CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › The Republican Party Going Forward v 2.0
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Republican Party Going Forward v 2.0 - Page 9

post #401 of 3798

I can see the GOP rebranding themselves into a Monty Python skit:

 

Sensible Party: Center-Right

Silly Party: Tea Party

Very Silly Party: Libertarians and other Objectivists

Incredibly Silly Party: Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, Callista Gingrich's amazing hair helmet.

post #402 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arturo RJ View Post

Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wisconsin and The Real World NY) apparantly dosent know what a vagina is and has never heard of a transvaginal ultrasound. A republican being perplexed by female anatomy? No that's unheard of.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/02/sean-duffy-ultrasound-bill.php?m=1


That's the Real World Boston my friend.

post #403 of 3798
Oops my bad. I never watched much of Real World so I got it mixed up. I know he was on Real World/Road Rules Challenge. Anyway I can't believe that he is in the congress that's unreal, and he seems like an utter moron, I remember during the presidential campaign he was stumping for Romney and he sounded like an utter idiot. Can't believe he got re-elected. I'm disappointed in you Wisconsin.
post #404 of 3798

Yeah, that guy is a stooge.

 

He's married to Rachel, from Real World San Francisco.  Which somehow makes him even more odious.

post #405 of 3798

I demand he always be labeled: (R- MTV)

post #406 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBananaGrabber View Post

I demand he always be labeled: (R- MTV)

"What happens when congressmen stop being nice, and start being real! The Real House of Repersentatives". I know people will probably think Michelle Bachmann as the batshit insane person that needs to be kicked out of the house, however I see as the ditzy airhead that is rather confused on most isssues and possibly sexually. (i.e.- see Marcus Bachmann)

However the member that might be asked to leave the most would Virginia Foxx (R-North Carolina, possibly from an unspeakable, unfathomable evil) for screaming at everyone to stay off her elevator! Oh and being utterly viscious to college students

http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/272723-more-staffers-recount-confrontational-elevator-rides-with-rep-foxx

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2012/04/17/representative-virginia-fox-on-student-debt_n_1431050.html

Ha! I like thinking of the House as a crappy reality show. It makes sense and its less depressing, or more I haven't decided which.
post #407 of 3798
Can you ride the elevator if you're wearing a Members Only jacket?
post #408 of 3798
And the Republicans move one step closer to becoming the next Whig Party.

Ha. Good luck purging yourself of sane people, you know people who can win elections. Sad thing the everyday Republicans are in total favor of this. They won't realize how bad of an idea this is.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/03/club-for-growths-primarymycongressmancom-escalates-gop-civil-war.php?m=1
post #409 of 3798

'During an impromptu press conference on Friday to address the sequester deadline, President Obama was asked why he was powerless to prevent the deep spending cuts from going into effect.

Obama responded by saying he can't "do a Jedi mind meld with these folks and convince them to do what's right."

The Twitterverse wasted no time in calling out the Commander-in-Chief for his apparent gaffe confusing "Star Wars" and "Star Trek."'

post #410 of 3798

See?  He's trying to reach across time and space an unite entire universes, and these other assholes can't even reach across the aisle and make a deal.

post #411 of 3798

Law nerds don't quite get movie geek references, but I give him points for trying.


Meanwhile, I listened to the entire statement and press conference.  A lot of the questions were stupid, especially the woman who pressed him on whether it was his fault, and no one asked the question I would have asked, which is: what loopholes are these savage sequester cuts being delivered to maintain?  Not one. 
 

post #412 of 3798
I think it was clear POTUS misspoke. He definitely knows what's what with Trek and Star Wars.

Edited to add, the Force can show people unique insist, into events past, present and future, as well as connect individual minds across vast distances. cool.gif
post #413 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arturo RJ View Post

And the Republicans move one step closer to becoming the next Whig Party.

