(07-28-2013 12:33 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 12:16 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 11:58 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Would think it would be interesting to see Bill as First Guy,

Guessing he'd be in charge of the interns.

Bill Clinton isn't in office and isn't running for anything. David Vitter (R-Prostitution) still holds his seat in the Senate, with the support of the GOP.

(07-26-2013 10:03 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I have mixed views of Gov. Christie. Offhand, I think he starts off the campaign as someone who is "acceptable" to rank-and-file GOP-supporters, but others are acceptable, too. It will be up to Christie to make the sale, if he can, when the time comes.

In reaction to firmbizzle's comment, I'll make two predictions about 2016 right now:

1. People who feel comfortable voting for HRC are probably not going to have much (or any) influence over the selection of the GOP nominee.

2. The GOP nominee is probably not going to have much (or any) appeal to people who feel comfortable voting for HRC.

We will see if either of those predictions turn out to be true. I hope that both of them do. But if they do, that will be a sign to me that Republicans are doing their party a lot of good.

I agree. Christie however would have crossover appeal and make a run in the NE.

(07-26-2013 11:06 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 10:54 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  The Democratic Party is a big tent, liberals, progressives, centrists, moderates and conservatives are included.

The D's and the R's are roughly equal in terms of ideological range, and in terms of tolerance/encouragement to dissenting views within the party.

Sorry - as someone who use to vote republican I would love to know what drugs you are on!

(07-28-2013 01:58 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 10:03 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I have mixed views of Gov. Christie. Offhand, I think he starts off the campaign as someone who is "acceptable" to rank-and-file GOP-supporters, but others are acceptable, too. It will be up to Christie to make the sale, if he can, when the time comes.

In reaction to firmbizzle's comment, I'll make two predictions about 2016 right now:

1. People who feel comfortable voting for HRC are probably not going to have much (or any) influence over the selection of the GOP nominee.

2. The GOP nominee is probably not going to have much (or any) appeal to people who feel comfortable voting for HRC.

We will see if either of those predictions turn out to be true. I hope that both of them do. But if they do, that will be a sign to me that Republicans are doing their party a lot of good.

I agree. Christie however would have crossover appeal and make a run in the NE.

Making a run isn't winning. Not good enough.

Christie has that gruff, abrasive, (NJ?) attitude. It appeals to some but I have to wonder if it might wear thin in a drawn out presidential race?

(07-28-2013 05:36 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Christie has that gruff, abrasive, (NJ?) attitude. It appeals to some but I have to wonder if it might wear thin in a drawn out presidential race?

He's a pro-life Rudy.

(07-28-2013 12:31 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 01:45 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 07:58 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 07:20 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 07:12 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Point me to ONE success in sHillary's political career. I'm not talking about getting elected in NY as a carpetbagger. That's not an accomplishment in terms of a track record. Successfully lying and covering up about Benghazi isn't either.

The Clinton legacy.

Wrong Clinton.

She has more experience in the WH than anybody that is eligible besides Carter & Bush 1.

And zero accountability, not that that seems to matter.

Debbie downer. Mr. Accountability.

(07-28-2013 06:18 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 12:31 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 01:45 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 07:58 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(07-27-2013 07:20 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  The Clinton legacy.

Wrong Clinton.

She has more experience in the WH than anybody that is eligible besides Carter & Bush 1.

And zero accountability, not that that seems to matter.

Debbie downer. Mr. Accountability.

inorite

Christie is not a true conservative.

(07-28-2013 06:51 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Christie is not a true conservative.

What constitutes a "true" conservative?

(07-28-2013 06:54 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 06:51 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Christie is not a true conservative.

What constitutes a "true" conservative?

If you have to ask you will never know.

(07-28-2013 06:55 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 06:54 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 06:51 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Christie is not a true conservative.

What constitutes a "true" conservative?

If you have to ask you will never know.

Oh I think I know but I would like to hear what you think. I doubt there are many candidates out there that can pass the "true" conservative litmus test.

Ronald Reagan couldn't pass the litmus test nowadays. Just like in the 1970s and 80's, when the Dems insistence on a rigid litmus test hurt them, the GOP's insistence is doing the same today.

