Bush personally offended by Trump's remarks

[dunksby]

Donald Trump is a ****ing asshole, the Republicas gotta disown him.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/07/04/bush-absolutely-offended-by-trumps-comments-on-mexicans/

[KingBeasley08]

We're gonna have a Bush vs. Clinton pt 2 aren't we...

Republicans gotta be pissed at Trump. Dude's singlehandedly ruining any chance of Hispanics switching parties

[senelcoolidge]

I don't know the details, but I don't think Trump was talking about ALL mexicans, just the illegals that break the law. This seems blown out of proportions. Of course he could have worded things better.

[Lakers Legend#32]

It took two weeks for him to get personally offended by Trump's remarks?
Jeb is just as scared of Trump as the rest of the Republican Party.

[Draz]

Mexicans work hard. It didn't come easy for them. I respect them more than the majority of the food stamp collecting Hispanics. Fck Trump.

[Hotlantadude81]

**** both of those guys.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Anyone else get tired of seeing the same names in politics?

Bush and Clinton? GTFOH

[NumberSix]

Mexicans work hard. It didn't come easy for them. I respect them more than the majority of the food stamp collecting Hispanics. Fck Trump.
Dats raciss

[Real Men Wear Green]

It took two weeks for him to get personally offended by Trump's remarks?
I guess he had to think about it.

More seriously I wonder when we'll see a socially liberal Republican (Republican for economic reasons) take the field. With so many social conservatives simultaneously splitting the bigot vote a Republican that supported gay rights and immigrants could maybe take the lead by getting voters that are dissatisfied with Obama's tax policies but support him and democrats because they don't want to lose rights for themselves or good friends. If a guy like Trump is willing to act like an ass just to get 10% of the vote on the right why won't someone come out and speak sensibly about minorities for 20%?*


*that's just a guess I don't really know how many Republicans are socially liberal or how many Democrats are fiscally conservative and would switch to the right if they felt they had a better option.

[SCdac]

I would love to see Hilary run on the republican ticket, for a few reasons. First, for shits and giggles, second because I think she's liberal but leans to the right a little, third it would throw off people voting just for a certain party or gender. Obviously it's not going to happen, but I'd like to see us get away from the dichotomy we see in today's politics

[Godzuki]

trump has some points about illegals, while other politicians are too PC to offend a voting group. an illegal just randomly killed some girl in SF, perfect timing for Trump. the US is doomed once hispanics become the main voting base the country is going to cater to for votes. its going to turn into some parts of Miami where knowing spanish is a necessity and the country is basically run to appease them.

too bad trump has to run with conservative right wing ideas to get their base votes. he doesn't believe in half the shit he's sided on. i think his main concerns he's really serious about our economy vs China, US business vs taxation/socialist policies, and illegals. he has to side right wing on abortion, gays, etc to get the right wing votes. he basically said as much on Stern.

anyways for how much trump sucks, he at least is willing to fight against the political correct fascism that is taking over and creating policies that aren't directly addressing the country's issues, rather scapegoating them to wrongfully blame. the country is fukked with that type of governance. Ferguson and Baltimore are great examples, look at the aftermath of letting the PC movement have their way.

[dude77]

when someone is getting attacked like he is, you know they're spittin' truths

[Lakers Legend#32]

Jeb's handlers told him to say this.

[RidonKs]

Jeb's handlers told him to say this.
people do realize this right?

jeb bush does not give to shits about this.

the only comment worth making on this thread is that the washington post decided to run a story about nonsense like jeb bush's opinion on a donald trump statement. **** off.

[senelcoolidge]

when someone is getting attacked like he is, you know they're spittin' truths

A lot of people are afraid of Trump and it's not just the democrats. He's not a politician. He will not put up with a lot of the crap that is going on.

[RidonKs]

A lot of people are afraid of Trump and it's not just the democrats. He's not a politician. He will not put up with a lot of the crap that is going on.
this is nonsense. trump has no idea what's going on. he doesn't put up with crap because he doesn't understand issues. people are afraid of trump because their handlers are afraid of trump. that is not remotely close to what we choose to term democracy. in fact its a complete perversion.

[NumberSix]

people do realize this right?

jeb bush does not give to shits about this.

the only comment worth making on this thread is that the washington post decided to run a story about nonsense like jeb bush's opinion on a donald trump statement. **** off.
You know that Jeb's wife is Mexican, right? You really think he does not give "to" shits about this, when his own kids look like this?

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/politics/georgepbush.banner.ap.jpg

[dunksby]

when someone is getting attacked like he is, you know they're spittin' truths
Yep you are right, ISIS is getting attacked even worse for stating stuff others don't like too. Bulletproof logic.

[dunksby]

this is nonsense. trump has no idea what's going on. he doesn't put up with crap because he doesn't understand issues. people are afraid of trump because their handlers are afraid of trump. that is not remotely close to what we choose to term democracy. in fact its a complete perversion.
So because he is a Bush he hates minorities? Can't he be be offended due to having a Mexican born wife? Wouldn't you be personally offended if you were in his shoes?

[dunksby]

A lot of people are afraid of Trump and it's not just the democrats. He's not a politician. He will not put up with a lot of the crap that is going on.
No, he isn't a politician, he is just a glorified landlord.

[Mirror]

Yeah.

Same shit, different name.

I think a lot of people would be fine with Hilary if she is as good as Bill was.

[senelcoolidge]

I think a lot of people would be fine with Hilary if she is as good as Bill was.

It's scary to think that this lady that should be in a prison somewhere is the democrats frontrunner. The apparent, you can almost call it the transparency of corruption is in your face yet she's a strong candidate to win it. yikes.

[kentatm]

Jeb's handlers told him to say this.


Jeb's wife is Mexican. This actually is personal for him.

[UK2K]

Donald Trump is a ****ing asshole, the Republicas gotta disown him.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/07/04/bush-absolutely-offended-by-trumps-comments-on-mexicans/

His popularity is up across the country.

And I agree with everything he said.

Need evidence? Look no further than California this weekend, where a 5 time border jumper murdered a woman in broad daylight.

[UK2K]

It's scary to think that this lady that should be in a prison somewhere is the democrats frontrunner. The apparent, you can almost call it the transparency of corruption is in your face yet she's a strong candidate to win it. yikes.

She should be in prison, after the 2nd, and third, and fourth time we found emails that she didn't turn over after she said she did.

Regardless of what was in those emails, the fact that she lied about them several times is enough.

Women and easily impressionable leftist voters will still vote for her though.

[KingBeasley08]

It's scary to think that this lady that should be in a prison somewhere is the democrats frontrunner. The apparent, you can almost call it the transparency of corruption is in your face yet she's a strong candidate to win it. yikes.
Yup, Hillary has so many skeletons in her closet and is such a shady person. She's probably gonna win though just because of the incompetence of the Republicans. The GOP needs to get their shit together, stop beating off to the memory of Ronald Reagan and start moving to the center again.

[UK2K]

Yup, Hillary has so many skeletons in her closet and is such a shady person. She's probably gonna win though just because of the incompetence of the Republicans. The GOP needs to get their shit together, stop beating off to the memory of Ronald Reagan and start moving to the center again.
I think moving to the center is what cost them in the first place.

The last election, the GOP moved further right, and the reinvigorated voting bloc came out in unprecedented numbers to wipe the floor of all Democrat runners.

The further you can distance yourself from Obama and Hilary, the better off they'll be.

[KingBeasley08]

I think moving to the center is what cost them in the first place.

The last election, the GOP moved further right, and the reinvigorated voting bloc came out in unprecedented numbers to wipe the floor of all Democrat runners.

The further you can distance yourself from Obama and Hilary, the better off they'll be.
It works in the midterms when minorities and youth, who make up the Democrat's base, don't show up but it'll cost them again and again in the Presidential elections. And I'm not only talking about winning and losing. The GOP has gone off the rails to the right the past couple years to the point that great Republican Presidents like Eisenhower would get criticized today for being a "RINO" or "too liberal" despite being pretty conservative.

