Jump to content

Alright guys, fairytale time is over.


12еr

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 542
  • Created
  • Last Reply

You better Hope Rubio pulls this **** off and comes back to center. Cruz or Trump will give Hillary the Whitehouse no matter what scandle she has going on in the week.

She might not even win tonight, and she's getting rekt in NH. 

 

But I think the dems have the election on lock no matter who gets the nomination. I almost think Trump was hired to sabotage the GOP honestly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She might not even win tonight, and she's getting rekt in NH.

 

But I think the dems have the election on lock no matter who gets the nomination. I almost think Trump was hired to sabotage the GOP honestly.

Oh I know its tight right now, but I think the long road she will pull ahead. Bernie is to far left.

 

Trump will cause Havok for awhile, you just have to hope Cruz doesn't take the nomination. Anyone who is willing to shutdown Government over something like altered planned parenthood videos, or to call themselves a conservative while billions is wasted by policies he likes is a joke.

 

No matter who wins, this election Americans of all sides will lose.

 

Canada just went through the same ****, **** or a turd sandwich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When do we know which candidates have been elected?  Also, in the results it showed Hilary and Bernie, but then three republicans' results.

 

What the heck happened to all the other guys in the debates??

 

So confusing....

This is the primary, they're vying for their respective parties nomination. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He'll win New Hampshire and South Carolina easily. So not really.

Maybe South Carolina, but I live in New Hampshire and I haven't heard a single kind word about that idiot from anyone around these parts. I won't be surprised if his huge lead amounts to nothing here as well.

 

He barely beat Rubio in Iowa for Christs sake. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I know, but in the republican/democrat debates there were loads of people.  Now it seems only 2 or 3 are being voted on? How were the rest "culled"?

The rest didn't get enough votes to even bother mentioning them. I think Huckabee is the only republican that dropped out, and I didn't even know he was running again.

 

There were only three democrats, and the third one only got > 1% of the vote and announced he was dropping out of the race before the winner was even announced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rest didn't get enough votes to even bother mentioning them. I think Huckabee is the only republican that dropped out, and I didn't even know he was running again.

 

There were only three democrats, and the third one only got > 1% of the vote and announced he was dropping out of the race before the winner was even announced.

Gotcha, thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of the three im pulling for Rubio.

 

 

I believe he hs enough momentum to overtake trump and make it a two man race.

 

Trump will drop out if he loses a couple more caucuses.

 

 

Lol at the Democratic party. Stuck with a felon and a socialist. Eventhough Clinton "won", she didn't really win as Sanders had a 50 point deficit last year in Iowa at this time.

 

 

And Iowa doesnt mean everything. I believe it was Santorum who beat Romney in 2012 in Iowa and then got swept after.

 

Will be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol at the Democratic party. Stuck with a felon and a socialist. Eventhough Clinton "won", she didn't really win as Sanders had a 50 point deficit last year in Iowa at this time.

 

 

And Iowa doesnt mean everything. I believe it was Santorum who beat Romney in 2012 in Iowa and then got swept after.

Sanders has the flimsiest policies. He reminds me of Trump when he's pressed on how he's going to pull some of his BS off. But Hillary is an equally poor choice for a leader. 

 

Also, it was Santorum that took Iowa last time. He dropped out within a few states after that. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe South Carolina, but I live in New Hampshire and I haven't heard a single kind word about that idiot from anyone around these parts. I won't be surprised if his huge lead amounts to nothing here as well.

 

He barely beat Rubio in Iowa for Christs sake. 

New Hampshire is a lock for Bernie.

 

He has something like 96% of the decided vote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please humour an Englishman, but why do they do it one state or caucus at a time?  Can't they just ask all members of that party to vote at once for their leader and see who gets the most votes?  Or would that not leave enough opportunity for vested interests to finance the various campaigns?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New Hampshire is a lock for Bernie.

 

He has something like 96% of the decided vote. 

Didn't stop Bill and Hillary from ruining my morning. If I had the foresight to actually check my college assigned email I may have known ahead of time that the Clintons were going to come to my school today, and cause a massive traffic jam and leave me no where to park.

 

It shattered my jimmies especially hard because I hate being late, and my school is tiny; the limited capacity doesn't even make it a good place to hold the event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please humour an Englishman, but why do they do it one state or caucus at a time?  Can't they just ask all members of that party to vote at once for their leader and see who gets the most votes?  Or would that not leave enough opportunity for vested interests to finance the various campaigns?

More or less. Don't forget the media milking it for filler too.

 

 

The series of presidential primary elections and caucuses held in each U.S. state and territory is part of the nominating process of United States presidential elections. This process was never included in the United States Constitution; it was created over time by the political parties. Some states only hold primary elections, some only hold caucuses, and others use a combination of both.

 

These primaries and caucuses are staggered generally between January and June before the general election in November. The primary elections are run by state and local governments, while caucuses are private events that are directly run by the political parties themselves. A state's primary election or caucus is usually an indirect election: instead of voters directly selecting a particular person running for President, they determine how many delegates each party's national convention will receive from their respective state. These delegates then in turn select their party's presidential nominee.

 

Each party determines how many delegates are allocated to each state. Along with those delegates chosen during the primaries and caucuses, state delegations to both the Democratic and Republican conventions also include "unpledged" delegates, usually current and former elected officeholders and party leaders, who can vote for whomever they want.