Lets review how its working out for them:

2006 (0/2 - Dems won the national vote for House and Senate)
2008 (0/3 - Dems won the national vote for House, Senate, and the Presidency)
2010 (1/1 - GOP won the national House vote, but lost the national Senate vote - largely due to candidates who could pass a litmus test with the irrational GOP base, but couldn't win a general election - ever)
2012 (0/3 - Dems won the national vote for House, Senate and the Presidency - the GOP controls the House due to gerrymandering - the Dems got more votes for Congress than the GOP).

I'm reading 1/10 for the GOP.

(07-28-2013 08:17 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Ronald Reagan couldn't pass the litmus test nowadays. Just like in the 1970s and 80's, when the Dems insistence on a rigid litmus test hurt them, the GOP's insistence is doing the same today.

Lets review how its working out for them:

2006 (0/2 - Dems won the national vote for House and Senate)
2008 (0/3 - Dems won the national vote for House, Senate, and the Presidency)
2010 (1/1 - GOP won the national House vote, but lost the national Senate vote - largely due to candidates who could pass a litmus test with the irrational GOP base, but couldn't win a general election - ever)
2012 (0/3 - Dems won the national vote for House, Senate and the Presidency - the GOP controls the House due to gerrymandering - the Dems got more votes for Congress than the GOP).

I'm reading 1/10 for the GOP.

Guess you will have to vote for Christie. Since you libs like him so much.

(07-28-2013 08:36 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 08:17 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Ronald Reagan couldn't pass the litmus test nowadays. Just like in the 1970s and 80's, when the Dems insistence on a rigid litmus test hurt them, the GOP's insistence is doing the same today.

Lets review how its working out for them:

2006 (0/2 - Dems won the national vote for House and Senate)
2008 (0/3 - Dems won the national vote for House, Senate, and the Presidency)
2010 (1/1 - GOP won the national House vote, but lost the national Senate vote - largely due to candidates who could pass a litmus test with the irrational GOP base, but couldn't win a general election - ever)
2012 (0/3 - Dems won the national vote for House, Senate and the Presidency - the GOP controls the House due to gerrymandering - the Dems got more votes for Congress than the GOP).

I'm reading 1/10 for the GOP.

Guess you will have to vote for Christie. Since you libs like him so much.

Actually he much more Conservative than his reputation. I'm not a fan. And if he runs, he'll have to run to the right.

Christie is the only Republican that conceivably beat HRC or Mark Warner right now with the exception of NM Gov Susana Martinez (who would be much more dangerous to the Dems than Rubio - but she's not interested and she probably can't win the nomination).

I'm glad the GOP is going to nominate some far right ideologue that can't win the general election. It makes it so much easier for us.

(07-28-2013 06:54 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 06:51 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Christie is not a true conservative.

What constitutes a "true" conservative?

1.) Hate Obama. 2.) Desire to dismantle all forms of government. 3.) B1tch and complain about everything. 4.) Angry 5.) Paranoid

Christie is going to be on the Liberal ticket for 2016. It's the only hope they have at keeping the WH.

(07-28-2013 10:05 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 06:54 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 06:51 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Christie is not a true conservative.

What constitutes a "true" conservative?

1.) Hate Obama. 2.) Desire to dismantle all forms of government. 3.) B1tch and complain about everything. 4.) Angry 5.) Paranoid

1) Yep 2) Nope. They need a government big enough to keep their taxpayer funded payola for their churches and to subsidize their private airports. Also need a government big enough to invade a woman's body and ban oral sex. 3) They don't complain about lots of things, such as people having no access to affordable healthcare, the shrinking middle class, gun violence, and any issue that might help minorities 4.) Yep. 5) Not all. But the Randists, Yep.

(07-28-2013 10:05 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 06:54 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 06:51 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Christie is not a true conservative.

What constitutes a "true" conservative?

1.) Hate Obama. 2.) Desire to dismantle all forms of government. 3.) B1tch and complain about everything. 4.) Angry 5.) Paranoid

Absolutely dead f-ing wrong on every one of those talking points. Stay delusional, my friend.

(07-29-2013 05:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 10:05 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 06:54 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-28-2013 06:51 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Christie is not a true conservative.

What constitutes a "true" conservative?

1.) Hate Obama. 2.) Desire to dismantle all forms of government. 3.) B1tch and complain about everything. 4.) Angry 5.) Paranoid

Absolutely dead f-ing wrong on every one of those talking points. Stay delusional, my friend.

Seriously, I'm conservative and don't agree with anything 1 through 5. I guess their talking points stick pretty well.