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.
2016/01/21 18:43:37
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I've yet to see anyone that I'd consider a "serious contender" from the Republican party.
Can you define serious contender? They have some good people but they are all crowded out by carnival barkers and con men atm it seems.
Basically, someone who has real policy... They aren't up on stage talking about building walls and having other countries pay for it. They aren't talking about biblical values that aren't in the constitution as if they are. They aren't trumping up falsehoods as facts and using those lies to put on a pouty outrage face. Also, if you lie on stage about stabbing "a friend"... They shouldn't be up there continuing the rhetoric of Obama being a "foreign muslim who shouldnt have been elected in the first place".
I mean, as I watched the democrats debate, they weren't saying any of that kind of ludicrous stuff... They were asked about global warming, and they responded with Policy like, "I want us to go here in 10 years" or whatever.
I think that's eliminated Trump, Cruz, Carson, and Fiorina right there. And I agree that the stage is so crowded, guys like me cannot see or hear any reasonable political talk from that side of the aisle.
I may consider Christy a "serious contender" but I think he does have issues that follow him around as well, so he's on the fence. That kind of leaves Kasich, Rubio Jeb and who knows who else.... But for me, Rubio is kind of up there with the Trumps/Cruzes because he has said some pretty off the wall things along the same lines.
2016/01/21 18:45:31
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Its like I said earlier, the way the GOP is going with the neo cons they end up alienating the moderate voters (which they need to win) just to get the nomination. It hasn't worked out for them in the past two elections and it won't now.
He sure as hell don't have my support. And he takes attention from the more serious contenders for the Republican nomination.
Like who?? Seriously, I've yet to see anyone that I'd consider a "serious contender" from the Republican party.
I watched a bit of the last Democratic debate, and I honestly think that HRC, O'Malley and Sanders are all three "serious contenders"... and without knowing much of his policies, I think O'Malley would have to be my number 2 choice for president from that crop.
I was referring to the Republican primaries, not the general election.
But in the end, it will come down to Cruz versus Trump for the Republican nomination. They're the "high profile" candidates in the running.
Proud Purveyor Of The Unconventional In 40k
2016/01/21 19:32:41
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ustrello wrote: Its like I said earlier, the way the GOP is going with the neo cons they end up alienating the moderate voters (which they need to win) just to get the nomination. It hasn't worked out for them in the past two elections and it won't now.
The only Neocon in the current crop of GOP candidates is Jeb Bush, and he isn't doing particularly well. Indeed, the popularity of people like Cruz, Trump, and Rubio is pretty much the direct result of public backlash against Neoconservatism, which was embodied by the Bush Administration.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2016/01/21 19:36:24
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ustrello wrote: Its like I said earlier, the way the GOP is going with the neo cons they end up alienating the moderate voters (which they need to win) just to get the nomination. It hasn't worked out for them in the past two elections and it won't now.
The only Neocon in the current crop of GOP candidates is Jeb Bush, and he isn't doing particularly well. Indeed, the popularity of people like Cruz, Trump, and Rubio is pretty much the direct result of public backlash against Neoconservatism, which was embodied by the Bush Administration.
Neoconservatives typically advocate the promotion of democracy and promotion of American national interest in international affairs, including by means of military force, and are known for espousing disdain for communism and for political radicalism.
Pretty sure that hits the mark on most if not all of the GOPs candidates at the moment
That just sounds like regular conservatism I grew up with.
Its not regular but has been around since the Regan era. It first became mainstream with Bush Jr.'s presidency despite Bush Jr. not being a neoconservative his admin was infested with them.
Fox News, has become the go to news source for neocon propaganda.
2016/01/21 21:24:11
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
I'm sure that the hard-core internet trolls worship him as their new god. Trump is the perfect embodiment of the successful "IRL troll".
He sure as hell don't have my support. And he takes attention from the more serious contenders for the Republican nomination.
I kid you not, this was on a test of mine today.
It was determing which one was a fact and which one was a value.
"Donald trump is a Goblin" and "Donald Trump should be president"
all the answers started with fact and the right answer was "Fact/Value, Respectively"
5000pts 6000pts 3000pts
2016/01/21 22:34:14
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Neoconservatives typically advocate the promotion of democracy and promotion of American national interest in international affairs, including by means of military force, and are known for espousing disdain for communism and for political radicalism.