America in general has move too far to the right in the past 30 years and it's a swing that I believe hasn't helped us. We as a country need to move to the left because far right wing politics is just hurting us

[UK2K]

It works in the midterms when minorities and youth, who make up the Democrat's base, don't show up but it'll cost them again and again in the Presidential elections. And I'm not only talking about winning and losing. The GOP has gone off the rails to the right the past couple years to the point that great Republican Presidents like Eisenhower would get criticized today for being a "RINO" or "too liberal" despite being pretty conservative.

America in general has move too far to the right in the past 30 years and it's a swing that I believe hasn't helped us. We as a country need to move to the left because far right wing politics is just hurting us

I disagree. I believe far left politics, and the borderline socialism that comes with it, is what is rotting our country from the inside out.

There is evidence of that for days. Look at any social program, and watch how it has exploded in the past decade. We now have more takers than givers. Ask Greece how that's working out for them.

Individual achievement is no longer celebrated. High schools are passing borderline retarded kids because they have to. Teachers aren't teaching anymore, they're regurgitating liberal propaganda (when kids are taught that Republicans and greed are synonymous).

I believe leftists policies are, literally, rotting this country from the inside out. You know what leftist policies get you? Detroit. Chicago. St. Louis. Baltimore. Los Angeles. Memphis. Cleveland. Philadelphia. Washington D.C. New York. The most dangerous, poverty stricken, shit hole places in this country.

[KingBeasley08]

I disagree. I believe far left politics, and the borderline socialism that comes with it, is what is rotting our country from the inside out.

There is evidence of that for days. Look at any social program, and watch how it has exploded in the past decade. We now have more takers than givers. Ask Greece how that's working out for them.

Individual achievement is no longer celebrated. High schools are passing borderline retarded kids because they have to. Teachers aren't teaching anymore, they're regurgitating liberal propaganda (when kids are taught that Republicans and greed are synonymous).

I believe leftists policies are, literally, rotting this country from the inside out.
You think we have far left politics? We haven't had progressive policies since maybe Kennedy and Johnson. I think this is something people ignore by acting like Democrats are a far left party. They aren't. They're a center/center-right party and the Republicans are far right.

Our most prosperous economic period was after the 1940s till the 1970s. It wasn't until Reagan started deregulating all the banks and overturning FDR's reforms that our income inequality and economy has been worsening. Hell, even the guy who came up with supply side economics admitted that Reaganomics doesn't work yet the right is still willing to ride with it because they've sold out to corporate interests. And the p*ssy left has been following them to the right instead of standing for progressive values. Hell, Obamacare was essentially a conservative idea for health care reform made by the Heritage Foundation. Yet the Republicans can't even back that out of partisanship. Forget about a single payer which would be much better. I blame the Democratic Congress for not getting the public option passed.

Your point with social programs has a lot of strawman in it. Greece has nothing to do with America. Hell, Greece's problem was that they had more tax dodgers than any country. They're proof that we should be increasing and enforcing tax laws. And that the IRS are assholes but that they serve a pretty necessary purpose. If you think Democratic Socialism is so bad, check out the Nordic nations. Also, being in favor of more progressive policies doesn't mean socialism. Just free market capitalism with regulations and more government programs. Libertarianism is up there with Communism in useless political ideologies that don't work in reality.

America is nowhere near a socialist government. Obama isn't socialist at all and very moderate yet still the most liberal President since maybe Johnson. That tells you about the state of American political affairs

[NumberSix]

It works in the midterms when minorities and youth, who make up the Democrat's base, don't show up but it'll cost them again and again in the Presidential elections. And I'm not only talking about winning and losing. The GOP has gone off the rails to the right the past couple years to the point that great Republican Presidents like Eisenhower would get criticized today for being a "RINO" or "too liberal" despite being pretty conservative.

America in general has move too far to the right in the past 30 years and it's a swing that I believe hasn't helped us. We as a country need to move to the left because far right wing politics is just hurting us
Are you joking? :wtf:

How the hell has America moved to the right?

[KingBeasley08]

Are you joking? :wtf:

How the hell has America moved to the right?
The US has absolutely moved to the right since the 80s. Our Democrats are considered right wing in Canada and Europe

[NumberSix]

The US has absolutely moved to the right since the 80s. Our Democrats are considered right wing in Canada and Europe
This doesn't explain how the United States has moved to the right. You just re asserted it without explanation.

And no, people in Canada and Europe do not consider the democrats to be right wing. They are quite clearly understood to be the left wing party.

[KingBeasley08]

This doesn't explain how the United States has moved to the right. You just re asserted it without explanation.

And no, people in Canada and Europe do not consider the democrats to be right wing. They are quite clearly understood to be the left wing party.
Specifically Reaganomics and the following Presidents have continued that. It started with decreasing government and now we've got candidates wanting to gut Medicare and hacks like Jindal and Brownback in office

Left wing in terms of American politics. Not in terms of their politics

[UK2K]

The US has absolutely moved to the right since the 80s. Our Democrats are considered right wing in Canada and Europe

It hasn't.

And since blacks (95%) and Hispanics (80%) vote Democrat, with their continued insistence to **** like stoned rabbits (thus more free shit), the country will continue to move farther and farther left.

[KingBeasley08]

It hasn't.

And since blacks (95%) and Hispanics (80%) vote Democrat, with their continued insistence to **** like stoned rabbits (thus more free shit), the country will continue to move farther and farther left.
Never got this idea. From how I see it, the Republicans have alienated the minority vote but they've came up with this idea that Democrats are tricking them with free stuff. Ok, let's say that Nixon applying the Southern Strategy and gaining the support of the racist Dixiecrats had nothing to do with it. Let's even assume Reagan expanding the War on Drugs had nothing to do with it and it's just because of 'free stuff'.

Why do most minority groups vote against Republicans? Asians are a pretty successful group yet voted for Democrats at a even higher rate than Hispanics. Jewish Americans are the most successful group in the country. Also overwhelmingly voted Democrat. I think Republicans need to stop crying about 'free stuff'. They've spent the last 40 years courting and pandering to the Evangelical crowd and are now feeling the consequences. Time to face it head on instead of complaining about 'free stuff'

[NumberSix]

Specifically Reaganomics and the following Presidents have continued that. It started with decreasing government and now we've got candidates wanting to gut Medicare and hacks like Jindal and Brownback in office

Left wing in terms of American politics. Not in terms of their politics
You know "Reaganomics" is not actually a thing, right? It's just a political buzzword.

People generally use it to mean things like lower taxes and a market with minimal government interference. The reality though is that Reagan actually raised taxes a bunch of times. Not like 2 or 3 times either. Double digits.

Give some specific policies that you believe have moved significantly to the right since the 80s.

[UK2K]

Never got this idea. From how I see it, the Republicans have alienated the minority vote but they've came up with this idea that Democrats are tricking them with free stuff. Ok, let's say that Nixon applying the Southern Strategy and gaining the support of the racist Dixiecrats had nothing to do with it. Let's even assume Reagan expanding the War on Drugs had nothing to do with it and it's just because of 'free stuff'.

Why do most minority groups vote against Republicans? Asians are a pretty successful group yet voted for Democrats at a even higher rate than Hispanics. Jewish Americans are the most successful group in the country. Also overwhelmingly voted Democrat. I think Republicans need to stop crying about 'free stuff'. They've spent the last 40 years courting and pandering to the Evangelical crowd and are now feeling the consequences. Time to face it head on instead of complaining about 'free stuff'

Blacks vote democrat because they are told to. If voting Democrat was so awesome, why are they worse now they before Obama took office? They are worse off now in nearly every, single, statistical category you can find. They fall farther and farther behind every decade. So why do they continue to vote for Democrats? Your guess is as good as mine, maybe you can help explain it.