Ha. Good luck purging yourself of sane people, you know people who can win elections. Sad thing the everyday Republicans are in total favor of this. They won't realize how bad of an idea this is.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/03/club-for-growths-primarymycongressmancom-escalates-gop-civil-war.php?m=1


Let them choke on their own stupidity. They deserve it.

post #414 of 3798
Thanks alot GOP! While I agree this is their fault and at least the lion share of blame should be directed at them, like 85% of it. Obama for agreeing the sequester was pathetic and weak so he dosent have much to complain about its his fault too! Though he is blaming it all on the Republicans.

http://rt.com/usa/obama-signs-sequester-bill-697/
Edited by Arturo RJ - 3/1/13 at 6:21pm
post #415 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arturo RJ View Post

Thanks alot GOP! While I agree this is their fault and at least the lion share of blame should be directed at them, like 85% of it. Obama for agreeing the sequester was pathetic and weak so he dosent have much to complain about its his fault too! Though he is blaming it all on the Republicans.

http://rt.com/usa/obama-signs-sequester-bill-697/


Until the Republicans make an actual counteroffer or some attempt to negotiate it's fair to blame this on them.

post #416 of 3798
Oh I agree that's why I gave GOP the 85% of the blame. But proposing and accepting this terrible sequester deal the Democrats and Obama do deserve some of the blame. But I'm willing to only give them 15% of that, but sceding the political ground to the Republicans was a huge, huge mistake. Please let the GOP be destroyed in 2014.
post #417 of 3798

 

 

All part of the plan.

 

post #418 of 3798

Lots of my conservative "friends" on Facebook have been sharing this link.  Eventually, I caved.  If you're still not convinced that the Republican Party won't be able to modernize soon, you should read the comment section.  And remember, the people they're mostly talking about from the mall ransacking a few weeks back were all underaged teens, some as young as thirteen.

 

http://truenewsusa.blogspot.com/2013/03/westfield-chicago-ridge-chicago-ridge.html

 

EDIT: This is definitely a racist site.  Not sure how work-safe it would be to convene here, so enter at your own risk. 

post #419 of 3798

The problem the Republicans have, going back to the Southern Strategy, expanding with Fallwell and the Moral Majority, and becoming absolute with the '94 election, is that the people they are most reliant on for their base are the worst people in the country. They rely on the racists, the xenophobes, the people who think the Confederacy was the good guys, that the KKK is judged too harshly, that white people becoming a minority means the end of America, that everyone other than white males needs to know their place. This isn't all Republicans, but it's probably about 40-50% of regular Republican voters.

 

The problem is that these people now compose enough of the party that no one wants to alienate them, because they do compose a majority of Republican primary voters, and they'll come out for a candidate they like. At the same time, they're completely toxic to the rest of the country, and anyone acceptable to them is unacceptable to the rest of the country. The only reason they didn't get a presidential nominee this year is because they're also incredibly badly organized, and couldn't unite behind any of the members of the clown car that were acceptable to them.

 

If they get their nominee in 2016 - which is relatively likely - we'll probably see the first massive landslide since at least '88, with only some of the South (AL, MI, LA, TN, SC, maybe Texas and Arkansas and Oklahoma) and Utah/Idaho going for the GOP. That might begin to fix the party, because a lot of the bigots will either drop out or go to third parties (which is where a lot of them belong) and it will be easier for the money types to retake the reins.

post #420 of 3798

http://truenewsusa.blogspot.com/2013/03/westfield-chicago-ridge-chicago-ridge.html

The talk back there is just..shocking to me. Do folks there really feel this way or are they just play-acting for the people reading that?

Talking about pulling out guns and getting high up and shooting the 'niggers' in the parking lot, geez. The riot conditions perpetrated by the teenagers in the mall, and the random destruction of vehicles in the parking lot is inexcusable. What kinda values are we imposing on our offspring these days? Makes me glad to NOT be a parent, and glad the society I grew up in wasn't the embarrassing mess the poor kids are dealt these days.

post #421 of 3798

I can't remember where I heard/read it this but here it goes....

 

With the sequester, I have no doubt that there are some Dems as well as Repubs that are (secretly) enjoying it.

The D's get to see the defense cuts happen which angers the R's.

The R's get to see cuts happen to the social programs which angers the D's.

 

So, both sides get to enjoy a bit of spite at the expense of the American populace.

 

 

But let's try and keep things hilarious...

 

Mealtime in the Monkey House

post #422 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Grimm View Post

The problem the Republicans have, going back to the Southern Strategy, expanding with Fallwell and the Moral Majority, and becoming absolute with the '94 election, is that the people they are most reliant on for their base are the worst people in the country. They rely on the racists, the xenophobes, the people who think the Confederacy was the good guys, that the KKK is judged too harshly, that white people becoming a minority means the end of America, that everyone other than white males needs to know their place. This isn't all Republicans, but it's probably about 40-50% of regular Republican voters.

