Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You're an idiot, like that's news.
The article cited the poll.
Quoting polls back to 2010 between Romney and Obama assumes that Romney would have been the candidate. I already showed there were other polls showing other Republicans winning the nomination.
Face it, Joe. You're just not very bright.
Everyone knows of Hillary's massive crash and burn in 2008. She was well ahead in the polls for nominee and thought John Edwards would be her most serious challenger.
It's just too soon to be making any accurate predictions about anything. There are too many what-if's.
I'm only thinking about the Cruz part of your ticket. I had forgotten about Walker actually being a viable candidate. Maybe a Walker/Rubio ticket...that might work. Ted Cruz though?...have you seen his national approval numbers with swing voters and Democrats?...they are the worstIt was every but as likely as yours.Wow.....I gotta hand it to you.....that seems like the most least likely scenario I've ever heard, and I'm impressed, because my worst fears are not as bad as that.OK, try this insteadLComing into this thread late....
It'll be Clinton/O'Mally VS Bush/(Christie, Ryan, or Rubio)
There are no southern Democrats to put on the ticket with Hillary, so it doesn't matter where Hillary's VP candidate comes from. Elizabeth Warren is too far left, and it's not quite time for two women on a presidential ticket.
Untill a Republican candidate starts polling within 5 points of Hillary, she will be the next President...especially if the Republicans go on about gay marriage/contraception/abortion in the mean time.
The GOP will also need to create legislation that Obama will sign, ot they'll be blamed for nothing happening in Washington, still!, in 2016
Hillary will not run as her negatives inside the Democrat Party are too great.
Dems will push Warren as Obama perfected. A Warren-Holder ticket will hit all the Dem strongpoints.
It will be utterly overwhelmed by a Walker-Cruz ticket, pitting the accomplished well spoken against the inexperienced radicals.
The GOP will work cleverly with dissident Dems, unhappy with their party's electoral performance, and come up with legislation that will easily get 2/3rds votes to override the veto, making Obama look like a blustering fool.
Were you joking?
At this point in 2008 if someone had said a one term junior senator from Illinois would be the next president he'd be laughed off the forum.
Lots can happen. Campaigns can blow up in 48 hours. Stars can emerge based on one dynamite performance.
Personally I think Obama will tip his hat to Deval Patrick and he will win the nomination. Dems have a winning formula. Why change?
I'm not betting on anything, it would be stupid at this point. I just read a sympathetic article on Hillary's 2008 fail that disagreed with your assessment completely.Everyone knows of Hillary's massive crash and burn in 2008. She was well ahead in the polls for nominee and thought John Edwards would be her most serious challenger.
It's just too soon to be making any accurate predictions about anything. There are too many what-if's.
I think it shows that you guys have no clue as to what happened in 2008.
First and foremost. Hillary DID actually get more votes than Obama. But some primaries were declared invalid because they jumped the calendar (Michigan and Florida) and the method of allocating delegates gave Obama a greater share than he earned. But it was the Superdelegates that put Obama over the top.
But you are right, Hillary didn't get the nomination.
The main reason she didn't was that she wrote Bush a blank check on Iraq, and she never understood how outraged the Democratic base was about the Iraq War. Obama did well because he was the guy who opposed the Iraq War when Bush had a 70% approval rating.
Also, a lot of Democrats would have been fine with HIllary or Obama. there were no Hillary supporters who fled into McCain's waiting arms. The thing was, a lot of Democrats said, "I like both of them, but if we put Hillary in, we are going to get all the assclownary we had under her husband about stained dresses and Ken Starr. Surely if we go with the new guy, the Republicans won't go all crazy and stuff."
After we see that Obama has made the right wing crazier than Clinton ever did, there's no point in hedging your bets on that.
False. The failure will be on whomever writes a bill that won't be signed by Obama.The GOP led congress will pass bills, if obama vetoes then the failure is on him and the dems.
Then why is the Right fighting what Obama and the owners of this country are trying to accomplish?The next US President will be whomever the Owners of this country say it will be.
You're contradicting yourself. First you say for the GOP to win, they have to send Obama legislation he will sign; then you say for the GOP to win, they need to send him legislation he won't sign.Maybe I'm overthinking this....but..........Coming into this thread late....
It'll be Clinton/O'Mally VS Bush/(Christie, Ryan, or Rubio)
There are no southern Democrats to put on the ticket with Hillary, so it doesn't matter where Hillary's VP candidate comes from. Elizabeth Warren is too far left, and it's not quite time for two women on a presidential ticket.
Untill a Republican candidate starts polling within 5 points of Hillary, she will be the next President...especially if the Republicans go on about gay marriage/contraception/abortion in the mean time.
The GOP will also need to create legislation that Obama will sign, ot they'll be blamed for nothing happening in Washington, still!, in 2016
I think you are wrong on all counts. But time will tell. The GOP led congress will pass bills, if obama vetoes then the failure is on him and the dems. The american people are not as stupid as the dems think they are---november 2014 proved that.
