This is just so damned funny.
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/11/13/angry-house-dems-demand-obamacare-fix-from-white-house-aides-in-heated-meeting/
Then there's the bed wetting over BJ Clinton.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/msnbcs-krystal-ball-blasts-bill-clinton-for-engaging-in-magical-thinking/
And to think just a few weeks ago the Republican party was going the way of the Whigs.
Quote from: guido911 on November 14, 2013, 12:34:36 PM
And to think just a few weeks ago the Republican party was going the way of the Whigs.
This is nothing compared to the crazy that is the Republican party
tempest in a teapot
Quote from: guido911 on November 14, 2013, 12:34:36 PM
And to think just a few weeks ago the Republican party was going the way of the Whigs.
Sorry for your premature celebration. You should see a doctor.
At this point, democrats are arguing with each other.
The republicans have spent six years running competing candidates against incumbents in primaries.
Hopefully, you see the difference.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 14, 2013, 01:39:26 PM
Sorry for your premature celebration. You should see a doctor.
At this point, democrats are arguing with each other.
The republicans have spent six years running competing candidates against incumbents in primaries.
Hopefully, you see the difference.
"But, but, but....that's different!".
Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 14, 2013, 01:39:26 PM
Sorry for your premature celebration. You should see a doctor.
At this point, democrats are arguing with each other.
The republicans have spent six years running competing candidates against incumbents in primaries.
Hopefully, you see the difference.
I have to agree. I don't see the Democrats as divided. I see them as gravely misled, but it seems they are all becoming aware of that and coming together as a group to find a remedy. Of course they are not all there yet, and many like Pelosi are still trying to redefine the problem, create new analogies, and otherwise save face, but ultimately I think they will all stick together.
Unfortunate for the president, they will all stick together against him in trying to distance themselves from the ACA. The good news for them is that most of the ACA was an executive exercise. In fact most Democrats never even got a chance to read it, they simply took the president's word.
Democrats may actually gain some traction in all of this. As for the Republican party, unless they are able to cultivate an influx of young voters, they are on very rocky ground.
Quote from: Gaspar on November 14, 2013, 02:07:33 PM
I have to agree. I don't see the Democrats as divided. I see them as gravely misled, but it seems they are all becoming aware of that and coming together as a group to find a remedy. Of course they are not all there yet, and many like Pelosi are still trying to redefine the problem, create new analogies, and otherwise save face, but ultimately I think they will all stick together.
Unfortunate for the president, they will all stick together against him in trying to distance themselves from the ACA. The good news for them is that most of the ACA was an executive exercise. In fact most Democrats never even got a chance to read it, they simply took the president's word.
Democrats may actually gain some traction in all of this. As for the Republican party, unless they are able to cultivate an influx of young voters, they are on very rocky ground.
I wonder what Pelosi thinks "now that we know what's in it".
Quote from: RecycleMichael on November 14, 2013, 01:39:26 PM
Sorry for your premature celebration. You should see a doctor.
At this point, democrats are arguing with each other.
The republicans have spent six years running competing candidates against incumbents in primaries.
Hopefully, you see the difference.
"But..but...but...that's different!" Hoss called it RM. I think he is finally coming around.
Quote from: Townsend on November 14, 2013, 01:17:36 PM
This is nothing compared to the crazy that is the Republican party
Of course it's not. NOTHING is that bad. I get you.
It's called the Democratic Party and it's comprised of people called Democrats.
(http://devmedia.managementdegrees.net/media/bill-lumbergh.jpg)
"Yeah, I am going to have to ask you not to come to Alaska to help me campaign, Mr. Obama"
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/11/14/awkward-sen-begich-speaks-on-whether-hed-like-obama-to-come-campaign-for-him/
Quote from: Ed W on November 14, 2013, 03:55:52 PM
It's called the Democratic Party and it's comprised of people called Democrats.
Thanks for the clearing that up, since it makes all the difference in this thread.
You're welcome. Glad to help.
Nothing to see here.
Want to know how bad it is? Chris Matthews is real close to having a moment requiring medicating. Seriously, watch him it is hilarious. Can't wait for Maddow.
