Jump to content


Are the PUB candidates shooting each other down to Obamas benefit ?

PuegotDaddy

By PuegotDaddy,
in Politics & Religion

Recommended Posts

johnnyrodgers20 Five-Star Recruit

johnnyrodgers20

Posted
Posted

Yes we need more jack booted thugs to even things out over here ... You guys need to get it together as the Black Walnut is too sexy for the job ! WAKE UP and get NEWT in there , or President Hussien is going to make you sorry ....

 

I like his foreign policy and his proposed audit of the Fed.

 

Other than that, he's a bit wacky.

 

I really don't like much of anything about the other candidates.

 

Some of his foreign policy sounds OK, but he really leans to the isolationist mentality we had back before the world wars. Locking down the borders and withdrawing from world politics never leads to anything good.

 

I don't see it as "isolationist" to not not be occupying and bombing several nations, and to have several hundred military bases all over the world.

 

Paul (from what I recall) has called for constructive engagement with the rest of the world, not a retreat from it.

He's open about withdrawing from NATO and the UN. Which would really hurt our influence on the world stage.

 

 

I just hope Cain drops out...knock on wood.

 

 

Yosarian........................Good to see you posting over here !!............(I'm a relative newbie here after the shutdown at the old joint)...............

 

Who are these jack booted thugs you are referring to? :dunno

Link to comment

Comish Starter

Comish

Posted
Posted
He's [Paul] open about withdrawing from NATO and the UN. Which would really hurt our influence on the world stage.

 

The UN is a disfunctional organization, and NATO should be disbanded.

 

Should have happened twenty years ago..................

Link to comment
HuZkurZ Recruit

HuZkurZ

Posted
Posted
Paul doesn't seem to be anymore than "Hey, lets get rid of all rules and regulations, and let the greedy businesses do whatever they want, and it will all work out" And really, thats how we got into the mess we are in now in the first place.

 

I like his foreign policy and his proposed audit of the Fed.

 

Other than that, he's a bit wacky.

 

I really don't like much of anything about the other candidates.

 

Not too wacky when compared to Kucinich.

Link to comment

VectorVictor Defensive Coordinator

VectorVictor

Posted
Posted

Who's that? That's the guy the mainstream press decided long ago you wouldn't hear about because there's no way he can win the nomination. Which becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. They made the guideline (which they don't follow) that a candidate has to score at least 2% in their polls to be invited to the debate. Sounds reasonable, right? Except they don't put Johnson's name on the poll as a choice. So he doesn't make the 2% threshold, isn't invited to the debates, and isn't covered by the media because he isn't even a 'serious enough' candidate to make it to the polls. Pretty disgusting.

 

You would do well to save the tin-foil hat conspiracy theory for something more, well, deserving.

 

The % rule you speak of comes directly from both parties, and falls in line with the percentage requirements required at the Federal level to receive matching funds--rules that both Democrats and Republicans agreed upon some time ago to prevent a viable third party from being formed without having to endure a lot of difficulty.

 

Plus, let's be honest here--there are dozens of folks that say they run for President every year--I believe the Whigs have a candidate again this year? :) You have to set a threshold, otherwise an already crowded debate is going to become more chock full 'o candidates, and no one wins.

Link to comment
Sub-Husker Scout Team

Sub-Husker

Posted
Posted
Who's that? That's the guy the mainstream press decided long ago you wouldn't hear about because there's no way he can win the nomination. Which becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. They made the guideline (which they don't follow) that a candidate has to score at least 2% in their polls to be invited to the debate. Sounds reasonable, right? Except they don't put Johnson's name on the poll as a choice. So he doesn't make the 2% threshold, isn't invited to the debates, and isn't covered by the media because he isn't even a 'serious enough' candidate to make it to the polls. Pretty disgusting.

 

It sure is.

 

Our system gaurantees that running a campaign costs lots of money, and the only way to get that is from corporations, and the only way to get that is to toe their line.

Link to comment
Sub-Husker Scout Team

Sub-Husker

Posted
Posted
You would do well to save the tin-foil hat conspiracy theory for something more, well, deserving.

 

Wow, that's a good way to start out on the right foot.

 

The % rule you speak of comes directly from both parties, and falls in line with the percentage requirements required at the Federal level to receive matching funds--rules that both Democrats and Republicans agreed upon some time ago to prevent a viable third party from being formed without having to endure a lot of difficulty.

 

Yes... the Republocrats and Democans are very protective of their monopoly on power.

 

Plus, let's be honest here--there are dozens of folks that say they run for President every year--I believe the Whigs have a candidate again this year? :) You have to set a threshold, otherwise an already crowded debate is going to become more chock full 'o candidates, and no one wins.

 

Why not make debate/ballot access dependant on getting signatures?

Link to comment

gobiggergoredder Starter

gobiggergoredder

Posted
Posted

Shakedown....continued.

 

http://news.yahoo.co...-080946066.html

 

 

You do know that there have been numerous people who have, unfortunately, been the victim of harassment at two different jobs, right? The fact that she complained at back-to-back jobs shouldn't cloud your impression of her complaint against Cain.

 

There's a little more to it than that knapp. Read the article.

 

Can't recall details...c'mon.

Link to comment
redblooded Five-Star Recruit

redblooded

Posted
Posted

The guy has multiple sexual sexual harassment allegations, and monetary settlements including NDAs. Yet people really think this is some sort of shakedown?

 

The damn sad thing is, these allegations are the smallest reason why he shouldn't be elected. Reason number one is the guy is a freaking idiot. From things like "china developing nuclear weapons" to Islamic Mosques using the first amendment to violate the separation of church and state if you listen to him talk it's clear he has no idea what the hell he's talking about quite a bit. This is the republican frontrunner for gods sakes. How many halfwits and twits are in that party and voting for this guy?? Probably the same bunch of people that were trying to rewrite the history of Paul Revere's ride when Palin got hit with a "gotcha" question about elementary school history at a site she was visiting. Take a step back and think about this for a minute, as a party... right now... this is the best you've got.

Link to comment
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...