 

The problem is that these people now compose enough of the party that no one wants to alienate them, because they do compose a majority of Republican primary voters, and they'll come out for a candidate they like. At the same time, they're completely toxic to the rest of the country, and anyone acceptable to them is unacceptable to the rest of the country. The only reason they didn't get a presidential nominee this year is because they're also incredibly badly organized, and couldn't unite behind any of the members of the clown car that were acceptable to them.

 

If they get their nominee in 2016 - which is relatively likely - we'll probably see the first massive landslide since at least '88, with only some of the South (AL, MI, LA, TN, SC, maybe Texas and Arkansas and Oklahoma) and Utah/Idaho going for the GOP. That might begin to fix the party, because a lot of the bigots will either drop out or go to third parties (which is where a lot of them belong) and it will be easier for the money types to retake the reins.

 

Can't remember exactly where this saying came from (Bill Maher??) 

 

"Not all Republicans are racist...but all racists are Republicans"

post #423 of 3798

Republicans broke the Hastert rule for the third time this year by bringing to the floor the Violence Against Women Act for renewal / expansion. It passed with Democratic support. Joe Biden publicly thanked Eric Cantor for keeping true to his word and bringing the bill to a vote. 

Thoughts? 

post #424 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Grimm View Post

The problem the Republicans have, going back to the Southern Strategy, expanding with Fallwell and the Moral Majority, and becoming absolute with the '94 election, is that the people they are most reliant on for their base are the worst people in the country. They rely on the racists, the xenophobes, the people who think the Confederacy was the good guys, that the KKK is judged too harshly, that white people becoming a minority means the end of America, that everyone other than white males needs to know their place. This isn't all Republicans, but it's probably about 40-50% of regular Republican voters.

The problem is that these people now compose enough of the party that no one wants to alienate them, because they do compose a majority of Republican primary voters, and they'll come out for a candidate they like. At the same time, they're completely toxic to the rest of the country, and anyone acceptable to them is unacceptable to the rest of the country. The only reason they didn't get a presidential nominee this year is because they're also incredibly badly organized, and couldn't unite behind any of the members of the clown car that were acceptable to them.

If they get their nominee in 2016 - which is relatively likely - we'll probably see the first massive landslide since at least '88, with only some of the South (AL, MI, LA, TN, SC, maybe Texas and Arkansas and Oklahoma) and Utah/Idaho going for the GOP. That might begin to fix the party, because a lot of the bigots will either drop out or go to third parties (which is where a lot of them belong) and it will be easier for the money types to retake the reins.

I hope so, something needs to happen to wake them up. We need a rational opposition party because our system only works with compromise and the current GOP has no interest in this. The only I see this happening though is if they only win 5 states or less. An utter embarrassment is needed.

TYT had a good point last night, the 2010 election was maybe the worst thing for them. It gave them the idea that they had a mandate and gave them false hope that people agreed with them and the new Tea Party Repulican Party, but this isn't the case they were just pissed at the whimpy Democratic Party. The Dems got the message however the Republicans and might be in a point of no return that might take a generation to come back from.
post #425 of 3798

  I watch some of the Last Word last night. Klein did a story on Obama's supposed lack of leadership. He correctly pointed out that the Constitution didn't make the President all powerful because the Founding Father didn't want a monarch. He can't make Congress do something it doesn't want to do. The Right is confusing caving in with leadership. While the drone program makes me uneasy* to say the least, the GOP is just pisses me off to no end. They don't care about the country; they just want to be in control and if they're not in control, they just want to make everyone else miserable.

 

 

*The program has killed 4700 people. I seriously doubt most of them where terrorists. It could make matters worst by making more people want to get revenge on America and become terrorists.

post #426 of 3798
Our media is pathetic. They don't do hard reporting, fail at telling the public real facts and put the blame on both sides, however most times the fault lays at the feet on just one. We need a real press but right now they are glorified PR men for the political and economic powers. BBC and Al-Jazeera put our corporate owned media to shame. I hope ALJ America, when they officially take over Current will give us the real news we deserve but severely lack with CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC (though they are best current news American channel).

Also people should check out RT there pretty good not as unbiased as BBC and ALJ, but their reporting on US news is hard but pretty fair and ask questions not heard on normal corporate news, just stay away from their news on Europe though; very, very biased indeed.

