The USA Political Thread

[lennco]

Here you can spout your USA political views.

Rules:
1. Keep it clean
2. No fighting
3. Respect the views of others.
4. US Political views, No Religious views
5. Have fun

:wave:

 

[GILSAN]

I definitely want to see Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio on the debate stage, anyone of these 3 would be outstanding leaders.

Couldn't agree with you more. Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul are definitely the best presidential candidates.

They are excellent orators as well as original thinkers and on top of it, they enjoy the support of the Tea Party. I just hope the Media doesn't influence people to vote for Christie.

 

[RogueWriter]

Let's compromise... we'll do the first 10... if you can do the most important 10...

Sorry, can't, too busy compiling all the positive pieces of legislature that Reid held up in committee.... Verbie gots a job to do, don't interrupt him.

 

[verbster]

While I am compiling all of them, how about you calculating the first million prime numbers manually with no calculator, and then add them together for me.

LOL, it seems you've been to the Boehner school of absurd negotiating . . . we want immigration legislation, but we won't pass anything because we're not sure Obama will enforce it.

 

[RogueWriter]

Couldn't agree with you more. Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul are definitely the best presidential candidates.

They are excellent orators as well as original thinkers and on top of it, they enjoy the support of the Tea Party. I just hope the Media doesn't influence people to vote for Christie.

I would like to see Rand Paul have a go at it, Rubio not so much. Out of a population of 350 million, one would think that we could avoid a Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton election, but big money will probably force those two upon us.

 

[verbster]

Personally, I don't see any good candidates in either party yet. The days of working for the common good are gone, and big money has turned the candidates and media into scared, greedy jellyfish.

 

[RaiderGirl]

It's actually working out ok, not all the doom and gloom the Right would have you believe - http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...t-and-you-wont-believe-whats-going-to-happen/

Rick UngarContributor
I write from the left on politics and policy.

Really? I would have never figured that.. LOL

Yeah, the number of sign ups grew as well did the number of insurers, but where is the data that shows how many LOST their insurance coverage or are still waiting from Medicaid? Your left wing propagandist conveniently left that part out.

Since you have so much faith into what Forbes publishes, the following article offers a lot more insight without all the spin.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot...ring-the-uninsured-a-glass-half-empty-moment/


How Well Is Obamacare Covering The Uninsured? A Glass Half Empty Moment

excerpt;

"I hope I have provided a useful way of assessing where we are on expanded coverage in this first year of major coverage expansion. At the end of the day, we appear to have covered 1 in 8 uninsured, but to get to this point, we have disrupted coverage for millions, increased premiums for tens of millions more and amplified the pain even further with a blizzard of new taxes and fees that will end up cost even the lowest income families nearly $7,000 over a decade.

Nothing I have seen in the rollout to date has altered my earlier estimate that we’ll see at least 4 “losers” for every “winner” under Obamacare, especially given that nearly two thirds (4.5 million of the 7.1 million) of the newly insured have gained their coverage through Medicaid rather than private coverage. Few would argue it’s bad news to see 7.1 million Americans gain coverage, but it’s regrettable that such a vastly bigger number of the nation’s citizens had to experience the dislocations, anxiety or greater financial burdens that they did since that really wasn’t necessary had Obamacare been designed more sensibly."

 

[RaiderGirl]

big money will probably force those two upon us.

I think Gilsans point about media influence plays a much bigger role than big money.

 

[GILSAN]

I would like to see Rand Paul have a go at it, Rubio not so much. Out of a population of 350 million, one would think that we could avoid a Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton election, but big money will probably force those two upon us.

God help us all if we get Jeb and Hillary

 

[JB Lions]

Rick UngarContributor
I write from the left on politics and policy.

Really? I would have never figured that.. LOL

Yeah, the number of sign ups grew as well did the number of insurers, but where is the data that shows how many LOST their insurance coverage or are still waiting from Medicaid? Your left wing propagandist conveniently left that part out.

Since you have so much faith into what Forbes publishes, the following article offers a lot more insight without all the spin.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot...ring-the-uninsured-a-glass-half-empty-moment/


How Well Is Obamacare Covering The Uninsured? A Glass Half Empty Moment

excerpt;

"I hope I have provided a useful way of assessing where we are on expanded coverage in this first year of major coverage expansion. At the end of the day, we appear to have covered 1 in 8 uninsured, but to get to this point, we have disrupted coverage for millions, increased premiums for tens of millions more and amplified the pain even further with a blizzard of new taxes and fees that will end up cost even the lowest income families nearly $7,000 over a decade.

Nothing I have seen in the rollout to date has altered my earlier estimate that we’ll see at least 4 “losers” for every “winner” under Obamacare, especially given that nearly two thirds (4.5 million of the 7.1 million) of the newly insured have gained their coverage through Medicaid rather than private coverage. Few would argue it’s bad news to see 7.1 million Americans gain coverage, but it’s regrettable that such a vastly bigger number of the nation’s citizens had to experience the dislocations, anxiety or greater financial burdens that they did since that really wasn’t necessary had Obamacare been designed more sensibly."

