chris Christie is another potential for 2016 that I don't find scary. I don't LIKE him, but again, not scary. My NJ relatives (several of whom are teachers, all of whom are blue through and through) would disown me for even saying that much, but...yeah, he's just normal NJ shady con, not terrifying.
Yes, if not for the poo-pooing on public employees and the fact that he's a Cowboys fan, Christie wouldn't scare me either.
I find Christie terrifying as a leader because I believe he is s vindictive asshole (bridge gate is an example). My understanding is that he is also a control freak so I think he knew and condoned the actions.
I know I'm not American, but in Canada I typically vote Liberal. However there are a few Conservative candidates I like provincially and federally. We have a fed election in the fall and I'm undecided. If Harper is running again (which I assume he is), I probably won't vote for him, but largely because he's been PM forever now. He's actually done a lot better than I anticipated, and I definitely thought the world was ending when he was elected.
Justin Trudeau is our liberal candidate, and I'm actually disapointed in that he's kinda just using his name power instead of talking about the issues.
I'm sure there are R's out there that wouldn't make me run for the hills. If it weren't for those pesky abortion rights and gay marriage, I'd probably be closer to an R than a D anyway. Maybe. I dunno...IIOY hasn't wonked out enough recently, I might be reverting.
I was posting articles about fiscal issues of interest to me and getting no responses, so I stopped. Even now I post articles about, say, surveillance issues, government fraud, or what's going on in Syria, and I'm lucky to get one response. What interests me seems to have diverged from some of the board's hot topics, and that's fine. I've been here long enough to know how these things go. Frankly my enthusiasm for this election is nil, so I'm content to play in the lighter threads for the time being and participate in the serious threads when someone hasn't already said what I was thinking.
Can you start posting your thoughts or article about that Chinese Bank Fund? I am VERY interested in it, and it has my H scared shitless.
I'm not asking for a Republican you would vote for. I'm asking for a candidate that wouldn't draw such extreme language and panic. Someone who wouldn't get your vote, but that doesn't send you into a tailspin of doom.
Right now, I feel like we can't even have a healthy debate because it goes straight to Republican candidate=super scary bringer of doom. So all I want is to know of is a real person that Rs could nominate where we could talk about actual politics.
I also think it's strange how caught up everyone gets in what they say vs. what they do. I tend to think 99% of what comes out of any politician's mouth is complete bullshit. Their record of actual governing is far more telling. So even if someone says all the right things, their record is what really counts.
I don't think Marco Rubio or Scott Walker are crazy, and I didn't think Romney was crazy. I just think they are so far deep into the pockets of Wall Street and big corporations (as evidenced by their voting records) that they can't be remotely trusted to make policies that will benefit anyone other than the Comcasts of the world.
I'm sure there are R's out there that wouldn't make me run for the hills. If it weren't for those pesky abortion rights and gay marriage, I'd probably be closer to an R than a D anyway. Maybe. I dunno...IIOY hasn't wonked out enough recently, I might be reverting.
I was posting articles about fiscal issues of interest to me and getting no responses, so I stopped. Even now I post articles about, say, surveillance issues, government fraud, or what's going on in Syria, and I'm lucky to get one response. What interests me seems to have diverged from some of the board's hot topics, and that's fine. I've been here long enough to know how these things go. Frankly my enthusiasm for this election is nil, so I'm content to play in the lighter threads for the time being and participate in the serious threads when someone hasn't already said what I was thinking.
This is how I feel every time I post something about Israel. Sigh...
I was posting articles about fiscal issues of interest to me and getting no responses, so I stopped. Even now I post articles about, say, surveillance issues, government fraud, or what's going on in Syria, and I'm lucky to get one response. What interests me seems to have diverged from some of the board's hot topics, and that's fine. I've been here long enough to know how these things go. Frankly my enthusiasm for this election is nil, so I'm content to play in the lighter threads for the time being and participate in the serious threads when someone hasn't already said what I was thinking.
This is how I feel every time I post something about Israel. Sigh...
Hey!!! We had some pretty involved discussions about Israel the last time we spoke about the new settlements.