In my world, you work for your welfare. You saw what happened in (I believe) New Hampshire when they instituted a 20 hour work week for welfare? 76% of the welfare recipients didnt apply again.

I believe in a world where hard work pays off. It has in my world. Minorities, especially the black community, don't (not all blacks, so spare me the 'you're a racist drivel). 'Reparations, son, money son, **** all that education bullshit gimme my money.' I have several friends (white and black) who are still saying the same shit. And they are still losers.

The only Hispanics who vote Republicans are the religious ones. The rest, guess what, want more shit. It's not hard to figure out. Relaxed border control. More welfare programs they can (illegally) exploit. How much is LA County paying for illegals? Way too ****ing much, but it aint my money so more power to them (for as long as they can, obviously, as they are about to default).

And your Asian voting point isn't relevant, because its not like they 'overwhelmingly' voted for one party or the other. Not to mention they make up less than 5% of the country.


3. While Asian Americans identify with the Democratic Party by a 20-point margin, currently they favor Democrats in the 2014 election by a smaller, 14-point margin, 42-28.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/10/07/the-increasingly-important-asian-american-vote-in-5-charts/

I'm not rich, nor am I (entirely) white, so why do I vote Republican? Because our country is fat, lazy, stupid as shit, constantly 'offended' and only getting worse by the day, and I can point to Democrat policies (and, in general, left leaning policies) as a direct result.

[KingBeasley08]

You know "Reaganomics" is not actually a thing, right? It's just a political buzzword.

People generally use it to mean things like lower taxes and a market with minimal government interference. The reality though is that Reagan actually raised taxes a bunch of times. Not like 2 or 3 times either. Double digits.

Give some specific policies that you believe have moved significantly to the right since the 80s.
Decreasing marginal tax rates, removing regulations on banks, housing, and many other markets (Clinton also gets blame for this), end of many Great Society welfare programs etc.. A lot of this was also under a Democratic Presidents so I wonder why 'Conservatives' hate Bill Clinton and Obama


Blacks vote democrat because they are told to. If voting Democrat was so awesome, why are they worse now they before Obama took office? They are worse off now in nearly every, single, statistical category you can find. They fall farther and farther behind every decade. So why do they continue to vote for Democrats? Your guess is as good as mine, maybe you can help explain it.

In my world, you work for your welfare. You saw what happened in (I believe) New Hampshire when they instituted a 20 hour work week for welfare? 76% of the welfare recipients didnt apply again.

I believe in a world where hard work pays off. It has in my world. Minorities, especially the black community, don't (not all blacks, so spare me the 'you're a racist drivel). 'Reparations, son, money son, **** all that education bullshit gimme my money.' I have several friends (white and black) who are still saying the same shit. And they are still losers.

The only Hispanics who vote Republicans are the religious ones. The rest, guess what, want more shit. It's not hard to figure out.

And your Asian voting point isn't relevant, because its not like they 'overwhelmingly' voted for one party or the other. Not to mention they make up less than 5% of the country.



I'm not rich, nor am I (entirely) white, so why do I vote Republican? Because our country is fat, lazy, stupid as shit, constantly 'offended' and only getting worse by the day, and I can point to Democrat policies (and, in general, left leaning policies) as a direct result.
But why? Blacks used to vote Republican back in the day even when they still received free shit. So what changed. I don't see why you're ignoring the Southern Strategy when the RNC has admitted and apologized for applying it.


In American politics, the Southern strategy refers to a Republican Party strategy in the late 20th century of gaining political support for presidential candidates in the Southern United States by appealing to regional racial tensions and history of segregation.[1][2]

The Democratic Party in the South defended slavery before the American Civil War. After regaining power in state governments in the 1870s, Democrats imposed white supremacy. At the end of the century, southern states passed new constitutions and laws making voter registration and voting more difficult, resulting in disenfranchising most blacks and many poor whites. The South became a one-party region, maintaining political exclusion of minorities well into the 1960s. The Solid South and its political power in Congress was achieved at the expense of African Americans. In the years after World War II, African Americans pressed for civil rights. White Southern Democrats gradually stopped supporting the national party following its adoption of the civil rights plank of the Democratic campaign in 1948 (against which the Dixiecrats formed), support for the African-American Civil Rights Movement, passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965, and push for desegregation.

In the mid 1960s, a period of social turmoil, Republican Presidential candidates Senator Barry Goldwater[3][4] and Richard Nixon worked to attract southern white conservative voters to their candidacies and the Republican Party.[5] Barry Goldwater won the five formerly Confederate states of the Deep South (Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina[6][7]) in the 1964 presidential election, but he otherwise won only in his home state of Arizona. In the 1968 presidential campaign, Nixon won Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, and Tennessee, all former Confederate states, contributing to the electoral realignment of white voters in some Southern states to the Republican Party. After federal civil rights legislation was gained via bipartisan votes, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965, more than 90 percent of black voters registered with the Democratic Party. The VRA provided tools to end their decades-long disenfranchisement by southern states. Hundreds of cases have been litigated to change election systems, such as at-large voting, that have prevented even significant minorities from electing candidates of their choice for city and county positions.

As the twentieth century came to a close, most white voters in the South had shifted to the Republican Party. It began to try to appeal again to black voters and rebuild the political relationship that had lasted through the 1920s, though with little success.[5] In 2005, Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman formally apologized to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), a national civil rights organization, for exploiting racial polarization to win elections and ignoring the black vote.[8][9]


Asians will vote Democrat again in 2016. Midterm elections favor the Republicans in general that their base shows up to vote.

The 'free shit' doesn't really work and is just conservative talking point nonsense. Democrats have always supported such programs since the 40s but Blacks didn't start voting overwhelmingly for Democrats until the 80s. Try and find a reason why. I think I've provided enough tidbits as to why they'd do that.

No one says that you shouldn't work hard. But it's true that in recent decades, economic mobility has stalled. The American Dream has been dead for a while. The Boomers might say they worked really hard for what they have but they were given tons of handouts after WWII. Funny that they turn around and try and force everyone else to work their way up with no assistance

[NumberSix]

Why do most minority groups vote against Republicans? Asians are a pretty successful group yet voted for Democrats at a even higher rate than Hispanics. Jewish Americans are the most successful group in the country. Also overwhelmingly voted Democrat. I think Republicans need to stop crying about 'free stuff'. They've spent the last 40 years courting and pandering to the Evangelical crowd and are now feeling the consequences. Time to face it head on instead of complaining about 'free stuff'
You know, Ann Coulter made an incredible point on this exact matter.

People always talk about the various minority votes, but...... what about the white vote? Everybody says the republicans need to try to get more Hispanic votes. Why? The republicans would need to get 40% of the Hispanic vote just to make it close. Why bother? If the republicans simply picked up another 3% of the white vote? they will win by a landslide. Isn't that actually astonishing?

Keep in mind, that the republicans already comfortably win the white vote every election. Would it really be that difficult to pick up another 3% of whites? Imagine if the republicans decided to start openly pandering to whites the way the democrats pander to minority groups?

[KingBeasley08]

You, Ann Coulter made an incredible point on this exact matter.

People always talk about the various minority votes, but...... what about the white vote? Everybody says the republicans need to try to get more Hispanic votes. Why? The republicans would need to get 40% of the Hispanic vote just to make it close. Why bother? If the republicans simply picked up another 3% of the white vote? they will win by a landslide. Isn't that actually astonishing?

Keep in mind, that the republicans already comfortably win the white vote every election. Would it really be that difficult to pick up another 3% of whites? Imagine if the republicans decided to start openly pandering to whites the way the democrats pander to minority groups?
Well, they already do and I'm not saying they shouldn't. I was replying to his point that Blacks only vote Democrat for free stuff. I argued that Republicans have been pandering to the White Vote and neglected all minorities. That's a bigger reason why Blacks don't vote GOP just like Hispanics, Asians, Indians etc..

