DescentBB

Out of the chute it looks like Scott Walker is clearly in the lead. Kinda surprising to me cause I thought someone like Romney or Bush would of grabbed that spot (Romney has excused himself from the race with the idea he would be Bush's VP). At this point Walker may be the only real viable choice. Jeb is just a clone of George and I for one don't want to see family dynasties being foisted upon us. Rand Paul kinda shot himself in the foot with the Ophthalmology board thing. Carson will be interesting to watch and see what his debate skills are like. Rubio looks too child like and the rest are has-beens.

https://polldaddy.com/poll/8625087/

Walker is the Koch's boy, bought and sold since around 2010(especially after they essentially funded his recall fight). If that is your idea of representative leadership, enjoy.

No more than Hillary has Soros holding her leash

agree completely, now, as you might guess, the details I'm privvy to are FAR less focused on Soros, sort of a bit player in electoral stuff, but the point that Hillary is bought and paid for by HER OWN group of supporters with certain goals is entirely valid. Face it, this is American politics 2016 style, post Citizens United, etc, and frankly, that's ALWAYS been the American way. The only chance we have is finding the folks with less threatening supporters, or less scary end goals. Now, this thought(and here is where I'll have a few of you all snorting in disgust, but if you plan on replying, focus on my reasoning) was one of the reasons I jumped to the Obama camp myself after Biden folded: part of his team's whole fundraising strategy was predicated on individual contributions equalling Big Money entities. In the end, they actually exceeded them in 2008. Not active in the campaign in 2012, but I'd guess that far more corporate interests paid to back a winner. Much of that thinking in 2008, actually as most of the weasels hedge the bet.

One of the candidates that any union worker worth their salt would be least likely ever vote for to be president.

I wouldn't vote for him if you PAID me.

I marvel at the impudence of the US government outright pick for the post of President of the United States frank stupid puppets. I understand very little English and the American electoral system, but even I can form an opinion about this man simply on the basis of his biography.

sigma wrote:I marvel at the impudence of the US government outright pick for the post of President of the United States frank stupid puppets. I understand very little English and the American electoral system, but even I can form an opinion about this man simply on the basis of his biography.

Well at least we can freely find and discuss the biography of our candidates. Is there even a word for 'candidate' in Russian?

I think it roughly translates to "Glorious Leader Putin."

sigma wrote:I marvel at the impudence of the US government outright pick for the post of President of the United States frank stupid puppets. I understand very little English and the American electoral system, but even I can form an opinion about this man simply on the basis of his biography.

I can form a opinion of Putin just by a picture of him shirtless.

sigma wrote: I understand very little English and the American electoral system

you should have realized this to be true, and that these facts make your other assumptions about the US sort of comical, although you seem
not to understand why.

sigma did get one thing right. The stupidity and arrogance of the candidates we seem to typically get in this country that run for president is mindboggling. Want proof? Just go to youtube and watch Sara Palin's Iowa Freedom Summit speech, or Huckabee's moronic bubbas vs. the bubbles idealogy.

ego, my dear, ego.....without it, one cannot aspire to be President, yet it causes those of lesser caliber to make utter asses of themselves.

That poll doesn't look the least bit scientific!

Jeff250 wrote:That poll doesn't look the least bit scientific!

Almost no political poll is scientific- most of them have a (guess what *SHOCK*) political agenda.

At least you can say Scott Walker keeps his promises, he was elected on a campaign to bend the working class over and rape them in the ass with a sideways telephone pole, and that is exactly what he has accomplished in Wisconsin.

Well based on the number of times in a relatively short period he was re-elected...and doing it up against a wealthy DNC effort...if you are correct about the rape... then the people of Wisconsin must really prefer taking their poles sideways.

ThunderBunny wrote:

Jeff250 wrote:That poll doesn't look the least bit scientific!

Almost no political poll is scientific- most of them have a (guess what *SHOCK*) political agenda.

not usually true, actually. Certain pollers tend to trend one way or another, but it is usually around methodology of polling, more than inherent political agenda. Also, by the date of any national election I've ever seen, any savvy political wonk can identify 4 or 5 major polling services which are extremely accurate, and quite scientific. Only real difference in those is the demographic modelling they use to predict the turnout demographics.

hey, we can count on this fellow for hirarity, right up to the day he has to relinquish his Senate seat by KY law, to run for President:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/0 ... mmon-core/

shades of Perry, last time, unable to even NAME the Cabinet departments, when he was calling for elimination of a few.