I mean how much talk is their about surveillance on American citizens, how the US Government attacks whistleblowers, or talk about the increased developed usage of drone strikes. About none, maybe on MSNBC, maybe.
post #427 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaz View Post

*The program has killed 4700 people. I seriously doubt most of them where terrorists. It could make matters worst by making more people want to get revenge on America and become terrorists.

 

I just wan tto grapple with this for a little bit, because its something I too struggle with. I supported Biden's faction when it came to the debate on the future of Afghanistan, and so I feel I own some personal responsibility for making sense of the policy. I fully admit to being made uneasy by the nature of the thing - flying, killer robots obviously trigger the sci-fi dystopian sensation. But when considered against the alternatives, taken as part of an opportunity cost, it loses a lot of the surface revulsion. Its going to boil down to three options: full-scale occupation, limited and targeted assassinations, or withdrawal. Obviously the occupation option almost always tallies up with more bodies. The withdrawal option is limited so long as the argument exists for maintaining stability against the threat of extremists, although there is no denying that the administration has gone about securing a full-fledged withdrawal about as quickly as can be seriously considered, and far quicker than most people expected. So you're left with the targeted option. Its not a good option, but its a compromise made in full consideration of a public that at once demands security and expects that security to be achieved ... how, exactly? There are always going to be far more people that want to kill Americans than can be dealt with, for a variety of reasons. The issue comes to actually dealing with those who have the capacity and organization to do so - and the fact is, those people are largely localized in a few hotspots, and thats where the drones are, and that's where the civilian casualties follow. 

COIN, as the only serious alternative provided to the Drone Program, simply doesn't work in Afghanistan - the analysis is that even though the Taliban have been responsible for the vast majority of civilian deaths, those deaths always follow American forces, and it doesn't matter to the Afghan people who ultimately is responsible: wherever the Americans are on the ground, that's where their civilian countrymen are being killed, and so they want us out. And that's been the trigger-point for the withdrawal. So, then, do we simply roll back the Drone program and leave security in Waziristan and Yemen to the local authorities? That's probably not a great idea, because the powers that be in those places are borderline failed states. Of course, the continuation of the Drone program further destabilizes those states, so its a hell of a Catch-22. The reactionary proposal is to simply cut the program and leave it to chance, I guess - most of these organized elements exist in lawless regions, and an assassination program is the only means of reaching them. And its an impossible gamble, because if an attack succeeds, and that attack is traced to one of these lawless regions, what then? The civil rights element of the argument is swept away immediately, as happened in the aftermath of 9-11. And so we see with the nomination of Brennan and some of the legal codification of the Drone program as part of an effort to establish legal norms that demonstrate a baseline level of respect for civil and human rights while not flinching from the necessary nature of disrupting these organization in regions where no one else can do the job. Its a hugely complex and difficult issue. And while I am fundamentally made uneasy by many of the things being done in the name of my country by people I voted for, I am also thankful that it is (seemingly) being handled in a thoughtful and thorough manner, in a manner totally contrary to the previous administration, and in a manner that the next administration would do well to draw upon. That isn't to say I agree with every decision, or think everything has been handled in a manner I approve of, but then again I'm not the fucking President.

That is to say, there are definitely questions worth raising, and debates worth having. But anyone who supported the Bush II administration and its policies should kindly keep the fuck out of the debate. They shouldn't have a seat at the table, and its telling that the most serious debates about this stuff are occurring within the Administration, within the Democratic Party, and within the larger American Left. I don't think that's necessarily healthy for the country, but there isn't going to be any 'reasonable' consideration for the opposition so long as the opposition pretends like the only thing wrong with it and its policies of the last 13 years is the messaging. 

post #428 of 3798

wow, I am surprised at this progressive ideal put forward by the GOP

 

......psych!!

Yeah, It's just the same ol' shitty GOP pizza.

The New Yorker piece referenced in this article is a good read but as with most insights into the GOP, I wanted to take a Silkwood shower after reading it.

Quote:

Eric Cantor will propose Federal Law that Ends Overtime Pay for hourly workers

 

   In Eric Cantor's February 2013 speech, he said he wanted to propose Federal Law that would end overtime pay for hourly workers.  Currently, the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA), signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, mandates that certain workers get paid "time + 1/2" for overtime work.  Eric Cantor wants to eliminate that law.  Because -- ya know -- workers not getting paid for overtime hours worked out so good for workers before FDR enacted that Law.