And they have been pandering to the White vote. The Evangelical voting bank is the strongest base of the GOP by far and it has been since they began targeting those voters in the 60s. Let's not act like both parties don't pander to their base. That's politics

[Mirror]

I'm personally offended by another Bush running for president.

[NumberSix]

Well, they already do and I'm not saying they shouldn't. I was replying to his point that Blacks only vote Democrat for free stuff. I argued that Republicans have been pandering to the White Vote and neglected all minorities. That's a bigger reason why Blacks don't vote GOP just like Hispanics, Asians, Indians etc..

And they have been pandering to the White vote. The Evangelical voting bank is the strongest base of the GOP by far and it has been since they began targeting those voters in the 60s. Let's not act like both parties don't pander to their base. That's politics
No they don't. In the south, they pandered to the racist white vote. That's a fact. But they have never at a national level pandered to the white vote.

When have you ever heard politicians talk about whites the way they do with blacks, gays, women, Hispanics? You haven't. Politicians never say shit like "how we can help white people", "policies that will benefit whites families" or any of that kind of nonsense. And rightfully so. In my opinion, politics should't be pandering to ANY identity group.

And people are right to say democrats tricked minority groups into voting for them. The republican was always known as the party for the black man.

The democrats were pro slavery, pro confederacy, pro KKK, pro segregation, etc... The democrats were the enemy of the black man for the entirety of American history, but then LBJ came along and said "give them a little something. Nothing that makes a difference... I'll have these ******s eating out of our hands for the next 200 years".

[UK2K]

Decreasing marginal tax rates, removing regulations on banks, housing, and many other markets (Clinton also gets blame for this), end of many Great Society welfare programs etc.. A lot of this was also under a Democratic Presidents so I wonder why 'Conservatives' hate Bill Clinton and Obama


But why? Blacks used to vote Republican back in the day even when they still received free shit. So what changed. I don't see why you're ignoring the Southern Strategy when the RNC has admitted and apologized for applying it.



Asians will vote Democrat again in 2016. Midterm elections favor the Republicans in general that their base shows up to vote.

The 'free shit' doesn't really work and is just conservative talking point nonsense. Democrats have always supported such programs since the 40s but Blacks didn't start voting overwhelmingly for Democrats until the 80s. Try and find a reason why. I think I've provided enough tidbits as to why they'd do that.

No one says that you shouldn't work hard. But it's true that in recent decades, economic mobility has stalled. The American Dream has been dead for a while. The Boomers might say they worked really hard for what they have but they were given tons of handouts after WWII. Funny that they turn around and try and force everyone else to work their way up with no assistance
"Now we've got to do something about this, we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference... I'll have them ******s voting Democratic for the next two hundred years".

That is the strategy... but not of Republicans. Who said that quote? Any guesses? The last KKK member in Congress, what party did he belong to? You got this, it was only about six years ago.

My dream is alive and well. I've come up from nothing to living a sweet life. Because the American Dream is dead for those who won't sacrifice for it, doesn't mean its dead for everyone. No matter where you grew up, what race, or wealthy your family is, you can be anything you want, if you are willing to sacrifice. Because most aren't, that's their fault, and I have no sympathy.

Just like most democrats on political message boards I speak with, you will run and throw out excuses as to why you can't be something. Excuses, not reasons. Everyone has hardships in their lives. Not everyone has excuses.

Everything that has happened to me, good and bad, is because I did or didn't do something. That's a fact. In everyone's lives.

[dunksby]

Damn Beasley murdering our resident rednecks :applause:

[KingBeasley08]

"Now we've got to do something about this, we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference... I'll have them ******s voting Democratic for the next two hundred years".

That is the strategy... but not of Republicans. Who said that quote? Any guesses? The last KKK member in Congress, what party did he belong to? You got this, it was only about six years ago.

My dream is alive and well. I've come up from nothing to living a sweet life. Because the American Dream is dead for those who won't sacrifice for it, doesn't mean its dead for everyone. No matter where you grew up, what race, or wealthy your family is, you can be anything you want, if you are willing to sacrifice. Because most aren't, that's their fault, and I have no sympathy.

Just like most democrats on political message boards I speak with, you will run and throw out excuses as to why you can't be something. Excuses, not reasons. Everyone has hardships in their lives. Not everyone has excuses.

Everything that has happened to me, good and bad, is because I did or didn't do something. That's a fact. In everyone's lives.
I guess I'll break this into piece. Johnson wasn't wrong. The man did more for African-Americans than any President before him and after him. It was a Republican strategy by Goldwater and Nixon that the RNC admits and apologizes for today. And with Nixon and Reagan's expansion of the War on Drugs which badly hurt the Black community, his words were prophetic. They've been Democrats since.

Congratulations on what you've achieved. I really mean that. But your experiences do not speak for everyone in America and anecdotal in nature. Economic mobility, as I said, has decreased in the past 30 years. In fact, it was easier to go from nothing to something in the past. My own family got bailed out by so many programs that allowed them to keep food on the table and provide so that my dad could get an education and reach the middle class. Now, I'm here and am living a nice life as product of what my parents achieved with the help of the government.

Nobody is saying you shouldn't have to work hard. Obviously, if you're lazy as shit, nothing will happen for you. I never claimed otherwise. In fact, this "argument" conservatives claim is purely made up. You don't need to have a socialist government or a complete libertarian society. The answer is somewhere in the middle but as I have been saying this entire thread, we have moved into this idea that it must be one or the other. And you argue that we have not moved to far to the right? Hell, I'm arguing for a moderate approach (with a more left wing focus, I won't lie since I am a progressive) yet you want a far right approach.

You and NumberSix essentially proved what I am talking about. All about "bootstraps" and if anyone argues against that... they must be in support of a socialist society :oldlol:

For a majority of the 20th century, we have had these policies that have assisted Americans in moving up. The GI Bill along with other New Deal programs gave the greatest generation the advantages to succeed (and Blacks got robbed of that opportunity) and provide for their children, the Boomers. The Boomers grow up and assume that they earned their place through hard work and now apply policies that keep the new generation from having the same advantages their parents did.

This'll probably be my last post in this thread since I don't think we're gonna reach a compromise and each of my arguments keep getting misconstrued as some socialist propaganda so we'll have to agree to disagree

[NumberSix]

I guess I'll break this into piece. Johnson wasn't wrong. The man did more for African-Americans than any President before him and after him. And with Nixon and Reagan's expansion of the War on Drugs, his words were prophetic. They've been Democrats since.

Congratulations on what you've achieved. I really mean that. But your experiences do not speak for everyone in America and anecdotal in nature. Economic mobility, as I said, has decreased in the past 30 years. In fact, it was easier to go from nothing to something in the past. My own family got bailed out by so many programs that allowed them to keep food on the table and provide so that my dad could get an education and reach the middle class. Now, I'm here and am living a nice life as product of what my parents achieved with the help of the government.

Nobody is saying you shouldn't have to work hard. Obviously, if you're lazy as shit, nothing will happen for you. I never claimed otherwise. In fact, this "argument" conservatives claim is purely made up. You don't need to have a socialist government or a complete libertarian society. The answer is somewhere in the middle but as I have been saying this entire thread, we have moved into this idea that it must be one or the other. And you argue that we have not moved to far to the right? Hell, I'm arguing for a moderate approach (with a more left wing focus, I won't lie since I am a progressive) yet you want a far right approach.

You and NumberSix essentially proved what I am talking about. All about "bootstraps" and if anyone argues against that... they must be in support of a socialist society :oldlol:

For a majority of the 20th century, we have had these policies that have assisted Americans in moving up. The GI Bill along with other New Deal programs gave the greatest generation the advantages to succeed (and Blacks got robbed of that opportunity) and provide for their children, the Boomers. The Boomers grow up and assume that they earned their place through hard work and now apply policies that keep the new generation from having the same advantages their parents did.