 

This system of presidential primaries and caucuses is somewhat controversial because of its staggered nature. The major advantage is that candidates can concentrate their resources in each area of the country one at a time instead of campaigning in every state simultaneously. However, the overall results may not be representative of the U.S. electorate as a whole: voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and other small states which traditionally hold their primaries and caucuses first usually have a major impact on the races, while voters in California and other large states which traditionally hold their primaries last in June generally end up having no say because the races are usually over by then. As a result, more states vie for earlier primaries to claim a greater influence in the process

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really need Hillary to win. As long as Bernie doesn't win I'm happy. The republicans are all morons this election (and most elections), so Hillary is the lesser of all the evils (except Bernie who I like but don't agree with his stance on one of his big key points - mmj legalization).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really need Hillary to win. As long as Bernie doesn't win I'm happy. The republicans are all morons this election (and most elections), so Hillary is the lesser of all the evils (except Bernie who I like but don't agree with his stance on one of his big key points - mmj legalization).

So you want Hillary to win based on Bernie supporting medical marijuana legalization? 

 

That is the only issue you care about? That nonissue?

 

LoL **** off troll. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of the three im pulling for Rubio.

 

 

I believe he hs enough momentum to overtake trump and make it a two man race.

 

Trump will drop out if he loses a couple more caucuses.

 

 

Lol at the Democratic party. Stuck with a felon and a socialist. Eventhough Clinton "won", she didn't really win as Sanders had a 50 point deficit last year in Iowa at this time.

 

 

And Iowa doesnt mean everything. I believe it was Santorum who beat Romney in 2012 in Iowa and then got swept after.

 

Will be interesting.

I'm hoping for Rubio to get the nomination too, he's the most reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet still a pile of garbage, what splendid choices we have. I thought you were in camp Paul?

He has literally no chance in hell of getting the nomination. Out of the three who do, I want it to be Rubio.

 

Also, Rand lets his religion override his espoused libertarian ideals a little too much for my tastes, so I've backpedaled on that support a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has literally no chance in hell of getting the nomination. Out of the three who do, I want it to be Rubio.

 

Also, Rand lets his religion override his espoused libertarian ideals a little too much for my tastes, so I've backpedaled on that support a bit.

:huh: He is quite literally the candidate least influenced by religion out of the whole republican party. Granted he has absolute no chance in winning regardless. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has literally no chance in hell of getting the nomination. Out of the three who do, I want it to be Rubio.

 

Also, Rand lets his religion override his espoused libertarian ideals a little too much for my tastes, so I've backpedaled on that support a bit.

If Rand had a chance would you support him over Rubio? Rand doesn't sound like half the religious nut as Rubio. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:huh: He is quite literally the candidate least influenced by religion out of the whole republican party. Granted he has absolute no chance in winning regardless. 

I vaguely remember him being opposed to gay marriage and abortion and it turned me off from him. 

 

If Rand had a chance would you support him over Rubio? Rand doesn't sound like half the religious nut as Rubio. 

Yes, Rubio is still a pile of ****. All of them are though. I don't want Trump, Cruz or the neuro-surgeon who denies evolution. I'd take Rubio, Rand or Carly over the three. Only one them has a chance of winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Rand had a chance would you support him over Rubio? Rand doesn't sound like half the religious nut as Rubio. 

Absolutely. I was a big Ron Paul supporter, and while Rand is a shell of what Ron is to me, he is still miles more logical than the other candidates. 

I dont support rubio or any candidate there for that matter. This is quite literally the worst  election ive been alive for. The kicker being the one i fear most will likely win the presidency, that being Clinton. 

 

 

I disagree with a lot of social plans that Sanders has, but he might be the default option im  pulling for. The one i would trust most in a crisis situation. That and most of his plans would never get through congress without severe compromise. I think he could do a lot of good on the other end of things (war on drugs, prisons, accountability, foreign policy, etc.) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please humour an Englishman, but why do they do it one state or caucus at a time?  Can't they just ask all members of that party to vote at once for their leader and see who gets the most votes?  Or would that not leave enough opportunity for vested interests to finance the various campaigns?

 

That is sort of what the convention is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol say what? Cruz won the biggest bible thumping state in America? Yeah guess he has the nomination in lock then huh.

 

Trump will easily win NH and SC and most other states then tear Liary Clinton apart. Easy money for the goat

Next week you'll be saying. "lol say what? Trump lost in a state with good education? He'll easily win in the hillbilly states."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I vaguely remember him being opposed to gay marriage and abortion and it turned me off from him. 

 

Yes, Rubio is still a pile of ****. All of them are though. I don't want Trump, Cruz or the neuro-surgeon who denies evolution. I'd take Rubio, Rand or Carly over the three. Only one them has a chance of winning.

It seems to me that Rand's views on abortion and gay marriage are perfectly in step with Libertarian values?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. I was a big Ron Paul supporter, and while Rand is a shell of what Ron is to me, he is still miles more logical than the other candidates. 

I dont support rubio or any candidate there for that matter. This is quite literally the worst  election ive been alive for. The kicker being the one i fear most will likely win the presidency, that being Clinton. 

 

 

I disagree with a lot of social plans that Sanders has, but he might be the default option im  pulling for. The one i would trust most in a crisis situation. That and most of his plans would never get through congress without severe compromise. I think he could do a lot of good on the other end of things (war on drugs, prisons, accountability, foreign policy, etc.) 

If it comes down to Paul vs Clinton, I will strongly consider voting for Paul. 

 

If it comes down to anybody vs Sanders, I will actually vote for Sanders, even though...

 

If it comes down to Hilarity vs anyone but Paul, I will abstain from voting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that Rand's views on abortion and gay marriage are perfectly in step with Libertarian values?

Opposing them is not a libertarian value. I guess you could argue that as long as he doesn't support government intervention on those issues, but the mere fact that he opposes them at all bothers me.

 

I'm not going to waste time and energy worrying about someone who isn't even in the running at this point though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...