Eh? I figured he was a lot less isolationist than his father was. Wasn't he one of the numpty signatories of that cringey open letter to Iran?
2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Eh? I figured he was a lot less isolationist than his father was. Wasn't he one of the numpty signatories of that cringey open letter to Iran?
He's probably comparably isolationist to his Dad, but markets it a bit differently to retain a degree of support from his redneck/Tea Party base.
That detestable cnut Santorum is really going to try again. I can't stomach his face on my screen.
its almost the exact opposite. He is far too extreme in his views for moderates. At the moment he has his moment in the sun with the patriot act discussion.
Paul has an image problem. He's just not likeable enough.
Wonder if Jeb´s crackhead daughter might cause a bit of a problem down the line with the conservative family values-tough on crime-
drug warrior Republican party.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...chapter-details-emails-Florida-eGovernor.html
drug warrior Republican party.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...chapter-details-emails-Florida-eGovernor.html
Jeb Bush looked eerily similar to his brother in a speech yesterday. It was the look that made W seem like a down to earth fella that likely got him a load of votes from people who just want to vote for someone they can relate to and have a beer with.
Paul's speech can't be going down well. Basically blamed his republican party hawks for creating ISIS.
Paul's speech can't be going down well. Basically blamed his republican party hawks for creating ISIS.
Jeb Bush looked eerily similar to his brother in a speech yesterday. It was the look that made W seem like a down to earth fella that likely got him a load of votes from people who just want to vote for someone they can relate to and have a beer with.
Paul's speech can't be going down well. Basically blamed his republican party hawks for creating ISIS.
Ought to resonate well with moderates though. He'd been seen as less of a hawk than Hillary.
Moderates don't do well in the GOP, especially during primary season. At this point its all a competition as to who can be more hawkish. To his credit, he does trash Hillary often which will score him points with the base.
I was referring more to moderates across the spectrum, not just the GOP ones. But again I'd realised he'd have to win his party's primary before even getting the chance to lock horns with Clinton II. So yeah, looks like his chances will be slim then.
He represents a very niche, libertarian strain of the Republican party who don't have much of a voice. The core of the conservative movement are still the interventionist hawks.
While I would somewhat agree with you (comparing him to Carson is a bit much), I still think there is a lot of good Bernie Sanders can do for the Democratic Party and for Hillary Clinton. Hopefully his authenticity and decency will rub off on Hillary, and that many of his ideas will become popularised in the democratic party, most of all pulling it away from the overly corporate sway that the Clintons had been instrumental in causing. Funny enough, he comes off quite well on Fox News interviews, refusing to go negative on Hillary, and appearing as a decent, concerned guy.
I enjoyed this article on him: http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/ber...n-the-democratic-primary-to-do-a-lot-of-good/
C´mon Bernie!
I'm thinking of sending some money to Bernie's campaign. If Hillary implodes then he could pull it off since nobody else of any note is running.
Thing is he'd probably be a shit president.
Thing is he'd probably be a shit president.
He'd be good I think except that of course the Republicans would not work with him and I think some of the establishment Dems might hope he fails so they run against him and prevent a 2nd term. Hopefully he can stay in the race and have an effect on the platform.
Pataki entering the race on the Republican side. That field is starting to get crowded, though after the first few primaries a few will be eliminated by poor showings.
It would be easier to just flush it down the toilet. He has zero chance, other than to raise issues the far left want Hillary to address as part of her eventual platform.
I know this, but I'd like him to get a national platform to say some things that need saying.
Isn´t Hillary running a fairly leftish campaign (for a central-establishment candidate) anyway, at least up to this point? Its not so much about what she says, but what she is going to do. Once the primaries are over all will be forgotten. I still think that its worth supporting other candidates if you like their message. The whole idea of supporting the lesser of two evil is part of the problem.
Yeah, I think this is the whole point. Be nice for his voice to be heard on bigger scale for a while. I´m sure Fox and the anti Hillary obsessives will give him a lot of air time.
Hillary is in big with banks and business...she won't do much about income inequality and reigning in fatcats.
This should get interesting. Dennis Hassert, the longest serving Republican speaker of the house, third in line to the presidency during the Bush years, has been indicted on charges of lying to the FBI and paying hush money to keep somebody and some thing quiet. The fact that he was forking out a whopping 3.5 million in hush money to cover it up speaks volumes. And he was supposed to be one of the most "decent" Republicans around.
Jaw-dropping Dennis Hastert indictment stirs deeper mystery
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...nnis-hastert-indictment-stirs-deeper-mystery/
We don’t know — we may never know — what former U.S. House speaker Dennis Hastert did that was so bad, if anything. What we do know: Prosecutors say he was willing to pay $3.5 million to cover it up. The former lawmaker was indicted this week on charges that he lied to the FBI and tried to disguise cash withdrawals paid to an unnamed party identified only as “Individual A” to “compensate for and conceal his prior misconduct against Individual A.” Hastert’s “prior misconduct” was not explained.
While “the indictment did not spell out the exact nature of the ‘prior misconduct’ by Hastert,” The Washington Post reported, “… it noted that before entering state and federal politics in 1981, Hastert served for more than a decade as a teacher and wrestling coach at Yorkville High School in Illinois.”