The GOP cannot send bills to Obama, that will be good for the economy and America...because he might sign them. At that point, anything good that happens between now and November 2016, can be claimed by the Democrats as well.
What the GOP needs to do, to make Obama look like an obstructionist, is to write legislation that he WON'T sign. So the GOP will have to sell it as good for the country, but load it up with deal breakers. Like if every piece of legislation includes some kind of change to Obamacare, that'll do the trick for the GOP.
The notion that the GOP will create positive legislation, and Obama will just veto whatever it is, will not happen. He's waiting for opportunities to be like Clinton in hsi second term.
Oh, nooooes, theYou're an idiot, like that's news.It's hard for you to take seriously because it means your post is bullshit.
Your attempts at rationalization are hysterical.
It's hard for me to take seriously because it provided no links to polls.
Here's a list of ALL the polls taken between Romney and Obama all the way back to 2010.
Obama leads in the vast majority of them and did all along.
RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election Romney vs. Obama
The article cited the poll.
Quoting polls back to 2010 between Romney and Obama assumes that Romney would have been the candidate. I already showed there were other polls showing other Republicans winning the nomination.
Face it, Joe. You're just not very bright.
forum jester gets smacked down again. forum jester , Joe said most polls showed Obama beating Romney at this point and he proved it with a link.
Obama is president, not king. Not yet anyway. If Obama vetoes a bipartisan bill then the onus is on him.False. The failure will be on whomever writes a bill that won't be signed by Obama.The GOP led congress will pass bills, if obama vetoes then the failure is on him and the dems.
Republicans know what is acceptable. If they disregard that in order to make the crazies happy, like slipping tougher abortion legislation into a Defense Bill, Obama is not going to sign it and it will be Boehner/McConnell's fault.
Obama is president, not king. Not yet anyway. If Obama vetoes a bipartisan bill then the onus is on him.
This is going to play out great. The Court is considering Burwell this term. They will decide the law actually means what it says--that government cannot subsidize health insurance purchased on the federal exchange. They will point out the remedy--an amendment to the law, and send it back to Congress.
No, he's right. Your political analysis seems to consist of "everyone else thinks just like I do."I don't suck at it, I love political analysis and I'm good at it. Have you seen the exploratory polling? Nobody can touch Hillary except maybe, Chris Christie. Republicans have nobody. Your candidates are all idiots or they bore everyone to tears.He isn't a Democrat. You should learn to like him, he is one who could beat Hillary. Nobody else can.Christie is the Republicans best hope.
No, he's yours. That's precisely what the Left wants is a Leftist president. Hell, you picked our last two candidates, so why not stick with what works, right?
Actually, they all can. Hillary "what difference does it make" Clinton has more baggage than Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain combined. There isn't a single potential contender I would worry about.
So no, we don't need Crisco Christie.
And you suck at political analysis.
You'll see Big Bill in the White House again, mark my words...
Palin is doing her best work right now going around making speeches and pontificating on this and that. I think she will make an excellent replacement for Ann Coulter.
As a politician she is finished. I have been a Reagan Republican since 1980 and there is no effing way I would vote for her. I like her ideas and ideals but she has proven herself incapable of holding office.
I am not sure he can wait until 2012 when President Palin takes office.
The truth is the GOP in general does not want to pursue impeachment, which will be a dead end at this point. Sarah Palin is not the GOP. She's not even an important part in it.
Wow, I yanked your chain real good.No, he's right. Your political analysis seems to consist of "everyone else thinks just like I do."I don't suck at it, I love political analysis and I'm good at it. Have you seen the exploratory polling? Nobody can touch Hillary except maybe, Chris Christie. Republicans have nobody. Your candidates are all idiots or they bore everyone to tears.He isn't a Democrat. You should learn to like him, he is one who could beat Hillary. Nobody else can.No, he's yours. That's precisely what the Left wants is a Leftist president. Hell, you picked our last two candidates, so why not stick with what works, right?
Actually, they all can. Hillary "what difference does it make" Clinton has more baggage than Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain combined. There isn't a single potential contender I would worry about.
So no, we don't need Crisco Christie.
And you suck at political analysis.
You'll see Big Bill in the White House again, mark my words...
And your political analysis? Look,I know you're Romney's blow toy so your picking him in 2012 was no surprise. But you can't even keep your stories straight Shirley:
November 2009:
Palin is doing her best work right now going around making speeches and pontificating on this and that. I think she will make an excellent replacement for Ann Coulter.
As a politician she is finished. I have been a Reagan Republican since 1980 and there is no effing way I would vote for her. I like her ideas and ideals but she has proven herself incapable of holding office.
Okay she's finished...right?
Not so fast:
April 2010 (5 months later):
I am not sure he can wait until 2012 when President Palin takes office.
Palin has continued to be an embarrassment to any and all who once supported her....You finally tried to bury her (again) here:
August 2014
The truth is the GOP in general does not want to pursue impeachment, which will be a dead end at this point. Sarah Palin is not the GOP. She's not even an important part in it.
