US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
Somehow the next one of these shitfests is on Saturday. It's all of an hour long now, which is precisely long enough for 8 candidates to say feck-all, so I'll save everyone the time:

Cain: "9-9-9!" *audience cheers*
Perry: "DUR DUR DUR I WEAR SHOES ON MY NOSE"
Romney: *Robot-smile*
Newt: "Missy, why don't you get me a coffee while I condescendingly pretend to answer your question?"
Huntsman: "I'm the least crazy person here!"
Paul: "I'm the most crazy!"
Bachmann: "The feck you are, old man!"
Santorum: "Actually, I thi-"
Moderator: "I'm sorry Congressman Santorum, we're out of time."
 
Silva said:
Well yes I think that much is fairly obvious. But all that does is make the Democrats look better than they actually are.
Click to expand...

we have had many great politicians in the past...both Republican and Democrat.

This bunch of GOP idiots just shows how far right the Republican party has gone.

Heck even President Obama has written two very good books and he is highly knowledgeable about world politics and history.
 
Red Dreams said:
we have had many great politicians in the past...both Republican and Democrat.
Click to expand...

Pity I can't remember many of 'em and I have been around for over half a century.

The truth of American politics for too long has been similar to the death of the Roman Empire - a bunch of brainless arseholes fighting to be in first class on the Titanic.

The Republican Party has, however sunk to new lows.
Oops.
Governor of Texas was once reasonably illustrious.
It's stock has sunk in it's last iterations.
 
Red Dreams said:
FDR, Kennedy,Teddy Rosevelt, Truman.
Click to expand...

Kennedy wern't all that and a bag of crisps, tho' - if he hadn't met a bullet, I'm not sure he would be as lauded.
Bay of Pigs?
His bro' wuz probably more interesting - in fact, both of 'em.

Surely Jimmy Carter is more interesting if ineffectual?
 
God, what a comedy horror show. Can it be that on every Cain answer he included 'bold plan....9-9-9"? Romney just lied through his teeth throughout....Obama hates America, corporate profits and can magically make China play fair but is failing to do so! Gingrich...just please feck off back to Fox News...the others...pffttt!

Just wow....


I liked Bartiromo though...didn't take any shit and asked some good follow-ups.
 
What a trainwreck.

I love how Romney played Perry along in his spasm of thought, classic moment.

Gingrich it seems turn up for a fight, I thought it was amusing that he and Paul came up with their tuition plans on a university campus.

Ron Paul's answer that students should pay for university like they do for computers and phones, but what does that even mean?
 
I want to know how Cain's 999 plan is costed, how do you cut your deficit and national debt when you cut the top rate of both your income and corporation taxes by nearly 75%?
 
The nonsense that Paul spouts is a good example of how Libertarianism has become a dinosaur among mammals in today's political parlance.
 
w'or bobby said:
Kennedy wern't all that and a bag of crisps, tho' - if he hadn't met a bullet, I'm not sure he would be as lauded.
Bay of Pigs?
His bro' wuz probably more interesting - in fact, both of 'em.

Surely Jimmy Carter is more interesting if ineffectual?
Click to expand...

Missle Crisis?
none of us would be here otherwise.
He would not have met that bullet if he had played ball with Joint Cheifs.

Liked Carter..good man. He had integrity unlike Ol Alzeihmers that followed him.
 
Seriously, Obama would absolutely destroy any one of these guys in a debate. Surely.

While Obama's stock has fallen, I don't see any of these guys as a viable alternative that can beat him in a straight race. He must be loving this current field of Republican candidates.
 
was funny to see Joe Scumbag and his cronies trying to put a good light on all this.

Romney hit it out of the the park???

You mean he looked like a suit compared to the rest who were busy with self-immolation.

it was funny to see Mika trying to keep a straight face when ol Joe was rattling on.
 
Ole's_toe_poke said:
Seriously, Obama would absolutely destroy any one of these guys in a debate. Surely.

While Obama's stock has fallen, I don't see any of these guys as a viable alternative that can beat him in a straight race. He must be loving this current field of Republican candidates.
Click to expand...

cant wait to see Chris Matthews this evening.....and what he thinks about all this.

like he says...Obama has to be the luckiest man in politics.

of course it does help when his IQ is greater than this whole bunch's added together...mind you Perry does start on the minus scale.
 
Red Dreams said:
Missle Crisis?
none of us would be here otherwise.
He would not have met that bullet if he had played ball with Joint Cheifs.

Liked Carter..good man. He had integrity unlike Ol Alzeihmers that followed him.
Click to expand...

We got to the point of the Cuban Missile Crisis because he was so utterly useless with regard to the Bay of Pigs in 1961 and in the summit with Khruschev in Vienna earlier in 1962 before doing absolutely nothing with regarding to the closing off of East Berlin, Ulbricht and the East Germans were absolutely paranoid that the Americans would respond, yet they hesitated in issuing a strongly worded press release. Not to mention the mess that was Laos and Vietnam which Johnson gets laboured with.