This'll probably be my last post in this thread since I don't think we're gonna reach a compromise and each of my arguments keep getting misconstrued as some socialist propaganda so we'll have to agree to disagree
If you forget about that whole freeing the slaves and granting blacks citizenship thing.

[senelcoolidge]

In my world, you work for your welfare. You saw what happened in (I believe) New Hampshire when they instituted a 20 hour work week for welfare? 76% of the welfare recipients didnt apply again.
more power to them (for as long as they can, obviously, as they are about to default).


That sounds like a good idea. I wish they would do this everywhere.

[NumberSix]

Nobody is saying you shouldn't have to work hard. Obviously, if you're lazy as shit, nothing will happen for you. I never claimed otherwise. In fact, this "argument" conservatives claim is purely made up. You don't need to have a socialist government or a complete libertarian society. The answer is somewhere in the middle but as I have been saying this entire thread, we have moved into this idea that it must be one or the other. And you argue that we have not moved to far to the right? Hell, I'm arguing for a moderate approach (with a more left wing focus, I won't lie since I am a progressive) yet you want a far right approach.
No we haven't. Almost nobody thinks that outside of communists and anarchists who are the #1 and #2 dumbest groups of people in the world.

I don't know what your "And you argue that we have not moved to far to the right?" statement means. You say that as if the previous sentences disproved that when you actually said nothing on the matter. Maybe you accidentally deleted part of your post? :confusedshrug:

[TripleA]

If you forget about that whole freeing the slaves and granting blacks citizenship thing.

well with the shitty candidates for the republicans this year it doesn't matter
because a democratic candidate is probably gonna win.:lol

[NumberSix]

well with the shitty candidates for the republicans this year it doesn't matter
because a democratic candidate is probably gonna win.:lol
I really don't think Hilary Clinton is going to win the presidency. She has way too much scandalous stuff surrounding her. In a presidential election, there's just too much material to overcome. She's gonna look so sketchy by November 2016.

[TripleA]

I really don't think Hilary Clinton is going to win the presidency. She has way too much scandalous stuff surrounding her. In a presidential election, there's just too much material to overcome. She's gonna look so sketchy by November 2016.

who do you think will win

[NumberSix]

who do you think will win
No clue.

I think Hilary winning the democrat's primary is as close to a lock as you can say this far out. Whoever the republicans run will probably win.

[Droid101]

Whoever the republicans run will probably win.
:roll:

You can't possibly believe this.. :oldlol:

[Fallguy20]

Wasn't a Bush offended at the Simpsons forever ago? If you are offended at everything, your offense means less and less.

And because im a lazy american, I choose to only associate the names presented and not who they actually belong to, regardless of which Bush it was. Damn greedy beer...

[NumberSix]

:roll:

You can't possibly believe this.. :oldlol:
What kind of bubble do you live in where you think the idea of a republican winning the presidency is unbelievable? I mean, the majority of presidents in my lifetime have been republican. It's not an unusual thing.

[UK2K]

No clue.

I think Hilary winning the democrat's primary is as close to a lock as you can say this far out. Whoever the republicans run will probably win.

I hope Hilary wins the D primary.

There is zero chance she ever wins a presidential election. Especially when she will be roasted by every one of her competitors. There are dozens of questions you could ask her, that she'd have no answer to.

Plus, she doesn't know how to work a fax machine. Like.... its 2015.

[Real Men Wear Green]

So of course it comes out that illegal aliens are working on one of Trump's luxury hotels. Naturally.

[Jailblazers7]

I hope Hilary wins the D primary.

There is zero chance she ever wins a presidential election. Especially when she will be roasted by every one of her competitors. There are dozens of questions you could ask her, that she'd have no answer to.

Plus, she doesn't know how to work a fax machine. Like.... its 2015.

What? :lol

Was that a news story or something?

[NumberSix]

So of course it comes out that illegal aliens are working on one of Trump's luxury hotels. Naturally.
Lol. I know people think that they've "busted" him, but the funny thing is, most hotels that have "trump" on them actually have nothing to do with him. People pay a licensing fee to use his name.

To be fair, I think Trump is a complete douche and a clown, but fair is fair. Do we actually know if this particular hotel is actually owned by Trump, or just pays him a fee to use his name?

[DeuceWallaces]

What kind of bubble do you live in where you think the idea of a republican winning the presidency is unbelievable? I mean, the majority of presidents in my lifetime have been republican. It's not an unusual thing.

Lies. I highly doubt you're old enough to vote.

[NumberSix]

Lies. I highly doubt you're old enough to vote.
No you don't.

[UK2K]

What? :lol

Was that a news story or something?

Part of all her 'turned over kinda but not really turned over so they found them but when they did she said she didn't not turn them over intentionally cause shes not a liar' emails that were released last week.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/30/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-state-department-top/

She didn't know when State Department meetings were. She e-mailed her aides to bring her tea.

Then there was this gem:


Abedin's email subject line was "can you hang up the fax line, they will call again and try fax."

"I thought it was supposed to be off hook to work?" Clinton responded.

Adedin asked Clinton to hang up once more so they "can re-establish the line."

"I did," Clinton said.

Abedin replied, "Just pick up phone and hang it up. And leave it hung up."

"I've done it twice now," Clinton said.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/150701082239-clinton-fax-email-780x439.png

[Jailblazers7]

Part of all her 'turned over kinda but not really turned over so they found them but when they did she said she didn't not turn them over intentionally cause shes not a liar' emails that were released last week.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/30/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-state-department-top/

She didn't know when State Department meetings were. She e-mailed her aides to bring her tea.

Then there was this gem:



http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/150701082239-clinton-fax-email-780x439.png

lol that's pretty good. Wouldn't be the first person I've seen struggle with a fax machine tho.

[DeuceWallaces]

Who the hell knows how to run a fax machine other than assistants and clerical workers.

Always a pain in the ass.

And of course, dumbass UK thinks they'll grill her about it during the debate.

"Just wait till they ask her about fax machines and the confederate flag. Just wait!"

[UK2K]

Who the hell knows how to run a fax machine other than assistants and clerical workers.

Always a pain in the ass.

And of course, dumbass UK thinks they'll grill her about it during the debate.

"Just wait till they ask her about fax machines and the confederate flag. Just wait!"

No, they'll ask her more complicated things, like how her hard drive ended up with scratches all over it. Or why her hard drive was erased several days after she was ordered to turn it over. Or why she broke federal law by not keeping records of her correspondence.

Or why she told the SHC she turned over all her e-mails when, in fact, she didn't.

The fax machine thing is just for laughs.

And I know how to use a fax machine, and I don't do either of those jobs.


That’s not all that the emails reveal about Clinton. She also has a thing for carpets, for instance, and hates the idea of human happiness (“Can you contact your protocol friend in China and ask him if I could get photos of the carpets of the rooms I met in w Potus during the recent trip?” 15 December 2009, subject “Don’t laugh!!”). She likes to balance her love of cold drinks with her enjoyment of setting up pointlessly long chains of middlemen (“Pls call Sarah and ask her if she can make me some iced tea,” 30 September 2009). She also apparently lives in a real-life version of Veep (“I heard on the radio that there is a Cabinet mtg this am. Is there? Can I go?” 8 June 2009).

I believe it was Bush or Romney who released nearly three decades worth of tax returns and emails. That's called transparency.

This administration, and the 'pass it to find out what's in it' mentality, is what you are cheering on. Congrats.

[KingBeasley08]

I really don't think they'll get Hillary. They've been trying to nail for almost two decades. If Benghazi and emails are the best they got, I think she's probably good

[NumberSix]

Fax machines still exist? Really?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-z-ShX3DHMzg/Ug9RoXbOgGI/AAAAAAAAD_0/iG2iP_Kkahk/s1600/dean-what-gif.gif

[Real Men Wear Green]

Lol. I know people think that they've "busted" him, but the funny thing is, most hotels that have "trump" on them actually have nothing to do with him. People pay a licensing fee to use his name.