I guess I'm confused as to why it is up to me to find a Republican that I'm not terrified of. What if they ARE all terrifying? They certainly have proved themselves to be over the last 10 years or so. John McCain is a good leader and a hero for what he suffered in Vietnam but I couldn't vote for him because he picked a terrifying running mate (after knuckling under to the freaks that now run his party) and because he used air quotes around "the health of the mother" answering a question about abortion during one of the debates in 2008.
I was posting articles about fiscal issues of interest to me and getting no responses, so I stopped. Even now I post articles about, say, surveillance issues, government fraud, or what's going on in Syria, and I'm lucky to get one response. What interests me seems to have diverged from some of the board's hot topics, and that's fine. I've been here long enough to know how these things go. Frankly my enthusiasm for this election is nil, so I'm content to play in the lighter threads for the time being and participate in the serious threads when someone hasn't already said what I was thinking.
This is how I feel every time I post something about Israel. Sigh...
When I see your posts I do try to respond because I find the topic fascinating and I am genuinely interested in this very complex issue.
pennypenny, I never (intentionally) shame anyone who has questions about fiscal stuff, unless you start your question with, "Listen, dumbass." LOL I struggle to grasp a fair amount of it myself. I do understand that a lot of it is quite dry ("dismal science" indeed) and my post was not intended to be critical so much as to speak to my recent lack of wonky-ness.
I was excited when we came here and had the like button feature, because I thought it would be a good way to say "hey I read this and I'm glad you posted it, but I don't really have anything useful or interesting to say about it right now." But it just doesn't feel right "liking" a post about, say, the latest civilian massacre in Syria.
I guess I'm confused as to why it is up to me to find a Republican that I'm not terrified of. What if they ARE all terrifying? They certainly have proved themselves to be over the last 10 years or so. John McCain is a good leader and a hero for what he suffered in Vietnam but I couldn't vote for him because he picked a terrifying running mate (after knuckling under to the freaks that now run his party) and because he used air quotes around "the health of the mother" answering a question about abortion during one of the debates in 2008.
it was a poll. No.confusion necessary. I believe the point was more on would you ever not.vote party line and look at the candidate or not. Some do, some don't. Hrc scares me with how hawkish she is. I don't want another war but worry it may come based on her hawkishness. But, I vote 3rd party because I won't vote for a social conservative either.
John Hunstman does not scare me. I wonder if his stance on abortion is something he would actively try to legislate.
He signed multiple pieces of legislation restricting abortions while he was governor of Utah, which is enough to make me wary of him as a potential POTUS.
I don't mind him otherwise, but that's one sticking point that I can't overlook.
I guess I'm confused as to why it is up to me to find a Republican that I'm not terrified of. What if they ARE all terrifying? They certainly have proved themselves to be over the last 10 years or so. John McCain is a good leader and a hero for what he suffered in Vietnam but I couldn't vote for him because he picked a terrifying running mate (after knuckling under to the freaks that now run his party) and because he used air quotes around "the health of the mother" answering a question about abortion during one of the debates in 2008.
it was a poll. No.confusion necessary. I believe the point was more on would you ever not.vote party line and look at the candidate or not. Some do, some don't. Hrc scares me with how hawkish she is. I don't want another war but worry it may come based on her hawkishness. But, I vote 3rd party because I won't vote for a social conservative either.
I didn't read it that way. I can remember when there were a few moderate Republicans - Bill Weld comes to mind. I could vote for one of them. But I haven't seen one in many many years. (I don't consider any Republican who is anti-choice to be moderate)
I was excited when we came here and had the like button feature, because I thought it would be a good way to say "hey I read this and I'm glad you posted it, but I don't really have anything useful or interesting to say about it right now." But it just doesn't feel right "liking" a post about, say, the latest civilian massacre in Syria.
The struggle is real.
I do try to like posts I read but about which I do not comment just so the OP knows I appreciate the post, but I agree that liking a post about a child molester or dead cat is just a bit awkward.
I guess I'm confused as to why it is up to me to find a Republican that I'm not terrified of. What if they ARE all terrifying? They certainly have proved themselves to be over the last 10 years or so. John McCain is a good leader and a hero for what he suffered in Vietnam but I couldn't vote for him because he picked a terrifying running mate (after knuckling under to the freaks that now run his party) and because he used air quotes around "the health of the mother" answering a question about abortion during one of the debates in 2008.
