Kasich 2016

[maskedmelon]

Twitter will be on fire for days, Texas will threaten to secede, college students will flee to their safe spaces and then the cattle will return to their fields to graze once more.

[Pokesan]

I have more faith in my countrymen than you do, I suppose.

[maskedmelon]

I have little faith in men, so I am sure you are correct.

[Blitzers]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

He'd have no problem getting confirmed. He is eminently qualified. He's just an asshole who can't work with people or win an election. His people problems aren't just with 'the establishment'. He's hated because he's rude and has no respect whatsoever for his fellow man. Even Trump is demonstrates more respect for others than Cruz.

yeah you have no clue about Cruz and his dissenters. All I can say is your wrong and quit repeating Fox News talking points it's beneath you. Too funny Cruz, rude and disrespectful to his fellow man, completely void and incorrect description of Cruz and lacking of any knowledge of the man. No reason to continue this conversation since false narratives and talking points is your only argument.

[AP2002]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Sorry guys, but this is how I felt after last night's melee.

Marco came off as a little shit.

Cruz remains an erudite asshole.

And Trump, well he has small hands.

To quote an ancient FQ celeb, Kasich sounded like "the lone voice of reason in a forest of Turkies."

Am I wrong?

This is why video gamers should not vote.

Dumb
Dumb
Dumb

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by AP2002 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is why video gamers should not vote.

Dumb
Dumb
Dumb

Ty Blitz.

[Daywolf]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't have any issues with assholes. The problem is that many people do and that renders Cruz unelectable. His particular brand of assholery (pious arrogance) is also particularly worrisome in a leader. Put Cruz on the SCOTUS where he can do far more good and need not worry about electability.

Well my post seems to be pointing away from rather than pointing to. In light of the topic of this thread; away from Kasich is a given, obviously. But the contrast is there, pointing to, but in general and not specifically at any particular nominee.

But in the matter of pointing to, this doesn't seem to exclude Donald in that observation, and wouldn't seem to fall into my strikeout list. But you know my standing in the matter, you're an observant person in these forums. I am fond of both of them for the purpose at hand, both assholes hah, and a purpose that needs to be addressed as no other. That's not Kasich, Rubio or even a possible hidden latecomer such as Romney. Lilliputians I say, certainly so, and a likely devastating hit to a party in revolt as it stands, as anyway my observation from a fringe party.

But I see two possibilities, possibly even a ticket in that as a likely outcome the way things are going. And to me, seems like anything else will likely be the same defeated outcome, predetermined out of defeatism as has been the norm at least in national elections out of the RNC. But I leave you something to gawk at, maybe a little outside of your projections Don and Ted's most excellent adventures. I don't agree with all parts of that article though, such as scenario #2 with Rubio having any chance of taking Idaho haha! But in general, the writer has a good grasp of things.
viva la revolucion!

[Lojik]

Watching the debates, it reminded me why I dislike almost every politician again. They're either uninformed, just plain stupid, or preoccupied with their competition. On the surface I'd agree that Kasich seemed the most reasonable, but I also agree with Lune that he is probably just full of shit.

One of my main issues with mainstream politics is that (at least from the numbers I saw) most americans want the us to become less involved in the affairs of other countries. However, in the US there exists a very vocal minority to this idea, that will label you almost traitorous if you take this position. I find this especially true with older Americans regardless of political affiliation, and they'll simply refuse to acknowledge any position you might take as long as it "betrays all we worked for on liberating the world in WW2." Even though the largest percentage of our discretionary spending goes to defense, there won't be an elected president of either party willing to actually limit defense spending. There's too many powerful factions still feeding off the victory propaganda of ww2, and too vocal a group of people unable to see past it.

[Pokesan]

calling it defense spending while crying about our global hegemony ought to disqualify you from voting

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Lojik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Watching the debates, it reminded me why I dislike almost every politician again. They're either uninformed, just plain stupid, or preoccupied with their competition. On the surface I'd agree that Kasich seemed the most reasonable, but I also agree with Lune that he is probably just full of shit.

One of my main issues with mainstream politics is that (at least from the numbers I saw) most americans want the us to become less involved in the affairs of other countries. However, in the US there exists a very vocal minority to this idea, that will label you almost traitorous if you take this position. I find this especially true with older Americans regardless of political affiliation, and they'll simply refuse to acknowledge any position you might take as long as it "betrays all we worked for on liberating the world in WW2." Even though the largest percentage of our discretionary spending goes to defense, there won't be an elected president of either party willing to actually limit defense spending. There's too many powerful factions still feeding off the victory propaganda of ww2, and too vocal a group of people unable to see past it.

Not only is it politically illegal to limit it, Republicans are hell bent on increasing it. (And Democrats are complicit, especially ones from military states.) Made me cringe during the debates listening to all the candidates calling for shit the Pentagon doesn't even need or want, like strategic bombers, which are almost completely irrelevant to the US military's situation, and talking about "rebuilding" our "broken" military as if we don't currently have the most powerful military machine in human history.

We need to scale it back to how it was before WW2, when we had only a token standing army and a very large navy. We have the luxury of being situated in our own hemisphere with large oceans full of American ships protecting us from everyone else's bullshit. And with all the money we'd save on defense spending we could invest in enough energy infrastructure to achieve energy independence so we don't even have to bend over for OPEC. Then we can just do our own thing while the Middle East destroys itself.