Quote from: guido911 on November 14, 2013, 06:29:46 PM
Want to know how bad it is? Chris Matthews is real close to having a moment requiring medicating. Seriously, watch him it is hilarious. Can't wait for Maddow.
Here is one of those "sense of history" moments... surely you remember what Will Rogers had to say about it. He was a member of no organized political party...he was a Democrat!
I'm betting it has always been like 'herdin' cats' !!
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 14, 2013, 09:58:16 PM
Here is one of those "sense of history" moments... surely you remember what Will Rogers had to say about it. He was a member of no organized political party...he was a Democrat!
I'm betting it has always been like 'herdin' cats' !!
Who is Will Rogers? I'm from St. Louis.... ;)
Quote from: guido911 on November 15, 2013, 09:18:57 PM
Who is Will Rogers? I'm from St. Louis.... ;)
Some guy that used to fly around with a guy with a patch over one eye.
;D
Quote from: Red Arrow on November 15, 2013, 09:27:51 PM
Some guy that used to fly around with a guy with a patch over one eye.
;D
That was Wiley.... like the airport.
Quote from: guido911 on November 15, 2013, 09:18:57 PM
Who is Will Rogers? I'm from St. Louis.... ;)
You must have heard of him, then... he flew around in the Spirit of St Louis....!!
Well, maybe that was the other guy....
Looks like a civil war is a brewin in the Democratic Party.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/10/dems-in-disarray-hawaii-governor-ousted-in-primary/
You are so desperate.
This is far from a civil war. This is simply voters tired of a bully governor who kept trying to raise taxes and be confrontational to his opponents. When he appointed his friend to become Senator upon the incumbent's death, the voters were upset.
One bad politician getting beat within the same factions of his party isn't a civil war, it is democrats voting smartly so they can keep the seat. Watch them win again.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 10, 2014, 08:15:10 PM
You are so desperate.
This is far from a civil war. This is simply voters tired of a bully governor who kept trying to raise taxes and be confrontational to his opponents. When he appointed his friend to become Senator upon the incumbent's death, the voters were upset.
One bad politician getting beat within the same factions of his party isn't a civil war, it is democrats voting smartly so they can keep the seat. Watch them win again.
Yep. As opposed to the formerly current House majority leader (Eric Cantor) getting ousted by a far right idealogue. The tea party has moderate republicans pissing themselves right now.
Quote from: Hoss on August 10, 2014, 08:17:18 PM
Yep. As opposed to the formerly current House majority leader (Eric Cantor) getting ousted by a far right idealogue. The tea party has moderate republicans pissing themselves right now.
Tea party will do that to 'em all right! Probably easier when they have no plan or original idea of any merit whatsoever....
(http://suyts.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/image218.png)
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 10, 2014, 08:15:10 PM
You are so desperate.
This is far from a civil war. This is simply voters tired of a bully governor who kept trying to raise taxes and be confrontational to his opponents. When he appointed his friend to become Senator upon the incumbent's death, the voters were upset.
One bad politician getting beat within the same factions of his party isn't a civil war, it is democrats voting smartly so they can keep the seat. Watch them win again.
Oh, I guess the fact that Obama, the democratic party leader, endorsed this "bully governor" had nothing to do with it.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/obama-endorsed-hawaii-gov-abercrombie-loses-primary
Quote from: Hoss on August 10, 2014, 08:17:18 PM
Yep. As opposed to the formerly current House majority leader (Eric Cantor) getting ousted by a far right idealogue. The tea party has moderate republicans pissing themselves right now.
Democrats are so desperate to distance themselves from other democrats they are glomming on to these moderate republicans "pissing themselves".
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/senate-races/214608-murkowski-sends-cease-and-desist-letter-to-begich-over-ad
Sheesh Hoss. Lob me another lightweight softball.
All you Democrats. Don't worry. Just Google the GOP options so far for 2016...
You'll forget anything that Hotair or Fox news or any of the others are feeding to their masses.
The Republican Party has moved to the side of harmful.
Quote from: Townsend on August 11, 2014, 12:48:20 PM
All you Democrats. Don't worry. Just Google the GOP options so far for 2016...
