(03-02-2016 08:33 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 06:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  Kind of jumping off the deep end aren't you?

Marco is nearly as conservative as Cruz. He rates the same as Huckabee on this scale and more conservative than Rick Perry. Saw a separate article that said he was the 16th most conservative Senator.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/marc...servative/

Maybe he doesn't score well on your libertarian ratings, but saying he's not conservative is pretty ridiculous.

When I see Marco Rubio -- particularly his talking points in debates he reflexively utters and his rehearsed election night speeches -- I don't see the same guy who came in with the tea party wave. Well, physically, I see the same guy. But what I hear is the same speeches from the same people who wrote them for Dubya while he was in office. I genuinely believe Rubio has been fully co-opted by the establishment.

Rubio never says much of anything. I don't know how you can take his empty suit speeches as being less conservative. One of my beefs with him is that he rarely says anything. Just mindless feel good generalities. Very much the approach that got Romney beaten.

Basically his campaign speech has been. "I'm the most electable. Everybody else should drop out. Especially those that just beat me in the last primary."

(03-02-2016 09:21 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I don't like the establishment, either, but I don't hate them enough to want Donald J. ******* Trump as President of the United States.

Donny boy. Leader of the free world. Jesus wept.

I BET Jesus would vote for Trump over Clinton.

(03-02-2016 09:31 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 09:21 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I don't like the establishment, either, but I don't hate them enough to want Donald J. ******* Trump as President of the United States.

Donny boy. Leader of the free world. Jesus wept.

I BET Jesus would vote for Trump over Clinton.

I bet Jesus wouldn't vote for either of them.

The GOP is in one hell of a pickle. On one hand, they don't want Trump because he can't win the general election. On the other hand, if they push too hard, Trump goes third party. I love it.

(03-03-2016 12:03 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  The GOP is in one hell of a pickle. On one hand, they don't want Trump because he can't win the general election. On the other hand, if they push too hard, Trump goes third party. I love it.

Why can't he won? I remember a certain President who was underwater on his favorability throughout the campaign and won. I remember being told that if just elect Mitt, we can win because he has the lowest unfavorables.

In the end hypothetical polls don't matter. I know the Dems are afraid of Trump because their mouthpiece, the media, has been talking about how he can't win and Marco is the best choice. At some point the gop has to stop allowing people that want them to lose from picking their candidates.

The Empire strikes back.

(03-02-2016 08:33 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 06:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  Kind of jumping off the deep end aren't you?

Marco is nearly as conservative as Cruz. He rates the same as Huckabee on this scale and more conservative than Rick Perry. Saw a separate article that said he was the 16th most conservative Senator.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/marc...servative/

Maybe he doesn't score well on your libertarian ratings, but saying he's not conservative is pretty ridiculous.

When I see Marco Rubio -- particularly his talking points in debates he reflexively utters and his rehearsed election night speeches -- I don't see the same guy who came in with the tea party wave. Well, physically, I see the same guy. But what I hear is the same speeches from the same people who wrote them for Dubya while he was in office. I genuinely believe Rubio has been fully co-opted by the establishment.

He was never Tea Party. Charlie Crist got in trouble with the Tea Party and Marco was their convenient to go guy. He melted into whatever he had to be.

(03-03-2016 12:03 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  The GOP is in one hell of a pickle. On one hand, they don't want Trump because he can't win the general election. On the other hand, if they push too hard, Trump goes third party. I love it.

And the Democrats Aren't ?Aging Bernie the Commie and Soon to likely get indicted Hillary looking at possible Jail time. Jesus Wouldn't wish that disaster on anyone.

You forgot the most important concept of Brewster's Millions. Brewster has to spend his money in order to inherit more more. And that's kind of what Trump's plan was all along I think. Spend some money and increase his Trump brand. Like Brewster, he never intended to actually win this thing.

(03-02-2016 07:10 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 06:21 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Would the Democratic Establishment back Sanders?

This election seems familiar. I guess that is because I am a movie buff, because I have seen both of these movies before. They were Brewster's Millions and The Distinguished Gentleman.

In Brewster's Millions (1985, as there are several versions), Montgomery Brewster runs for mayor of New York with no real platform, no policy, no details: no real plan. He ran on the premise that the other candidates were so bad, everyone should vote for "none of the above, " which in this case is a vote for Trump.

Meanwhile Hilary Clinton, not to be outdone, is running what might be an even more devious campaign. Hers is based on on the premise of The Distinguished Gentlemen, where an unknown man runs for congress on the sole basis that his name is similar to the person who recently vacated the post (he died). His entire campaign slogan "Jeff Johnson, the name you know."

So what happens next? On the one hand, Brewster's Millions was by far the better movie. And "none of the above" won the election. But the last time the Brewster's strategy was tried by H. Ross Perot, he came up short. On the other hand Hilary Clinton just borrowed this strategy from our most recent former president, when it got him elected. And like the movie, no one really noticed it was not the same person since he kept all of the same people around, and did everything the same, and pretended to be the same person.

