DescentBB

really, is this what the nation needs? Mr. Meltdown.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... li=AAa0dzB

the Donald did ask the core question, "how stupid are people?"

The alternative popular Republican candidate, Ben Carson, also has the ego to match Trump, plus the vanity. He even commissioned a painting of himself with what appears to be a black Jesus standing right behind Ben with His hand sitting on Ben's shoulder. That's on top of all the other awards and paraphernalia gracing and covering Ben's hallowed halls of self-homage. If either of these guys wins the presidency, we'll then have a vain egotist with delusions of grandeur running things.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/gall ... n-pictures

With that ego he could have been a rapper.

Think, Trump as President and Carson as Veep. It could happen. What a nightmare of egos and vanity.

it takes a certain level of ego to even consider running for President, but, yes, one can carry it too far.

Yeah, but these guys may actually get elected!

tunnelcat wrote:Yeah, but these guys may actually get elected!

in what alternate reality? Nominated? Maybe(but I doubt it), but elected? I have THAT much faith in my fellow citizens.

Why is this troll thread allowed to exist? I have "suggested" no one for president. Trump, Carson, Fiorina and Cruz would all be acceptable especially considering what a poor field the Dems are fielding. Seriously, a former Marxist Communist and a liar who is being investigated by the FBI for mishandling classified documents? Just a stellar field there.

Also she is probably an illegal space alien sith lord changling from a dominion prison planet in the gamma quadrant here to enslave us all.

Anything I posted that was untrue to so rattle your cage Krom?

woodchip wrote:...a former Marxist Communist...

Can you verify that?

Sorry slicko, but it seems Trumps rant did little to hurt his image:

According to the five-day rolling Reuters/Ipsos presidential poll, Trump has leapt some 17 percentage points among likely Republican voters since Nov. 6, when he was essentially tied with Ben Carson at about 25 percent. Trump now captures 42 percent of those voters while Carson has fallen off slightly.

I seem to remember back when Trump first entered the race and made his immigration statements, that some of you thought Trump had no chance and would soon fall off the charts. That was 6 months ago and he's still here.

woodchip wrote:That was 6 months ago and he's still here.

He'll be here through the primaries. Slick wouldn't deny that either. Trump won't get the nomination because he has no chance of winning against either Mr. Sanders or Mrs. Clinton. That said, I'm not sure any current Republican candidate can beat them. The Democratic party is not is good shape either and the primaries will be extremely difficult for everyone, especially the public.

after the boring debate last night why do you think anybody in their right mind would vote for a democrat?

woodchip wrote:after the boring debate last night why do you think anybody in their right mind would vote for a democrat?

because they are sane, rational, professional and actually understand the depth of issues? Sure, that may strike you as 'boring', but a lot of us vote for competence.

So sane, rational and competent that the front runner is under investigation by the FBI? Who "lost" FBI files while her husband was president? So competent that when she was handed the job of getting a health bill passed when Bill was president and failed at her task? So sane that she put up with Bills affairs even after the spotted blue dress? Yeah tell me how rational your front runner is.

Not that anyone here really wants to vote for Hillary, but when the alternative is a bunch of third rate stand up comedian wannabes... Politics aren't supposed to be entertaining.

That explains why the Democratic debates are so Hollywood.

woodchip wrote:So sane, rational and competent that the front runner is under investigation by the FBI? Who "lost" FBI files while her husband was president? So competent that when she was handed the job of getting a health bill passed when Bill was president and failed at her task? So sane that she put up with Bills affairs even after the spotted blue dress? Yeah tell me how rational your front runner is.

she doesn't jump up and down calling for walls to be built, claiming to want to bomb the ★■◆●(his exact words) out of the Middle East. I can go on. Yes, she has her issues, everyone does, but the three people looked so much more adult than the mess on the other side as to be painful to compare.

Spidey wrote:That explains why the Democratic debates are so Hollywood.

boring to Woody, Hollywood to you, adult to me. Aren't perceptions fun!

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:So sane, rational and competent that the front runner is under investigation by the FBI? Who "lost" FBI files while her husband was president? So competent that when she was handed the job of getting a health bill passed when Bill was president and failed at her task? So sane that she put up with Bills affairs even after the spotted blue dress? Yeah tell me how rational your front runner is.

she doesn't jump up and down calling for walls to be built, claiming to want to bomb the ****(his exact words) out of the Middle East. I can go on. Yes, she has her issues, everyone does, but the three people looked so much more adult than the mess on the other side as to be painful to compare.

All three are bats*** crazy and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the office of the president.

Crazy, how? Seriously, that is a ridiculous comment. Frankly, the only person I heard to date that really grasps fighting ISIS is Sanders. He is right, we have to stop fighting the cold war, completely refocus the military for the 21st century, and get our heads around the fact that (jihadist or otherwise) terrorism is the 21st century method of war and that intelligence is the way to fight that war.

I missed the first 30 minutes or so of the debate. I almost fell over when Clinton was questioned on her Wall Street donors, and she answered with 9/11.

Vander wrote:I missed the first 30 minutes or so of the debate. I almost fell over when Clinton was questioned on her Wall Street donors, and she answered with 9/11.

I think the general sense is that the statement was the stupid political statement of the evening.

woodchip wrote:after the boring debate...

