Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Jihadin wrote:Movie Cool Running

Do not most Blue Collar workers in Teaxs wear Carhartt?

often. Cafhartt/Dickies are a primary clothier for uniforms and heavy work. Its no big deal. Their big factory is McAllen is hot. Not the good way, but the "sweet baby Jebus I just want to die" way. Of course, the devil has to get a good ice tea after he visits McAllen anyway, its so ing hot.

Jihadin wrote:Do not knock Carhartt jackets that Rick wearing. Shows he's an actual blue color worker. They're very durable

I know I'm a little late to this thread, but I simply could not resist pointing out that only in the Dakka OT could someone describe, seemingly with a straight face, a 30-year career politician worth nearly 3 million dollars as "an actual blue collar worker".

Ahtman wrote:Did you know as a child young Newt was able to survive a hostile alien infestation on LV-426? Also, he was a girl.

It's funny you should mention this, because last night in a speech when asked about illegal aliens, Newt responded simply "They mostly come at night. Mostly.", before gazing off despondently into the distance.

It's funny you should mention this, because last night in a speech when asked about illegal aliens, Newt responded simply "They mostly come at night. Mostly.", before gazing off despondently into the distance.

He seriously do that?

Ouze wrote:

Jihadin wrote:Do not knock Carhartt jackets that Rick wearing. Shows he's an actual blue color worker. They're very durable

I know I'm a little late to this thread, but I simply could not resist pointing out that only in the Dakka OT could someone describe, seemingly with a straight face, a 30-year career politician worth nearly 3 million dollars as "an actual

I read it as being extremely sarcastic, not actually a belief that he is a blue collar worker.

Jihadin wrote:

It's funny you should mention this, because last night in a speech when asked about illegal aliens, Newt responded simply "They mostly come at night. Mostly.", before gazing off despondently into the distance.

He seriously do that?

No, but if he did, I'd vote for him, and you have my word on that.

The idea of a president gingrich is frightening to behold.

I mean sure, I can imagine a President Romney not fething things up... or even a Cain president being too incompetent and having too little sway to matter worth a damn... or a Huntsman president trying to balance the budget... but Gingrich...? Sheesh he has a lot of nutty ideas.

Hopefully that'll be why he loses to Obama, if he wins nomination.

Melissia wrote:The idea of a president gingrich is frightening to behold.

I mean sure, I can imagine a President Romney not fething things up... or even a Cain president being too incompetent and having too little sway to matter worth a damn... or a Huntsman president trying to balance the budget... but Gingrich...? Sheesh he has a lot of nutty ideas.

Hopefully that'll be why he loses to Obama, if he wins nomination.

What I cannot fathom, is that a nation of over 300 million people cant rustle up a single nominee for the Republicans who isnt an absolute prick.

Ive said it numerous times, I personally dislike Obama, he is smug and insincere and I have never forgotten seeing the primaries when I was living in LA and seeing him lie through his teeth during debates with Hilary Clinton who I preferred, but seriously, how can you pick a Republican over the guy?

Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry are all proper scum bags, and lets not even entertain the idea of any of the nutty Religious chicks.

Couldn't we put John McCain in a rejuvo-vat like an Inquisitor and get him to run again wearing a wig?

I mean, sure he had some flaws but compared to those three he's like a friggin boy scout!

mattyrm wrote: What I cannot fathom, is that a nation of over 300 million people cant rustle up a single nominee for the Republicans who isnt an absolute prick.

Because only a small amount of that number are card carrying political party members. You don't need to win over that many people, just a core group you can count on to vote, especially when the number of voters is down.

Hey I just thought, Bush senior is still alive and he was alright, he was smart too.

Get him to run, and McCain will look more youthful alongside him, so he can run as VP.

mattyrm wrote: What I cannot fathom, is that a nation of over 300 million people cant rustle up a single nominee for the Republicans who isnt an absolute prick.

I wouldn't say this is solely a Republican trait, if we want to be really honest the field for President has been weak since Clinton (or more properly Clinton's reelection) Bush II v ManBearPig, Bush II v Kerry, Obama v McCain...I highly doubt any of those politicians will go down as great presidents, or for the losers great politicians. I wish I could say I was surprised by the lukewarm nature of American politicians. You know who needs to run?

