2016 Election Thread

[Craig Arko]

 

Is anyone else more hung up on the part where he said "scientists say aliens helped???"

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

Is anyone else more hung up on the part where he said "scientists say aliens helped???"

 

it is one of my favorite parts, yes. I should have mentioned that. And, sorry I said Moses earlier, my bad.

[Willihammer]

Although in truth, suggesting that God aided is just as whacko. More pandering too.

[drjim]

No, discussing grain storage and Moses really cannot be taken from the Bible. Nothing turning pyramids to food storage is Biblical either.

To be clear and in fairness, Carson didn't mention Moses and the pyramids, he said Joseph (Moses reference was honest mistake by Mike). And the Bible isn't clear what the granaries of Joseph were made of.

[biggentleben]

 

To be clear and in fairness, Carson didn't mention Moses and the pyramids, he said Joseph (Moses reference was honest mistake by Mike). And the Bible isn't clear what the granaries of Joseph were made of.

 

Okay, then the Moses bit is excused, but I've never heard from a single theologian I know (and yes, I know a few that teach various aspects of theology for different seminaries) make any claim that the pyramids were what were referenced. The same Hebrew was used for "store houses" many times throughout the old testament, but I'm guessing no one wants to claim there were pyramids all over the middle east.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Okay, then the Moses bit is excused, but I've never heard from a single theologian I know (and yes, I know a few that teach various aspects of theology for different seminaries) make any claim that the pyramids were what were referenced. The same Hebrew was used for "store houses" many times throughout the old testament, but I'm guessing no one wants to claim there were pyramids all over the middle east.

 

Of course there were pyramids all over the middle east, satan removed them to confuse you about Egypt. Keep up, sir, keep up.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Hmmm.

 

Start out wanting to talk about issues, end up wanting to sterilize the opposition. Sounds about like a typical term in public office.

 

Hey, at least I'm keeping them alive in my scenario!

[Craig Arko]

Ziggurat's were more common in the area anyway, and maybe older than the pyramids. Probably were easier to build.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziggurat

[mikecgrimes]

 

John Oliver's attacks know no ideology. Some are against government waste and stupidity and others point out the hypocrisy of people like this schmuck.

He seriously bailed out his failed company with government money. But he says the right things to a mass of idiots and they vote him in.

 

If you say so.

[mikecgrimes]

 

You obviously know nothing about John Oliver.

 

Yes, he's liberal but he's just as willing to take swings at the left as he does the right (he's one of the few people on TV who has aggressively gone after Obama for his drone usage).

 

I see you're not actually defending Matt Bevin here, though... Instead, you choose to use an ad hominem attack on Oliver. It's not John Oliver's fault Matt Bevin is a slimeball.

 

I'm not defending Bevin?  I'm sorry I don't have time to care about the dirt John Oliver is throwing at him.  He won, and when he runs for president and people a little more significant then Oliver want to investigate him I'll defend him.

[mikecgrimes]

 

John Kasich is the only guy in the GOP field that doesn't turn my stomach... And just like Jon Huntsman in 2012, he's basically ignored by the GOP base.

 

No not ignored at all.  We considered him and moved on.  If you want John Kasich vote for Clinton.

[TheLeviathan]

 

If you say so.

 

Well, no, reality says so.

 

If you want to vote for someone that claims to be about small government while he milked the tax payers to save his failed business, then you go right ahead.  Seems like exactly the WORST kind of person to put into a major office.

 

But as has been shown time again, as long as you spout the right talking points at Tea Partyers (no matter how dumb or demonstrably false they may be) you have a chance to win an election.

 

Seriously, the guy asked "What business does government have in marriage?"  That right there is grounds for a 24/7 dunce cap on your head.

[formerly33]

 

I feel like if I voted for Donald Duck this year I'd be making a more rational vote than pretty much anything on the actual ballot.

That's interesting because about five or so years ago my older brother drew a cartoon of a polygamous Donald Duck whose wives were named Marla, Ivana, and Melania.

[Craig Arko]

It would be more fun to vote for Howard the Duck.

[ashbury]

That's interesting because about five or so years ago my older brother drew a cartoon of a polygamous Donald Duck whose wives were named Marla, Ivana, and Melania.

http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/properties/bizarro/art_images/cg56183815bab8a.jpg

A recent cartoon on the funny pages.

[drjim]

 

No not ignored at all.  We considered him and moved on.  If you want John Kasich vote for Clinton.

 

I suspect enough Americans will take you up on this offer.

[Shane Wahl]

Rubio and Bush still remain as the only two people the GOP can possibly be serious about in a general election. Clinton simply destroys the rest of them.

[mikecgrimes]

 

Rubio and Bush still remain as the only two people the GOP can possibly be serious about in a general election. Clinton simply destroys the rest of them.

 

So play it safe and have no convictions, and make sure nothing changes?  I'd rather vote for Clinton.  By the way how did that work out for us with McCain and Rommney.  I guess we just have to assume it would have beem worse with Ron Paul. 

 

I'd like to see Ted Cruz get 35% so you all can do a little happy dance cause you were right.  Only problem is I don't think you're right.

[TheLeviathan]

I won't be doing any happy dances about Clinton vs Cruz.

 

Probably more wallowing in hopelessness in that scenario.

[USAFChief]

I won't be doing any happy dances about Clinton vs Cruz.

Probably more wallowing in hopelessness in that scenario.