The idea that he was strong on the foreign policy front is purely revisionism.
 
Team Brian GB said:
We got to the point of the Cuban Missile Crisis because he was so utterly useless with regard to the Bay of Pigs in 1961 and in the summit with Khruschev in Vienna earlier in 1962 before doing absolutely nothing with regarding to the closing off of East Berlin, Ulbricht and the East Germans were absolutely paranoid that the Americans would respond, yet they hesitated in issuing a strongly worded press release. Not to mention the mess that was Laos and Vietnam which Johnson gets laboured with.

This is revisionism.
Click to expand...

Something else you're clueless about...qu'elle surprise.
 
Grinner said:
Something else you're clueless about...qu'elle surprise.
Click to expand...

Except I am not hence I can talk about those events and you have not. There are big similarities between the Kennedy and Obama administrations, chief amongst them is failing to live up to the hype. Khruschev was emboldened by him, Ulbricht ran circles round him, Castro laughed at him, De Gaulle ignored him, Adenauer despised him and Macmillan was unimpressed.

As I said before, he fumbled everything on the foreign policy front for two years, he was awful in meeting Khruschev - after the Vienna summit Macmillan had to cheer him up.

Considering how central Berlin was to the show, failing so badly to react to the closing of West Berlin was atrocious. It was exactly like the Germans marching into the Rhineland in 1936, the GDR troops were under orders to fall back should the Americans dismantle their barricades - the Americans took well over 12 hours to issue a press release and the only thing the US military did was to cordon the West Berlin side to prevent civilian interference with GDR forces.

It was this complete ineptitude that brought around the Cuban Missile Crisis in the first place.
 
Red Dreams said:
the only revisionism is by right wing tools.
Click to expand...


I am not right wing in American terms.

Look at what the American people thought of his foreign policy at the time, they most certainly didn't consider him to be great because of it.

Johnson was a far more impressive president than Kennedy after him and so was Nixon who is the world's biggest idiot for destroying his own reputation.
 
It's crap. Kennedy was being undermined the whole time by agents in his own government. You should look at the behaviour of the diplomats in the Saigon embassy as to how Vietnam unfolded. I've read the cables and documents...it's amazing how much they worked against Kennedy's wishes.

JFK was being pressured into all-out war with Cuba by his JCS and everybody else and resisted. As for being weak...how did it turn out when he stood up to Kruschev? It's no wonder they had him killed.

Johnson was impressive domestically but his continuation of Vietnam to aid his business kingmakers was despicable. It's no surprise that you would overlook that however.
 
Team Brian GB said:
I am not right wing in American terms.

Look at what the American people thought of his foreign policy at the time, they most certainly didn't consider him to be great because of it.

Johnson was a far more impressive president than Kennedy after him and so was Nixon who is the world's biggest idiot for destroying his own reputation.
Click to expand...

...I suppose that is why the majority of Americans want JFK added on Mount Rushmore.

Johnson achieved Civil Rights Law because the nation was mourning for a slain young President. Pity he tained his presidency with Vietnam. Kennedy would never have allowed the country to be so weakened. even if he had gone in, he would have had the courage to bring us out.

Kennedy knew his father bought him the Presidency, but once he sat in that chair he decided he will do what is right.

That is why he was killed. He knew it was a matter of time....
 
The paranoia on this site is ridiculous - all Presidents come under pressure, they all face special interests - it is what they do to overcome that matters and Kennedy was awful at it at home and abroad.

It is thanks to Johnson that there is racial equality under the law in your country, that your voting rights are protected and that there are multi-billion programmes to give the old and the poor healthcare, and give tens of millions of American students the chance to go to university who otherwise could not afford it. Kennedy did nothing compared to that, Johnson knew he was destroying the Democrats in the southern states for generations by pushing the Civil Rights Act, Kennedy was far too timid to try to get anything of the sort through Congress.
 
JFK was let down greatly in the Bay of Pigs disaster by CIA and being in the presidency for only 3 months. Closer attention to detail by CIA and JFK could have kept it from blowing up the way it did.
 
Sir Matt said:
JFK was let down greatly in the Bay of Pigs disaster by CIA and being in the presidency for only 3 months. Closer attention to detail by CIA and JFK could have kept it from blowing up the way it did.
Click to expand...

The Bay of Pigs debacle was a plan handed to JFK, that was planned to fail.

The hope of the CIA and the JCS was to push the young President into a full scle invasion of Cuba, which he refused to do.

Instead he took full personal responsibility for what happened and moved on.
 
Red Dreams said:
...I suppose that is why the majority of Americans want JFK added on Mount Rushmore.

Johnson achieved Civil Rights Law because the nation was mourning for a slain young President. Pity he tained his presidency with Vietnam. Kennedy would never have allowed the country to be so weakened. even if he had gone in, he would have had the courage to bring us out.