Its not too late. A vote for Frazzled is a vote for Freedom.

-A dog biscuit in every bowl.
-The Good will be raised up and the Wicked Punished.

Matty's got a fair point guys. That many people in your country and that handful is all the Republican's can come up with? In fairness though I'd say the same about the other lot. Surely you must be able to come up candidates that, although you may not agree with them, have some respect for them.

How is JFK viewed nowadays? Has his time in office been turned into some kind of ideal myth or was he a great President? If so, what happened to that mould?

I was expecting Bobby Jindal to run, I'm guessing maybe he'll run in 2016.

Wolfstan wrote:How is JFK viewed nowadays? Has his time in office been turned into some kind of ideal myth or was he a great President? If so, what happened to that mould?

The general perception, as I see it, is that JFK is idolized as a great president despite the fact he was probably one of the worst presidents the country has ever had (in my opinion).

Conversely, Nixon probably has the worst reputation among modern presidents, despite the fact I think he was probably one of the better ones, and did many great things*.

*Well, and one bad thing.

AustonT wrote:I was expecting Bobby Jindal to run, I'm guessing maybe he'll run in 2016.

Bobby Jindal lost his ticket to the big show when he showed us he delivers a national address like an eight year-old delivering a book report.

Seaward wrote:

AustonT wrote:I was expecting Bobby Jindal to run, I'm guessing maybe he'll run in 2016.

Bobby Jindal lost his ticket to the big show when he showed us he delivers a national address like an eight year-old delivering a book report.

Huh, I didn't know pinkmonkey and sparknotes could be used for addressing the nation!

Seaward wrote:

AustonT wrote:I was expecting Bobby Jindal to run, I'm guessing maybe he'll run in 2016.

Bobby Jindal lost his ticket to the big show when he showed us he delivers a national address like an eight year-old delivering a book report.

Then why is Newt popular again?

Ouze wrote:

Conversely, Nixon probably has the worst reputation among modern presidents, despite the fact I think he was probably one of the better ones, and did many great things*.

*Well, and one bad thing.

Isn't that just the opinion of some pretty right leaning Republicans? I always thought he was apparently a super racist, eternally dishonest bastard of a man?

I thought the general consensus was that he was extremely intelligent and helped things along with regards to the commies and such, but he was morally lacking in pretty much every department?

I suppose it's all down to your definition of a good president as well. I mean, I can see the point that he was a good one because he did the job pretty good, but if he was an absolute toilet of a human being I cant happily say that he was "one of the better ones" because.. well.. its a happy medium between the two isn't it?

Like Clinton was only half the jerk he was, and he did as good a job as a president didn't he?

Although, its my missus who sings his praises.. and she has a heavy democrat bias.

Ouze wrote:
The general perception, as I see it, is that JFK is idolized as a great president despite the fact he was probably one of the worst presidents the country has ever had (in my opinion)

It helps that he died before his legacy could rack up much more than the Cuban Missile Crisis.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Seaward wrote:

AustonT wrote:I was expecting Bobby Jindal to run, I'm guessing maybe he'll run in 2016.

Bobby Jindal lost his ticket to the big show when he showed us he delivers a national address like an eight year-old delivering a book report.

Then why is Newt popular again?

I've been trying to figure that out myself. I'd say he's popular because he's the only choice left. Bachman's insane, Cain imploded, Perry's a horrible debater and the Republicans already did the "plain-spoken average Joe from Texas," thing recently, Santorum's cultural values would have gotten him elected seven hundred years ago, nobody knows who the hell Huntsman is, Ron Paul's some sort of stick insect from Mars, and Romney's a Mormon.

I blame the primary system, as I do for a lot of things. It really is a pretty craptastic way of getting us a nominee. Candidates spend months going as far right or as far left as they can during primary season to appeal to the hardcore, crazy radical base, and then spend the general election trying to claw their way back to the middle so they can actually get voted for by the majority of the country.

Ron Paul's some sort of stick insect from Mars

I'm keeping this.

I blame the primary system, as I do for a lot of things. It really is a pretty craptastic way of getting us a nominee. Candidates spend months going as far right or as far left as they can during primary season to appeal to the hardcore, crazy radical base, and then spend the general election trying to claw their way back to the middle so they can actually get voted for by the majority of the country.

