USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
- Thread starter Kepler
- Start date
- Status
unofan
Well-known member
Uh, kinda by definition, if she won big, she won way more than the 1 percenters...
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Not when you figure in the three card monte dealers too.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
From my experience, that's half the city right there.
From my experience, that's half the city right there.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
I'm going cut joe some slack. He's facing the prospect of Donald freakin' Trump being his party's nominee!
If that doesn't hurt, I don't know what does.
Regarding party unity, I say make a deal with Lizzy Warren and screw Sanders. Warren should be the keynote speaker and have a hand in drafting the platform. Sanders can go park cars outside of the convention hall. His self centered idiocy and God complex is something the Dems need to stay far, far away from and there are far more effective progressive voices in the party (the aforementioned Warren for example) who also know how to play ball.
I'm going cut joe some slack. He's facing the prospect of Donald freakin' Trump being his party's nominee!
If that doesn't hurt, I don't know what does.Regarding party unity, I say make a deal with Lizzy Warren and screw Sanders. Warren should be the keynote speaker and have a hand in drafting the platform. Sanders can go park cars outside of the convention hall. His self centered idiocy and God complex is something the Dems need to stay far, far away from and there are far more effective progressive voices in the party (the aforementioned Warren for example) who also know how to play ball.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Obvious troll is obvious...Rover is the perfect mouthpiece for his candidate.
And I highly doubt Liz Warren is going to do anything to bolster a Wall Street Mistress like Clinton. She can have Barney Frank talk he is about as likeable a person as The Shrill.
Man I am happy I dont have to vote in this election. Frank Underwood FTW!
Obvious troll is obvious...Rover is the perfect mouthpiece for his candidate.
And I highly doubt Liz Warren is going to do anything to bolster a Wall Street Mistress like Clinton. She can have Barney Frank talk he is about as likeable a person as The Shrill.
Man I am happy I dont have to vote in this election. Frank Underwood FTW!
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Sanders must have stolen Rover's girl back in 1975 for him to be so mad.
But it would obviously be insanely stupid to freeze Bernie out, when he represents 40% of the voters who we need to beat the orcs this November, and Hillary aint stupid. Nor is Bernie, who understands that having any (D) in the White House is preferable to any (R), if for no other reason than to save the Court from any more Scalia / Thomas / Alito hatchet men. Come to think of it, Bernie could use his leverage to put forward a slate of anti-corporate justices to counter the influence of the Four Horsemen of Mahogany Row for Hillary to pick from for either the Scalia or Ginsburg seat and trade full-throated support for Hillary in the general. He is a pragmatist and he knows he will never have more influence than right this moment.
Sanders must have stolen Rover's girl back in 1975 for him to be so mad.
But it would obviously be insanely stupid to freeze Bernie out, when he represents 40% of the voters who we need to beat the orcs this November, and Hillary aint stupid. Nor is Bernie, who understands that having any (D) in the White House is preferable to any (R), if for no other reason than to save the Court from any more Scalia / Thomas / Alito hatchet men. Come to think of it, Bernie could use his leverage to put forward a slate of anti-corporate justices to counter the influence of the Four Horsemen of Mahogany Row for Hillary to pick from for either the Scalia or Ginsburg seat and trade full-throated support for Hillary in the general. He is a pragmatist and he knows he will never have more influence than right this moment.
Last edited:
Spartanforlife4
Generic Catchy Message
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
I've been trying to decide if Rover has been serious this whole time or if it's been a long con. I've been leaning towards serious because the latter seems like too much of a commitment.
Bernie's in this to the end, it'll be fun to see how it plays out.
I've been trying to decide if Rover has been serious this whole time or if it's been a long con. I've been leaning towards serious because the latter seems like too much of a commitment.
Bernie's in this to the end, it'll be fun to see how it plays out.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Its called "Earned Arrogance" Handy. We know we're going to win. You know we're going to win. Just need to let it happen.
Your next point is stupid. Warren isn't going to help Hillary get elected, and therefore allow Trump a better chance of winning?
Oookaayyyyyy then...
Feel free to write in a fictional character's name. The rest of us will be busy electing President Hillary!
Its called "Earned Arrogance" Handy. We know we're going to win. You know we're going to win. Just need to let it happen.
Your next point is stupid. Warren isn't going to help Hillary get elected, and therefore allow Trump a better chance of winning?
Oookaayyyyyy then...Feel free to write in a fictional character's name. The rest of us will be busy electing President Hillary!
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Well if he was after girls the same age as I was in 1975, that would make him a sex offender. Kep, are you trying to tell us something? Sanders isn't a pragmatist. He's a self centered loon. Warren is a pragmatist, and would be doing a lot better than senile old man Bernie if she had run instead. Make the deal with her and tell him (quietly) to go screw. His actions the last month have proven a lot about the man, and none of it is good.
I like making fun of irrational people that live in fantasyland. That used to be exclusively conservatives and fans of Boston College athletic programs. Now apparently some far lefties, who we'll call Bernouts, qualify.
Oh, and I can tell you how this will "play out". Sanders will lose.
Sanders must have stolen Rover's girl back in 1975 for him to be so mad.
But it would obviously be insanely stupid to freeze Bernie out, when he represents 40% of the voters who we need to beat the orcs this November, and Hillary aint stupid. Nor is Bernie, who understands that having any (D) in the White House is preferable to any (R), if for no other reason than to save the Court from any more Scalia / Thomas / Alito hatchet men. Come to think of it, Bernie could use his leverage to put forward a slate of anti-corporate justices to counter the influence of the Four Horsemen of Mahogany Row for Hillary to pick from for either the Scalia or Ginsburg seat and trade full-throated support for Hillary in the general. He is a pragmatist and he knows he will never have more influence than right this moment.