You'll forget anything that Hotair or Fox news or any of the others are feeding to their masses.
The Republican Party has moved to the side of harmful.
At some point critical mass is going to be reached with the moderate Republicans and the Party of Crazy. I suspect the Party of Crazy will split and become it's own party, then down the line will fade into obscurity much like the Green Party. Or Libertarians.
But hey, I used to be registered democrat, so I obviously hate America, so don't listen to me. ;)
Guido911 is just chapped that I made fun of the republican party division. If you ask anybody who follows national politics they would all agree that there is a divide between main-stream republicans and tea party republicans. Guido911 just tries to act like every time a democrat incumbent has a close race it is because there is a party within the party.
In all actuality, the democratic party is more together than it has ever been. There is solid support behind most of their candidates on state and national races and democrats are focusing on registering voters in traditionally red states.
It has been hard to be a democrat. The party has been the champion of women's rights, gay rights, civil rights, pro-choice, public education and so much more. It is hard to have so many issues. This is one of the reasons that republicans seem to win national and state races.
I think it is a positive thing to have some conflict within a party. That dialogue makes the party stronger in the long run and it will benefit the republican party long term if it doesn't break apart. No party can just assume loyalty from citizens anymore.
Democrats fall in love with their candidates and republicans fall in line with theirs. Maybe through dialogue, both parties will evolve.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 11, 2014, 01:53:20 PM
Democrats fall in love with their candidates and republicans fall in line with theirs.
[
Emphasis]. Is anyone else kinda creeped out by this?
Quote from: guido911 on August 11, 2014, 02:19:14 PM
[Emphasis]. Is anyone else kinda creeped out by this?
I am creeped out by both. And also creeped out by anyone else who isn't creeped out by both lol.
I'm creeped out by people who use the words Democrat Party instead of the Democratic Party. They don't refer to Republicans as the Republic Party. Its a hangover froma
Quote from: guido911 on August 11, 2014, 02:19:14 PM
[Emphasis]. Is anyone else kinda creeped out by this?
That is my point. We shouldn't worship politicians nor should we automatically support every stance they take.
Equally, we shouldn't expect a candidate for office support each stance their party takes.
Axelrod vs. Hillary?
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/12/axelrod-hits-back-at-hillary-when-we-say-dont-do-stupid-stuff-we-mean-stuff-like-occupying-iraq/
Quote from: guido911 on August 12, 2014, 12:22:04 PM
Axelrod vs. Hillary?
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/12/axelrod-hits-back-at-hillary-when-we-say-dont-do-stupid-stuff-we-mean-stuff-like-occupying-iraq/
Go ahead everybody...click it
Boring smile. That's doesn't make much of a case for division in the party, just politics intruding into common sense conversation, but I think when you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail, and of course we all want to be the hammer, not the nail.
I'm trying to find a Daily Kos or Think Progress link criticizing Obama or showing division. But gee, for some reason there isn't one. I wonder why? Anyway, here is more Hillary v. Obama.
QuoteThe former secretary of state, and probable candidate for president, outlines her foreign-policy doctrine. She says this about President Obama's: "Great nations need organizing principles, and 'Don't do stupid stuff' is not an organizing principle."
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/hillary-clinton-failure-to-help-syrian-rebels-led-to-the-rise-of-isis/375832/
Quote from: guido911 on August 12, 2014, 11:01:59 PM
I'm trying to find a Daily Kos or Think Progress link criticizing Obama or showing division. But gee, for some reason there isn't one. I wonder why? Anyway, here is more Hillary v. Obama.
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/hillary-clinton-failure-to-help-syrian-rebels-led-to-the-rise-of-isis/375832/
Maybe the same reason Fox News didn't really report on the final outcome of the Benghazi 'scandal'?
Conspiracies no doubt. No one dares criticize a sitting president, right?
Quote from: AquaMan on August 13, 2014, 08:34:25 AM
Conspiracies no doubt. No one dares criticize a sitting president, right?
Better not criticize this president. It's racist, and you would be just beggin' for an audit.