The future is not pretty either way.

(03-02-2016 10:09 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 09:31 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 09:21 PM)Smaug Wrote:  I don't like the establishment, either, but I don't hate them enough to want Donald J. ******* Trump as President of the United States.

Donny boy. Leader of the free world. Jesus wept.

I BET Jesus would vote for Trump over Clinton.

I bet Jesus wouldn't vote for either of them.

Jesus would be very strong for Trump. Trump loves Jesus and both Corinthians.

(03-02-2016 08:45 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 08:33 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 06:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  Kind of jumping off the deep end aren't you?
Marco is nearly as conservative as Cruz. He rates the same as Huckabee on this scale and more conservative than Rick Perry. Saw a separate article that said he was the 16th most conservative Senator.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/marc...servative/
Maybe he doesn't score well on your libertarian ratings, but saying he's not conservative is pretty ridiculous.

When I see Marco Rubio -- particularly his talking points in debates he reflexively utters and his rehearsed election night speeches -- I don't see the same guy who came in with the tea party wave. Well, physically, I see the same guy. But what I hear is the same speeches from the same people who wrote them for Dubya while he was in office. I genuinely believe Rubio has been fully co-opted by the establishment.

I agree. This just ain't the same guy. I liked the old one a lot better.

he's been polished from day 1......fox just dump-trumped his arse...

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/201...-news.html

(03-03-2016 09:36 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 08:45 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 08:33 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 06:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  Kind of jumping off the deep end aren't you?
Marco is nearly as conservative as Cruz. He rates the same as Huckabee on this scale and more conservative than Rick Perry. Saw a separate article that said he was the 16th most conservative Senator.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/marc...servative/
Maybe he doesn't score well on your libertarian ratings, but saying he's not conservative is pretty ridiculous.

When I see Marco Rubio -- particularly his talking points in debates he reflexively utters and his rehearsed election night speeches -- I don't see the same guy who came in with the tea party wave. Well, physically, I see the same guy. But what I hear is the same speeches from the same people who wrote them for Dubya while he was in office. I genuinely believe Rubio has been fully co-opted by the establishment.

I agree. This just ain't the same guy. I liked the old one a lot better.

he's been polished from day 1......fox just dump-trumped his arse...

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/201...-news.html

He used the Tea Party to ride the wave, but got to Washington and made fitting in with the party bosses his priority. That said, he was still the correct choice over Crist, which is even more obvious today.

(03-03-2016 09:49 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 09:36 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 08:45 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 08:33 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 06:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  Kind of jumping off the deep end aren't you?
Marco is nearly as conservative as Cruz. He rates the same as Huckabee on this scale and more conservative than Rick Perry. Saw a separate article that said he was the 16th most conservative Senator.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/marc...servative/
Maybe he doesn't score well on your libertarian ratings, but saying he's not conservative is pretty ridiculous.

When I see Marco Rubio -- particularly his talking points in debates he reflexively utters and his rehearsed election night speeches -- I don't see the same guy who came in with the tea party wave. Well, physically, I see the same guy. But what I hear is the same speeches from the same people who wrote them for Dubya while he was in office. I genuinely believe Rubio has been fully co-opted by the establishment.

I agree. This just ain't the same guy. I liked the old one a lot better.

he's been polished from day 1......fox just dump-trumped his arse...

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/201...-news.html

He used the Tea Party to ride the wave, but got to Washington and made fitting in with the party bosses his priority. That said, he was still the correct choice over Crist, which is even more obvious today.

Yes, on immigration he tried to work with Dems to soften their push for a more liberal immigration reform but he also stood firm on Obamacare and led the charge against it. Read this

Rubio should be talking about this more.

(03-02-2016 05:56 PM)bullet Wrote:  Clinton is a vast left wing evil nut case.

Trump's problem isn't Republicans voting for Clinton. Its Republicans not voting.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-do-the-...tial-race/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016...-record-d/

One might argue that the extremely high GOP turnout is based on fear of Trump winning, but based on the results so far I find that extremely hard to believe. What the numbers tell me are that a lot of people are voting for outsiders to take over and to "throw the bums out". The people are done with the GOP leadership, and it's driving turnout. If Trump wins the nomination, I expect a very high GOP and Independents turnout for him.

(03-03-2016 10:05 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 05:56 PM)bullet Wrote:  Clinton is a vast left wing evil nut case.

Trump's problem isn't Republicans voting for Clinton. Its Republicans not voting.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-do-the-...tial-race/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016...-record-d/

One might argue that the extremely high GOP turnout is based on fear of Trump winning, but based on the results so far I find that extremely hard to believe. What the numbers tell me are that a lot of people are voting for outsiders to take over and to "throw the bums out". The people are done with the GOP leadership, and it's driving turnout. If Trump wins the nomination, I expect a very high GOP and Independents turnout for him.