     

Eric Cantor's "end of overtime pay for workers" that he talked about in his February speech was overshadowed, in part, by the public whining Cantor did bitching that 'Obama gave his speech at the same time as me ... wah, wah, wah.'

 

     In this week's New Yorker Magazine, Ryan Lizza wrote an excellent article titled: "Can Eric Cantor, the Republican Majority Leader, redeem his party and himself?" in which Lizza reminded readers that Eric Cantor wants to end the Federal law that mandates certain workers get paid overtime for the extra hours they labor.

 

From the New Yorker Magazine: (page 12)

Quote:
Can Eric Cantor, the Republican Majority Leader, redeem his party and himself? (page 13)

Cantor spoke about school choice, tax reform, expanding visas. After the speech, he rode back to the Capitol and met privately with House Republicans to discuss one of the policies he had emphasized: a policy that would allow workers to convert overtime compensation into time off. “I gave a talk today about helping people and about finally focussing on legislation that has understandable benefits right away,” Cantor said. He explained that it would help parents who wanted to go on a field trip or attend a teacher conference. “What I want to see is how we can communicate this, communicate the benefit. How are we going to build a coalition and get it done?

<cont.>

 

...and this echoes what I referenced earlier

Quote:
  Since the 2012 elections, the Republicans have been divided between those who believe their policies are the problem and those who believe they just need better marketing—between those who believe they need to make better pizza and those who think they just need a more attractive box. Cantor, who is known among his colleagues as someone with strategic intelligence and a knack for political positioning, argues that it’s the box.
post #429 of 3798
Are you suprised by this? Of course the GOP are trying to destroy anything good created by the Democrats and especially stuff that was proposed by Huey Long, FDR, Kennedy and LBJ.

This isn't new this is a giant duh, hell Greg Palast has been reporting about these "new secret plans" for what like 15 years. This won't work though people will eventually see through this yes it takes time but Americans won't purposely destroy themselves, yes we get frustrated and act were so conservative and selfish, however generally we are rather progressive and all the bad things we've done have been eliminated after we became aware of the bad mistakes.

It's funny we're like blackout angry violent drunks that do stupid and vile things and than when we sober up we realize how dumb we were and correct those mistakes (See Andrew Jackson, the 1850's, slavery, anti-woman rights, genocide of Indians, lynching of blacks, abuses against Irish, Chinese, and Japanese, segregation, strike breakers, trusts, anti gay rights, the absolute crushing of dissent in Phillipines post-1898, Vietnam War, Iraq War, and the entire deregulation of our entire economic system) Okay I know that seems bad but we do tend to reverse our terrible course...........eventually.
post #430 of 3798

Uh oh! Is there a new George Bush on the rise? GB 3.0? The latino edition able to pander to all ethnic groups. He could be deadly he has name value coming from one of the oldest political families in American politics and he's also half latino. Shit! Though he'll need his dad to teach him how to properly steal elections. I could see Bush battling Castro for the Govenorship of Texas in a few years and than a presidential run would be almost a lock. Damn this is scary, obviously he is a spawn incubated in hell, though I hope he is at least smarter than his uncle, Uncle Dubya.

 

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/George-P-Bush-gauges-interest-in-him-as-a-4318700.php

post #431 of 3798

I think the Bush name is going to be politically toxic for a while. Nixon's a pretty common last name too, and I still think it's off-limits for candidates forty years after Watergate.

post #432 of 3798

Heeeeere's Mitty....


     Quote:

Romney says Obama is like a Roman emperor: ‘Nero is fiddling’

Former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney asserted in a recent interview that President Barack Obama was like the Roman emperor, Nero, who was “fiddling” while Rome burned.

“It kills me not to be there, not to be in the White House doing what needs to be done,” Romney told Fox News host Chris Wallace. “The president is the leader of the nation. The president brings people together, does the deals, does the trades, knocks the heads together. The president leads, and I don’t see that kind of leadership happening. He’s campaigning.”

The former Republican presidential nominee faulted Obama for “blaming the Republicans” because they had refused to the avert automatic spending cut in the so-called “sequester.”

“That causes the Republicans to retrench and to put up a wall and to fight back,” he insisted. “It’s a very natural human emotion… I have to tell you, the hardest thing about losing is watching this critical moment, this golden moment just slip away.”