Quote from: guido911 on August 12, 2014, 11:01:59 PM
I'm trying to find a Daily Kos or Think Progress link
Glad to see you have expanded your horizons. Keep reading. You can change.
Quote from: guido911 on August 14, 2014, 06:38:52 PM
Better not criticize this president. It's racist, and you would be just beggin' for an audit.
Hmm. Just like criticizing the last president during conflict was what......unpatriotic and may lead to getting on the no fly list. So, those who criticize are either unpatriotic or racist. Got it.
Quote from: guido911 on August 14, 2014, 06:38:52 PM
Better not criticize this president. It's racist, and you would be just beggin' for an audit.
It's not the criticism that is racist - it's all the other stuff going on around that IS racist.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 14, 2014, 08:22:02 PM
Hmm. Just like criticizing the last president during conflict was what......unpatriotic and may lead to getting on the no fly list. So, those who criticize are either unpatriotic or racist. Got it.
It's about time you "got it".
After 2016 it will be sexist.
;D
Insightful! Then we can work on homophobic or maybe age-ist.
It's getting real bad now. The divide is so bad some people are calling it a potential civil war in the democratic ranks. Uh-Oh. Hair on fire alert!!!
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/09/03/civil-war-andrew-cuomos-liberal-primary-opponent-gets-major-endorsement/
Your sources crack me up.
Hotair. com was founded by Michelle Malkin. You may remember her as the crazy who got fired by Fox News after fighting with Geraldo Rivera.
You might as well post stories your hairdresser told you.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on September 03, 2014, 07:45:41 PM
Your sources crack me up.
Hotair. com was founded by Michelle Malkin. You may remember her as the crazy who got fired by Fox News after fighting with Geraldo Rivera.
You might as well post stories your hairdresser told you.
(https://fireden.net/4chan/images.4chan.org//vg/src/1357724480031.jpg)
Quote from: RecycleMichael on September 03, 2014, 07:45:41 PM
You might as well post stories your hairdresser told you.
I believe the last time I saw Guido I would describe his "hairdresser" as Norelco.
:D
I thought it was a creative insult. Glad you understood.
If you can't laugh at yourself....
The interview yesterday of Elizabeth Warren by Katy Couric was very enlightening. Warren is going to take the position that Hillary is cosy with Wall Street and adopt the Occupy crowd, and judging from the reactions of the crazy wing of my family up in Oregon and California, it's working.
Hillary is not particularly well liked among progressives, and Warren seems to hit on all cylinders with them. It may be a hard road for Warren though, because it's obvious by her recent silence on foreign affairs, that Hillary is counting on the high likelihood that we will be at war in 2016. The complete collapse in foreign policy positions Hillary for unchallenged nomination.
I think Warren will also have a difficult time motivating the Occupy and RaisTheWage crowd to show up at a polling place (on the correct day).
Quote from: Gaspar on September 04, 2014, 07:25:14 AM
The interview yesterday of Elizabeth Warren by Katy Couric was very enlightening. Warren is going to take the position that Hillary is cosy with Wall Street and adopt the Occupy crowd, and judging from the reactions of the crazy wing of my family up in Oregon and California, it's working.
Hillary is not particularly well liked among progressives, and Warren seems to hit on all cylinders with them. It may be a hard road for Warren though, because it's obvious by her recent silence on foreign affairs, that Hillary is counting on the high likelihood that we will be at war in 2016. The complete collapse in foreign policy positions Hillary for unchallenged nomination.
I think Warren will also have a difficult time motivating the Occupy and RaisTheWage crowd to show up at a polling place (on the correct day).
She was on Letterman last night, but we passed up the opportunity to watch. Another cult of personality candidate.
Only thing missing with her that I see is the debutante treatment Bill Clinton received at the Democratic convention in '88 and Obama got in '04. Julian Castro seemed to be the one they were
pimping er primping in '12.
She might be a really good VP candidate. She shares the ability to tell real whoppers about her accomplishments/family heritage just like crazy Uncle Joe and she would likely make any president impeachment and assassination-proof.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 04, 2014, 09:03:58 AM
She was on Letterman last night, but we passed up the opportunity to watch. Another cult of personality candidate.