To be fair, I think Trump is a complete douche and a clown, but fair is fair. Do we actually know if this particular hotel is actually owned by Trump, or just pays him a fee to use his name?
To be fair, he owns it. (http://www.businessinsider.com/undocumented-immigrants-donald-trump-hotel-report-2015-7)

Here is the excuse they are giving:
"Mr. Trump, who is the 100% owner of the Old Post Office [where the new hotel is being built], hired one of the largest contractors in the world to act as the general contractor," Michael Cohen, executive vice president and special counsel to Trump, told the newspaper. "That company is Lend Lease. They then go out and employ subcontractors to work for them.

"The obligation to check all workers on site is exclusive to Lend Lease," Cohen added. "This of course assumes that the assertion regarding the employees' status is accurate."

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/undocumented-immigrants-donald-trump-hotel-report-2015-7#ixzz3fEzE0BrE
Which just leaves us to wonder how he's going to keep all of these thieves and rapists out of something as big as our country when he can't even keep them off the grounds of his hotel.

If I was a Republican I would be thankful for this. Jeb Bush and a few others might beat Clinton. But Trumps crazy ass would probably lose to Bernie Sanders. There are enough bigots in this country for a guy like Trump to get attention but in a general election people would oppose him in droves out of sheer disgust. I don't see him winning the Republican nomination anyway but the smart people in the party want him knocked out of the race ASAP.

[NumberSix]

To be fair, he owns it. (http://www.businessinsider.com/undocumented-immigrants-donald-trump-hotel-report-2015-7)

Here is the excuse they are giving:Which just leaves us to wonder how he's going to keep all of these thieves and rapists out of something as big as our country when he can't even keep them off the grounds of his hotel.

If I was a Republican I would be thankful for this. Jeb Bush and a few others might beat Clinton. But Trumps crazy ass would probably lose to Bernie Sanders. There are enough bigots in this country for a guy like Trump to get attention but in a general election people would oppose him in droves out of sheer disgust. I don't see him winning the Republican nomination anyway but the smart people in the party want him knocked out of the race ASAP.
Donald Trump is not a real candidate. He's a clown. His "candidacy" is a pr stunt.

That being said, it's inappropriate to assume that anybody concerned with immigration is a bigot.

[Droid101]

I believe it was Bush or Romney who released nearly three decades worth of tax returns and emails. That's called transparency.

If you had a brain, you wouldn't even bring up Romney and his tax returns. He was the one who only released one year, and his tax attorney literally said they claimed less deductions that year so it would look like he paid more. :roll:

[Real Men Wear Green]

Donald Trump is not a real candidate. He's a clown. His "candidacy" is a pr stunt.And he's one of the highest-polling Republicans right now. I'm not saying for sure he should be taken seriously but he's actually let his bigotry cost some money losing a number of valuable deals her had in the firestorm following his foolishness.


That being said, it's inappropriate to assume that anybody concerned with immigration is a bigot.
[QUOTE=Bigot]

[NumberSix]

And he's one of the highest-polling Republicans right now. I'm not saying for sure he should be taken seriously but he's actually let his bigotry cost some money losing a number of valuable deals her had in the firestorm following his foolishness.
You can think Trump is a bigot if you want. If you do, it's dumb to think that everybody else who is concerned with immigration policy is a bigot.


As I always say, the entire lefty political position is...


All things MUST be heavily controlled or regulated by the government...... except immigration.

[Droid101]

As I always say, the entire lefty political position is...


All things MUST be heavily controlled or regulated by the government...... except immigration.
Completely untrue. "Lefty" (whatever the **** that means) position wants things that need regulation regulated.

Legalize it bro.

[Real Men Wear Green]

You can think Trump is a bigot if you want.Oh, thank you.:cheers:
If you do, it's dumb to think that everybody else who is concerned with immigration policy is a bigot. The people supporting Donald Trump represent the biggest bigots in the Republican party. Unfortunately for the Republican party as a whole these bigots are one of their most important voting blocks. Everyone that wants "border security" isn't necessarily a racist but it's become a rallying cry for the idiot bigot wing of the Republican Party. That is the reality that Republicans have saddled themselves with by tolerating people like Trump.


As I always say, the entire lefty political position is...


All things MUST be heavily controlled or regulated by the government...... except immigration.*yawn*

[NumberSix]

Oh, thank you.:cheers: The people supporting Donald Trump represent the biggest bigots in the Republican party. Unfortunately for the Republican party as a whole these bigots are one of their most important voting blocks. Everyone that wants "border security" isn't necessarily a racist but it's become a rallying cry for the idiot bigot wing of the Republican Party. That is the reality that Republicans have saddled themselves with by tolerating people like Trump.

*yawn*
Oh, really? 12% of the people who answered a few early polls are "one of their most important voting blocks"? That's wussup?


Meanwhile, what do you think about a recent poll where 25% of the American Muslims they asked said violence against Americans is justified if it's for the purpose of jihad? Is that poll super serious business too?

[Real Men Wear Green]

Oh, really? 12% of the people who answered a few early polls are "one of their most important voting blocks"? That's wussup?Yes. Lose that support to a third-party candidate or have them decide not to vote because they feel like the Republican nominee doesn't represent their interest and explain how they win a nationwide election. Romney and McCain both lost with their support, losing them won't help unless some new voting block replaces them. Which could maybe happen with a social liberal that was Republican fiscally but no one like that is getting any push.


Meanwhile, what do you think about a recent poll where 25% of the American Muslims they asked said violence against Americans is justified if it's for the purpose of jihad? Is that poll super serious business too?It's bad. I have no idea what it has to do with the discussion though. Is this also an important Republican voting block? I didn't know that. Thank you for the information. I guess.

:cheers:

[NumberSix]

Yes. Lose that support to a third-party candidate or have them decide not to vote because they feel like the Republican nominee doesn't represent their interest and explain how they win a nationwide election. Romney and McCain both lost with their support, losing them won't help unless some new voting block replaces them. Which could maybe happen with a social liberal that was Republican fiscally but no one like that is getting any push.

It's bad. I have no idea what it has to do with the discussion though. Is this also an important Republican voting block? I didn't know that. Thank you for the information. I guess.

:cheers:
The Republicans don't win the White House when they run a McCain or a Romney. They win when they run a Reagan or a Bush.

I don't know who is going to be the republican candidate, looking at the pool, there's not much risk of it being someone "too far to the left" for republican voting blocks.

[Real Men Wear Green]

The Republicans don't win the White House when they run a McCain or a Romney. They win when they run a Reagan or a Bush.
"Republicans don't win when they run a nominee that loses. They win when they run a nominee that wins."

Um, ok. :cheers:

[24-Inch_Chrome]

Plus, she doesn't know how to work a fax machine. Like.... its 2015.

Yeah, it's 2015. Couldn't tell you the last time I used a fax machine...

[NumberSix]

"Republicans don't win when they run a nominee that loses. They win when they run a nominee that wins."

Um, ok. :cheers:
Republicans don't win when they run "moderates".

[Real Men Wear Green]

Republicans don't win when they run "moderates".
Was the first George Bush a moderate? I'm talking about by the standards of his time, not today.

[KevinNYC]

What kind of bubble do you live in where you think the idea of a republican winning the presidency is unbelievable? I mean, the majority of presidents in my lifetime have been republican. It's not an unusual thing.
Of the last six presidential elections the Republicans have won the popular vote once.

Right now there is an obvious Democratic frontrunner and a very crowded Republican field where no candidate is getting above 20%. This means Republican campaign operatives and media have a single giant target to focus on, while the Democrats do not.

Even with all that of the 52 times polls asked about Clinton vs a Repbublican, (see the front page here (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/)) Clinton has won 48 times and tied once. One of the times she lost was vs the governor of Ohio and the poll was only in the state of Ohio.