It's a freaking clown car, I tell you....and, while that assclown Matthews has taken t using the term on MSNBC, I should sue,because I coined the term two elections ago. Post-Bush, the GOP primary has been hilarious.

Yeah and I bet we get some mileage out of Hillaries, 'We were dead broke when we left the White House" comment

want to see political disaster in action, Woody(and your hoped for response to one comment by Hillary, which is actually true on some levels pales)?
Witness last weekend, when certain GOP action-figures went goofy over vaccination of children. Paul actually lied on TV and had to backpedal by Monday, Christie went into hiding. Meanwhile, at the VERY time when the GOP would like to be painting a picture and narrative for Ms Clinton, instead they set her up to reply, calmly, via Twitter: Everyone should have their children vaccinated. It is good science and good common sense. #Grandmothers know best. Voila, in one tweet she sets herself up as the kindly grandma who can be trusted, shows herself to be on the side of both science and common sense, and, writ large, pursues the winning strategy of painting herself simply as 'not one of these nitwits'.

Krom wrote:At least you can say Scott Walker keeps his promises, he was elected on a campaign to bend the working class over and rape them in the ass with a sideways telephone pole, and that is exactly what he has accomplished in Wisconsin.

Didn't Scott Walker want to implement Rick Snyder's Michigan emergency manager program in Wisconsin too, but he kind of chickened out and never went ahead with it? Maybe he thought that 2 sideways telephone poles shoved up Wisconsin's collective ass was too much for even him to get away with.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2 ... wisconsin/

if I were any GOP candidate, or power broker, this would terrify the bejeepers out of me. Oddly, these loons seem oblivious to both recent history in Presidential elections, and how elections are won(hint-throwing 900 million dollars into it really doesn't matter):
http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2 ... /22912339/

Too bad Bush has to carry the family baggage, he seems like the most credible one out there. (so far)

Well, at least from what I have heard from him so far…unfortunately foot in mouth disease is never far away.

Spidey wrote:Too bad Bush has to carry the family baggage, he seems like the most credible one out there. (so far)

I agree, and generally always had a good vibe from Jeb(Babs said he was the bright one of her kids). Sad to say, he is being savaged all over the net for support of commonsense immigration policies, and is too short on backbone or personal character to stand by what he said before 9 months ago.

callmeslick wrote:want to see political disaster in action, Woody(and your hoped for response to one comment by Hillary, which is actually true on some levels pales)?
Witness last weekend, when certain GOP action-figures went goofy over vaccination of children. Paul actually lied on TV and had to backpedal by Monday, Christie went into hiding. Meanwhile, at the VERY time when the GOP would like to be painting a picture and narrative for Ms Clinton, instead they set her up to reply, calmly, via Twitter: Everyone should have their children vaccinated. It is good science and good common sense. #Grandmothers know best. Voila, in one tweet she sets herself up as the kindly grandma who can be trusted, shows herself to be on the side of both science and common sense, and, writ large, pursues the winning strategy of painting herself simply as 'not one of these nitwits'.

I'll see your disaster with:

"Former President Bill Clinton visited the hedonistic private island of a billionaire pedophile who police found was engaging girls as young as 12, multiple times. Now a new lawsuit may compel the former president to testify under oath about what he was doing there."

Lets see in Hillary uses the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" mantra to counter this. Or perhaps Bill will state, "I never had sex with those girls...not once, not ever" all the while wagging his stink finger at us.

callmeslick wrote:want to see political disaster in action, Woody(and your hoped for response to one comment by Hillary, which is actually true on some levels pales)?
Witness last weekend, when certain GOP action-figures went goofy over vaccination of children. Paul actually lied on TV and had to backpedal by Monday, Christie went into hiding. Meanwhile, at the VERY time when the GOP would like to be painting a picture and narrative for Ms Clinton, instead they set her up to reply, calmly, via Twitter: Everyone should have their children vaccinated. It is good science and good common sense. #Grandmothers know best. Voila, in one tweet she sets herself up as the kindly grandma who can be trusted, shows herself to be on the side of both science and common sense, and, writ large, pursues the winning strategy of painting herself simply as 'not one of these nitwits'.