Only thing missing with her that I see is the debutante treatment Bill Clinton received at the Democratic convention in '88 and Obama got in '04. Julian Castro seemed to be the one they were pimping er primping in '12.
She might be a really good VP candidate. She shares the ability to tell real whoppers about her accomplishments/family heritage just like crazy Uncle Joe and she would likely make any president impeachment and assassination-proof.
I don't know. There will be great carnage in the democrat primaries this round. The Clintons are ruthless and cunning, and any challenger will need to be just as ruthless to hold up against them.
Lieawatha has so much baggage lying around on YouTube, that I'm fairly confident the Clinton camp has already designed the attack ads, and it would be hard for Hillary to turn around and offer her hand to Warren's bloody stump when the campaign is over. Besides, she'll need someone young inexperienced and popular to round-out the ticket. She will also need someone who can hold on to what is left of the Obama supporters.
I'm leaning towards Cory Booker.
Quote from: Gaspar on September 04, 2014, 10:31:58 AM
I don't know. There will be great carnage in the democrat primaries this round. The Clintons are ruthless and cunning, and any challenger will need to be just as ruthless to hold up against them.
Lieawatha has so much baggage lying around on YouTube, that I'm fairly confident the Clinton camp has already designed the attack ads, and it would be hard for Hillary to turn around and offer her hand to Warren's bloody stump when the campaign is over. Besides, she'll need someone young inexperienced and popular to round-out the ticket. She will also need someone who can hold on to what is left of the Obama supporters.
I'm leaning towards Cory Booker.
Would Booker have enough appeal to pragmatic independents while still being able to court the moon bat left? So far, I've not heard any candidate names floating around I'd care to vote for. I've never voted (D) for president. Not that I'm beyond that, they've simply not run a candidate I cared for.
FWIW, I also think Hillary would be considered too centrist for the far left of the Democrat Party. One positive legacy from the Clinton years is how well the economy did for most of his tenure. Part of that was the unprecedented growth in the tech and communications sectors which would have made any president look good, but they also were more business-friendly than the current admin has been.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 04, 2014, 10:53:57 AM
Would Booker have enough appeal to pragmatic independents while still being able to court the moon bat left? So far, I've not heard any candidate names floating around I'd care to vote for. I've never voted (D) for president. Not that I'm beyond that, they've simply not run a candidate I cared for.
FWIW, I also think Hillary would be considered too centrist for the far left of the Democrat Party. One positive legacy from the Clinton years is how well the economy did for most of his tenure. Part of that was the unprecedented growth in the tech and communications sectors which would have made any president look good, but they also were more business-friendly than the current admin has been.
Booker is actually quite popular among independents. I really like the guy, even though I disagree with some of his politics. He is really eager and engaging. I've actually had social media conversations with him, and he remains likable even when you disagree with him, something that Hillary desperately needs. I think he would make an almost unbeatable ticket, bullet-proof, and create a legacy by offering a VP candidate with the appeal to be elected president some day.
Even more strife noted. I fear the democratic party might be dissolving this time.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/09/04/mutiny-senate-democrats-urge-obama-to-get-hawkish-on-the-isis-threat/
As for Booker, I like him personally as well.
Five comments in a row by republicans of who they think should be the democratic nominee for President.
You guys crack me up.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on September 04, 2014, 02:52:17 PM
Five comments in a row by republicans of who they think should be the democratic nominee for President.
You guys crack me up.
Just taking your lead, RM.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on September 04, 2014, 02:52:17 PM
Five comments in a row by republicans of who they think should be the democratic nominee for President.
You guys crack me up.
You CANNOT be serious. ;D
The evidence is becoming overwhelming.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewart-dems-so-desperate-to-win-theyre-jumping-ship-from-obama/
Quote from: RecycleMichael on September 04, 2014, 02:52:17 PM
Five comments in a row by republicans of who they think should be the democratic nominee for President.
You guys crack me up.
Just testing the waters for open primaries.
:D
The above ad and this politician is catching fire. Here is what is grabbing people's attention.
https://twitter.com/ElbertGuillory/status/517456061767614464
We all know what will be in his Christmas stocking this year...I big fat IRS audit.
