What a unique idea. Selecting someone w the correct tempermant to deal w the serious problems of today rather than a the demague who is Trump. It is Kasich for me but he has little chance
WTF is a demague?
I make a lot of spelling mistakes myself. Don't spend a lot of time like some obsessive weirdo writing paragraphs of lengthy odd Spins desperately grasping at any cheap shot or out of left field inference.
My guess is he meant demagogue. Seems like the simple explanation coming from some like myself that misspells a lot.
You can reference a few posts back for the weirdo psycho-nutjob interpretation. It's like a Rorschach test and the results are quite concerning. Lol.
Maybe he needs another bail thread because it's obvious to everyone he is falling apart again to the point of needing one
What a unique idea. Selecting someone w the correct tempermant to deal w the serious problems of today rather than a the demague who is Trump. It is Kasich for me but he has little chance
WTF is a demague?
I make a lot of spelling mistakes myself. Don't spend a lot of time like some obsessive weirdo writing paragraphs of lengthy odd Spins desperately grasping at any cheap shot or out of left field inference.
My guess is he meant demagogue. Seems like the simple explanation coming from some like myself that misspells a lot.
You can reference a few posts back for the weirdo psycho-nutjob interpretation. It's like a Rorschach test and the results are quite concerning. Lol.
Maybe he needs another bail thread because it's obvious to everyone he is falling apart again to the point of needing one
"GOPs don't have an answer for bigger banks nor do they set that as an agenda. Much of the conservative ideals is about limiting regulations on banks. Why would should america think that the GOP wouldn't make banks bigger? It's just a poor issue for the GOP to run on".
Apr 19, 2014 - Previously restricted papers reveal attempts to rush president to ... A Financial Services Modernization Act was passed by Congress in 1999. ... Wall Streetderegulation, blamed for deepening the banking crisis, was aggressively pushed by advisers to Bill Clinton who have also been .... Most popular in US ...
"GOPs don't have an answer for bigger banks nor do they set that as an agenda. Much of the conservative ideals is about limiting regulations on banks. Why would should america think that the GOP wouldn't make banks bigger? It's just a poor issue for the GOP to run on".
Apr 19, 2014 - Previously restricted papers reveal attempts to rush president to ... A Financial Services Modernization Act was passed by Congress in 1999. ... Wall Streetderegulation, blamed for deepening the banking crisis, was aggressively pushed by advisers to Bill Clinton who have also been .... Most popular in US ...
Jan 19, 2011 - When Bill Clinton suffered an electoral reversal after his first two years in ... used by Clinton when he signed off on the sweeping deregulation legislation ... advisers who were the most effective advocates for those special interests? ... from the president'shealth-care and financial regulatory overhauls has, ...
Jan 19, 2011 - When Bill Clinton suffered an electoral reversal after his first two years in ... used by Clinton when he signed off on the sweeping deregulation legislation ... advisers who were the most effective advocates for those special interests? ... from the president'shealth-care and financial regulatory overhauls has, ...
See but this tactic of bringing up the other side doesn't mean that the GOP has the solution. The minute he gop is taking about the other side they are basically saying they don't have the answer. If not they would be talking about it.
I clearly spell out a solution. What do you think about my solution to how the GOP can win?
See but this tactic of bringing up the other side doesn't mean that the GOP has the solution. The minute he gop is taking about the other side they are basically saying they don't have the answer. If not they would be talking about it.
I clearly spell out a solution. What do you think about my solution to how the GOP can win?
Mar 28, 2008 - Democrats from Carter to Clinton helped roll back the government's ... signed into law bills deregulating the railroads and the trucking industry.
I've got more when you are done with these. Speaking of myths.
Mar 28, 2008 - Democrats from Carter to Clinton helped roll back the government's ... signed into law bills deregulating the railroads and the trucking industry.
I've got more when you are done with these. Speaking of myths.
An epidemic of federal employees watching pornography on government computers during work hours has gotten so out of control that legislation has been introduced in Congress to contain the embarrassing crisis.
Dozens of SEC employees, including senior officers with lucrative six-figure salaries viewing explicit images on their agency computers during work hours. One senior attorney at the SEC headquarters in Washington D.C. spent up to eight hours a day accessing internet porn. When his government computer ran out of file space, he downloaded pornographic images on compact discs and stored them in boxes in his office.
