| World of KJ http://worldofkj.com/forum/ |
|
| 2016 Election: Back To The Future? http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=68285 |
Page 2 of 2 |
| Author: | Mannyisthebest [ Thu Nov 15, 2012 8:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
Shack is right.... Going back to a Gore/Kerry choice would be lethal for the Democrats.. A Romney style character is also not good for the Republicans either... Hilary vs Christie would pretty much end up being decided by moderates... Christie has improved himself and now is quite well liked in NJ, and Sandy has shown that he is a good man who cares for his people greatly. Hilary is likley one of the most well liked and respected Democrats in the country. She actually enjoys a lot of respect from Moderates and Normal Republicans as well. I think the only problem with Christie is that he is not a normal politician... He speaks his mind and well sometimes he says stuff that gets him in trouble... However, over time... What I have seen is that if people like the man they actually ignore the gaffes... |
|
| Author: | Chippy [ Fri Nov 16, 2012 11:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
Mannyisthebest wrote: Shack is right.... LOL |
|
| Author: | Tyler [ Fri Nov 16, 2012 12:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
Mannyisthebest wrote: I know Warren has humble origins but her tone and attitude just reminds me of John Kerry... And Hilary's tone and attitude is like a shrill, entitled, bitter old nag. What's your point? I actually like Warren's tone, it's rather reassuring and kindly without being submissive. I could listen to her for four or eight years and not want to castrate myself. |
|
| Author: | Mannyisthebest [ Fri Nov 16, 2012 2:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
"What's your point? " Um choosing Warren would leave the door open to the Republicans to come back to the white house... |
|
| Author: | Tyler [ Sat Nov 17, 2012 1:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
How, because she's hawkish on banks? Banks are pretty unpopular. It's a selling point, if anything. Though it might piss off the Geithner types the Democrats have wooed since the mid-1970s. Plus, she's also hawkish on Iran. Honestly, my dream candidate is Feingold, but that's seriously unlikely. |
|
| Author: | Mannyisthebest [ Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
Come on Tyler... Running for President is more about image and likeability... I dont see Warren scoring high on either. |
|
| Author: | Chippy [ Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
L. O. L. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... ?hpt=hp_t3 |
|
| Author: | Mannyisthebest [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 11:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
Lol I would take Hilary over Grandpa Joe Biden or a liar like Obama. |
|
| Author: | Chippy [ Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
YOU'RE CANADIAN. NOBODY GIVES A SHIT. |
|
| Author: | Mannyisthebest [ Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
I think most American would agree ^ Do you want Grandpa Joe Biden as President or another inexperienced man like Obama in office? I think the next President needs to be one who can say "Yes I have and yes we can, yes we shall" Then "yes we can" |
|
| Author: | Chippy [ Fri Sep 27, 2013 11:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
No. I don't want that. Because the person you're describing is some dick who is already in deep politics. |
|
| Author: | Tyler [ Sat Sep 28, 2013 1:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
There's almost no difference between Hillary or Obama politically and neither of them give a shit about us. They're careerists. The only Republican that could win is Fat Man, who is politically close to them or Cory Booker except socially a tad more conservative. |
|
| Author: | Caius [ Sat Sep 28, 2013 9:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
Tyler wrote: There's almost no difference between Hillary or Obama politically and neither of them give a shit about us. Agree. Most of the differences in candidates within parties stem from temperament and speaking ability. Any differences between those two are on the margins and maybe how they go about a policy goal rather than the policy itself. Same with a McCain and Romney. Although McCain's need to bomb people really seems to be marginalizing him further from based on the shift in the GOP over the last year or so on privacy/military action. I dislike Christie because he is fat and that suggests to me he lacks discipline. Whatever, genes, I don't care. |
|
| Author: | Mannyisthebest [ Sun Sep 29, 2013 7:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
Thats a silly argument. Obama smokes does that show lack of will power? |
|
| Author: | Caius [ Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
Mannyisthebest wrote: Thats a silly argument. Obama smokes does that show lack of will power? It shows he succumbed to peer pressure and picked up an expensive and stupid habit and yes it shows he lacks self-discipline, though indications are that he has mostly quit. |
|
| Author: | Mannyisthebest [ Mon Sep 30, 2013 11:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
Imo looking into the past Superfical leaders get nothing done. The ones who are more real and relatable have, |
|
| Author: | Tyler [ Tue Oct 01, 2013 5:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
Presidents don't exist to be "leaders". They exist to distract from real power. |
|
| Author: | Chippy [ Fri Jul 18, 2014 2:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
The Democrat candidates look to be Warren, Clinton and Biden. In my opinion, obviously. I'd say that is a MUCH stronger slate than anything the Republicans throw out. |
|
| Author: | Caius [ Sat Jul 19, 2014 7:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2016 Election: Back To The Future? |
Tyler wrote: How, because she's hawkish on banks? Banks are pretty unpopular. It's a selling point, if anything. Though it might piss off the Geithner types the Democrats have wooed since the mid-1970s. Plus, she's also hawkish on Iran. Honestly, my dream candidate is Feingold, but that's seriously unlikely. What about this bank? http://go.bloomberg.com/political-capital/2014-07-18/warren-backs-ex-im-bank-heritage-invites/ |
|
| Page 2 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|