I would.

 

I don't want to see where we end up with R's in charge of both houses and the Oval Office, and a Ted Cruz nomination virtually eliminates that possibility.

[Squirrel]

I would.

I don't want to see where we end up with R's in charge of both houses and the Oval Office, and a Ted Cruz nomination virtually eliminates that possibility.

This. A thousand times this. I've said it many times but I'll say it again. As long as the republicans are who they are, and me being a woman, I will do a happy dance whenever they are defeated, whoever defeats them.

[TheLeviathan]

I would.

I don't want to see where we end up with R's in charge of both houses and the Oval Office, and a Ted Cruz nomination virtually eliminates that possibility.

I agree about that, but defaulting to Clinton is a bitter pill to swallow with it.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I'm not defending Bevin?  I'm sorry I don't have time to care about the dirt John Oliver is throwing at him.  He won, and when he runs for president and people a little more significant then Oliver want to investigate him I'll defend him.

So you don't care that he flat-out lied during a debate and preaches small government while gladly taking a huge pile of cash from the government for his own business.

 

Nice politicking you got there.

 

So you don't care what Matt Bevin says or does, provided the "correct" news source doesn't cover it. Got it.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I won't be doing any happy dances about Clinton vs Cruz.

Probably more wallowing in hopelessness in that scenario.

Same here, really. While I utterly despise Cruz, I don't like Clinton, either.

 

I'm really tired of Douche vs. Turd Sandwich elections.

[Squirrel]

Same here, really. While I utterly despise Cruz, I don't like Clinton, either.

 

I'm really tired of Douche vs. Turd Sandwich elections.

I don't disagree with the pill swallowing of choosing the lesser of evils in elections, but I will still be happy dancing for my own personal well being at the defeat of any of the current republican nominees. They are beyond 'douche vs turd,' they are downright frightening and there will be much sighing of relief and happy dancing for any of them being defeated.

[Craig Arko]

I understand Ron Gardenhire is looking for work.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I don't disagree with the pill swallowing of choosing the lesser of evils in elections, but I will still be happy dancing for my own personal well being at the defeat of any of the current republican nominees. They are beyond 'douche vs turd,' they are downright frightening and there will be much sighing of relief and happy dancing for any of them being defeated.

I don't disagree - I dislike Clinton but I'm certainly not scared of her ideas - it's more of a "I've been beaten down with our choices over the past 20 or so years".

 

But Clinton really irritates me. I have absolutely no idea what she genuinely believes in. She's a professional politician who panders to the crowd to such a degree I have little idea where she actually stands on the issues.

 

One day, it's gay marriage, "BOO!" The next, it's a rainbow ****ing flag campaign logo. She's a political ping pong ball and I struggle to respect anyone who runs on that kind of (very mobile) platform. Obama isn't much different, when you get right down to it. The Great Left Hope who ends up being a wishy-washy centrist for most of his tenure.

[Craig Arko]

The land of E Pluribus Chaos.

[Mike Sixel]

 

So play it safe and have no convictions, and make sure nothing changes?  I'd rather vote for Clinton.  By the way how did that work out for us with McCain and Rommney.  I guess we just have to assume it would have beem worse with Ron Paul. 

 

I'd like to see Ted Cruz get 35% so you all can do a little happy dance cause you were right.  Only problem is I don't think you're right.

 

Except, when they get into power, nothing does change......no matter how many seats the Koch brothers and other rich people (on either side) buy....nothing really changes.

 

Republicans scream and yell about "big government", then INSIST that their state gets more and more money. Democrats yell about wanting to help the poor, then cut taxes and continue to subsidize big business and fight against logical changes in the system that would reduce waste (allowing more money to go to the poor).

 

Nothing really changes when it comes to taxing and spending in this country. Fortunately, eventually, we do largely end up with more freedom as we go, but that's about it.

[formerly33]

 

I don't disagree - I dislike Clinton but I'm certainly not scared of her ideas - it's more of a "I've been beaten down with our choices over the past 20 or so years".

 

But Clinton really irritates me. I have absolutely no idea what she genuinely believes in. She's a professional politician who panders to the crowd to such a degree I have little idea where she actually stands on the issues.

 

One day, it's gay marriage, "BOO!" The next, it's a rainbow ****ing flag campaign logo. She's a political ping pong ball and I struggle to respect anyone who runs on that kind of (very mobile) platform. Obama isn't much different, when you get right down to it. The Great Left Hope who ends up being a wishy-washy centrist for most of his tenure.

Well, what do you prefer? A politician who literally said that women fantasize about being raped but changes his mind as soon as he needs to present a better image to his female audience, or, as you so eloquently put it, a gay marriage "BOO!" and then a rainbow ****ing flag campaign logo?

 

At least you know Hillary's always going to be on the majority's side. Vote her in and you get what you want (or at least what you asked for). And I can assure you, she's not just pretending to be on the LGBT side to get their votes. As you guys have been saying over and over in various other threads, people can change their ideas for the better concerning SSM.

 

And you know what? Bernie didn't even change his mind. He just got his office to claim that it was a "dumb attempt at a dark satire." Dumb? I'll say! That would be like saying in response to rape victims having abortions, "Make them marry their aggressor instead." Dumb, right? Worse than dumb; it's ****ing insane. And I have a hard time believing it was satirical anyway since everything else he said was dead serious.

 

I'll take Hillary over Sanders any day.