I'll see your disaster with:

"Former President Bill Clinton visited the hedonistic private island of a billionaire pedophile who police found was engaging girls as young as 12, multiple times. Now a new lawsuit may compel the former president to testify under oath about what he was doing there."

Lets see in Hillary uses the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" mantra to counter this. Or perhaps Bill will state, "I never had sex with those girls...not once, not ever" all the while wagging his stink finger at us.

Bill Clinton isn't running, a fact many of the right overlook. Hillary is.

Keep thinking that.

the public separates the two nicely. Worth noting, you had so little to counter that you posted the same whine twice.

Spidey wrote:Too bad Bush has to carry the family baggage, he seems like the most credible one out there. (so far)

Well, at least from what I have heard from him so far…unfortunately foot in mouth disease is never far away.

Unfortunately, part of that baggage is being in a family dynasty that's controlled the Presidency for too many years. We've had enough Bushies for now. We've also had enough of the Clinton Dynasty too. Time for someone with youthful vigor, smart, not bought off by big money, not extreme politically either way, and not a nutcase almost ready for the funny farm. I'm hoping for too much aren't I?

Spidey wrote:Too bad Bush has to carry the family baggage... (so far)

We can agree on that. He's my top pick right now. Hopefully he can prove to everyone he's not another George.

Too bad, he's related, no matter how you cut the cards.

I wish the idiots that run the Repub party would pursue someone like John Kasich instead of Bush/Romney/etc.

Naa. He was previously a Fox News "personality". That's an automatic hit right there because he's learned the patented Fox News art of lying and exaggeration to get what he wants, so he tells people what he thinks we all need or else like some slick shyster. Plus, he's got a few skeletons in his closet too.

http://crooksandliars.com/kenneth-quinn ... v-john-kas

Will Robinson wrote:I wish the idiots that run the Repub party would pursue someone like John Kasich instead of Bush/Romney/etc.

can't say that Kasich is any worse than the rest of the field. I figure he will step forward, given the weakness of the early field(Donald Trump, forgawdsakes!).

yeah, this is the decisive leader we need:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/02/scot ... n-is-real/

Kinda like Obama when asked about abortion saying it was way above his pay grade.

So what about Hillarie's donors leaving in droves?:

"The dispute broke into the open on Monday after David Brock, a Clinton ally, accused Priorities USA Action — a pro-Clinton “super PAC” whose co-chairman is Jim Messina, Mr. Obama’s 2012 campaign manager — of planting negative stories about the fund-raising practices of Mr. Brock’s organizations. Mr. Brock resigned from the super PAC’s board in protest."

gawd, you're hilarious. I point out a major problem with Walker and decisiveness about a PROVEN FACT(evolution is fact, origin of species is but theory), and, as usual, it's 'look at what Obama did, look at Hillary'. Rather lame, don't you think?

also, even if we take your examples as valid:
1. Obama was commenting on the absolute right and wrong about a woman getting an abortion. Not being a woman, nor a God, he rightly claimed that to be not a matter for him to decide.
2. Hillary example dealt with a beef with ONE DONOR. She is NOT lacking for donors. Hell, no candidate in my memory ever raised as much as she
has in the war chest before DECLARING, ever.

How do EITHER of these conflate with Walker ducking a question on settled biological fact?

Because, if you read your link

"The governor went on to say that the debate between science and religious dogma is “a question a politician shouldn’t be involved in one way or another.”

So just like Obama, he chose not to get involved with religion or science that may pertain to it.

The problem the guy had with the question is simple…the primaries.

With that being said, I came up with half a dozen answers to evade that question, in a far better way. (off the top of my head)

Republicans are behind the curve on these kinds of things, he should have known someone was going to try to embarrass him, it’s done all the time, with visiting Republicans.

Something like:

“I’m not here to start a religion vs. science debate, please keep the questions on topic”

Then when the host says….”Ha Ha Ha you idiot, of course evolution is real” (deliberate paraphrase) You say…”See you already knew the answer, so why did you ask me?” Then you say in a more forceful way…”Can we please keep the questions on topic”.

Placing the host in the defensive position, at the very least, they have to respect you came prepared.

Say what you will….the stupid election system we have in this country can make the best of them look like idiots. (including your precious Democrats)

Damn it! I broke my own rule against defending stupid politicians…