Pollsters averages of polls of Clinton vs various Republicans look like this

http://e.huffpost.com/screenshooter/elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/ss/2016-general-election-bush-vs-clinton.png

http://e.huffpost.com/screenshooter/elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/ss/2016-general-election-walker-vs-clinton.png

http://e.huffpost.com/screenshooter/elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/ss/2016-general-election-paul-vs-clinton.png

In the closest of these charts, the probability that Clinton is leading is 99%

It's one thing to say you want a Republican to win, but at this point, saying the Republican will probably win is living in a bubble.

[KingBeasley08]

I definitely think Republicans can win but they're gonna have a lot of work to do. Right now the electoral college doesn't really favor them and they have to flip a lot of swing states

[KevinNYC]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2567705#.VZunyfSsM1o.twitter
"Trump is a suicide bomber," said this Republican, who is not affiliated with any presidential candidate. "As a competing campaign, your only hope to avoid the blast is that he doesn't find a reason to show up at your doorstep. Anyone who utters the name Trump runs the risk of a seven-day jihad from a guy who has absolutely no sense of appropriateness or decency."

[Charlie Sheen]

Why should I care about voting in a presidential election? I live in California. Oops thought this was Kev's 2016 thread :lol

[DonDadda59]

Trump = Herman Cain with a wig.

And like the Pokemon master before him, Trump actually has a large following among Republicans. Check the surveys/polls after his statements. :lol

[KevinNYC]

Was the first George Bush a moderate? I'm talking about by the standards of his time, not today.
I think you can argue that GW Bush ran more as a moderate the first campaign.



Republicans don't win when they run "moderates".
Or when they run against the only candidate since Eisenhower to get 51% twice in a presidential election.

Or in elections when the voters remember George W Bush's second term.

Lots of lessons you can take from the last two elections.

[NumberSix]

Of the last six presidential elections the Republicans have won the popular vote once.
:wtf:

Off the top of my head, Bush41 won the popular vote against Clinton and I'm pretty sure Bush43 won the popular vote against Kerry.

[Real Men Wear Green]

:wtf:

Off the top of my head, Bush41 won the popular vote against Clinton and I'm pretty sure Bush43 won the popular vote against Kerry.Well, no. (http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1992)
If it makes you feel better he might have if Perot hadn't gotten back in. Also might not have.

[Droid101]

:wtf:

Off the top of my head, Bush41 won the popular vote against Clinton and I'm pretty sure Bush43 won the popular vote against Kerry.
lolno

You expect anyone to take your stupid posts seriously when you don't even know real, verifiable facts?

[NumberSix]

Well, no. (http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1992)
If it makes you feel better he might have if Perot hadn't gotten back in. Also might not have.
Why would it make me feel better? :confusedshrug:

[NumberSix]

lolno

You expect anyone to take your stupid posts seriously when you don't even know real, verifiable facts?
Meh, I got it wrong. Like I said, off the top of my head. But of course, I'm sure you knew the vote totals of the 1992 election off the top of your head.

[DeuceWallaces]

I've never heard anyone but you insinuate Bush won the popular vote in '92.

[Droid101]

Meh, I got it wrong. Like I said, off the top of my head. But of course, I'm sure you knew the vote totals of the 1992 election off the top of your head.
Er, I knew Clinton won the popular by a huge margin, that's for sure.

[DeuceWallaces]

Er, I knew Clinton won the popular by a huge margin, that's for sure.

I'm guessing he wasn't even born yet.

[KevinNYC]

Meh, I got it wrong.

Clinton won pretty easily in 1992. He got 370 electoral votes. There's no realistic way he could have done that if he lost the popular vote.

Also other than Gore you have to go back to the 1800's to find another candidate who won the popular vote, but not the presidency.

[KevinNYC]

ARNOLDS PARK, IA

[ThePhantomCreep]

I really don't think Hilary Clinton is going to win the presidency. She has way too much scandalous stuff surrounding her. In a presidential election, there's just too much material to overcome. She's gonna look so sketchy by November 2016.
Straight from the Fox News/Rush Limbaugh echo chamber.

If Hillary loses (doubtful at this point) it won't be because of whatever manufactured "scandals" the GOP trots out.

[DeuceWallaces]

Straight from the Fox News/Rush Limbaugh echo chamber.

If Hillary loses (doubtful at this point) it won't be because of whatever manufactured "scandals" the GOP trots out.

They said the same things leading up to the last election. It was hilarious watching them backtrack all week and talk about how they have to change their stance on social issues and immigration. But here we are 4 years later and most their candidates want no path to citizenship and won't take a stance on gay marriage or the confederate flag; hiding behind states right's and their crazy base.

[UK2K]

They said the same things leading up to the last election. It was hilarious watching them backtrack all week and talk about how they have to change their stance on social issues and immigration. But here we are 4 years later and most their candidates want no path to citizenship and won't take a stance on gay marriage or the confederate flag; hiding behind states right's and their crazy base.

You guys did well in the last election cycle.

[rufuspaul]

Straight from the Fox News/Rush Limbaugh echo chamber.

If Hillary loses (doubtful at this point) it won't be because of whatever manufactured "scandals" the GOP trots out.


They might try to manufacture some things but there are so many skeletons in the Clinton's closet that they really don't have to. The question is: do voters really care?

Right now Hillary is the frontrunner and the Republicans have their work cut out for them to get a candidate that will have the support of their base but still appeal as a moderate. Tough to do, but not impossible. I think that a right wing, tea party, religious fanatic, gun toting, *** hating, white Southerner would vote for a moderate Republican candidate over Hillary. He wouldn't be happy about it, but he ain't voting for no Clinton woman.

[UK2K]

I definitely think Republicans can win but they're gonna have a lot of work to do. Right now the electoral college doesn't really favor them and they have to flip a lot of swing states

If the GOP doesn't win this election, they probably never will.

Minorities are ****ing like stoned rabbits.


Another notable change during this period was the rise in births to unmarried women. In 2008, a record 41% of births in the United States were to unmarried women, up from 28% in 1990. The share of births that are non-marital is highest for black women (72%), followed by Hispanics (53%), whites (29%) and Asians (17%), but the increase over the past two decades has been greatest for whites — the share rose 69%.

AKA, minorities are going out getting sexed up, popping out kids left and right, with no regard for their welfare because the state will cover up their mistakes over and over.


The share of births to foreign-born mothers, 15% of U.S. births in 1990, has grown at least 60% through 2004. Births to foreign-born women in 2004 accounted for the majority of Hispanic (61%) and Asian (83%) births.

Not to mention people aren't dumb, they know if they can just hold that baby in until they cross that imaginary border, they can pop out an American citizen and they'll be free from (what little there is) deportation.

White women are delaying having children in order to be financially sound, and to educate themselves, whereas minorities DGAF.

Check this out...

Births by age and race of mother:

From 13-19 years of age

Whites: 120,623
Blacks: 72,548
Hispanics: 104,118

Tell me how it is acceptable that blacks and Hispanics, who make up about 26% of the population of this country, make up nearly 70% of birth mothers under the age of 19.

The average age for first time pregnancies for white women was 26. The average age of first time pregnant Hispanics? 23.1. For Blacks? 22.7.

Some on here want to sit and argue that we are 'diversifying' the country, which is true. We are also slowly grinding this country into a shit hole, a giant cesspool of welfare, stupidity, and crime.

At some point though, it will become obvious. There are not doctors jumping the borders. There are no chemists, or engineers, or physicists, its the lowest of the low, the shit heads that have no future and no skills.

So truth be told, if the GOP doesn't win this, or the next, election, they will be bred out, kinda like the British did to the Irish. How did it go? "If we can't get them out, we'll breed them out". Couple that with leftist brainwashing starting as soon as elementary schools (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/02/09/republicans-described-as-unwilling-to-help-poor-in-classroom-assignment-parent/) and before you know it, you have an indoctrinated army of minorities willing to do what they're told.

