What's new
By:
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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Speaking of conservatism, Trump's plan today--after he was informed yesterday that defaulting on debt would murder and bury the entire US economy--is that the US can just print more money to cover his ludicrous tax cuts. It's like getting economic policy from a third grader. Hope I can get my employer to pay me in pesos if he gets elected.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Probably the only occurrence of "narcissist" and Drumpf in the same sentence in which Drumpf is not intended as the narcissist.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Rover said:
Not a bad call since Bill left office 15 years ago and Obama's approval ratings are creeping back over 50%.
Click to expand...

Cleared 50, heading towards 60.

I am convinced that in comparison with the fight for his successor people will long for Obama by September.
 
MaizeRage said:
Speaking of conservatism, Trump's plan today--after he was informed yesterday that defaulting on debt would murder and bury the entire US economy--is that the US can just print more money to cover his ludicrous tax cuts. It's like getting economic policy from a third grader. Hope I can get my employer to pay me in pesos if he gets elected.
Click to expand...

Ummmm
The us gov has been printing money in just this fashion for some time now.
 
mookie1995 said:
Ummmm
The us gov has been printing money in just this fashion for some time now.
Click to expand...

No, it hasn't. If we were, we'd be seeing Zimbabwe like inflation.

That said, Trump is technically correct (the best type of correct) that we could do so. It'd be monumentally bad to do it, but it's an available option.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

http://gawker.com/people-places-and-things-you-can-blame-for-donald-tru-1775180922

Posted not for the article, but the brilliant comment and even better reply:

Picture
Click to expand...

This is the line that Hillary needs to take with Trump. As stated in a previous Gawker post, the moniker Dangerous Donald and all that implies is ripe to backfire in the Dems’ face. The nickname Sideshow Don is so much more effective and serves to belittle his “message” and “policies.”
Click to expand...
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

unofan said:
No, it hasn't. If we were, we'd be seeing Zimbabwe like inflation.

That said, Trump is technically correct (the best type of correct) that we could do so. It'd be monumentally bad to do it, but it's an available option.
Click to expand...

if only zimbabwe was able to have everything globally priced in zimbabwerency :rolleyes:
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Bathroom bigotry is bad politics.

Which brings up an interesting problem for the Republicans. What happens as that constituency becomes more and more radical compared to the mean? Candidates who can win the general can't win their nomination, while candidates who can win their nomination can't win the general. We've been seeing this at the Presidential level, but eventually it should catch up to them with statewide office (Senate, Governor, Lt. Governor). It will never percolate down to House and local because at that granularity self-segregation and gerrymandering allow radicals to win.

Which brings up an even more interesting question: why hasn't this become a problem statewide for Republicans? Voter suppression might be a small part of it (and is certainly an attempt to counter their eventual obsolescence), but the GOP has actually done a really good job, so far, of shielding its vulnerable incumbents against those tides.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top