Romney added that the White House may have opposed a Republican plan to give Obama more flexibility in how the $85 billion in spending cuts are implemented because “there may be more interest in showing pain in saying, ‘See what the other guys did?’”

“Look, this is the country,” Romney opined. “This is America we’re talking about at a critical time and, you know, Nero is fiddling.”

video at link
 

Isn't there a horse elevator somewhere that will keep this Stepford politician busy?

post #433 of 3798

 If Romney was President, the debt problem would be solved, in the sense that no one on the right would talk about, even though he would be adding to it.

post #434 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Grimm View Post

I think the Bush name is going to be politically toxic for a while. Nixon's a pretty common last name too, and I still think it's off-limits for candidates forty years after Watergate.

Hmmm I don't know about that. I think you're in what I'd call the liberal/progressive bubble. The Bush name still has a lot of value since its a known name. Hell people were trying to push Jeb to run in 2012 and probably pushing him to run in 2016.

George Prescott Bush is totally going to get a huge push that will probably propel him to the governorship or possibly national office in the house or senate and in 20-30 years will run for the presidency and potentially win, the fact he's half Hispanic is a huge factor too.

I'm sure tons of people will vote against him due to being a Bush, but with the current cult of personality in this country he's a shoe in to be a future nominee for president. It's why all the Kennedy's get in office, Hilary being a front runner and why if Chelsea would run for anything she'd probably win and how Jesse Jackson Jr. Got his congressional seat.

It's sickening but true. Don't count out the Bush's they've either has economic or political power since essentially the beginning of this nations history, certainly since it was an industrial power.

So I see President George P. Bush being a possibility.
Edited by Arturo RJ - 3/3/13 at 5:42pm
post #435 of 3798

You could be right. Rolling Stone did a story about the 2010 midterms and Jeb Bush did come up as a future candidate.

post #436 of 3798
Quote:


“The president is the leader of the nation. The president brings people together, does the deals, does the trades, knocks the heads together. The president leads, and I don’t see that kind of leadership happening. He’s campaigning.”

For what? A third term?

post #437 of 3798

If Jeb Bush is the GOP candidate in 2016, the Dems would be stupid to not make his dip shit brother his albatross. Now I have that Monty Python bit stuck in my head.

post #438 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fafhrd View Post

For what? A third term?


In a roundabout way, Obama is campaigning for a 3rd term for the Democrats.

post #439 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaz View Post

You could be right. Rolling Stone did a story about the 2010 midterms and Jeb Bush did come up as a future candidate.


Hell, the conservative pundits have been talking about Jeb ever since Dubya first got "elected".

IIRC, there were many in the GOP wanted Jeb instead of Dubya because, deep down,  they knew GW was a fuckup.

Once Cheney was on board as VP, an easily manipulated POTUS was just the thing to fulfill the Rove/Cheney/Rumsfield/NeoCon/et al.  plan.

post #440 of 3798

I honestly don't see Jeb Bush running. Actually out of potential GOP candidates he would be my second pick behind Christie, the rest are just terrible, most obvious picks would be Paul Ryan, Rand Paul, Bobby Jindal, and Marco Rubio.

 

However the thing is I feel he knows if people dig their will be potentially very, very damaging information on what he did to get his brother elected president and maybe stuff he did to do the same for himself. The allegations of voter suppression especially after what happened in 2012 would not go over well.

 

there are also definitely some questionable dealings in his private sector days too. Like whether he did same shady stuff to make a huge personal fortune and potential dealt with terrorists did some super sketchy real estate deals, also very questionable policies he did as governor most notably Stand Your Ground laws and I'm certain Democrats will mock him for the whole Terri Schiavo situation. So there is a lot of stuff you can pin on Jeb on his own not even with bringing his brother into it. 

post #441 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaz View Post

Now I have that Monty Python bit stuck in my head.

 

Heh !

 

That reminded me....I can't be the first person to think that this is the perfect representation of the 2012 GOP race.

post #442 of 3798

Jeb is more interested in being a kingmaker, especially in Florida, than he is in running for President. If he wanted to run, he'd already be doing certain things he simply isn't doing right now. He's also got positions on a few issues - immigration especially - that the Tea party will attack him over.

post #443 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Grimm View Post

Jeb is more interested in being a kingmaker, especially in Florida, than he is in running for President. If he wanted to run, he'd already be doing certain things he simply isn't doing right now. He's also got positions on a few issues - immigration especially - that the Tea party will attack him over.