[Why Dennis Hastert got indicted by the feds]
The indictment’s allusion to Hastert’s tenure as a wrestling coach and teacher was provocative. So was its reference to Individual A. Individual A claimed to have known Hastert “most of” his or her life. Individual A met with Hastert repeatedly “in or about 2010″ and “discussed past misconduct” by Hastert against him or her that “had occurred years earlier.” And, allegedly, Hastert paid Individual A off.
Indeed, there was far more media interest in what the indictment didn’t say than in what it did. Individual A got as much attention as the relatively mundane details about money allegedly moving in and out of Hastert’s bank accounts. What kind of “misconduct” could the Republican from Illinois have been a part of as a coach and teacher?
The U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, who brought the charges, provided no comment. And Hastert, who has yet to comment, provided no answers.
It was “Denny Hastert’s dark secret,” as the Chicago Tribune said in an editorial. “The formal charges against the affable Illinois Republican are as baffling as they are astonishing…. This isn’t just yet another Illinois politician winding up in the crosshairs of federal prosecutors. The underlying narrative leaves much to the imagination . . . ” (cont)
Jaw-dropping Dennis Hastert indictment stirs deeper mystery
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...nnis-hastert-indictment-stirs-deeper-mystery/
We don’t know — we may never know — what former U.S. House speaker Dennis Hastert did that was so bad, if anything. What we do know: Prosecutors say he was willing to pay $3.5 million to cover it up. The former lawmaker was indicted this week on charges that he lied to the FBI and tried to disguise cash withdrawals paid to an unnamed party identified only as “Individual A” to “compensate for and conceal his prior misconduct against Individual A.” Hastert’s “prior misconduct” was not explained.
While “the indictment did not spell out the exact nature of the ‘prior misconduct’ by Hastert,” The Washington Post reported, “… it noted that before entering state and federal politics in 1981, Hastert served for more than a decade as a teacher and wrestling coach at Yorkville High School in Illinois.”
[Why Dennis Hastert got indicted by the feds]
The indictment’s allusion to Hastert’s tenure as a wrestling coach and teacher was provocative. So was its reference to Individual A. Individual A claimed to have known Hastert “most of” his or her life. Individual A met with Hastert repeatedly “in or about 2010″ and “discussed past misconduct” by Hastert against him or her that “had occurred years earlier.” And, allegedly, Hastert paid Individual A off.
Indeed, there was far more media interest in what the indictment didn’t say than in what it did. Individual A got as much attention as the relatively mundane details about money allegedly moving in and out of Hastert’s bank accounts. What kind of “misconduct” could the Republican from Illinois have been a part of as a coach and teacher?
The U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, who brought the charges, provided no comment. And Hastert, who has yet to comment, provided no answers.
It was “Denny Hastert’s dark secret,” as the Chicago Tribune said in an editorial. “The formal charges against the affable Illinois Republican are as baffling as they are astonishing…. This isn’t just yet another Illinois politician winding up in the crosshairs of federal prosecutors. The underlying narrative leaves much to the imagination . . . ” (cont)
I've had Fox news on for a few hours and still not a word about Hastert yet.
Oh dear me, sounds like this longest ever Speaker of the House of the patriotic family values, holier-than-thou conservative moralist Republican party, two steps away from being President of the United States, had a penchant for fondling and schlulmping young high school boys in his days as a wrestling coach and had to pay a youth-turned-man year upon year to put a sock in it.
Dear dear Denny Denny dear dear me. You can never be too surprised with Republicans.
And lest anybody he surprised about his voting record on gay rights . . .
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/den...ven-his-terrible-voting-record-on-gay-rights/
Dear dear Denny Denny dear dear me. You can never be too surprised with Republicans.
And lest anybody he surprised about his voting record on gay rights . . .
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/den...ven-his-terrible-voting-record-on-gay-rights/
Last edited:
Just watched Mathews interview Rand Paul. He really did very well. Ive not listened to him at length before. Certainly not the same Looney tune as the other runners.
The reason he did well is because he wasn't partisan. He said things that appealed to both sides.
Sounds like he is paying for more than putting a sock in it!
Does he veer right in front of his own?
Is Jindal really going to run? There's no way that winnity lilttle feck can get elected.
You can say the same for 75% of the Republican candidates so far.
Surely it's a Hillary Clintion landslide this? Another (implied) demographic rule-breaking presidential election on the cards.
He's another that's running for a VP spot. I doubt Jeb will pick him though. I can see him choosing Fiorina if she doesn't feck the campaigning up too badly and doesn't lay into him during any debates.
Isn't Jeb falling behind a little bit? Or is he expected to pick up steam as it goes on? Walker's looking a decent bet at the moment.
Numbers don't mean shit this early. Jeb just has to make sure he doesn't feck up like Giuliani did and come in too late.
Don't mean in terms of polling, just from what I've been reading generally.
Bush made a bit of a mess so far. Nothing serious, but he has to get his act together if he wants to win the nomination.
Nobody cares apart from some cable news people and a few hundred thousand old people that watch.
I think it's great that Lindsey Graham is the first gay candidate.
Fabulous. I read his Wiki and he's not a bad bloke if you ignore the self-loathing. I've no idea why he's running though.
Hilary's numbers have taken quite a hit.
I didn't expect him to run anyway, but with the death of his son, Beau, I highly doubt Joe Biden will run now. His poor family has had awful luck. Beau seemed to be a goodun too.
- Status