Ssssooooo many. Dozens probably.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChunkyMonkey
Printable View
Ssssooooo many. Dozens probably.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChunkyMonkey
Doubt they'll even remember to vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by DD977GM2
I wish Colorado would do a real primary rather than a caucus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridge
okay great. so who are you going to vote for. the guy in there now that is going to continue what he has done for the last 4 years and has an agenda and has the support of the Brady campaign, or are you going to vote for the guy who has been an accomplished businessman, be it selling off failed companies after fixing them up and making them profitable/marketable, he does have some stains on his shirt from his past. they all do. at least we KNOW what he has done...he has the support of the NRA, a lifetime member, he has Paul Ryan who hunts, can make the hard decisions to cut .gov and make the budget see black again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridge
Romney can't tell us how he intends to fix 4 years of fuckups in the 2 minutes he gets with the mircophone, that isn't going to happen. We will hear bits and pieces...so far it sounds much better than the crap obama has done in the last 4 years and plans to do in the next 4. Obama has said he has a plan to get rid of the deficit and cut back the spending. yet he wants to reallocate the money used on wars for education. All of our kids will need education...that's great, but will they be in debt for the rest of their life to learn a skill to become a slave of the .gov? who wants that?
You said:so you want them to pay more taxes? just like the CCW in national parks, you don't pay attention to the details. where in history has more taxes done more for the American people other than to enslave us longer to the government. That is the whole reason we are a country is due to over taxation. that is nowhere near the answer. it is absolutely, unequivocally, positively the wrong answer.Quote:
the American people need to be willing to do more to help their country out.
Precisely. The caucus is when the extremists and hardliners show up.Quote:
Originally Posted by funkfool
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChunkyMonkey
not me...
Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper7
oh come on Sniper.. there is not greater good than principle and ego.
and more than likely the AWB would have been passed, it wouldn't be a topic of concern or something to re-introduce either.Quote:
Originally Posted by funkfool
a lot of pot smokers are pro-gun republicans/libertarians who don't think the .gov should be involved in their lives or what they inhale into their lungs. Just like alcohol.Quote:
Originally Posted by DD977GM2
Agreed. Not only that but we should have a national day of primaries ... and all primaries should be closed.Quote:
Originally Posted by hollohas
No monkey wrenching the other party's primaries.
No early primary states reducing the number of candidates the late primary states are allowed to vote for.
I recommend the first Tuesday after the first Monday in February of an election year.
This is true (I count myself as one of those ... although I'm voting against 64, but for other reasons that I don't want to derail this thread with), but the majority of pro-legalization folk are left of center ... you know, a broken clock being right once a day and all that.Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper7
And we've derailed.
Romney did not pass a permanent assault weapons ban as governor of MA. Please stop saying this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridge
ETA: Sorry, came in late on this one. I'm watching a recording.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by hollohas
Even though we may have vast opinions on our politics we all have a common bond.
The jabs are leaning to the overly personal side (I am just as guilty at times).
We need to remember that we all do business with each other, trade with each other and share our sport.
We can agree to disagree but we are ALL better than that. If we are to disagree, let's do it in a mature manner.
We all learn from an intelligent discussion.
Whatever, friskies licker! [Tooth]Quote:
Originally Posted by BPTactical
I'd like to point out that just because someone criticizes the Republican party, doesn't mean that they are voting for Johnson or Obama. If you are voting for Romney, then Romney is the only person you need to criticize. Not voting for Obama or Johnson is criticism enough, and there is no need for further discussion of their policies.
So when someone questions, or challenges something that your preferred candidate has done, said, or plans to do, you shouldn't respond as if they said, "I am voting for the other guy because..." unless they already have.
Those questions serve two purposes.
1) Gives you an opportunity to defend your decision by expressing WHY you have made that decision. This shows that there is a thought process behind your actions, and you aren't just doing it because you FEEL like it is the right thing to do, or don't know what else to do.
2) By being able to explain your position, this reinforces your own expectations of said candidate. You know what you expect, and if you are let down, you know exactly what to say to your guy in a letter to get him back on track.
OR...
You guys can just call everyone liberals, point fingers and declare people to be against you if they aren't with you, act like dicks, and fail, still, to actually address the concern.
In the words of a Great African American role model...Rodney King "Can't we all just get along?"
Or did did he say "Glug, gasp....Glug.........."
Goodnight gang.......
Knock that shit off. Everyone.
Don't get this thread closed for everyone else.
Agree to disagree on this, and move back to the topic at hand: the debate.
[CONTEXT EDIT: Posts were cleaned that brought forth this remark. Left as a reminder to keep this a civil political discussion]
How many times do I have to tell you?Quote:
Originally Posted by ChunkyMonkey
Friskies is welfare catfood![Bang]
I have more refined taste such as Wellness!
