Kasich 2016

[maskedmelon]

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?

[SHOWITME]

dunno how we r supposed to get tough on immigration if we elect rubio who is a mexican

cruz loves jesus 2 much

trump small dick confirmed by the mexican

kasich the only 1 left

[Pokesan]

you are forgetting the congressional scenario

the great filter approaches

[maskedmelon]

No, that plays right into the discussion. If Trump goes full independent and manages to deny Hillary a majority (51%) congress will choose the Republican nominee, whomever that may be.

While it is unlikely Kasich can secure the nomination conventionally if he demonstrates significant momentum going forward he might be able to secure the nom at a contested convention.

I was surprised though when I Trump said he'd support the eventual nominee last night. I'd think with attacks from all sides he'd feel he was being treated unfairly, but then most of the shit flying his direction is from other candidates and the stuff from the media is all entirely valid. He's somewhat acknowledged that with the 2 page policy plan he's released, but he is going to need to do more now to continue. After last debate I was surprised he showed up at this one empty handed.

[barrettdc1]

trump has a big cock

[Hastley]

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?

Doesn't small hands make your junk look bigger? Kasich was the only
One that addressed anything remotely resembling substance and policy. That said he has 0 chance at te nomination and even less than that in the general.

TLDR don't waste your vote on someone who can't win (same goes for Rubio)

[Lune]

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

Am I wrong?

Kasich was literally a higher-up investment banker at Lehman brothers when it went under in 2008. So I'd say if you want the government to keep serving the financial sector at the expense of the middle class (yes it is zero sum sometimes), vote Kasich or Hillary.

Climate science denier, but less intensely anti-environment than his peers.

Best healthcare position of any Republican candidate.

Bought and paid for candidate who operates with PACs, and is guaranteed as a politician in office to answer to bribes, rather than the best interest of the US as a whole. So I wouldn't put too much stock in what he says he actually says he believes, because his beliefs are available for purchase.

Probably the least destructive Republican candidate.

[Patriam1066]

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

Kasich was literally a higher-up investment banker at Lehman brothers when it went under in 2008. So I'd say if you want the government to keep serving the financial sector at the expense of the middle class (yes it is zero sum sometimes), vote Kasich or Hillary.

Climate science denier, but less intensely anti-environment than his peers.

Best healthcare position of any Republican candidate.

Bought and paid for candidate who operates with PACs, and is guaranteed as a politician in office to answer to bribes, rather than the best interest of the US as a whole. So I wouldn't put too much stock in what he says he actually says he believes, because his beliefs are available for purchase.

Probably the least destructive Republican candidate.

You're right about all of this except that he's better than both Sanders and Clinton on day one since he's been a governor and actually has done something in his life.

PS: You talk about Lehman brothers and banks. Sanders adds how much to the national debt? Who benefits from the government financing the debt? Large banks. Who wrote the budget in 2014? Citigroup. Are you following so far?

The national debt isn't a debate about Keynes or Friedman, it's an egregious example of corporate welfare that passes under the radar because:
1. republicans won't give up defense
2. dems won't give up welfare
3. neither will give up social security or medicare

Finally, there is a huge debate over whether a national debt actually matters. Not to bring up Greece or Venezuela, since neither is analogous to the United States government or economy, however, in our corrupt system, which you acknowledge has PACs, interest groups, lobbyists, etc, how much do you imagine that massive amount of money (trillions of dollars) influences our congressmen and women during their campaigns? Lobbyists are paid hundreds of millions every year to keep the budget high so that it will continue to line the coffers of massive banks, which in turn inject themselves into our political system.

Kasich is a shitty candidate, but he's the best this country has right now, and I voted for him on Super Tuesday. He got 4ish% in Texas. Bottom line, find me a Sanders-like candidate who understands that balancing the fucking budget is literally the most important part of eliminating corruption in the US. That will never happen, because this country is composed of idiots who can simultaneously understand Halliburton, the military-industrial complex, how insurance companies taint out healthcare system, but miraculously, through some amazing capacity for cognitive dissonance, CANT FIGURE OUT THAT CITIGROUP WROTE THE 2014 BUDGET PRECISELY TO INCREASE THE NATIONAL DEBT, which, coincidentally I guess to you retards, happens to perpetually guarantee that they HUGE assets on their balance sheets.

Oh, and who gives a fuck, because that government that finances the debt with them... if all of the major banks collapse the international economy, the government has to bail them out because if they didn't, the US federal government literally couldn't pay salaries and God forbid congressmen and senators actually ahve to answer for something. Oh well, add another trillion in debt so that the government can continue the illusion that they have a clue and the rest of us can happily pay our taxes so that Shylock can have another yacht.

I hope this what should've been middle school lesson on macroeconomics and government got through to you socialists who don't understand your ass from your elbow. Class dismissed.

[maskedmelon]

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

Probably the least destructive Republican candidate.

This practically an endorsement coming from you Lune ^^

As for Lehman Brothers, I just want to point out that he was one of several hundred investment bankers there. His influence there has been overstated (by others, you seem to have been reserved in how you raised the issue). Unsettling that he was a part of that firm, but I don't think it is reasonable to attribute the fall of Lehman Brothers or even a portion of it to him.

[maskedmelon]

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

That said he has 0 chance at te nomination and even less than that in the general.

Kasich actually has the best national numbers against Clinton. I'm terms of electability, the polls rank the candidates like this:

1. Kasich
2. Rubio
3. Cruz
4. Trump

As for winning the primary, I agree Kasich has an uphill battle. However, it is unlikely anyone will surpass Trump in the primary case and equally unlikely that Trump will secure the number of delegates ended to lock the nomination. If he doesn't get a majority, the RNC won't nominate him, that is apparent. Accordingly it makes most sense to support the best suited candidate so that the RNC has an easier time nominating them.