What If Mitt And Jeb Really Do Go At It, Hammer And Tongs?

[Jack Davenport]

We cannot afford another Texan as president they seem to do far more harm than good.
My hope is Ted Cruz is striken with horrible health and vanishes.

And THAT is the reason a lot of us want him to run. Stay classy!

 

[Mayhem]

If Cruz runs, along with Bush, Mitt and Christie; it'll be the Titanic. Last time it was stupid, pandering people whacking away at each other. Now it will be smart, combative people whacking away. Palin won't be able to keep quiet. I predict Bachmann will want as much camera time as possible. And these guys will have to go so far to the right, it will be Romney 2012 all over again. By the time a nominee is selected, GOP donors will not only be broke but shellshocked and disgusted.

The only thing that could possibly make this more perfect than it already is, is if Newt decides to give it another try.

 

[Jack Davenport]

If Cruz runs, along with Bush, Mitt and Christie; it'll be the Titanic. Last time it was stupid, pandering people whacking away at each other. Now it will be smart, combative people whacking away. Palin won't be able to keep quiet. I predict Bachmann will want as much camera time as possible. And these guys will have to go so far to the right, it will be Romney 2012 all over again. By the time a nominee is selected, GOP donors will not only be broke but shellshocked and disgusted.

The only thing that could possibly make this more perfect than it already is, is if Newt decides to give it another try.

All these same predictions were made one year before the mid terms I actually had people bet me money that the government shutdown was the end of the republican party and that they would lose handily.. The only way it will be Romney 2012 all over again is if it is Romney 2016 the Farewell Tour. We have already tried "so far to the left" it is time for a swing in the other direction.

 

[xfire]

Yes comparing Cruz to Saunders is laughable. You probably need to get your head around the fact that Cruz is probably going to run and he is going to do well. There is a groundswell of support for him in the conservative ranks. Kinda getting tired of you making assumptions about what conservatives do or don't know about your democrat hopefuls. I have been paying attention to Saunders for many years and unlike some, I actually pay attention to the opposition and what they say and do. Saunders is an unapologetic socialist, that is a fact. Look, I know liberals don't like Cruz and the demonization is already starting because he is a threat. I don't feel threatened by Weekend at Bernie because he is unelectable. But like I said earlier, I really don't care who your side runs or nominates, I am going to focus on getting the best nominee our party can offer and hopefully that nominee this time around is a conservative and not from the mushy middle.

If you know so much about Bernie Sanders you wouldn't continue to misspell his last name. Ted Cruz is going to fall flat on his face in the primaries. I don't take shots at him because he's an idiot that doesn't need any help. Cruz is a true radical in a field of wingnuts. I hope he wins the GOP primary, if he does be sure and put a bow on top. I like Sanders, he's a man of conviction and he's got my vote. I don't think he will do well in the Democratic primary, which is a shame, I want a real liberal, not some mushy middle centrist that will kowtow to the GOP. I like Elizabeth Warren, but she's a novice and Hillary Clinton would chew her up and spit her out. I hope your side gets exactly what you want, a teabagger "conservative" with no prayer in hell of winning.

 

[Jack Davenport]

Excuse me, Sanders. Happy now?I guess I could have Googled some more about (even Mayhem who said he could support him admitted to that) him but I know enough about him and his ideas that I didn't have to so the correct spelling of his name fell by the wayside. I admire Sanders for one thing, that he is one of the few socialists that is willing to put it out there as to what he is. And he is willing to go on traditionally conservative news programs and make his case. If there is any potential candidate out there that is driven by conviction it is Cruz. Call him a wingnut, or whatever you like but there are plenty of wingnuts on your side too and that will become increasingly apparent as the fight for the dem nomination gets into full gear. The problem with you is that everyone on your side of the spectrum are centrists when in fact that is not the case. We have an ideologically driven left wingnut occupying 1600 Pennsylvania right now as I type this.

 

[Jack Davenport]

My hope is Ted Cruz is striken with horrible health and vanishes.

Oh and congratulations, you just entered Will E. "hope the people of Maryland get shot" or whatever he said a couple of years ago territory.