Congrats. You will win the presidency sooner rather than later. Now though, elections are more about whose side is 'winning' as opposed to whats right for America. The left will win at some point, through sheer numbers. Hope it's all worth it.

[UK2K]

They might try to manufacture some things but there are so many skeletons in the Clinton's closet that they really don't have to. The question is: do voters really care?

Right now Hillary is the frontrunner and the Republicans have their work cut out for them to get a candidate that will have the support of their base but still appeal as a moderate. Tough to do, but not impossible. I think that a right wing, tea party, religious fanatic, gun toting, *** hating, white Southerner would vote for a moderate Republican candidate over Hillary. He wouldn't be happy about it, but he ain't voting for no Clinton woman.
Anybody should be embarrassed to vote for her.

The problem is, 80% of this country is too dumb and/or don't care enough to really analyze the candidates.

[Real Men Wear Green]

And now he's attacking McCain...methinks the fall has begun. Got all the way up to #1 in the polls though and I think he'll still be around for some of the debates.

[Droid101]

The problem is, 80% of this country is too dumb and/or don't care enough to really analyze the candidates.
Please I'd love to hear your expert analysis of the Republican clowncar primary candidates. :lol

[KingBeasley08]

Fck Game of Thrones and House of Cards. The 2016 Republican Primary's are gonna easily be the most entertaining show on television

[Patrick Chewing]

Please I'd love to hear your expert analysis of the Republican clowncar primary candidates. :lol


Here's an analysis. They're all more qualified than Obama, and surely more qualified and smarter than a brown clown like you.

[NumberSix]

Hilary is sketchy, but I would vote for her over McCain or Romney.

[TripleA]

Here's an analysis. They're all more qualified than Obama, and surely more qualified and smarter than a brown clown like you.
Other than Obama being a democrat why is he so bad. I'm gonna turn 18 when the election starts and both parties here reasoning for their being better are so vague.

[Godzuki]

Trump has a point about Mccain. We throw the term hero around loosely. they're calling the girl who survived a plane crash and found safety a hero. everyone who survives annything becomes a hero. then what does that make a real hero who saves 5 others? kills a 100 bad guys?

I seriously may vote for Trump. i hate his far right platforms but dude is taking on a lot of the stupid in the political correctness of America.

[TripleA]

Trump has a point about Mccain. We throw the term hero around loosely. they're calling the girl who survived a plane crash and found safety a hero. everyone who survives annything becomes a hero. then what does that make a real hero who saves 5 others? kills a 100 bad guys?

I seriously may vote for Trump. i hate his far right platforms but dude is taking on a lot of the stupid in the political correctness of America.

:applause: stupid like you.

[Godzuki]

:applause: stupid like you.


some of us think for ourselves, and then theres lots of low IQ sheep like you who believes whatever the media portrays :pimp:

[Patrick Chewing]

Other than Obama being a democrat why is he so bad. I'm gonna turn 18 when the election starts and both parties here reasoning for their being better are so vague.


From a non-political standpoint, the country seems to be at war with each other since he took over. Blacks and whites disagreeing like it was the 60's. People backing down due to Political Correctness. It's insane.

And to me, he's a borderline racist opportunist. He has no problem showing up to black funerals and excusing black culture, but the assclown is half white too ya know?? Show a little respect to your other half and maybe we wouldn't have all this racial division.


Politically, his foreign policies are non-existent. Amnestying illegals is borderline treasonous, not to mention all the times he's circumvented Congress.

Here's my list of Obama's bad ideas:

1. Obamacare (Oh you have no insurance? Pay up!)
2. Bowe Bergdahl for 5 ruthless terrorists
3. Iran deal while they shout "death to America"
4. Shitting on those who legally become citizens by amnestying illegals.
5. Interjecting himself into social issues. "If I had a son..."

[TripleA]

From a non-political standpoint, the country seems to be at war with each other since he took over. Blacks and whites disagreeing like it was the 60's. People backing down due to Political Correctness. It's insane.

And to me, he's a borderline racist opportunist. He has no problem showing up to black funerals and excusing black culture, but the assclown is half white too ya know?? Show a little respect to your other half and maybe we wouldn't have all this racial division.


Politically, his foreign policies are non-existent. Amnestying illegals is borderline treasonous, not to mention all the times he's circumvented Congress.

Here's my list of Obama's bad ideas:

1. Obamacare (Oh you have no insurance? Pay up!)
2. Bowe Bergdahl for 5 ruthless terrorists
3. Iran deal while they shout "death to America"
4. Shitting on those who legally become citizens by amnestying illegals.
5. Interjecting himself into social issues. "If I had a son..."

Fair points. I would just drone the terrorists and take Bergdahl but whatever.
Who do you think is better Obama or Hilary.

[Patrick Chewing]

Fair points. I would just drone the terrorists and take berg dark but whatever.
Who do you think is better Obama or Hilary.

Ha! I rather take a taser to my nuts.



I don't think Hillary has a chance, but let's play devil's advocate. Hillary is an Obama clone in terms of domestic policy, but I can see her being a bit more tough globally. Yes, I want to see boots on the ground against ISIS. ISIS is forcing kids to behead prisoners. How can any country, especially ours allow that to happen??

The Democratic Party has been overrun by these delusional politically correct pacifists that think if the terrorists "had jobs", that they wouldn't be killing people. For that exact quote, go and Youtube Marie Harf and terrorist jobs. Unreal. No way Hillary gets voted for a 2nd term. You will see the rise of a 3rd party (possibly the resurgence of the Tea Party) come out guns blazing in 2020 and lead us back to the promised land.

[IcanzIIravor]

Other than Obama being a democrat why is he so bad. I'm gonna turn 18 when the election starts and both parties here reasoning for their being better are so vague.

My suggestion is to register as an independent.

Start with a site like this to educate yourself and go from there.

http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm

[Dresta]

From a non-political standpoint, the country seems to be at war with each other since he took over. Blacks and whites disagreeing like it was the 60's. People backing down due to Political Correctness. It's insane.

And to me, he's a borderline racist opportunist. He has no problem showing up to black funerals and excusing black culture, but the assclown is half white too ya know?? Show a little respect to your other half and maybe we wouldn't have all this racial division.


Politically, his foreign policies are non-existent. Amnestying illegals is borderline treasonous, not to mention all the times he's circumvented Congress.

Here's my list of Obama's bad ideas:

1. Obamacare (Oh you have no insurance? Pay up!)
2. Bowe Bergdahl for 5 ruthless terrorists
3. Iran deal while they shout "death to America"
4. Shitting on those who legally become citizens by amnestying illegals.
5. Interjecting himself into social issues. "If I had a son..."
He's a community organiser; community organisers thrive off societal divisions, which is why Obama has been working so hard to widen them - tis all he knows.

[RidonKs]

[QUOTE=KevinNYC]ARNOLDS PARK, IA

[KevinNYC]

[Trollsmasher]

[QUOTE=KevinNYC]

[KevinNYC]

hearsay

3rd hand sources

libel
Nope.

If you followed the link you'll find this is a first hand accusation in a sworn deposition. If Trump wants to sue for libel, he needs to sue the person who made the first-hand accusation in a sworn deposition. He did not. She did pretty well

Donald and Ivana Trump are closing the book on their highly public divorce. She gets $14 million, a 45-room Greenwich, Conn., mansion, an apartment in the Trump Plaza, and the use of the 118-room Mar-a-Lago mansion in Florida for one month a year.

The settlement, under which Mr. Trump will also pay about $650,000 annually to support the couple's three children

If Trump sues, like he is threatening to, it will get tossed out of court. He also had the chance to sue for libel 20 years ago when the book came out.


I less interested in if Ivana was telling the truth, than Trump's gangster lawyer treatening the reporters AND claiming a husband can't rape his wife.