Try an article from this time period, not April.

And no, Jeb has no chance. I guess you forgot how the Republicans handled him with his views on immigration? Not exactly walking the party line. You have to get the Republican nod first. Even Gilsan can grasp that after looking at the cartoon he posted.

It won't be the Canadian Cruz, especially after his role in the government shutdown.

Won't be Rand Paul. The same people that think he has a chance, are the same people that thought his daddy did.

Won't be Rubio, they'll have a field day with him.

Again, I'm waiting for the Republicans in this thread to tell me how this works in a National Election? These are Tea Party candidates, local red meat candidates, nothing more. Does not play well on a National level. Do you seriously not grasp that? I can quote this post when they finally do have a candidate, and it won't be any of these. I think you like them merely for the show. They stir the pot, like to get at people, but they won't ever be President.

It's very early on, don't know who's going to be up but in early polls, Clinton is clearly ahead any of the names you put up so far

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html

Picking the same losers over and over again.

One of the reasons you've lost 4 out of the last 5 elections on Popular Vote, is because you don't put up any contenders.

 

[JB Lions]

Oh, the Unemployment rates just came out, dropped yet again, now 5.8%

Economy Adds 214,000 Jobs in October, Unemployment Rate Drops to 5.8%

Unemployment rate drops to lowest level since July 2008

http://time.com/3572116/new-jobs-report/

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

It case you forgot, it was 7.8% when he was sworn in.

 

[RWD]

I think Romney will run again. Nobody else is going to get the rep. nom. if he decides to give it another go. IMO

 

[GILSAN]

I think Romney will run again. Nobody else is going to get the rep. nom. if he decides to give it another go. IMO

Hmmm....not too sure about that. It would be a dumb move from his part IMO, but we never know who the MSM is going to push.

 

[RogueWriter]

It's funny how the various prognosticators on tv state that the election results were either terrible for Hillary or great for Hillary, lol.

 

[JB Lions]

Don't think it matters. They still need to find somebody that can beat her. So far nothing. If anything, just fires up the Dems. They don't want the right to have complete control.

And according to polls, they still pick Romney - http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/romney-tops-gop-field-in-new-poll/ar-BB9Y9od

 

[GILSAN]

 

[Domainace]

Normally, I would say Rubio is a great candidate, but I think someone with the same brass balls as Obama is needed. That might be Cruz. Though Rand Paul seems closer to my political philosophy (e.g. government is a necessary evil). One thing is sure, the media will do everything it can to tar all three of them,

 

[GILSAN]

How Journalists with WFOR in Miami React to Republican’s Re-Election

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...or-in-miami-react-to-republicans-re-election/

On the other side of the coin, this one from the New York Post should get the Liberal media really ticked off

Just a few more cartoons for laughs:

 

[GILSAN]

How can anyone ever trust liberal reporters. Just look at Chris Mathews on this video after Obama & Co. were thrashed. He actually sounds like what a true unbiased reporter should be.... he's actually saying the truth. I can't believe that this is the same snake that would "feel a thrill running up his leg" when he talked about Obama, that conservatives were evil, racists, intolerant a$$s and now that Obama got clobbered really hard he changed his tune and finally says the truth.

Shows how the dangerous snakes in the Liberal MSM work.

 

[verbster]

Normally, I would say Rubio is a great candidate, but I think someone with the same brass balls as Obama is needed. That might be Cruz. Though Rand Paul seems closer to my political philosophy (e.g. government is a necessary evil). One thing is sure, the media will do everything it can to tar all three of them,

And that's where big money comes into play. Unfortunately, it's a fact that negative campaigning works, so hundreds of millions, probably billions, will be paid for dirt, distorted facts and outright lies. The news will be carrion eaters, with a little slant of their own to sensationalize bits and pieces, but they'll go where the money goes because money is going to win his election, not substance.

Seems pretty early for Republicans to already start making excuses and blaming the media. I don't know much about the possible candidates, but I am curious about why you like Cruz, Rubio or Paul. What is it they offer to make the country better? I've tried to look at their beliefs and supposed actions if they were in charge, and I can't see the attraction. Same thing with Clinton, plus she's too old. All the candidates talk as though they have a game plan, but it's mostly criticisms of the current policies especially the ACA, with nothing specific to replace or repair it, as if going back to the way it was is better. One other thought about Obama Care: What we've got now is very different than what it started as. It was pretty much gutted.

 

[RaiderGirl]

now that Obama got clobbered really hard he changed his tune and finally says the truth.

I think the media changed their tune before the election even got under way, If you look back to 2012 and how much the liberal media reported on Democratic candidates and compare that to the 2014 election, it's like night and day, There was a study done on this prior to election day and I cant recall what the numbers were, but it was substantial.. The Liberal Media has indeed pulled part of their head out of their asses, when they start supporting conservatives, that's when you know they pulled it all the way out.