It's not up to you. I was wondering if there ws anyone that we could discuss rationally, without the immediate jump to terrifying. But if you find each and every Republican terrifying, then there's nothing to even discuss. Except for maybe your definition of terrifying.
I guess I'm confused as to why it is up to me to find a Republican that I'm not terrified of. What if they ARE all terrifying? They certainly have proved themselves to be over the last 10 years or so. John McCain is a good leader and a hero for what he suffered in Vietnam but I couldn't vote for him because he picked a terrifying running mate (after knuckling under to the freaks that now run his party) and because he used air quotes around "the health of the mother" answering a question about abortion during one of the debates in 2008.
It's not up to you. I was wondering if there ws anyone that we could discuss rationally, without the immediate jump to terrifying. But if you find each and every Republican terrifying, then there's nothing to even discuss. Except for maybe your definition of terrifying.
For me it's not so much the individual candidates who are terrifying (except for Ted Cruz and Rand Paul) but the party and party leadership itself. And I worry that even a reasonable candidate would be beholden to that.
Post by iammalcolmx on Apr 22, 2015 8:12:47 GMT -5
Honestly in my experience the person running for the nomination morphs into someone different when they are running are President so I am not too scared yet.
i'm quite surprised at how many people *still* like McCain, setting aside the clusterfuck that was Palin & his age. The man is a huge war hawk, and although he had some tendencies to be more moderate & bipartisan, he's quite a flip flopper and will go all right wing on certain issues when it pleases him.
ETA: it seems like he will say anything these days just to get on television...
rare.us/story/want-to-know-just-how-crazy-john-mccain-and-lindsey-graham-are-on-foreign-policy/ So if you’re keeping track, that means that, if John McCain or Lindsey Graham were president, the United States would be… Waging war on the Syrian regime and its Iranian proxies… while supplying arms and airstrikes that would boost Syrian rebels groups like ISIS… while fighting ISIS in Iraq with the help of Iran’s military… while destroying Iran’s military… in addition to beating back the Taliban in Afghanistan… building a Lockean democracy in Libya… and mopping up Boko Haram in Nigeria… and managing two peripheral conflicts in North Korea and Ukraine.
IIOY I got a bit fiscal in the WI thread last night. (That almost sounds like I'm saying I got frisky doesn't it?)
I can wrap my head better around state budgets at the moment because that is my frame of reference. I do read your posts but rarely respond because on the national level those numbers and projections make me want to start drinking.
It's not up to you. I was wondering if there ws anyone that we could discuss rationally, without the immediate jump to terrifying. But if you find each and every Republican terrifying, then there's nothing to even discuss. Except for maybe your definition of terrifying.
For me it's not so much the individual candidates who are terrifying (except for Ted Cruz and Rand Paul) but the party and party leadership itself. And I worry that even a reasonable candidate would be beholden to that.
My governor is one that that has been tossed out a few times as more moderate and non-scary (John Kasich) but being here and knowing what he's done/is trying to do in the state...and even he is scary. Luckily a lot of times, things have not gotten past the Ohio Senate, but I worry that with the backing of the scarier party leadership...that things actually WILL happen. And it won't be state laws - it will be Supreme Court Justices.
That's my big thing. Their records show their beliefs, and they will be appointing Supreme Court Justices. It IS scary, if you are a liberal. Not scary like they're crazy evil people...but scary that they can change the very basis of our laws.
I guess I'm confused as to why it is up to me to find a Republican that I'm not terrified of. What if they ARE all terrifying? They certainly have proved themselves to be over the last 10 years or so. John McCain is a good leader and a hero for what he suffered in Vietnam but I couldn't vote for him because he picked a terrifying running mate (after knuckling under to the freaks that now run his party) and because he used air quotes around "the health of the mother" answering a question about abortion during one of the debates in 2008.
It's not up to you. I was wondering if there ws anyone that we could discuss rationally, without the immediate jump to terrifying. But if you find each and every Republican terrifying, then there's nothing to even discuss. Except for maybe your definition of terrifying.