 

[xfire]

Excuse me, Sanders. Happy now?I guess I could have Googled some more about (even Mayhem who said he could support him admitted to that) him but I know enough about him and his ideas that I didn't have to so the correct spelling of his name fell by the wayside. I admire Sanders for one thing, that he is one of the few socialists that is willing to put it out there as to what he is. And he is willing to go on traditionally conservative news programs and make his case. If there is any potential candidate out there that is driven by conviction it is Cruz. Call him a wingnut, or whatever you like but there are plenty of wingnuts on your side too and that will become increasingly apparent as the fight for the dem nomination gets into full gear. The problem with you is that everyone on your side of the spectrum are centrists when in fact that is not the case. We have an ideologically driven left wingnut occupying 1600 Pennsylvania right now as I type this.

Ted Cruz is a clown with no convictions, it's all a game to him. He's only interested in power to line his own pockets. Once more, I really hope you get exactly what you want, a teabagger "conservative" with no chance in hell of winning. You keep proving out that you're really only interested in labels, anyway, the best thing you could get is exactly what you keep asking for. As far as misspelling Sanders, you can continue to spell it Saunders all you like, small detail but extremely revealing.

 

[Mayhem]

We have an ideologically driven left wingnut occupying 1600 Pennsylvania right now as I type this.

No, he really isn't. It's the game that he talked, but not really the game that he played. The Immigration thing is too little, too late. Obama is a centrist and a pacifier. And that's the legacy that he's going to have to live with.

And our wingnuts don't run for Prez like your wingnuts do. 2012 proved that. tvstrip posted:

Don't forget Herman Cain! I would love to see him get back in the game.

Seriously? He's the guy who makes Bachmann and Palin look intellectual.

If Sanders decides to run, he's still light years away from Bachmann, Cain or Perry, as wingnuts go.

But for me, it will always be Lizzy. At least until she completely quashes the possiblity. Not an ounce of wingnut on her. (And the whole Native American thing is lame. If the GOP keeps bringing it up, it will just make them more tiresome to people than they already are.) She is absolutely the best choice, regardless of Party.

 

[Jack Davenport]

Ted Cruz is a clown with no convictions, it's all a game to him. He's only interested in power to line his own pockets. Once more, I really hope you get exactly what you want, a teabagger "conservative" with no chance in hell of winning. You keep proving out that you're really only interested in labels, anyway, the best thing you could get is exactly what you keep asking for. As far as misspelling Sanders, you can continue to spell it Saunders all you like, small detail but extremely revealing.

You can keep beating that horse, the only thing revealing is that he is senator from a small state that isn't really on anyone's radar except for the fact that a few of us pay attention to what he says. I probably shouldn't pay attention to him at all but I find him entertaining. I have a friend I have known for 35 years and I didn't realize there was a T in his last name until last week. I think your characterization of Cruz is more than revealing especially since you are a Texan. If anyone around here is constantly throwing around labels it is you, unless you happen to agree with them.

This Texas rodeo clown is going to make a lot of waves, even partisans like Carville recognize it. I'll take a Texas" Teabagger" (interesting that tolerant liberals love to use that term) over the D-baggers we have now or that hope to win the White House next time around.

 

[Jack Davenport]

No, he really isn't. It's the game that he talked, but not really the game that he played. The Immigration thing is too little, too late. Obama is a centrist and a pacifier. And that's the legacy that he's going to have to live with.

And our wingnuts don't run for Prez like your wingnuts do. 2012 proved that. tvstrip posted: Seriously? He's the guy who makes Bachmann and Palin look intellectual.

If Sanders decides to run, he's still light years away from Bachmann, Cain or Perry, as wingnuts go.

But for me, it will always be Lizzy. At least until she completely quashes the possiblity. Not an ounce of wingnut on her. (And the whole Native American thing is lame. If the GOP keeps bringing it up, it will just make them more tiresome to people than they already are.) She is absolutely the best choice, regardless of Party.