One agency accountant tried to access porn websites 16,000 times in one month and got busted with hundreds of pornographic images on her computer hard drive...
An epidemic of federal employees watching pornography on government computers during work hours has gotten so out of control that legislation has been introduced in Congress to contain the embarrassing crisis.
Dozens of SEC employees, including senior officers with lucrative six-figure salaries viewing explicit images on their agency computers during work hours. One senior attorney at the SEC headquarters in Washington D.C. spent up to eight hours a day accessing internet porn. When his government computer ran out of file space, he downloaded pornographic images on compact discs and stored them in boxes in his office.
One agency accountant tried to access porn websites 16,000 times in one month and got busted with hundreds of pornographic images on her computer hard drive...
First, the idea that deregulation is the work of just the republicans is a myth as I have pointed out. Not sure where you got your facts on that one.
Second, I completely agree that the negative and mud slinging is a waste of time. I agree they need to get away from that but I doubt it will happen. All it does is antagonize people.
Third, instead of championing Obama and Clinton they need to focus on what they bring to the table as far as moving this country forward economically. I believe this should be the number 1 talking point. Number 2 should be trying to include all Americans regardless of race, color or political persuasion in the economic solutions.
Fourth, I don't see any reason to call out Fox News. Fox leans right and MSNBC leans left. Hillary doesn't need to call out MSNBC and Republicans don't need to call out FOX.
First, the idea that deregulation is the work of just the republicans is a myth as I have pointed out. Not sure where you got your facts on that one.
Second, I completely agree that the negative and mud slinging is a waste of time. I agree they need to get away from that but I doubt it will happen. All it does is antagonize people.
Third, instead of championing Obama and Clinton they need to focus on what they bring to the table as far as moving this country forward economically. I believe this should be the number 1 talking point. Number 2 should be trying to include all Americans regardless of race, color or political persuasion in the economic solutions.
Fourth, I don't see any reason to call out Fox News. Fox leans right and MSNBC leans left. Hillary doesn't need to call out MSNBC and Republicans don't need to call out FOX.
With all that being said Republicans need to unite behind whoever the nominee is. No whining if there guy or gal doesn't get the nod.
Republicans can learn a lesson from 08. Hillary supporters were extremely disappointed that she didn't get the nomination. They sucked it up and voted for Obama anyways. Republicans should learn from that.
With all that being said Republicans need to unite behind whoever the nominee is. No whining if there guy or gal doesn't get the nod.
Republicans can learn a lesson from 08. Hillary supporters were extremely disappointed that she didn't get the nomination. They sucked it up and voted for Obama anyways. Republicans should learn from that.
In fact, a new study from Pew's Project for Excellence in Journalism finds that the media has covered both Obama and Romney more negatively than positively since the week of the Republican National Convention in August.
Overall from August 27 through October 21, 19% of stories about Obama studied in a cross section of mainstream media were clearly favorable in tone while 30% were unfavorable and 51% mixed. This is a differential of 11 percentage points between unfavorable and favorable stories.
For Romney, 15% of the stories studied were favorable, 38% were unfavorable and 47% were mixed—a differential toward negative stories of 23 points.
In fact, a new study from Pew's Project for Excellence in Journalism finds that the media has covered both Obama and Romney more negatively than positively since the week of the Republican National Convention in August.
Overall from August 27 through October 21, 19% of stories about Obama studied in a cross section of mainstream media were clearly favorable in tone while 30% were unfavorable and 51% mixed. This is a differential of 11 percentage points between unfavorable and favorable stories.
For Romney, 15% of the stories studied were favorable, 38% were unfavorable and 47% were mixed—a differential toward negative stories of 23 points.
It's the Deregulation, Stupid | Mother Joneswww.motherjones.com/politics/2008/03/its-deregulation-stupidMar 28, 2008 - Democrats from Carter to Clinton helped roll back the government's ... signed into law bills deregulating the railroads and the trucking industry.I've got more when you are done with these. Speaking of myths.
Yup but that's not a solution. What do you think about my solution?
It's the Deregulation, Stupid | Mother Joneswww.motherjones.com/politics/2008/03/its-deregulation-stupidMar 28, 2008 - Democrats from Carter to Clinton helped roll back the government's ... signed into law bills deregulating the railroads and the trucking industry.I've got more when you are done with these. Speaking of myths.