I imagine you'll jump back on the bandwagon of Palin for President in 2016 sometime. Meanwhile, you shouldn't worry about winning a debate with anyone--you can't. First try winning a debate with yourself.
Wow, I yanked your chain real good.
The real question is why you hate Palin so much, especially since she obviously has a better grasp on foreign affairs than Obama. Is it because she takes dick and you're jealous?
Whut?Wow, I yanked your chain real good.
The real question is why you hate Palin so much, especially since she obviously has a better grasp on foreign affairs than Obama. Is it because she takes dick and you're jealous?
Yes, Palin has such a great grasp on foreign affairs that she doesn't know which Korea is our ally.
No, he's right. Your political analysis seems to consist of "everyone else thinks just like I do."I don't suck at it, I love political analysis and I'm good at it. Have you seen the exploratory polling? Nobody can touch Hillary except maybe, Chris Christie. Republicans have nobody. Your candidates are all idiots or they bore everyone to tears.He isn't a Democrat. You should learn to like him, he is one who could beat Hillary. Nobody else can.No, he's yours. That's precisely what the Left wants is a Leftist president. Hell, you picked our last two candidates, so why not stick with what works, right?
Actually, they all can. Hillary "what difference does it make" Clinton has more baggage than Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain combined. There isn't a single potential contender I would worry about.
So no, we don't need Crisco Christie.
And you suck at political analysis.
You'll see Big Bill in the White House again, mark my words...
And your political analysis? Look,I know you're Romney's blow toy so your picking him in 2012 was no surprise. But you can't even keep your stories straight Shirley:
November 2009:
Palin is doing her best work right now going around making speeches and pontificating on this and that. I think she will make an excellent replacement for Ann Coulter.
As a politician she is finished. I have been a Reagan Republican since 1980 and there is no effing way I would vote for her. I like her ideas and ideals but she has proven herself incapable of holding office.
Okay she's finished...right?
Not so fast:
April 2010 (5 months later):
I am not sure he can wait until 2012 when President Palin takes office.
Palin has continued to be an embarrassment to any and all who once supported her....You finally tried to bury her (again) here:
August 2014
The truth is the GOP in general does not want to pursue impeachment, which will be a dead end at this point. Sarah Palin is not the GOP. She's not even an important part in it.
I imagine you'll jump back on the bandwagon of Palin for President in 2016 sometime. Meanwhile, you shouldn't worry about winning a debate with anyone--you can't. First try winning a debate with yourself.
Whut?Wow, I yanked your chain real good.
The real question is why you hate Palin so much, especially since she obviously has a better grasp on foreign affairs than Obama. Is it because she takes dick and you're jealous?
Yes, Palin has such a great grasp on foreign affairs that she doesn't know which Korea is our ally.
Yawn.No, he's right. Your political analysis seems to consist of "everyone else thinks just like I do."I don't suck at it, I love political analysis and I'm good at it. Have you seen the exploratory polling? Nobody can touch Hillary except maybe, Chris Christie. Republicans have nobody. Your candidates are all idiots or they bore everyone to tears.He isn't a Democrat. You should learn to like him, he is one who could beat Hillary. Nobody else can.
Actually, they all can. Hillary "what difference does it make" Clinton has more baggage than Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain combined. There isn't a single potential contender I would worry about.
So no, we don't need Crisco Christie.
And you suck at political analysis.
You'll see Big Bill in the White House again, mark my words...
And your political analysis? Look,I know you're Romney's blow toy so your picking him in 2012 was no surprise. But you can't even keep your stories straight Shirley:
November 2009:
Palin is doing her best work right now going around making speeches and pontificating on this and that. I think she will make an excellent replacement for Ann Coulter.
As a politician she is finished. I have been a Reagan Republican since 1980 and there is no effing way I would vote for her. I like her ideas and ideals but she has proven herself incapable of holding office.
Okay she's finished...right?
Not so fast:
April 2010 (5 months later):
I am not sure he can wait until 2012 when President Palin takes office.
Palin has continued to be an embarrassment to any and all who once supported her....You finally tried to bury her (again) here:
August 2014
The truth is the GOP in general does not want to pursue impeachment, which will be a dead end at this point. Sarah Palin is not the GOP. She's not even an important part in it.
I imagine you'll jump back on the bandwagon of Palin for President in 2016 sometime. Meanwhile, you shouldn't worry about winning a debate with anyone--you can't. First try winning a debate with yourself.
Whut?Wow, I yanked your chain real good.
The real question is why you hate Palin so much, especially since she obviously has a better grasp on foreign affairs than Obama. Is it because she takes dick and you're jealous?
Yes, Palin has such a great grasp on foreign affairs that she doesn't know which Korea is our ally.
did someone put her on a national ticket?
Does she have a contract with MSNBC saying this kind of stupid stuff every week?