Kennedy knew his father bought him the Presidency, but once he sat in that chair he decided he will do what is right.

That is why he was killed. He knew it was a matter of time....
Click to expand...


You half come up with some rubbish, Kennedy got you into Vietnam, Americans were dying there under his presidency - Johnson may have escalated it dramatically but by no means did he start it, you were already in deep by the end of 1963.

You speak about him as if he were Jesus, he was a poor president who failed to live up to the hype then and to the revisionism now. He was shot because American nutters make attempts at most presidents, it turns out that this one was successful.
 
Red Dreams said:
The Bay of Pigs debacle was a plan handed to JFK, that was planned to fail.

The hope of the CIA and the JCS was to push the young President into a full scle invasion of Cuba, which he refused to do.

Instead he took full personal responsibility for what happened and moved on.
Click to expand...

No, he screwed it up by changing the landing zone. There were a number of other issues with the plan, especially not telling Stephenson and using the wrong model planes. If the invasion had been at the original landing point, it would have been a much shorter trip into the Escambray Mountains. That's even if the Cuban rebels could keep their mouths shut and not talk about it as openly as they did.

He wanted something done about Fidel and berated Nixon about not having a plan to deal with him all the while Nixon and Eisenhower had been devising the Bay of Pigs invasion. It wasn't as poorly planned originally as it was by the time JFK decided to give greater deniability more importance than giving an effective landing zone. The one at Trinidad wasn't perfect, but it would have better allowed for a guerilla force to escape inland rather than be stuck in a swamp right off the beach.
 
If only Bobby had lived. Vietnam would have been ended five years sooner.

Nixon gave us the Southern Strategy and is the main reason everything is so fecked up now.
 
Team Brian GB said:
You half come up with some rubbish, Kennedy got you into Vietnam, Americans were dying there under his presidency - Johnson may have escalated it dramatically but by no means did he start it, you were already in deep by the end of 1963.

You speak about him as if he were Jesus, he was a poor president who failed to live up to the hype then and to the revisionism now. He was shot because American nutters make attempts at most presidents, it turns out that this one was successful.
Click to expand...

You really haven't studied Vietnam in depth, have you? It's quite apparent.
 
Red Dreams said:
I'm guessing he reads right wing blogs...

this has been written about extensively.

Damn surprised with some of what Brian has said here...

well perhaps I should not be.

He thinks Romney is right... :eek:
Click to expand...



This coming from the American version of PeterStorey accept less well informed. At least he can say that there is a strong following of democratic socialism in Britain, you would be left wing by our standards, let alone American ones - you could barely be further from the American mainstream if you tried.
 
Team Brian GB said:
This coming from the American version of PeterStorey accept less well informed. At least he can say that there is a strong following of democratic socialism in Britain, you would be left wing by our standards, let alone American ones - you could barely be further from the American mainstream if you tried.
Click to expand...

that coming from someone who cares a damn his club has been raped by a murderer, I will accept as a compliment.

have a nice day.
 
slapfight.gif
 
Just seen the highlights of the GOP debate...enough green smilies couldn't do it justice. I don't think I've ever seen a group of people in a leadership debate of any importance, anywhere, who have so little clue about anything. I mean it was staggering. You'd at least have a healthy dose of prep from their back room teams making sure they were up to speed on, well you know, the stuff you sort of need to know. If this is how they act prepared for an in-house debate (it wasn't as if they were going after each other in the way a cross party debate would) how fecking dense and clueless are they in real life?

If Obama doesn't walk it, I'll be flabbergasted.
 
Grinner said:
If only Bobby had lived. Vietnam would have been ended five years sooner.

Nixon gave us the Southern Strategy and is the main reason everything is so fecked up now.
Click to expand...


You say I haven't studied Vietnam extensively and you come out with a clanger like that?


First things first, Kennedy was not in a position to win the Democratic nomination in 1968 unless it went to a tie on the convention floor - Humphries had 200 more delegates than he at the time of his death and his own campaign manager thought his chances were rubbish, and five years sooner than when Vietnam ended the 1968 campaign was still going on and Johnson was still the president.

And this is before you talk about the long drawback that was Vietnamisation.


Are you making this up as you go along?
 
Team Brian GB said:
You say I haven't studied Vietnam extensively and you come out with a clanger like that?


First things first, Kennedy was not in a position to win the Democratic nomination in 1968 unless it went to a tie on the convention floor - Humphries had 200 more delegates than he at the time of his death and his own campaign manager thought his chances were rubbish, and five years sooner than when Vietnam ended the 1968 campaign was still going on and Johnson was still the president.

And this is before you talk about the long drawback that was Vietnamisation.


Are you making this up as you go along?
Click to expand...


You underestimate the power of the Kennedy machine. BTW...it's Humphrey. His behaviour towards McGovern was nothing short of disgusting either. A despicable man.

McGovern would have made the best President.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.