Well if he was after girls the same age as I was in 1975, that would make him a sex offender.
Kep, are you trying to tell us something? Sanders isn't a pragmatist. He's a self centered loon. Warren is a pragmatist, and would be doing a lot better than senile old man Bernie if she had run instead. Make the deal with her and tell him (quietly) to go screw. His actions the last month have proven a lot about the man, and none of it is good.I like making fun of irrational people that live in fantasyland. That used to be exclusively conservatives and fans of Boston College athletic programs. Now apparently some far lefties, who we'll call Bernouts, qualify.
Oh, and I can tell you how this will "play out". Sanders will lose.
Last edited:
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Again people are underestimating how much hatred there is of Hillary. Every single poll out there has Kasich beating her. A guy who can't even get any State besides his own to vote for him.
If Hillary wins it's not because she's inevitable or because anyone is voting for her. It's because the other party is in shambles.
Again people are underestimating how much hatred there is of Hillary. Every single poll out there has Kasich beating her. A guy who can't even get any State besides his own to vote for him.
If Hillary wins it's not because she's inevitable or because anyone is voting for her. It's because the other party is in shambles.
Spartanforlife4
Generic Catchy Message
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Bernie wins in states with least income inequality, Clinton in states with most.
Bernie wins in states with least income inequality, Clinton in states with most.
bronconick
Yep, still here
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Part of that because Kasich's other name is "Generic Republican"
If he actually got press coverage, his favorables would plummet like every other (R)
Part of that because Kasich's other name is "Generic Republican"
If he actually got press coverage, his favorables would plummet like every other (R)
Last edited:
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
You've made a fool of yourself the past few months. You've absorbed Clinton's electioneering strategy and rhetoric as if they were facts. Rookie mistake. A campaign is about perception, not fact, and you're old enough to know better.
However, the people in charge of Hillary's and Sanders' campaign are serious, experienced, and professional, and over the next few months they'll make the pivot to unity. Bernie will have a major speech at the convention and unleash a can of whup-as-s painting the GOP as the Official Spokesmen of Plutocracy, something Hillary could not do without drawing guffaws. Hillary will continue to back channel signal to Wall Street that she's house broken and won't upset their crime syndicate, and will probably wind up getting almost as much in contributions from them as the Republican since really what choice do they have? In so doing, we will nullify one of the major systemic advantages the GOP typically enjoys.
Now yes, it would be nice to have a liberal VP to balance the ticket, but we don't want to lose any Senate seats by doing it, so I'm not sure who that leaves for Hillary to pick. Has the country grown up enough to have two women, or do we need another round of avuncular old white guy to step in if the Student Driver gets careless? Good question.
The only things that matter between now and November are winning the White House, retaking the Senate, and closing the GOP House lead to where it can be drowned in a bathtub.
You've made a fool of yourself the past few months. You've absorbed Clinton's electioneering strategy and rhetoric as if they were facts. Rookie mistake. A campaign is about perception, not fact, and you're old enough to know better.
However, the people in charge of Hillary's and Sanders' campaign are serious, experienced, and professional, and over the next few months they'll make the pivot to unity. Bernie will have a major speech at the convention and unleash a can of whup-as-s painting the GOP as the Official Spokesmen of Plutocracy, something Hillary could not do without drawing guffaws. Hillary will continue to back channel signal to Wall Street that she's house broken and won't upset their crime syndicate, and will probably wind up getting almost as much in contributions from them as the Republican since really what choice do they have? In so doing, we will nullify one of the major systemic advantages the GOP typically enjoys.
Now yes, it would be nice to have a liberal VP to balance the ticket, but we don't want to lose any Senate seats by doing it, so I'm not sure who that leaves for Hillary to pick. Has the country grown up enough to have two women, or do we need another round of avuncular old white guy to step in if the Student Driver gets careless? Good question.
The only things that matter between now and November are winning the White House, retaking the Senate, and closing the GOP House lead to where it can be drowned in a bathtub.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Losing to Generic Republican is still bad. It's like no one actually reads their party platform or pays any attention to what their Governor's are doing at the State level, never the less the **** show in Washington.
Losing to Generic Republican is still bad. It's like no one actually reads their party platform or pays any attention to what their Governor's are doing at the State level, never the less the **** show in Washington.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
From the You Think You Got Problems? department, Steve King gonna Steve King:
From the You Think You Got Problems? department, Steve King gonna Steve King:
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
yep, no one knows enough about him to hate him yet.
yep, no one knows enough about him to hate him yet.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
I know he's no progressive like Warren, but what if we just went with good old Uncle Joe as a VP again? It doesn't remove an incumbent senator from office, so there is no risk in losing a seat. He is an old white guy. He isn't running for president, but would have given different family circumstances so he isn't ready to retire from politics. He's experienced, and would be able to step right in when Hillary goes to jail!
I know he's no progressive like Warren, but what if we just went with good old Uncle Joe as a VP again? It doesn't remove an incumbent senator from office, so there is no risk in losing a seat. He is an old white guy. He isn't running for president, but would have given different family circumstances so he isn't ready to retire from politics. He's experienced, and would be able to step right in when Hillary goes to jail!
Doesn't the 20th Amendment say something about that?
- Status