Democrat = one individual.
Democratic Party ic the correct name.
Ed W
Quote from: guido911 on October 01, 2014, 05:34:27 PM
Ouch.
I wonder how much blame Mr. Guillory places on President Obama for black poverty while the Prez flys around on a taxpayer provided jumbo jet and plays golf on the lushest of country clubs.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 02, 2014, 08:48:55 AM
I wonder how much blame Mr. Guillory places on President Obama for black poverty while the Prez flys around on a taxpayer provided jumbo jet and plays golf on the lushest of country clubs.
Priorities, you fool!
He's spent about 700 hours in "Presidential Daily Briefings" since 2009 (missing over 50% of them), but 800 hours on golf courses since 2009, many of which took place during presidential daily briefings.
Quote from: Gaspar on October 02, 2014, 09:42:33 AM
Priorities, you fool!
He's spent about 700 hours in "Presidential Daily Briefings" since 2009 (missing over 50% of them), but 800 hours on golf courses since 2009, many of which took place during presidential daily briefings.
I'm sure Ms. Jarrett relayed to him the really salient points of those briefings.
Quote from: guido911 on October 01, 2014, 05:34:27 PM
Ouch.
Yeah...Opelousas is a raggedy-a$$ little town - got family living there. And he is right - they will keep on voting for her, because no matter how bad she is...and she is pretty sorry...the alternatives have always been worse! That is the real tragedy in Opelousas!
Quote from: Ed W on October 02, 2014, 05:47:58 AM
Democrat = one individual.
Democratic Party ic the correct name.
Ed W
You told me that near the beginning of this thread:
QuoteIt's called the Democratic Party and it's comprised of people called Democrats.
Obama's speech today was amazing. It's the same speech he's given a dozen times over the past 6 years EXCEPT he's randomly throwing in things that are going to get him in trouble with his base, but make him look more moderate to embattled candidates. It's a splattering of everything and complete ADD brilliance!
"I actually believe that capitalism is the greatest force for prosperity and opportunity the world has ever known"
He asked Republicans to "get with the 21st century, instead of just reading it in the newspapers." :o
"Let's invest more in the kind of basic research that led to Google and GPS, and make our economy stronger."
"By the end of this decade, let's enroll 6 million children in high-quality preschool" I suggest PreSchool.gov. ;)
"We cannot let up and we cannot be complacent. We have to be hungry as a nation." Actually are accomplishing this now.
"When alarms go off somewhere in the world... the world calls America. They don't call Moscow/Beijing. But us." . . .and our answering machine gets it.
"American leadership is the one constant in an uncertain world." FORE!
Too much comedy gold here. SNL and Kimmel are going to have a blast!
Quote from: Gaspar on October 02, 2014, 02:26:31 PM
Obama's speech today was amazing. It's the same speech he's given a dozen times over the past 6 years EXCEPT he's randomly throwing in things that are going to get him in trouble with his base, but make him look more moderate to embattled candidates. It's a splattering of everything and complete ADD brilliance!
"I actually believe that capitalism is the greatest force for prosperity and opportunity the world has ever known"
He asked Republicans to "get with the 21st century, instead of just reading it in the newspapers." :o
"Let's invest more in the kind of basic research that led to Google and GPS, and make our economy stronger."
"By the end of this decade, let's enroll 6 million children in high-quality preschool" I suggest PreSchool.gov. ;)
"We cannot let up and we cannot be complacent. We have to be hungry as a nation." Actually are accomplishing this now.
"When alarms go off somewhere in the world... the world calls America. They don't call Moscow/Beijing. But us." . . .and our answering machine gets it.
"American leadership is the one constant in an uncertain world." FORE!
Too much comedy gold here. SNL and Kimmel are going to have a blast!
Holding aside your dislike of Obama, which of these quotes are supposed to be funny? All of them seem like standard speech fare to me. I heard the "alarms" line earlier, and think it's one of the better single lines out of a speech in a while.
OK, I do see one that could be an easy shot for Kimmel:
He asked Republicans to "get with the 21st century, instead of just reading it in the newspapers." Kimmel: "See that's been one of the President's main failures throughout his term in office. He keeps assuming that Republicans can actually read..." (cue rim shot..)
