried that you are using the same flawed reasoning that made you believe that Romney would win the presidency despite the preponderance of evidence to the contrary at the time? I'd be more worried about that than any political election.

    Leave a comment:


  • DaShi
    replied
    Ken is right. Scott Walker won't be able to carry a national election. He just barely passed a recount in his own state.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hauldren Collider
    replied
    Also, hillary clinton's a ****ty politician. I don't know why anyone harbors fantasies to the contrary. Her campaign in 2008 was a shitshow, and the only time she actually had a major policy initiative, she cost the Clinton administration both houses of Congress (Hillarycare). Put her up against a decent GOP ex-Governor and she's fighting an uphill battle.

    Kentonio, your understanding of US politics rivals Ben Kenobi's. It would not have taken much for Romney to win, and YOU'RE deluded if you don't think Scott Walker is a major threat to the democrats. Democrats who are paying attention think he is a major threat to the democrats.

    The GOP is in better shape than it has been in decades, actually. Don't look at the polls. Look at how much of the government they actually control. One house of congress and something like 30 states. They don't have the white house or the senate, true, but in the 80s it had been decades since they had both houses of congress and most state legislatures were solidly blue.

    Leave a comment:


  • kentonio
    replied
    Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
    DaShi's analysis is beyond absurd, to the point that it's not even worth discussing. The GOP is not in terrible shape, or doomed, or anything of the sort.
    It's not doomed but its in the worst shape it's been in for decades. If you don't see that, go look at some polls.

    Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
    Romney very nearly won the last election and there are a number of very popular ex-Governors that will be in the running for 2016.
    He did not 'very nearly' win the last election, he lost 47-53% and 332-206 EC votes in an election that he should have won by a comfortable margin. Stop lying to yourself.

    Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
    Keep an eye out for Scott Walker. Yes, the democrats hate him, but he's an electoral juggernaut able to pull victories in blue-leaning states and has shown himself to be a capable administrator and politician.
    You're deluding yourself, seriously.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hauldren Collider
    replied
    Ryan's plan is perfectly reasonable. A voucher plan is exactly what medicare has to become if it isn't going to bankrupt the country. The left-leaning democrats are completely in denial about this. Less crazy democrats like Bill Clinton actually like Paul Ryan, and agree medicare needs changing.

    Leave a comment:


  • kentonio
    replied
    Originally posted by DaShi View Post
    Reasonable candidates like Christie and Ryan will get sidelined.
    Ryan wants to turn Medicare into a voucher plan, he is not a 'reasonable' candidate. Agreed about Christie though, who is already toast.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hauldren Collider
    replied
    DaShi's analysis is beyond absurd, to the point that it's not even worth discussing. The GOP is not in terrible shape, or doomed, or anything of the sort. Romney very nearly won the last election and there are a number of very popular ex-Governors that will be in the running for 2016. Keep an eye out for Scott Walker. Yes, the democrats hate him, but he's an electoral juggernaut able to pull victories in blue-leaning states and has shown himself to be a capable administrator and politician. Plus, he supports immigration reform but the Newt Gingriches and Michelle Bachmanns can't claim that he's "not conservative enough".

    Leave a comment:


  • DaShi
    replied
    Look at it this way:

    Political Points Lost
    Win: 200 (100 for embarrassing election, 100 for dividing the party)
    Loss: 200 (100 for embarrassing election, 100 for losing presidency)
    Don't run: 100 (100 for losing presidency)

    2016 is a lose-lose-lose for Republicans. It just comes down to which loss is the least damaging.

    Leave a comment:


  • Elok
    replied
    At this point, I suspect almost any halfway-sane person who appeared among the GOP ranks would be dubbed "electable" and get a sizable base solidly behind him instantly. Anyway, why should the GOP bow out? As a political party, it's not in their interests to give up a presidential race, no matter what the odds.

    Leave a comment:


  • giblets
    replied
    They have a 50/50 chance of winning, it looks like. They nominated Romney last time around, so it's not like they're doomed to nominate a nutjob like Bachmann. Most of the potential Republican candidates are terrible, but it seems like most presidential candidates in general are terrible.


    Originally posted by Dinner View Post
    They should run Ted Cruz. That would be both entertaining and end the delusion that "if only we ran a TRUE conservative than we would win!" Plus it would be funny to see Hillary take 48 states.
    The majority of Republican primary voters seem to be more realistic than that. It's just a loud minority that think picking an extremist will lead to better results.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X