Yup but that's not a solution. What do you think about my solution?
[Quote: Originally Posted bybettingforfun]With all that being said Republicans need to unite behind whoever the nominee is. No whining if there guy or gal doesn't get the nod.Republicans can learn a lesson from 08. Hillary supporters were extremely disappointed that she didn't get the nomination. They sucked it up and voted for Obama anyways. Republicans should learn from that.[/Quote]
I think that either obama or Hillary could have won in 2008.
History shows that the GOP voting base will blindly vote (r) like they did with McCain/palin or romney/Ryan.
[Quote: Originally Posted bybettingforfun]With all that being said Republicans need to unite behind whoever the nominee is. No whining if there guy or gal doesn't get the nod.Republicans can learn a lesson from 08. Hillary supporters were extremely disappointed that she didn't get the nomination. They sucked it up and voted for Obama anyways. Republicans should learn from that.[/Quote]
I think that either obama or Hillary could have won in 2008.
History shows that the GOP voting base will blindly vote (r) like they did with McCain/palin or romney/Ryan.
[Quote: Originally Posted bybettingforfun]First, the idea that deregulation is the work of just the republicans is a myth as I have pointed out. Not sure where you got your facts on that one.Second, I completely agree that the negative and mud slinging is a waste of time. I agree they need to get away from that but I doubt it will happen. All it does is antagonize people.Third, instead of championing Obama and Clinton they need to focus on what they bring to the table as far as moving this country forward economically. I believe this should be the number 1 talking point. Number 2 should be trying to include all Americans regardless of race, color or political persuasion in the economic solutions.Fourth, I don't see any reason to call out Fox News. Fox leans right and MSNBC leans left. Hillary doesn't need to call out MSNBC and Republicans don't need to call out FOX.[/Quote]
First let's be real, just because both side have done deregulation doesn't mean it's equal or that the GOP didn't/aren't going to do it. That's why I say the GOP candidate running on the bigger banks issues is like running on military spending and war as an issue. Sure obama and dems have waged war and spent money on military, but it's not like gop is the answer.
Mudslinging and negativity is a problem for the image of GOP who look like angry emotionally out of control tantrum throwers since 2008. It's an image issue on one level. But on a another level it's a sign of weakness that they are basically waiving the white flag that they have nothing and no one to offer. If they did they would do so. But much of the rhetoric is oppositional therefore issues are simply dictated by the dems. And to see this lack of control and autonomy shows weakeness.
GOP need to do more than talk inclusiveness, they need to show policies, plans and specifically how they are going to make it happen. This is where they Fail.
It's funny with the foxnews that you bring up hillary. The point is the GOP and hillary are in different positions. The GOP and conservatives are constantly playing the victim and crying about the "liberal and biased media". Because they over play this card while hiding behind Fox News it's a different position.
In this discussion about the GOP winning, if we are talking about hillary and the dems we are probably on the wrong track.
There are so many in America that laugh at foxnews. The problem is that it is simply an indulgence for the person that would blindly vote GOP anyways. By distancing themselves from foxnews and calling it out for what it is, it is a huge opportunity to gain voters that don't watch Fox News, people that might not have blindly voted for the them because Fox News says to.
[Quote: Originally Posted bybettingforfun]First, the idea that deregulation is the work of just the republicans is a myth as I have pointed out. Not sure where you got your facts on that one.Second, I completely agree that the negative and mud slinging is a waste of time. I agree they need to get away from that but I doubt it will happen. All it does is antagonize people.Third, instead of championing Obama and Clinton they need to focus on what they bring to the table as far as moving this country forward economically. I believe this should be the number 1 talking point. Number 2 should be trying to include all Americans regardless of race, color or political persuasion in the economic solutions.Fourth, I don't see any reason to call out Fox News. Fox leans right and MSNBC leans left. Hillary doesn't need to call out MSNBC and Republicans don't need to call out FOX.[/Quote]
First let's be real, just because both side have done deregulation doesn't mean it's equal or that the GOP didn't/aren't going to do it. That's why I say the GOP candidate running on the bigger banks issues is like running on military spending and war as an issue. Sure obama and dems have waged war and spent money on military, but it's not like gop is the answer.