Quote from: Gaspar on October 02, 2014, 02:26:31 PM
"When alarms go off somewhere in the world... the world calls America. They don't call Moscow/Beijing. But us." . . .and our answering machine gets it.
So, when the Marines say it, it's good, but when Obama says it, it's bad....riiiggghhhhtttttt....got it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHL0ZjgVxt0
One dem cannot even say she
voted for Obama?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/10/09/40-painful-seconds-of-alison-lundergan-grimes-refusing-to-say-whether-she-voted-for-president-obama/
It's those darned yes or no questions that got her confused. OR, she of course is a racist. ::)
Why are republicans for every post in America (Senate, House, Governor, City Council) running against Obama?
It is because they have no ideas.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on October 10, 2014, 08:39:00 AM
Why are republicans for every post in America (Senate, House, Governor, City Council) running against Obama?
It is because they have no ideas.
Fox news
Quote from: RecycleMichael on October 10, 2014, 08:39:00 AM
Why are republicans for every post in America (Senate, House, Governor, City Council) running against Obama?
It is because they have no ideas.
Same reason Democrats are running away from Obama.
It's human nature to flee disaster.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on October 10, 2014, 08:39:00 AM
Why are republicans for every post in America (Senate, House, Governor, City Council) running against Obama?
It is because they have no ideas.
Sleestaks running from fire.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on October 10, 2014, 08:39:00 AM
Why are republicans for every post in America (Senate, House, Governor, City Council) running against Obama?
I believe there are two political entities, Obama the person and President of the USA and there is Obama the political philosophy.
Draw your own conclusions.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on October 10, 2014, 08:39:00 AM
Why are republicans for every post in America (Senate, House, Governor, City Council) running against Obama?
It is because they have no ideas.
Sounds like everyone has the same idea. Run against Obama. Nothing else matters.
Quote from: Red Arrow on October 10, 2014, 10:35:50 PM
I believe there are two political entities, Obama the person and President of the USA and there is Obama the political philosophy.
Draw your own conclusions.
You forgot the cult of personality. I'd be impressed if he actually had a personality.
It's as if Max Headroom were president. ;)
Really bad way to enter the midterms:
http://www.langerresearch.com/uploads/1163a2The2014Midterms.pdf
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/10/abc-poll-trouble-democrats-election-day/
Barack Obama and his political party are heading into the midterm elections in trouble. The president's 40 percent job approval rating in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll is the lowest of his career – and the Democratic Party's popularity is its weakest in polling back 30 years, with more than half of Americans seeing the party unfavorably for the first time.
The Republican Party is even more unpopular. But benefitting from their supporters' greater likelihood of voting, GOP candidates nonetheless hold a 50-43 percent lead among likely voters for U.S. House seats in the Nov. 4 election.
Here's how Nate Silver scores it at the moment:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/interactives/senate-forecast/
I'd love nothing more than to see Harry Reid ousted as the Senate Majority Leader, but I'm not sure Mitch McConnell would be a much better replacement.
And a good blog post from Silver regarding poll bias:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-polls-might-be-skewed-against-democrats-or-republicans/
Dude is a true numbers geek. He'd be a great wing man to have at a casino.
Quote from: Conan71 on October 15, 2014, 10:48:19 AM
I'd love nothing more than to see Harry Reid ousted as the Senate Majority Leader, but I'm not sure Mitch McConnell would be a much better replacement.
They both suck.
Quote from: guido911 on October 15, 2014, 11:14:25 PM
They both suck.
100% agree.
They are ineffective leaders, refuse to work with the other side of the aisle, terrible spokespeople, and involved in very shady dealings in their home state.
Obama is irrelevant, according to a democrat?
QuoteUnlike some Democratic Senate candidates, incumbent Mark Begich of Alaska is willing to say he voted for President Obama.
But he's also found a way to distance himself from the president, who is unpopular in reddish Alaska.