Get it right Obese Primate!
Dammnninnt![Bang]
OMG, dont be so jealous that I am grounded to the ground... like Toyota Camry yo!Quote:
Originally Posted by BPTactical
Last warning... Unlike the debate, getting the last word in isn't an option on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by J
Drop the bickering between the two/three of you and get back to the topic.
Ok,Ok-just don't fling poo[Coffee]Quote:
Originally Posted by ChunkyMonkey
I am done, I posted my last one while you were posting this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by J
Back to my hole.
Don't be bringing my family name into this.. and its Mr. Hu Flung Poo to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by BPTactical
And I always thought it was Mr. I Chu Poo.........go figureQuote:
Originally Posted by ChunkyMonkey
Took me 20 minutes, but I think I cleaned the BS up, and we should be returning to our regularly scheduled programming in 3...2....1....
MSM is writing this one down for obama. I see a couple screw ups on romneys part. and a couple big hits.
F&F was brought up, but so was the 47% issue.
The ambassador getting killed, and obamas response kind of blew up in Romneys face. Candy called him out on it on the spot.
Romney seems to start talking more about his plan. I'm not sure if he even knows what the full thing is yet or not, or just letting out enough to keep people interested but not too much for the obama campaign to find flaws and call him out on them...that is more than likely the case.
Foreign Policy will be interesting to see when that debate comes up. Obama has more experience in this one now...even though he had none in 08 when he won, but Romney has been around the block and knows what it going on, just not at the same level as Obama.
sorry about that. sometimes I get excited...like a little dog who pees just a little [Tooth]Quote:
Originally Posted by J
No he goes by the name Dr Fwd... he is such a crybaby and spoiled. He is the clingy poo.Quote:
Originally Posted by BPTactical
Ok, so is your anorexic cousin Skinny Poo?Quote:
Originally Posted by ChunkyMonkey
Both candidates pretending to answer the question for 11 seconds, then using the last 1:49 to talk about something unrelated that the other guy did, got pretty old, pretty quick. I'd much rather people actually stick to answering a question in two minutes, than trying to cram their pre-planned rhetoric over the top of dodging a question in that amount of time. If you debated like that in Forensics class, you'd lose every time.Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper7
I think that people are saying that Obama won because he really nailed it a few times, with what his proponents believe/want to hear.
Can't argue with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
Foreign policy debate will be interesting for one reason. I want to see who makes up what to try to differentiate themselves from the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridge
Otherwise it is going to be like McCain and Obama debate on the economy. "I agree with him on that".
I would personally prefer a 3-5 question debate wherein candidates are required to show their work. A Bipartisan set of examples:
1. Obama says that gas prices were artificially low, and that was a contributing factor the the economic collapse. I have never seen any evidence to that point.... show your work in 10 minutes or less as to how the gas prices were a factor to the collapse and how either a) your policies WILL (not maybe) reduce them or B) how the value they are at now is the permanent stable value it needs to be!
2. Romney says that Obama policies have actually reduced/hindered domestic natural gas production. Most things I have seen suggest otherwise (one of the few things I believe he has done OK). Show your work in 10 minutes or less on how his polices have reduced natural gas output and how your polices can increase it!
Perhaps that's just the enginerd in me... but does anyone else agree? Show your work, make me understand how you will do it! Then I believe. I have to imagine there are others like me who are not blind faith voters (though the 2008 election might suggest otherwise).
I'm as data-driven as you are, and this would be a great format. Will it be open book? Can they use calculators? I think McCain is the only recent candidate who would be capable of using a slide-rule ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by J
Facts? Records? That would be the extinction of politicians.
The goal isn't to be correct; it's to be elected.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChunkyMonkey
If they get to use Google I want to see the screen they are seeing.Quote:
Originally Posted by J
Jesus this wind. Must be the low pressure system of hot air coming out of NY.
This is the most important thing that you've said. How can you realistically tell a nation that there is a lot of hard work to be done, and everyone needs to do their part, if you don't bother to explain what you are talking about and get everyone onto the same page? You want to convince a voter that your idea is the best one? Make sure you at least try and explain it enough that the voter can grasp the general idea. Heck, they don't even have to be able to explain it to their buddy the next day, just understand it as it is spoken to them. There is no point in preaching about banding together to tackle challenges if no one even knows what step number one is. Just throwing money at a candidate isn't banding together, and it isn't hard work.Quote:
Originally Posted by J
Its windy as all getout up here.
Was very annoying to watch the debate. It was honestly " who can ramble on about their grandparents without answering the question, then insist on exceeding the 2 min limit because what they have to say isimportant...the best?"