Sharpton and Kucinich say hello. And of course you think Obama is not a wingnut, but there is one thing that we can document is that he is a liar. Shall I produce the list?

 

[xfire]

You can keep beating that horse, the only thing revealing is that he is senator from a small state that isn't really on anyone's radar except for the fact that a few of us pay attention to what he says. I probably shouldn't pay attention to him at all but I find him entertaining. I have a friend I have known for 35 years and I didn't realize there was a T in his last name until last week. I think your characterization of Cruz is more than revealing especially since you are a Texan. If anyone around here is constantly throwing around labels it is you, unless you happen to agree with them.

This Texas rodeo clown is going to make a lot of waves, even partisans like Carville recognize it. I'll take a Texas" Teabagger" (interesting that tolerant liberals love to use that term) over the D-baggers we have now or that hope to win the White House next time around.

Seeing you get your hopes up over Ted Cruz is going to make his fall even that much more lulzy. Seriously, I "constantly throw around labels"? That's a stretch, I barely post anymore, let alone "constantly" do jack shit. Don't fall back into bad old habits.

 

[Jack Davenport]

Seeing you get your hopes up over Ted Cruz is going to make his fall even that much more lulzy. Seriously, I "constantly throw around labels"? That's a stretch, I barely post anymore, let alone "constantly" do jack shit. Don't fall back into bad old habits.

I probably don't have time to do the search, but yeah you have a history of blind assumptions and labeling. We are gonna give Theodore a shot at this if he seeks it. Doesn't mean he will make it, but you may be surprised. And you guys can keep hawking Warren and Clinton all you want, still not convinced that America will actually elect a woman as president. The dynamics aren't in place for either of them as they were for Obama.

 

[Rattrap]

I will not vote for Jeb Bush even if he is the nominee. It will be the first time I ever sit out a presidential election.

What a waste of a genuine opportunity to express - in the only way that matters - dissatisfaction with the direction of our government. But I'm assuming; maybe you are satisfied with it.

I'm willing to consider the rest of the names being thrown out there right now.

...so long as they belong to your party of choice, no? Cue Einstein's quote about insanity. Unless, again, I'm assuming too much.

I don't see any strong leaders from either side of the fence. Most seem like they've been bought and paid for already.

They have been. Of course they have been - they always are. And we elect them anyway, time after time after time.

I don't know who they are polling, everyone I have spoken to is dead set against either of them running, same with Hillary. This is rapidly shaping up to be one crapola of a campaign, hopefully someone remotly decent steps up.

...like the election before that, and the one before that and...fuck, there's a theme here.

And the theme is: we complain, we rant, we rave - and then we elect exactly the same people that we've just ranted and raved about.

So, what are your guys':
A) Expected Presidential Race

Establishment R and D politicians go head to head like every presidential election in our recent history. The campaigns make a big hooha about a gulf of differences, but in reality both stand firmly in the corporatist corner, the authoritarian-right. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer, the public bitches and moans and then votes around the 95% mark for politicians who continue and reinforce these trends.

B) "Dream" Presidential Race

People realize they were never invited to the R/D party and vote for someone with their interests in mind.

 

[xfire]

I probably don't have time to do the search, but yeah you have a history of blind assumptions and labeling. We are gonna give Theodore a shot at this if he seeks it. Doesn't mean he will make it, but you may be surprised. And you guys can keep hawking Warren and Clinton all you want, still not convinced that America will actually elect a woman as president. The dynamics aren't in place for either of them as they were for Obama.

I haven't been hawking Clinton or Warren but either of them would be better than anyone on the far right. Please, make Ted Cruz the GOP nominee, but like I already said, be sure to put a bow on top. I'm sure anyone could dig a few assumptions and labels out of my posting history, but it's not something that I "constantly" do, and that's a fucking fact.

 

[Jack Davenport]

What a waste of a genuine opportunity to express - in the only way that matters - dissatisfaction with the direction of our government. But I'm assuming; maybe you are satisfied with it.

...so long as they belong to your party of choice, no? Cue Einstein's quote about insanity. Unless, again, I'm assuming too much.