 

...and this morning on the 'Today Show'

Quote:

Jeb Bush won’t rule out 2016 presidential bid

 

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) said Monday he would consider running for president in 2016.

Speaking on NBC’s “The Today Show,” Bush was asked directly if he could rule out a bid in the next cycle.

“I won’t [rule it out] but I’m not going to declare today either,” Bush said. 

 

“That’s way off into the future,” Bush added. “I have a voice and I want to share my beliefs about how the conservative movement and the Republican Party can regain its footing, because we’ve lost our way.”
<cont.>

 

After watching him this morning, the only word that came to mind was "milquetoast"

 

edit...a second word came to mind : "duplicitous"

post #444 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arturo RJ View Post

I'm sure tons of people will vote against him due to being a Bush, but with the current cult of personality in this country he's a shoe in to be a future nominee for president. It's why all the Kennedy's get in office, Hilary being a front runner and why if Chelsea would run for anything she'd probably win and how Jesse Jackson Jr. Got his congressional seat.
 

 

Yeah, but people were generally happy with the Kennedys and even, at this remove, the Clintons. Bush's legacy isn't going to improve anytime soon.

 

It's interesting, in 2008 I was pro-Obama and anti-Clinton partly because I didn't think she could win due to all the lingering hate from the 90s. At this particular point, though, people seem to be increasingly rejecting the conservative narrative, making Hillary look more and more like a shoo-in. She probably didn't want to wait 8 years but I think it's been one of the best things for her as a candidate.

post #445 of 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTRan View Post

 

...and this morning on the 'Today Show'

 

After watching him this morning, the only word that came to mind was "milquetoast"

 

edit...a second word came to mind : "duplicitous"

 

His brother had a "aw shucks" amiability to him that I kind of couldn't stand, but some people seem to flock to. Jeb is a hard-line autocrat, and lacks the relatability that some people saw in Bush.

 

I could maybe see him running if he thinks it's going to be a big year for the GOP, but if Clinton starts getting anointed far enough ahead of time, the Republicans may just sacrifice someone in 16. I still don't think Bush is going to run.

 

If we start seeing him make a lot of national appearances, or appearances in swing states other than Florida, I may reconsider, but he's mainly been cashing in in GOP strongholds.

post #446 of 3798
According to Empress Anne our country really dropped the ball by not coranating her and Emperor Willard is a terrible mistake for our country but of course not a disappointmrnt for herself personally.

You know all good things said about her should be retracted. Who does she think she is? What the hell we're citizens of this country not subjects of a royalty.

God thankfully we didn't elect the Romney's. imagine the state of our country if they did. Oh and of course the sequestion wouldn't happen because they would go back to spending like drunken sailors, for example look at Mitts plan for defense spending during his campaign. What frauds the Republicans are!

http://m.dailykos.com/stories/1191442
post #447 of 3798

They are everything that's wrong with American culture.

 

Meanwhile, is it too much to ask any mainstream journalist to cover the parts of the sequester story that aren't being discussed in any way anywhere?  Like what shedding 750,000 jobs does to the deficit itself?  Or what loopholes precisely are the Republicans stonewalling to protect?  I listened to a little NPR this morning and was just appalled.  It's the elephant in the room and they won't f-ing touch it.  Has everyone lost their minds?

post #448 of 3798

Re: Ann Romney

 

Is there such a thing as Losing2  ?

post #449 of 3798

Okay my former comment saying Jeb isn't running is now utterly false. He is running. I'm not totally against him running for national office and would rather him get the nomination than Rand Paul, Paul Ryan or Marco Rubio; however his new stance on illegal immigration is stupid and utterly backwards.

 

Good luck GOP running again on anti-pathway to citizenship agenda again. Maybe you'll get 5% of the Latino vote this time. Man to quote Rachel Maddow they are really bad at their jobs. At this point you could run almost any generic Democrat vs. their top GOP candidates and it wont matter, if they continue under this self destructive road they will never win a national general election ever again, just pathetic. Oh so triple trans-vaginal ultrasounds are probably in the future and no Planned Parenthood clinics in the Midwest and South seem to be the future as well. Just stupid.

 

 

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/04/jeb-bush-book_n_2806602.html

post #450 of 3798

re: Jeb running

 

  

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › The Republican Party Going Forward v 2.0