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 XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is awful

Status
Not open for further replies.
FreshFish said:
If you are asking polemicists for an answer, I doubt you'll get one based on what the GOP actually has said recently..... oh, I get it, by "traditional" they can make anything up they want to, never mind.

anyway, based on the 2016 Republican convention, Republicans want to protect the LGBTQ community from foreign terrorists who want to kill them merely for who they are, and Republicans want to protect women from rapists. it is also part of their platform to expand access to childcare for working mothers.

they also want to expand access for minority children to better-quality schools, and favor promoting charter schools over traditional teachers' union schools, and they want to keep members of minority communities safe from criminals.

that was what they said then, anyway, though I admit that the mainstream media probably missed those stories.

Did you notice that the Protector of the Downtrodden, Senator Warren, just came out against access to quality education for minority children? I was a bit surprised that the Noble Warrior would cave to the teachers' unions so abjectly. :(
Click to expand...
Wow. Sadly somebody will believe this.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

At this point, I don't think we can say for certain that the freefall has stopped for Hilldawg. Election Day will determine that.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

dxmnkd316 said:
You have to look at the breakdown near the bottom that shows the split.
Click to expand...

Right but you have to remember that even if it does end up 50/50 the GOP loses unless Drumpf wins. (VP breaks the tie) That is why the percentages are still with Dems taking the Upper House.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

FadeToBlack&Gold said:
At this point, I don't think we can say for certain that the freefall has stopped for Hilldawg. Election Day will determine that.
Click to expand...

I dont think the freefall matters anymore. I think for the vast vast vast vast majority of the voters who plan to vote have passed the point of no return.

Not to mention think about this...in 2012 125 million people cast ballots. We most likely have had 1/3 of that already vote. (most likely more) They aint taking their votes back because of some freefall.

It is a weird sort of limbo we are in right now...
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

The Sicatoka said:
Foreign influences in American elections !!!!

And it's not 25 years old with an above-average wrist shot, so no I don't. :D
Click to expand...

Hey you said that not me ;)
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

The Sicatoka said:
I just beat you to it; you're predictable*.


*Nice way of saying "one trick pony".
Click to expand...

Nah I never was one to mock you guys over that...though I did always laugh when others did ;) Hockey has its rules...they are kinda dumb but they are the rules so far be it from me to criticize UND for taking advantage.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

ScoobyDoo said:
Just imagine. Hillary in the White House for (2) years with GOP Senate and House Majorities spending every waking minute of their day investigating her, defunding Obamacare and Planned Parenthood, and refusing to pass the debt Ceiling.

Meanwhile the Supreme Court moves down to a 7 seat body and not a single Judicial opening anywhere is filled.

Shang-Ri-Lah.
Click to expand...

There's no great reason that the SCOTUS has to be a 9-seat body. It began as a 5-seat body for its first quorum in 1789 while the sixth was still under consideration by the Senate. It eventually grew to 10 justices by the 1860, only to then be shrunk to 7 by 1867 and returned to 9 in 1869. FDR threatened to add four more justices in the Court ruled against his New Deal laws. Nine isn't really a sacred number, Scooby.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

Handyman said:
Nah I never was one to mock you guys over that...though I did always laugh when others did ;) Hockey has its rules...they are kinda dumb but they are the rules so far be it from me to criticize UND for taking advantage.
Click to expand...

And I never criticized UMn for "all Minnesotans". Hey, if you want to be xenophobic, so be it. ;)

And it took finally breaking that mold, with Potulny from ND no less, to win a title. :eek:
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

St. Clown said:
There's no great reason that the SCOTUS has to be a 9-seat body. It began as a 5-seat body for its first quorum in 1789 while the sixth was still under consideration by the Senate. It eventually grew to 10 justices by the 1860, only to then be shrunk to 7 by 1867 and returned to 9 in 1869. FDR threatened to add four more justices in the Court ruled against his New Deal laws. Nine isn't really a sacred number, Scooby.
Click to expand...

Yup, from beyond the grave FDR looks at today's "court packers" as mere small-minded amateurs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Procedures_Reform_Bill_of_1937
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

ticapnews said:
If you're trying to break into stand up your act needs work. The bit about the GOP being pro-LGBTQ was funny but the rest of your shtick needs to be much better.
Click to expand...

You missed his point, which was sarcasm. The right's been making a huge thing all election season that you need to vote for them, so they can stop ISIS, unlike those treasonous democrats who created ISIS, cause over in the Middle East, ISIS is killing and beheading all the gheys, ISIS got no tolerance for those folk. Not like the compassionate and loving GOP.
 
Kepler said:
I have had the same conversation with at least a dozen co-workers. It's always "she's coming for my guns." I explain to them that I'm far to the left of Hillary or even Bernie and I literally do not care about their guns -- it's not even on my list of top 100 topics to do something about. They look at me like I'm either lying or crazy, because guns are #1 on their list therefore they're #1 on everybody's list and "she's coming for my guns."

It was that way with Gore and Kerry and Obama, too. The NRA has sealed their minds. I've finally restricted myself to just talking to people who say they're undecided.

Once the input allowance bit changes from one to zero, it's over.

The really depressing thing is this happens with young coworkers, too. There's an entire new generation of these robots out there.
Click to expand...

I'm not aware of a single person at work that will vote for Trump (but I haven't talked politics with the guy that empties my trash can). I'm sure with 1400 people at this site, some exist -- but for the most part we are a bunch of flaming liberals.
 
FreshFish said:
If you are asking polemicists for an answer, I doubt you'll get one based on what the GOP actually has said recently..... oh, I get it, by "traditional" they can make anything up they want to, never mind.

anyway, based on the 2016 Republican convention, Republicans want to protect the LGBTQ community from foreign terrorists who want to kill them merely for who they are, and Republicans want to protect women from rapists. it is also part of their platform to expand access to childcare for working mothers.

they also want to expand access for minority children to better-quality schools, and favor promoting charter schools over traditional teachers' union schools, and they want to keep members of minority communities safe from criminals.

that was what they said then, anyway, though I admit that the mainstream media probably missed those stories.

Did you notice that the Protector of the Downtrodden, Senator Warren, just came out against access to quality education for minority children? I was a bit surprised that the Noble Warrior would cave to the teachers' unions so abjectly. :(
Click to expand...

What a bunch of horse ****
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

St. Clown said:
There's no great reason that the SCOTUS has to be a 9-seat body. It began as a 5-seat body for its first quorum in 1789 while the sixth was still under consideration by the Senate. It eventually grew to 10 justices by the 1860, only to then be shrunk to 7 by 1867 and returned to 9 in 1869. FDR threatened to add four more justices in the Court ruled against his New Deal laws. Nine isn't really a sacred number, Scooby.
Click to expand...

Other than the standing law- the Judiciary Act of 1869. So for congress to not break their own law, they would have to change that statute for the current 9 that is stated in the law...

Not sacred, but a law.

It's also interesting to note that the party who claims that they are for the Constitution so very much turn their back on the Constitution, not letting the President nominate nor the senate to confirm. One of many items where they "claim" to care about just one small part of it- the 2nd amendment. The rest- eh. Voting is over rated, the President should not be allowed what he's allowed to do when congress does nothing, businesses can take land just for money and not a public reason, religion- we can select ones that are ok, etc.

How they can hide behind the Constitutional claim is beyond me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top