Mudslinging and negativity is a problem for the image of GOP who look like angry emotionally out of control tantrum throwers since 2008. It's an image issue on one level. But on a another level it's a sign of weakness that they are basically waiving the white flag that they have nothing and no one to offer. If they did they would do so. But much of the rhetoric is oppositional therefore issues are simply dictated by the dems. And to see this lack of control and autonomy shows weakeness.
GOP need to do more than talk inclusiveness, they need to show policies, plans and specifically how they are going to make it happen. This is where they Fail.
It's funny with the foxnews that you bring up hillary. The point is the GOP and hillary are in different positions. The GOP and conservatives are constantly playing the victim and crying about the "liberal and biased media". Because they over play this card while hiding behind Fox News it's a different position.
In this discussion about the GOP winning, if we are talking about hillary and the dems we are probably on the wrong track.
There are so many in America that laugh at foxnews. The problem is that it is simply an indulgence for the person that would blindly vote GOP anyways. By distancing themselves from foxnews and calling it out for what it is, it is a huge opportunity to gain voters that don't watch Fox News, people that might not have blindly voted for the them because Fox News says to.
I think that either obama or Hillary could have won in 2008.
History shows that the GOP voting base will blindly vote (r) like they did with McCain/palin or romney/Ryan.
Once again that is not a solution.
History also shows that Democrats will blindly vote (d) as well. No party got my vote in 2008 or 2012. As an Independent I felt it was my duty not to vote for either party since I thought I wasn't given good choices in either of those years. Could be more of the same in 16.
I think that either obama or Hillary could have won in 2008.
History shows that the GOP voting base will blindly vote (r) like they did with McCain/palin or romney/Ryan.
Once again that is not a solution.
History also shows that Democrats will blindly vote (d) as well. No party got my vote in 2008 or 2012. As an Independent I felt it was my duty not to vote for either party since I thought I wasn't given good choices in either of those years. Could be more of the same in 16.
Trump is obviously doing somethings right based on polls.
I have heard funny theories that hillary is paying trump to do this because it is helping her win in 2016.
I have also heard a theory that trump and Murdoch are rivals so trump is doing this to make foxnews look stupid.
While those may not be the purposefully intended plans, those appear to the outcomes. So maybe it could be said based on outcomes that not being back by foxnews is a good thing.
Could u imagine the popularity of a gop candidate that renounced foxnews and exposed them for being biased?
Getting the attention of so many non conservatives or GOPs who would suddenly consider them as someone to vote for rather than hillary?
But like I said, it's a bold move that take guts courage and from what I see of the line up of empty suits talking the some old rhetoric and talking points, they will cower behind foxnews seeking refuge
Trump is obviously doing somethings right based on polls.
I have heard funny theories that hillary is paying trump to do this because it is helping her win in 2016.
I have also heard a theory that trump and Murdoch are rivals so trump is doing this to make foxnews look stupid.
While those may not be the purposefully intended plans, those appear to the outcomes. So maybe it could be said based on outcomes that not being back by foxnews is a good thing.
Could u imagine the popularity of a gop candidate that renounced foxnews and exposed them for being biased?
Getting the attention of so many non conservatives or GOPs who would suddenly consider them as someone to vote for rather than hillary?
But like I said, it's a bold move that take guts courage and from what I see of the line up of empty suits talking the some old rhetoric and talking points, they will cower behind foxnews seeking refuge
GOP need to do more than talk inclusiveness, they need to show policies, plans and specifically how they are going to make it happen. This is where they Fail.
GOP need to do more than talk inclusiveness, they need to show policies, plans and specifically how they are going to make it happen. This is where they Fail.
George will looks sacred and comes off as controlling because he feels like things are out of control.
I think trump supporters are people that voted for McCain/palin and Romney/Ryan. When you saw zelo, sara and other usual suspects getting jazzed about trump, it reminded me of how palin enegerized the GOP base.
Will comes accross like trump supporters are from the outside, but I think it's because he knows that trump exposes the part of the GOP base that falls for talking points that channel their emotional tirades like a racial/culturally loaded topic like immigration.
I honesty don't think yin come across as scared and controlling. There are others that fit that profile much more accurately.
George will looks sacred and comes off as controlling because he feels like things are out of control.
I think trump supporters are people that voted for McCain/palin and Romney/Ryan. When you saw zelo, sara and other usual suspects getting jazzed about trump, it reminded me of how palin enegerized the GOP base.
