Rubio is a nutter, but the field on the Republican side is a disaster.
Clinton is probably the most palatable (realistic) candidate left.
Rubio is a nutter, but the field on the Republican side is a disaster.
Clinton is probably the most palatable (realistic) candidate left.
She's Rubio with a skirt (or a potato sack on that debate.)
EDIT:
Trump wins Nevada. This is becoming frightening.
Why is it frightening? The only thing that's suffering here is the credibility of the US Republican party. That's great.Originally Posted by Spoonsky
Have you read the details of how he and his family sought guidance from God to run?
That's great, unless he gets elected. And him being the nominee would already be too close for comfort.
I really hope Trump wins. Someone who speaks for the ordinary, working class right would be amazing.
Trump as president > Rubio as president. Will take incompetent over someone who pushes 'Republican values' any day.
Wouldn't every Trump (or 'Bernie' for that matter) initiative just be lolled out of the Congress/Senate, thereby limiting his potential to fuck things up?
It's the Commander-in-Chief element that I'd find more worrying.
'Mr President, let me introduce General Casey C. Cheesebur...'
'Just bomb the Jews, and the Muslims.'
Exactly, which is why I would prefer him over Rubio. Bernie would get a lot shit done via the youth uprising.
This sums up why Trump will win.
In policy terms he's no worse than any of the others. An obnoxious twat who does bad thing is arguably better to have there than someone who appears statesmanlike while doing the same things.
Trump would presumably modify his views if he was actually elected and be pragmatic about things.
Someone like Cruz or Rubio is more likely to STAND FIRM on ideological grounds.
People argue that about Bernie a lot, and what they don't realize is that essentially the same thing has happened to Obama, who ran to the right of Hillary in 2008. Republicans have gone so far to the right that you might as well have someone crazy like Bernie to fight them rather than Hillary who will capitulate. Trump would probably be able to get things done with the current Congress, sadly.
Calling Trump a member of the "right" is missing the point. He's not an ideologue. He's a reactionary who has worked out what demographic are most likely to buy his schtick, and saying what they want to hear.
He was on Oprah back in the day praising Ronnie Regan to the hills and speaking in much the same way as he does now. This was back in '88. Interesting to watch now:
I don't really understand his point on Japan. Whenever Japan exports anything to the US, it's liable for Import Duties... so they aren't getting away with anything.
If he levies massive duties any importers, then imports will dry up - he gets his way and more products are made in the US, lo and behold, the prices to the end customers double due to massive manufacturing costs in the US.
The US needs China, Japan, South America and the EU, just as much as they need the US.
Free trade is obviously best trade, but if everybody shut up shop we would all feel it before them. China would fall to pieces in about three days.
He doesn't understand his point either.
This is like watching a movie from the 80's and seeing a running joke about how the character can't leave the house because you may miss an important call. Context is that in the decade the US flipped from being the biggest exporter to the biggest importer and everyone was complaining that it happened because we had lower tariffs and regulations than anyone else.
Or Pepe is right and uses fewer words.
It's irrelevant. The point being made is that he has pretty much always been the way he is now. It is exaggerated and he does bluster, but it's not some big act.
Also, he really does look like the stereotypical 80's man there.
I saw a quite amazing video the other day of him drawing the ties for the 1991-2 Rumbelows Cup quarter-finals along with Jimmy Greaves.
It's not hard to dig up examples of him promoting things like single-payer healthcare or abortion rights in his past. He's a reactionary, who doesn't adhere to a consistent ideological position. And there's nothing intrinsically wrong with that, but it does mean that it oversimplifies the case dramatically to refer to him as any kind of wing.
In the last debate he said he was against defunding planned parenthood, but he still claimed to be against abortion.
I think I prefer someone who doesn't adhere to a consistent, ideological position. You may be right though, I'm not all right wing.
Good article (developing Pepe's cartoon from a coupe of pages ago) on the Republican Party and President Trump:
Start focus-grouping names for the replacement. The Free Soil Party was probably too metropolitan, and the American Party had an unfortunate nickname, so what about the Conservative Party? The Conservative and Unionist Party if they want a nod towards Abraham Lincoln.Let’s be clear: Trump is no fluke. Nor is he hijacking the Republican Party or the conservative movement, if there is such a thing. He is, rather, the party’s creation, its Frankenstein monster, brought to life by the party, fed by the party and now made strong enough to destroy its maker.
What's likely to happen with the House and Senate? I can't find any info on polling for that. Are the Democrats likely to take back some control there?
Not sure you can criticize him for that, that's actually a really sensible view. Loads of people are against abortion, the problem is that abortion is only ~5% of the services that Planned Parenthood provides, and so when you defund that you're also defunding accessible birth control, etc - which will lead ultimately to more abortions. It's a pretty moderate view to be against abortion but not against defunding Planned Parenthood.
I don't criticize him, at all. Just shows how ridiculous the rest are and how he is not that in-line with The Party.
Gotcha.
For once I'm not interested in the Republican debate tonight. Maybe it was Poor Jeb that kept pulling me back.
First few minutes where tremendous entertainment. Hard to believe that this is an actual debate involving presidential candidates. Simply surreal.
Texas.
Good to see Rubio getting into the mud with Trump. Zero class on that man.
Trump is getting worked over in this debate. Rubio and Cruz have both gone after him, and he's struggling to deal with it.
Trump is running riot here.
They got a few blows in but when it comes to Maurying a debate he dons them easily. Pathetic to see 'serious' politicians stoop down to that level.
Yeah, I was just coming here to note that Trump pulled it back in the part of the debate after I posted that.
It's going to be one hell of an election.
Anyone know which network hosted the latest debate?
Can't be sure mate, give us a clue.
Trump saying he's being audited because he is a Christian.
How is he proposing to force the Mexicans to pay for his wall again?
Especially since there are engineers saying it's impossible.
Yeah, I don't get this either. If the US wants the wall.. the US should pay for it. Good luck trying to bully another country into building a wall they don't want.
It's a wall. How 'impossible' can it be to build? Unless it means politically, since it will presumably cost a lot of whatever Mexicans use as money.
And he does that face - the only face he does - which I saw brilliantly described on twitter as 'I like lasagne, but it's not what I ordered'.
Donald's daughter is tidy...nice fakies.
Toggle Spoiler
Why are those stone parrots humping?
Chris Christie appears to have taken that Marco Rubio spat rather too personally.
Reply With Quote