"I did (vote for him), but that's irrelevant," Begich told the Washington Examiner. "The president's not relevant. He's gone in two years."
http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2014/10/23/begich-obama-president-relevant/
Quote from: guido911 on October 23, 2014, 08:26:06 PM
Obama is irrelevant, according to a democrat?
Great, maybe decisions will be made that have nothing to do with "I'm votin' agin' that Moose-lim in the white house."
The poodle is cringe-worthy. Brutal she cannot explain that "Moose-lim in the white house" and competitive senate races
Welp, it's Corey Booker's turn. I suppose that since he has been subpoenaed, he is assumed guilty of something. I post this here because I thought there was talk of him as a VP candidate somewhere in this forum.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/10/27/bad-timing-cory-booker-contends-with-subpoena-bad-press-ahead-of-senate-election/?utm_source=hafbp&utm_medium=fbpage&utm_campaign=haupdate
Quote from: guido911 on October 27, 2014, 06:34:42 PM
Welp, it's Corey Booker's turn. I suppose that since he has been subpoenaed, he is assumed guilty of something. I post this here because I thought there was talk of him as a VP candidate somewhere in this forum.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/10/27/bad-timing-cory-booker-contends-with-subpoena-bad-press-ahead-of-senate-election/?utm_source=hafbp&utm_medium=fbpage&utm_campaign=haupdate
Probably worried Bridgegate was all his work and not Christie's.
Manchin again.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/11/11/red-state-dem-joe-manchin-im-not-going-to-put-up-with-any-obstructionist-bullsht-from-my-party-in-the-senate/
Quote from: guido911 on November 11, 2014, 04:15:09 PM
Manchin again.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/11/11/red-state-dem-joe-manchin-im-not-going-to-put-up-with-any-obstructionist-bullsht-from-my-party-in-the-senate/
That's funny.....
Even the dems are turning on Obama.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/09/bob-woodward-democrats-tell-me-privately-they-hate-obama-too-video/
Okay, this post mortem crap has about run its course. I get it. Each dem that lost election is because of Obama. They didn't suck, he did. ::).
Dems war on women and war on our troops wrapped up in one.
QuoteHouse Democrats are continuing to criticize Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's refusal to allow Rep. Tammy Duckworth — a double amputee Iraq War veteran whose pregnancy has made her unable to travel — to vote by proxy in leadership elections this week.
Pelosi and her allies have been saying since Nov. 13, when the issue first came up, that House Democratic Caucus rules prohibit proxy votes, and that allowing exceptions for the Illinois Democrat would create a slippery-slope scenario.
Members and aides are privately seething over what they see as Pelosi's latest attempt to stack the deck against Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-N.J., who is running for ranking member on the Energy and Commerce Committee against Pelosi's closest friend and fellow Californian, Rep. Anna G. Eshoo.
http://blogs.rollcall.com/218/tammy-duckworth-nancy-pelosi-democrats/?dcz=emailalert
Dems worried about the "slippery slope" of letting double amputee war vet who is pregnant getting over on the voting rules...Oh the screeching "if the Repubs did this"
Quote from: guido911 on November 18, 2014, 05:17:55 PM
Dems war on women and war on our troops wrapped up in one.
http://blogs.rollcall.com/218/tammy-duckworth-nancy-pelosi-democrats/?dcz=emailalert
Dems worried about the "slippery slope" of letting double amputee war vet who is pregnant getting over on the voting rules...Oh the screeching "if the Repubs did this"
I don't get the rub. They want their constituents to vote by proxy, why not their house members?
Quote from: Conan71 on November 18, 2014, 09:01:01 PM
I don't get the rub. They want their constituents to vote by proxy, why not their house members?
BOOM.
Quote from: guido911 on November 18, 2014, 05:17:55 PM
Dems war on women and war on our troops wrapped up in one.
http://blogs.rollcall.com/218/tammy-duckworth-nancy-pelosi-democrats/?dcz=emailalert
Dems worried about the "slippery slope" of letting double amputee war vet who is pregnant getting over on the voting rules...Oh the screeching "if the Repubs did this"
Jon Stewart channeling his inner guido...later the same night. Must have killed him to have to say something this negative about a dem.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/11/19/jon-stewart-tells-nancy-pelosi-to-go-away-right-now/