Will comes accross like trump supporters are from the outside, but I think it's because he knows that trump exposes the part of the GOP base that falls for talking points that channel their emotional tirades like a racial/culturally loaded topic like immigration.
I honesty don't think yin come across as scared and controlling. There are others that fit that profile much more accurately.
Second, I completely agree that the negative and mud slinging is a waste of time. I agree they need to get away from that but I doubt it will happen. All it does is antagonize people.
I may not like it. But I think this is wrong. There are many people making an awful lot of money to study this and advise the candidates. Maybe some folks feel the more negative someone is about the incumbent or the other party's candidate the more they will do something about the things they go on about. I don't know why but it must resonate with some people.
Like the man said--- they wouldn't do it if it didn't work.
I think it turns off the politically attentive folks -- but the average voter must like it or something.
Second, I completely agree that the negative and mud slinging is a waste of time. I agree they need to get away from that but I doubt it will happen. All it does is antagonize people.
I may not like it. But I think this is wrong. There are many people making an awful lot of money to study this and advise the candidates. Maybe some folks feel the more negative someone is about the incumbent or the other party's candidate the more they will do something about the things they go on about. I don't know why but it must resonate with some people.
Like the man said--- they wouldn't do it if it didn't work.
I think it turns off the politically attentive folks -- but the average voter must like it or something.
With all that being said Republicans need to unite behind whoever the nominee is. No whining if there guy or gal doesn't get the nod.
Republicans can learn a lesson from 08. Hillary supporters were extremely disappointed that she didn't get the nomination. They sucked it up and voted for Obama anyways. Republicans should learn from that.
With all that being said Republicans need to unite behind whoever the nominee is. No whining if there guy or gal doesn't get the nod.
Republicans can learn a lesson from 08. Hillary supporters were extremely disappointed that she didn't get the nomination. They sucked it up and voted for Obama anyways. Republicans should learn from that.
History also shows that Democrats will blindly vote (d) as well. No party got my vote in 2008 or 2012. As an Independent I felt it was my duty not to vote for either party since I thought I wasn't given good choices in either of those years. Could be more of the same in 16.
I feel this, however, is wrong thing to do.
I very much wish there were 3-4 strong parties. But there simply aren't. So, I feel whether a person likes it or not, at the end you have to choose the candidate that you feel will do the most good for the country. After all, it is not just about you. As you just said in a sense you should unite behind the best candidate left. Or, if you prefer, unite against the worst candidate left.
For sure none of the last ones in the last couple of elections were my preferred choices. But you should still feel an innate duty to vote for the best left standing.
History also shows that Democrats will blindly vote (d) as well. No party got my vote in 2008 or 2012. As an Independent I felt it was my duty not to vote for either party since I thought I wasn't given good choices in either of those years. Could be more of the same in 16.
I feel this, however, is wrong thing to do.
I very much wish there were 3-4 strong parties. But there simply aren't. So, I feel whether a person likes it or not, at the end you have to choose the candidate that you feel will do the most good for the country. After all, it is not just about you. As you just said in a sense you should unite behind the best candidate left. Or, if you prefer, unite against the worst candidate left.
For sure none of the last ones in the last couple of elections were my preferred choices. But you should still feel an innate duty to vote for the best left standing.
GOP need to do more than talk inclusiveness, they need to show policies, plans and specifically how they are going to make it happen. This is where they Fail.
If I give you the benefit of the doubt here---could you list a couple of exact examples with a few specifics?
I have never like the complaint that Republicans need to compromise. It is always the Republicans that DO compromise. Democrats never do not are asked to.
So, when you say inclusiveness what would you suggest. And would it be without having to compromise your values and ideas?
For example, would you try to include more women how? More blacks how? More Hispanics how?
GOP need to do more than talk inclusiveness, they need to show policies, plans and specifically how they are going to make it happen. This is where they Fail.
If I give you the benefit of the doubt here---could you list a couple of exact examples with a few specifics?
I have never like the complaint that Republicans need to compromise. It is always the Republicans that DO compromise. Democrats never do not are asked to.
So, when you say inclusiveness what would you suggest. And would it be without having to compromise your values and ideas?
For example, would you try to include more women how? More blacks how? More Hispanics how?
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.