Pretty sure that hits the mark on most if not all of the GOPs candidates at the moment
Not really. Neoconservatives place the security of American supremacy through active foreign policy at the center of their platform, for the current crop of GOP candidates it's mostly just a way to appear radically different from the Democrats. Even Jeb Bush, who actually is a Neocon, hasn't had much to say on that front in this cycle. Moreover, while not endorsing radicalism in the classical sense, all three of the current GOP front runners have tapped into a similar mentality by appealing to populism, something Neocons absolutely do not do.
Indeed, the central focus for Trump, Rubio, and Cruz (aside from Obamacare) has been reducing the size of the Federal Government; something which Neocons only pay lip service to.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2016/01/21 22:52:49
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
The GOP has ALWAYS been in favor of more government, they have just managed to somehow convince a lot of folks that they are not. The Social Conservative platform is a cornerstone of the GOP and you can't have that without being willing to expand the government to put the social conservative values into law.
2016/01/21 23:20:05
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
oldravenman3025 wrote: I was referring to the Republican primaries, not the general election.
But in the end, it will come down to Cruz versus Trump for the Republican nomination. They're the "high profile" candidates in the running.
Perhaps it was a bad example, but I was also referring to the primaries... as I watch their train wreck "debates", and compare them with what the Democrats are offering in the primaries (seriously, 3 people in one party versus what... 15?)
The Democratic side definitely seems content to actually talk policy and goals if they are elected, whereas the Republican side, as has been talked about ad nauseum in this thread, seems to be a competition of who can say the most off the wall, outlandish, never-gonna-happen gak and get away with it.
2016/01/21 23:44:03
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
The Democrats do not have enough candidates in their debates in my opinion. Clinton is a charisma black hole. I love Sanders, but I imagine he appears too elderly and perhaps left for the general populous, and is probably fundamentally better suited for a legislative role than an executive one in government. And I'm pretty sure O'Malley is just there running for a Secretary of HUD appointment or something.
Biden would have swept this field, I think.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/01/21 23:47:45
2016/01/22 00:09:41
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
It sounds like the Republican party right now in the US is kind of reminiscent of the status of the labour party in the UK. - Except in the US, it's a case of going more 'right wing' where in the UK, Labour are seeming to go all in on being 'left wing.'
2016/01/22 02:54:01
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Yes, I take great joy in the trials and tribulations of someone who complains about not having health insurance (thanks, Obama!) when he's rolling in enough money of his own to be able to repay a half million dollar loan in less than a year or so.
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
2016/01/22 03:07:17
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Yes, I take great joy in the trials and tribulations of someone who complains about not having health insurance (thanks, Obama!) when he's rolling in enough money of his own to be able to repay a half million dollar loan in less than a year or so.
His comments at the end of the second article are so utterly ridiculous....
2016/01/22 03:31:28
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Yes, I take great joy in the trials and tribulations of someone who complains about not having health insurance (thanks, Obama!) when he's rolling in enough money of his own to be able to repay a half million dollar loan in less than a year or so.
One thing that might be worth pointing out is that prior to the ACA, Senators and Representatives were participating in the same health insurance program that every other federal employee was participating in.
Republican Senator Chuck Grassley wanted an amendment to the ACA requiring all members of Congress and their staff to leave the traditional exchange and enroll under the marketplace because "if it's so great, we should all be doing it!!!!!". Reid called him out and put the amendment up for a vote, all Democrats agreed and the Republicans opposed, because ACA. And it became part of the ACA.
So a Republican demand was included, the same demand that "caused" him to loose his coverage, but it's Obama's fault.
Go figure.
2016/01/22 03:39:57
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
2016/01/22 05:21:39
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Like i said, its usually so dark in alaska, that the first time palin saw the sun when McCain nominated her is fried her brain. ......Im packing up and moving to mexico Seriously, Political correctness is a suicide vest?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/22 06:13:23
5000pts 6000pts 3000pts
2016/01/22 06:18:13
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ensis Ferrae wrote: On further viewing... my Stone Cold remark was wrong... she asked for a "hallelujah" not a "hell yeah"
Hopefully God will sue her then.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
2016/01/22 11:13:42
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Although taking potshots at Sarah Palin is the very lowest of low fruit, my favorite part was when she described herself - a 51 year old woman who has held elected office on and off again for the last 24 years - as a "non-politician".
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2016/01/22 12:01:32
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
5000pts 
6000pts 
3000pts