I expect the exact opposite. A very high turnout against Trump especially with Latinos and blacks once the democrats paint him as a racist. Most of the estsblishment GOP will stay home and Clinton will win easily. The lost will be the biggest in modern history.

(03-03-2016 08:06 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 07:10 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  This election seems familiar. I guess that is because I am a movie buff, because I have seen both of these movies before. They were Brewster's Millions and The Distinguished Gentleman.

In Brewster's Millions (1985, as there are several versions), Montgomery Brewster runs for mayor of New York with no real platform, no policy, no details: no real plan. He ran on the premise that the other candidates were so bad, everyone should vote for "none of the above, " which in this case is a vote for Trump.

You forgot the most important concept of Brewster's Millions. Brewster has to spend his money in order to inherit more more. And that's kind of what Trump's plan was all along I think. Spend some money and increase his Trump brand. Like Brewster, he never intended to actually win this thing.

It is funny you say that, because that has been my contention the entire time. I think that is even why he says the stupid stuff he does, almost trying to keep himself from winning. But like Montgomery Brewster, it keeps backfiring and making him MORE popular.

Granted I am starting to lean towards he may be in it to win it now, but I don't think he ever intended to win. If he wins, he has to back all of this **** up. And that is not a good position for him.

(03-03-2016 09:53 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 09:49 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 09:36 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 08:45 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 08:33 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  When I see Marco Rubio -- particularly his talking points in debates he reflexively utters and his rehearsed election night speeches -- I don't see the same guy who came in with the tea party wave. Well, physically, I see the same guy. But what I hear is the same speeches from the same people who wrote them for Dubya while he was in office. I genuinely believe Rubio has been fully co-opted by the establishment.

I agree. This just ain't the same guy. I liked the old one a lot better.

he's been polished from day 1......fox just dump-trumped his arse...

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/201...-news.html

He used the Tea Party to ride the wave, but got to Washington and made fitting in with the party bosses his priority. That said, he was still the correct choice over Crist, which is even more obvious today.

Yes, on immigration he tried to work with Dems to soften their push for a more liberal immigration reform but he also stood firm on Obamacare and led the charge against it. Read this

Rubio should be talking about this more.

The narrative will change next week when Rubio wins Florida and crushes Trump in Illinois. The Trump campaign is still dumping on Rubio because he crush Trump in the Urban areas. In GA Rubio won Atlanta and Athens. Trump won all the rural counties, same in VA. This scares the Trump campaign with the Urban states coming up

(03-03-2016 10:22 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 10:05 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 05:56 PM)bullet Wrote:  Clinton is a vast left wing evil nut case.

Trump's problem isn't Republicans voting for Clinton. Its Republicans not voting.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-do-the-...tial-race/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016...-record-d/

One might argue that the extremely high GOP turnout is based on fear of Trump winning, but based on the results so far I find that extremely hard to believe. What the numbers tell me are that a lot of people are voting for outsiders to take over and to "throw the bums out". The people are done with the GOP leadership, and it's driving turnout. If Trump wins the nomination, I expect a very high GOP and Independents turnout for him.

I expect the exact opposite. A very high turnout against Trump especially with Latinos and blacks once the democrats paint him as a racist. Most of the estsblishment GOP will stay home and Clinton will win easily. The lost will be the biggest in modern history.

The GOP has quite a conundrum. If the people who are supporting Trump feel that their guy is being screwed by the RNC, then they will stay home and not vote. I get what you think will happen, but I disagree. This election is going to be all about economics and national security. IMHO, Trump can bridge the gap with blacks and Latinos through economics.

Again, GOP turnout for these primaries are quite high. Without Trump, the enthusiasm wouldn't be at this level. The numbers seem to bear that out.

(03-03-2016 10:34 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-03-2016 08:06 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(03-02-2016 07:10 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  This election seems familiar. I guess that is because I am a movie buff, because I have seen both of these movies before. They were Brewster's Millions and The Distinguished Gentleman.

In Brewster's Millions (1985, as there are several versions), Montgomery Brewster runs for mayor of New York with no real platform, no policy, no details: no real plan. He ran on the premise that the other candidates were so bad, everyone should vote for "none of the above, " which in this case is a vote for Trump.

You forgot the most important concept of Brewster's Millions. Brewster has to spend his money in order to inherit more more. And that's kind of what Trump's plan was all along I think. Spend some money and increase his Trump brand. Like Brewster, he never intended to actually win this thing.

It is funny you say that, because that has been my contention the entire time. I think that is even why he says the stupid stuff he does, almost trying to keep himself from winning. But like Montgomery Brewster, it keeps backfiring and making him MORE popular.

Granted I am starting to lean towards he may be in it to win it now, but I don't think he ever intended to win. If he wins, he has to back all of this **** up. And that is not a good position for him.

I believe that also. It was funny to watch him try to act presidential Tuesday with Christie scared behind him wondering what he was going to say next.