I find this years crop of Republican nominees to be far right and yes terrifying. If Olympia Snowe were a possible candidate I would not find her terrifying - but I don't believe she would ever be a viable candidate for the current far-right base of the Republican party.
The GOP is having an identity crisis - at least in my state - and there's been tons of drama in local/state R leadership over social issues. Basically the extreme ones vs the more libertarian live and let live types. It is interesting to hear about. My DH is involved and when I ask him about why there don't seem to be decent candidates, it kind of comes to this discussion of the lack of unity. I don't know if this is the case nationally, but for example, DH ran for something a few years ago as an R (he's fiscally conservative and socially liberal) and he lost in the primary to someone who used bible verses during a question about gay marriage in their debate, and somehow turned every single economy question into an abortion discussion. The people in our area preferred that nut job. It's like republicans don't want anyone halfway reasonable. They'd rather have a democrat they can complain about than a moderate republican.
I'm sure there are R's out there that wouldn't make me run for the hills. If it weren't for those pesky abortion rights and gay marriage, I'd probably be closer to an R than a D anyway. Maybe. I dunno...IIOY hasn't wonked out enough recently, I might be reverting.
I was posting articles about fiscal issues of interest to me and getting no responses, so I stopped. Even now I post articles about, say, surveillance issues, government fraud, or what's going on in Syria, and I'm lucky to get one response. What interests me seems to have diverged from some of the board's hot topics, and that's fine. I've been here long enough to know how these things go. Frankly my enthusiasm for this election is nil, so I'm content to play in the lighter threads for the time being and participate in the serious threads when someone hasn't already said what I was thinking.
Yeah, I figured. I was just teasing. I too suffer from the "I have nothing substantive to add, but "liking" just seems wrong." issue.
It's not up to you. I was wondering if there ws anyone that we could discuss rationally, without the immediate jump to terrifying. But if you find each and every Republican terrifying, then there's nothing to even discuss. Except for maybe your definition of terrifying.
For me it's not so much the individual candidates who are terrifying (except for Ted Cruz and Rand Paul) but the party and party leadership itself. And I worry that even a reasonable candidate would be beholden to that.
I think this is the issue exactly.
1) I remember what happened the last time the GOP ran on a platform of "jobs, jobs, jobs." *cough*vagcams*cough*
2) I can't believe that a Republican president, no matter how sensible and moderate, would continuously deny his or her party support for whack-a-doo legislation, supported by the majority of the party and passed in both houses. And if by chance that actually happened, the person would face some serious blowback and most likely be a 1 term president, and get approximately 0 things done, legislatively.
Also, I think we've talked quite a bit about what, specifically, we find scary about the Republican candidates. For example, their stated desire to make abortion of any kind, under any circumstances, illegal. Their willingness to declare allegiance to a foreign country above that of their own country's president. Their desire to put corporate interests above those of consumers and the public (here I am specifically referring to arbitration clauses, net neutrality, personhood rights for corporations, etc. ESF). Their unwillingness to propose, let alone enact, even the mildest of gun control provisions (for example, cracking down on straw purchases, universal background checks, limiting the number of handguns you can purchase in one sitting, etc.).
These are not just campaign promises or rhetoric - these are things that you can see clearly from their voting records.
So I don't think it's really fair to say that we just dismiss any Republican candidate as crazy and won't discuss politics or policies. On the contrary, I think we've done quite a bit of that.
Generally speaking, I am less wary of Republican governors. Though, as someone who has seen a Jeb administration up close and personal, I can tell you he needs to be kept FAR from the Presidency. I get physically ill just thinking about it.
I grew up in Texas. I voted Republican in my first election and, like others, strongly considered McCain before he chose Sarah Palin as a running mate. I do not come from an anti-Republican background and would consider voting for the GOP in the future if they drift back toward the middle on social issues. I just don't see that happening in this race. If a GOP candidate were to come out and say, "Look, I'm anti-abortion and I'm not that comfortable with gay marriage, but I will respect the rulings of the Supreme Court* so lets move on to more important topics now", then I would pay more attention.
*I refuse to believe the Supreme Court will rule anything other than in favor of the legalization of gay marriage.