Because some people don't pick candidates based on their entertainment value? Why are you watching a debate of people you would never vote for?

callmeslick wrote:
she doesn't jump up and down calling for walls to be built, claiming to want to bomb the ★■◆●(his exact words) out of the Middle East. I can go on. Yes, she has her issues, everyone does, but the three people looked so much more adult than the mess on the other side as to be painful to compare.

No she just talks in strange dialects and doesn't get enough air time to show anything about her. Odd how the DNC chair is trying to keep her from view. To bad she is not confronted by the gotcha moderators like the GOP field has been. All you have been allowed to see is a carefully orchestrated show to make you think she is adult. The real mess are the people who get sucked into the image that is portrayed. Wonder how her and Bernie would do if the moderators were Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin and Mike Savage. I suspect they would look like the complete idiots they really are.

callmeslick wrote:Crazy, how? Seriously, that is a ridiculous comment. Frankly, the only person I heard to date that really grasps fighting ISIS is Sanders. He is right, we have to stop fighting the cold war, completely refocus the military for the 21st century, and get our heads around the fact that (jihadist or otherwise) terrorism is the 21st century method of war and that intelligence is the way to fight that war.

And Bernies ideas would take how long to implement? The only Dem I heard that got it right is Diane Feinstein when she said we either have to confront ISIS now or face a much bigger threat later (I suspect the French understand that fully now). And after 7 years you are saying the Guy in charge now has been handling the situation wrong. Glad to see you finally got the message.

Vander wrote:I missed the first 30 minutes or so of the debate. I almost fell over when Clinton was questioned on her Wall Street donors, and she answered with 9/11.

And with this kind of reply she should be trusted to run the country?

vision wrote:

woodchip wrote:after the boring debate...

Because some people don't pick candidates based on their entertainment value? Why are you watching a debate of people you would never vote for?

I never watched the debate. My OP was based on what others in the media were saying. As to entertainment value I see Sanders and Clinton both liked getting on SNL as much as Trump did...only Trump was much better.

Edit add:

Tweet from Rupert Murdoch:

"Democratic debate almost too painful to watch. Pathetic group talking nonsense for two hours. Is this the best Dems can do?"

woodchip wrote:Wonder how her and Bernie would do if the moderators were Rush Limbaugh

Heh. "Did you order the murder of Vince Foster to hide your affair? Or did you murder Vince Foster yourself to hide drug smuggling by your husband?" -Moderator Rush Limbaugh

woodchip wrote:And with this kind of reply she should be trusted to run the country?

Meh. It's spin that makes you want to take a shower with turpentine after you hear it, but it's not like she said she's going to build a big wall with a beautiful gate and make Mexico pay for it.

Vander wrote: but it's not like she said she's going to build a big wall with a beautiful gate and make Mexico pay for it.

Actually Vander I suspect there are a awfully lot of Americans that agrees with Trump.

Ah yes, the mouth-breathing inbred racist contingent. Totally want them deciding who controls the free world. 'Murica!

Meanwhile those of us with all our teeth and something resembling intelligence realize that the Democratic slate, while flawed, at least features candidates well-qualified to hold the office. Or, y'know, perform pretty much any task requiring basic human competence.

Also the fact that woody is quoting Rupert ★■◆●ing Murdoch as a voice of reason is just goddamn hilarious. Such a good little puppet you are!

So... Republicans believe the absurd stuff that comes out of their candidates mouths? Because I'm pretty sure most Democrats groaned at Hillary's comment.

Krom wrote:Not that anyone here really wants to vote for Hillary, but when the alternative is a bunch of third rate stand up comedian wannabes... Politics aren't supposed to be entertaining.

Don't you mean third rate dictator wannabes with delusions of grandeur? I don't see anything remotely funny about any of the Republicans, other than they're crazy delusional egotists who think they know what every American really wants from a candidate. Except for Kasich, the only one with a brain and he's not far right enough for most conservatives.

woodchip wrote:I never watched the debate. My OP was based on what others in the media were saying.

Oh god, I should have known.

I seriously can't think of a better example of "what's wrong with our election system" when we have huge swaths of the public who sit in their little outrage circles and repost garbage fed to them.

vision wrote:

woodchip wrote:I never watched the debate. My OP was based on what others in the media were saying.

Oh god, I should have known.

I seriously can't think of a better example of "what's wrong with our election system" when we have huge swaths of the public who sit in their little outrage circles and repost garbage fed to them.

Not only that, but woody's only "source" was Fox News. Far and balanced my rear end. Woody and most conservatives cloister themselves inside the Fox News bubble like it's a protective castle. No wonder half of this country is brainwashed. They're not bothering to even try and fact check the junk that Fox News spews forth and calls news. They only accept being spoon fed what they really want to hear. Sad.

woodchip wrote:

Vander wrote: but it's not like she said she's going to build a big wall with a beautiful gate and make Mexico pay for it.

Actually Vander I suspect there are a awfully lot of Americans that agrees with Trump.

perhaps far too many, but not an 'awfully lot'. At least based on any reliable polling.

Southpark nailed it with their take on the democrat/republican choices

callmeslick wrote:perhaps far too many, but not an 'awfully lot'

I think the case can be made that the lot is awful.

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:

Vander wrote: but it's not like she said she's going to build a big wall with a beautiful gate and make Mexico pay for it.

Actually Vander I suspect there are a awfully lot of Americans that agrees with Trump.

perhaps far too many, but not an 'awfully lot'. At least based on any reliable polling.

And yet he is at 42%.