They have been. Of course they have been - they always are. And we elect them anyway, time after time after time.


...like the election before that, and the one before that and...fuck, there's a theme here.

And the theme is: we complain, we rant, we rave - and then we elect exactly the same people that we've just ranted and raved about.


Establishment R and D politicians go head to head like every presidential election in our recent history. The campaigns make a big hooha about a gulf of differences, but in reality both stand firmly in the corporatist corner, the authoritarian-right. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer, the public bitches and moans and then votes around the 95% mark for politicians who continue and reinforce these trends.



People realize they were never invited to the R/D party and vote for someone with their interests in mind.

You really have no understanding at all of Einstein's definition if you think that is what the repubs have been doing, They haven't nominated a conservative for president in 30 years.

 

[Jack Davenport]

lol @ someone reporting my Ted Cruz sig. I hope who did it doesn't have a big screen television as you're going to be seeing him a lot more over the coming months and hopefully years .

 

[BlkHawk]

...like the election before that, and the one before that and...fuck, there's a theme here.

And the theme is: we complain, we rant, we rave - and then we elect exactly the same people that we've just ranted and raved about.

Speak for yourself sir, I'll have you know only one person I voted for has ever been elected to a national office. Every other person I have voted for lost, usually by large margins.

I'm thinking I should vote for the person I don't want in office this time, and hope my mojo continues.

 

[Rattrap]

You really have no understanding at all of Einstein's definition if you think that is what the repubs have been doing, They haven't nominated a conservative for president in 30 years.

Longer.

...and that's part of the point. If you think you'll get anything different with the Republican party these days...well, let's just say I'm decidedly not the one misunderstanding Einstein. What sort of 'conservative' are you looking for, anyway? Less government spending? Less government intrusion? Then the Republican party is not your best bet. Socially conservative policies, more religion in the public sphere, etc? Well...maybe then it is your best bet. Maybe there's still a better party for you there, but that's decidedly not a direction I'm paying attention to.

Speak for yourself sir, I'll have you know only one person I voted for has ever been elected to a national office. Every other person I have voted for lost, usually by large margins.

Ditto. And good on you. My 'once' was a learning experience. Fool me once, and so on.

Voting for more of the same will get you more of the same. I'm really baffled that people (by which I mean, 95+% of voters if you look at any given election) don't consider this. Ah, but you know, if you vote D/R, then that evil-er R/D will get in! Lesser of two evils! Nonsense. Why vote evil in the first place when you have other options?

Take a look at this: http://politicalcompass.org/ - left side, scroll down the US elections. Have a look and notice where the party candidates are. What do they have in common?

 

[Johan]

I'm willing to consider the rest of the names being thrown out there right now.

Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, Ted Cruz, Chris Christy, Rand Paul, Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio

Can't wait to see the cast of goofballs the Dems run. Hillary may be the front runner for the Dems but there is going to be plenty of comedy coming out of the Democrat debates.

Except Elizabeth Warren I can't see anyone able to beat Hillary. And I think there won't be many candidates

 

[bobjustbob]

The Fat Man is hated by the Tea Party. He didn't denounce them, he did something worse. Said that they were based upon good conservative values but they got out of hand. Will he seek their support? Will he need it in the primaries? That is to be seen. Will he start swinging his speech to get that support? I doubt it. This is part of his image problem. Christie has set up his PAC to do the polling. Money is needed to run a campaign so let's see what we get from him after they do their work.

Bridgegate is a non-issue. Nothing ties him to that and he will be very vocal to squash that. Christie does have a jobs problem for me. 9k lost in AC he can't help. That was a spiral he got handed way before he took office. Though he tried with state tax cuts for Revel and taking over some of the non-gambling things down there, the politics that got them there and business models the casinos held onto made it a money pit. Hurricane Sandy is another issue. He embraced the roll of the fed structure for recovery. Many needed relief and the response was rapid to help them. Jobs were created to reconstruct and the shore was up and running in no time. But the shore and AC are not the entire NJ economy. What impact the recession had on NJ was slow to not addressed. That's where I see his hurt.