Perrys strength always was that at the end of the day he's the only realistic choice. I kind of expect the infatuation with Newt to die out soon. He's not a viable choice. He can't possibly win and he's about as far as any of those candidates from presidential material as can be found. Among the very, very many things that he lacks the "it" factor that makes someone look presidential is a big one. Romney is basically a clone from a future presidents body.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Ron Paul's some sort of stick insect from Mars

I'm keeping this.

I blame the primary system, as I do for a lot of things. It really is a pretty craptastic way of getting us a nominee. Candidates spend months going as far right or as far left as they can during primary season to appeal to the hardcore, crazy radical base, and then spend the general election trying to claw their way back to the middle so they can actually get voted for by the majority of the country.

Perrys strength always was that at the end of the day he's the only realistic choice. I kind of expect the infatuation with Newt to die out soon. He's not a viable choice. He can't possibly win and he's about as far as any of those candidates from presidential material as can be found. Among the very, very many things that he lacks the "it" factor that makes someone look presidential is a big one. Romney is basically a clone from a future presidents body.

Horse crap. Don't blame Mars for Ron Paul. You'll tick off Marvin the Martian.

Everyone contending to be POTUS can look and be Presidential material. Its the attack ads that would bring memories of certain events that would ake them look bad.

example (just an example so don't crucify me)
Solyndra
Extra Martital Affairs
Dead Lock congress (both sides since "vacation" probaly be thrown in)

Not going to throw in the military since no one can question a Pres. for acting on intell. Its different from one perspective that not sitting in the seat to make decision since one does not have the full spectrum on intell provided.

mattyrm, Nixon was far more to the left than Obama is on many issues.

He gave us the Environmental Protection Agency and the Clean Air Act. Hell, he proclaimed the first Earth Day.

He made Native American issues a bigger deal than any other modern president. He strengthened civil rights. He proposed a universal minimum wage and universal health care. He didn't roll back any of the Great Society.

I'm serious, for all his fault Nixon did a lot of really good things. I'm not even trying to be dishonest when I hear people say crazy stuff like, "Bush Jr did lots of good things like giving money to fight AIDS in Africa so he's more liberal than Obummer!".

When you add up Nixon's policies he comes out as much more to the left than Obama. So does Eisenhower and most other presidents before the Reagan / Clinton era.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Can we start talking about how the Republican base hates Mormons again? I'm serious, Gingrich has flip flopped on all the same issues Romney has while being worse in every other aspect. How can people seriously question Romney's sincerity or honesty while supporting Gingrich?

It's baffling. How could someone think Gingrich is a viable candidate while not giving Romney a chance without his Mormonism being an issue?

TheHammer wrote:
It's baffling. How could someone think Gingrich is a viable candidate while not giving Romney a chance without his Mormonism being an issue?

Mormonism isn't the issue, at least not the heart of it. The issue is that Gingrich is willing (and able) to sell himself using soaring, populist rhetoric while Romney is not.

That's the thing, in the primaries, they aren't running to get elected by normal, rational, and sane people.

They're running to get elected by the most hardcore republicans in the party. Happens with both parties too, we just don't have to consider it for dems this year cause Obama's the incumbent.

dogma wrote:Mormonism isn't the issue, at least not the heart of it. The issue is that Gingrich is willing (and able) to sell himself using soaring, populist rhetoric while Romney is not.

That and Gingrich is not Romney. That alone gets him votes.

Every time I worry about the current slate of Republican candidates I look at the opposition and am immediately heartened.

I've said it before, the Republicans could win this election with a cardboard cutout.

Of course, the cardboard cutout at least wouldn't say anythign stupid ,which puts it above the current republican candidates.

Melissia wrote:That's the thing, in the primaries, they aren't running to get elected by normal, rational, and sane people.

They're running to get elected by the most hardcore republicans in the party. Happens with both parties too, we just don't have to consider it for dems this year cause Obama's the incumbent.

But remember, the hard core left are who nominated the incumbent in the Democratic primary for the last election... They don't fall into the normal, rational, and sane category either.

True, but even still... Obama's more centrist than anyone the Republicans have put forth so far save possibly Romney... who is hurt by the fact that his own party refuses to budge on the tax issue (spend and tax cut republicans-- just keep spending and cutting income, then blame democrats whenever the budget gets out of control).